http://www.universetoday.com/2007/11/23/inflatable-lunar-habitat-to-be-tested-in-antarctica/ Space and astronomy news Sun, 22 Nov 2009 03:07:54 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 http://www.universetoday.com/2007/11/23/inflatable-lunar-habitat-to-be-tested-in-antarctica/comment-page-1/#comment-35149 Frankgloucester Mon, 06 Oct 2008 15:29:52 +0000 http://www.universetoday.com/2007/11/23/inflatable-lunar-habitat-to-be-tested-in-antarctica/#comment-35149 Actually, while I agree that it needs to be tested before use, this is a little much. There are many places on Earth with environments that make the Moon look positively benign. (Try building a shirtsleeve home under 300 feet of water) Erecting an inflatable building on the moon has many advantages. Consider: You are in a vacumn. This is good. No wind load. Look at the diagram. Look how much work is going into over coming the problems caused by moving air, wind loads. On the moon, all of that is eliminated. The only loads on the structure are caused by the movement of people within it bouncing into the floor and sides, and by people and equipment bouncing into it on the outside. That can be handled by bags on the outside edges filled with a few hundred pounds of lunar dirt. Plentiful, cheap. The only other considerations are thermal protection, and someway to keep it from being degraded by solar radiation in all of its forms. More dirt and/or use a mylar film. Micrometorites? More dirt. It is a vacumn. So it only takes a load of 12.3 psi. That is not much. It only needs to take that much so that humans can breath (that is the pressure at 5000 ft, the altitude of Denver) One of the problems with our approach to space, and our lack of progress, is the tendency to over test and engineer. Build one. Put it in orbit by the ISS. Live in it there for a year where rescue is easy. Then go back to the moon. Take another lunar Rover, with a dozer blade and shovels. Don't overcomplicate it. KISS! But of course NASA would rather spend money on useless research/development reinventing the wheel. than on actual exploration/colonization. Actually, while I agree that it needs to be tested before use, this is a little much. There are many places on Earth with environments that make the Moon look positively benign. (Try building a shirtsleeve home under 300 feet of water)
Erecting an inflatable building on the moon has many advantages. Consider:
You are in a vacumn. This is good. No wind load. Look at the diagram. Look how much work is going into over coming the problems caused by moving air, wind loads. On the moon, all of that is eliminated. The only loads on the structure are caused by the movement of people within it bouncing into the floor and sides, and by people and equipment bouncing into it on the outside. That can be handled by bags on the outside edges filled with a few hundred pounds of lunar dirt. Plentiful, cheap.
The only other considerations are thermal protection, and someway to keep it from being degraded by solar radiation in all of its forms. More dirt and/or use a mylar film. Micrometorites? More dirt.
It is a vacumn. So it only takes a load of 12.3 psi. That is not much. It only needs to take that much so that humans can breath (that is the pressure at 5000 ft, the altitude of Denver)
One of the problems with our approach to space, and our lack of progress, is the tendency to over test and engineer. Build one. Put it in orbit by the ISS. Live in it there for a year where rescue is easy. Then go back to the moon. Take another lunar Rover, with a dozer blade and shovels. Don't overcomplicate it. KISS! But of course NASA would rather spend money on useless research/development reinventing the wheel. than on actual exploration/colonization.

]]> http://www.universetoday.com/2007/11/23/inflatable-lunar-habitat-to-be-tested-in-antarctica/comment-page-1/#comment-14929 morgan Wed, 05 Mar 2008 23:11:35 +0000 http://www.universetoday.com/2007/11/23/inflatable-lunar-habitat-to-be-tested-in-antarctica/#comment-14929 um...hi um…hi

]]>