High combustion temperature? Not according to these calculations (refer to the column labeled "Ctemp").
Can i refer you to a very recent dissertation called Risk-value optimization of performance and cost for propellant production on Mars that factors in all the previous work, including NASA DRM 3 and DRA 5 studies, everything that Dr. Rapp has written and then some, and does actual modelling and design trades ? The conclusions are well worth a read.
One of the risks to MOXIE is the dust in the Martian atmosphere. To protect MOXIEfrom dust, a High Efficiency Particulate Arrestance (HEPA) filter is fitted at the inlet(Fig. 2). However, as the filter accumulates dust, the pressure drop across the filterwill increase. If the pressure drop becomes large enough, there is a risk that the CO2compressor (a scroll pump) will not be able to deliver the required 1 atm outletpressure for electrolysis [2]Although HEPA filters have been widely studied on Earth (e.g. [3]), their performanceunder Martian conditions is less well known. We investigated the effect of dustloading, filtration velocity, and ambient pressure on the filter’s pressure drop.
CONCLUSIONSuspended dust at typical background levels is unlikely to produce a problematicfilter pressure drop during the operational lifetime of MOXIE (30 hours), with marginto 300 hours. However, 30 hours is a small fraction of the total mission, during whichthe filter will be continuously exposed to the environment. Therefore, long-durationtesting is needed to study dust ingestion from landing, winds, dust devils and storms.
High combustion temperature? Not according to these calculations (refer to the column labeled "Ctemp").Attached are two older papers on oxygen-CO, the second of which maps out the conditions under which the combination ignites. There are some tricks to ignition, but it does not seem an insurmountable problem.
I think even Zubrin has abandoned the idea of bringing H2. It was used because at the time they did not know there is so much water on Mars.
TRL is really not applicable here. When we send pepople water from Mars will be used. So the required technology will have to be developed. It is not rocket science.
Are you trying to draw parallels between Cassini and a mining robot that digs through regolith?
Edit: A mining robot designed and built by SpaceX.
Quote from: guckyfan on 04/03/2017 05:57 pmEdit: A mining robot designed and built by SpaceX.Link please! A quick Google reveals only the usual arm waving and hot air.
Quote from: Dalhousie on 04/03/2017 10:14 pmQuote from: guckyfan on 04/03/2017 05:57 pmEdit: A mining robot designed and built by SpaceX.Link please! A quick Google reveals only the usual arm waving and hot air.Try formulating it less rude and I will consider an answer.
Or you could try just answering their very simple request; either way.
Quote from: Rei on 04/04/2017 08:13 amOr you could try just answering their very simple request; either way.Since it is you asking, I will. Mission statements on Red Mars in the IAC presentation. Mission Objectives........Identify and characterize potential resources such as water.........Demonstrate key surface capabilities on Mars.That quite clearly indicates capability to get to water and find out what is mixed into it. Not a stretch from there to a small digging robot. Certainly much less of a stretch than the comparison of Cassini to a basic mining robot.As to the experience of SpaceX. They did the Roomba, they can do a lot of things if they set their mind to it.
So I show a document by SpaceX that says they are planning to do it and you just brush it aside as speculation?
Quote from: guckyfan on 04/04/2017 12:28 pmSo I show a document by SpaceX that says they are planning to do it and you just brush it aside as speculation?You're confusing "planning to do it" with "the technology is mature and / or trivial to mature"
Quote from: Rei on 04/04/2017 03:49 pmQuote from: guckyfan on 04/04/2017 12:28 pmSo I show a document by SpaceX that says they are planning to do it and you just brush it aside as speculation?You're confusing "planning to do it" with "the technology is mature and / or trivial to mature"This is moving beyond ridiculous now. Nobody has landed a mining robot on Mars yet. We all know this. I was talking about plans, I provided the proof for those plans existing. Get over it.