 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Here's my latest render of a spinner colony for the video game GearHead.
Mike
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'gh_scene_spinner_cutaway_interior_10.png' (450 KB)
Preview of image 'gh_scene_spinner_cutaway_interior_10.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2/8/2015 6:35 AM, Mike Horvath wrote:
> Here's my latest render of a spinner colony for the video game GearHead.
>
> Mike
Forgot to say that it took nearly a full day to render.
Operating System
Windows 7 Professional 64-bit SP1
CPU
AMD A8-5600K 80 °C
Trinity 32nm Technology
RAM
8.00GB Dual-Channel DDR3 @ 803MHz (11-11-12-28)
Motherboard
ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. A78M-E (FM2+ ) 44 °C
Graphics
ASUS VS247 (1920x1080@60Hz)
2047MB NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Ti (EVGA) 27 °C
Storage
931GB Western Digital WDC WD10 EZEX-08M2NA0 SATA Disk Device (SATA) 24 °C
111GB Patriot Blaze SATA Disk Device (SSD) 30 °C
Optical Drives
ASUS DRW-24B1ST i SATA CdRom Device
Audio
High Definition Audio Device
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Exterior view. I would welcome some science-y critiques regarding the
structure of the space station. The main things that are bugging me
right now are the positions of the solar panels and agridomes. I think
they are blocking each other with respect to the sun. But I don't know
where I *should* be putting them.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'gh_scene_spinner_cutaway_04.png' (677 KB)
Preview of image 'gh_scene_spinner_cutaway_04.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 15-02-09 17:43, Mike Horvath a écrit :
> Exterior view. I would welcome some science-y critiques regarding the
> structure of the space station. The main things that are bugging me
> right now are the positions of the solar panels and agridomes. I think
> they are blocking each other with respect to the sun. But I don't know
> where I *should* be putting them.
The domes are blocking the solar pannels.
I see two solutions:
1 - Place the domes closer to the station's body, maybe in a circle
around it and push the pannels outward beyong the domes.
2 - Keep the current geometry, but rotate the domes or pannels 90°
arount the main axis of the station.
Alain
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 10/02/2015 01:06, Alain a écrit :
> Le 15-02-09 17:43, Mike Horvath a écrit :
>> Exterior view. I would welcome some science-y critiques regarding the
>> structure of the space station. The main things that are bugging me
>> right now are the positions of the solar panels and agridomes. I think
>> they are blocking each other with respect to the sun. But I don't know
>> where I *should* be putting them.
>
> The domes are blocking the solar pannels.
>
> I see two solutions:
> 1 - Place the domes closer to the station's body, maybe in a circle
> around it and push the pannels outward beyong the domes.
>
> 2 - Keep the current geometry, but rotate the domes or pannels 90°
> arount the main axis of the station.
>
> Alain
I would vote for second.
Also, think about symmetry and revolution: 4 panels and 2 agridomes,
they should be 60° apart of each other. To balance the torque, agridome
should be 180° of each other and if panels come in two kind, each kind
should be next to each other. (ABCABC when turning around the axis)
--
Just because nobody complains does not mean all parachutes are perfect.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2/9/2015 7:06 PM, Alain wrote:
> I see two solutions:
> 1 - Place the domes closer to the station's body, maybe in a circle
> around it and push the pannels outward beyong the domes.
This is interesting. This would induce "gravity", but the exposure to
the sun would not be as good since the domes would all face inwards.
> 2 - Keep the current geometry, but rotate the domes or pannels 90°
> arount the main axis of the station.
>
> Alain
Not sure if I understand. You mean at right angles with respect to each
other? I think Le_Forgeron has a better idea in this case.
Except that I think both of you misunderstand. The *entire* station does
not rotate around the central axis. Just the inner shell (currently
colored blue) rotates. The outer shell remains fixed. I don't have a
good explanation why I chose to do it this way.
Anyway, I've attached my latest design. The panels and domes are no
longer blocking each other. But I think it is ugly. :(
What do you think?
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'gh_scene_spinner_cutaway_05.png' (507 KB)
Preview of image 'gh_scene_spinner_cutaway_05.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 10/02/2015 19:11, Mike Horvath a écrit :
> On 2/9/2015 7:06 PM, Alain wrote:
>> I see two solutions:
>> 1 - Place the domes closer to the station's body, maybe in a circle
>> around it and push the pannels outward beyong the domes.
>
> This is interesting. This would induce "gravity", but the exposure to
> the sun would not be as good since the domes would all face inwards.
>
>
>
>
>
>> 2 - Keep the current geometry, but rotate the domes or pannels 90°
>> arount the main axis of the station.
>>
>> Alain
>
> Not sure if I understand. You mean at right angles with respect to each
> other? I think Le_Forgeron has a better idea in this case.
>
> Except that I think both of you misunderstand. The *entire* station does
> not rotate around the central axis. Just the inner shell (currently
> colored blue) rotates. The outer shell remains fixed. I don't have a
> good explanation why I chose to do it this way.
>
Fixed is relative. the outer shell should have a symmetry even if "not
moving". Or unless it is in a gravity field that would define a up and
down (such as in low orbit of a planet).
> Anyway, I've attached my latest design. The panels and domes are no
> longer blocking each other. But I think it is ugly. :(
>
And fragile: the connection of the solar panels are going to have so
much stress that they would break. Or you need to remove that 90° angle
> What do you think?
Assuming the rear is a nuclear pulse engine (detonating small nuclear
balls to get acceleration), the living blue zone is far to near the
engine, and the solar panels & agridome will get separated away from the
central body.
Also, given the kind of scale for the blue rotating cylinder, you should
have a small line of agridomes from the main body to the current group.
Which also mean that the current section of the support might actually
be unrealistic (they are too big in proportion), and the six shaped
stars might also enjoy being a mesh of triangular sections.
In Babylon 5, the central axis is a support for a transportation system
(kind of metro). Presently here, it does not seems to have a purpose and
its length (as a single segment) is unrealistic. Or I get really wrong
about the scale of the spinning colony.
About the solar panels: they are far too perfect on alignment. Can they
be folded independently ?
The length of the support of the agridomes also seems to be unjustified.
What about some agridome in construction or some docking station at the
very end ?
Powerful solar panels but the distance to the users seems huge: the lost
by joule effect might be important. It might be interesting for the
agridome that some solar panels act as mirror to provide more lights (so
they should be orientable to perform such purpose).
Last: how do you protect agridome from strong solar wind ? (in case of
solar eruption) Could the solar panels provide some shielding ?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2/10/2015 3:50 PM, Le_Forgeron wrote:
> Fixed is relative. the outer shell should have a symmetry even if "not
> moving". Or unless it is in a gravity field that would define a up and
> down (such as in low orbit of a planet).
The station was originally meant to stay in orbit around a planet. I'm
just now playing around with the idea of giving it engines and turning
it into a vehicle.
> Assuming the rear is a nuclear pulse engine (detonating small nuclear
> balls to get acceleration), the living blue zone is far to near the
> engine, and the solar panels & agridome will get separated away from the
> central body.
I'm going to expand the area between the habitable cylinder and the
cargo hold and engine a little.
> Also, given the kind of scale for the blue rotating cylinder, you should
> have a small line of agridomes from the main body to the current group.
Not sure what you mean without a sketch.
> Which also mean that the current section of the support might actually
> be unrealistic (they are too big in proportion), and the six shaped
> stars might also enjoy being a mesh of triangular sections.
Not sure what you mean.
> In Babylon 5, the central axis is a support for a transportation system
> (kind of metro). Presently here, it does not seems to have a purpose and
> its length (as a single segment) is unrealistic. Or I get really wrong
> about the scale of the spinning colony.
The central axis is actually the light source. It serves no structural
function.
> About the solar panels: they are far too perfect on alignment. Can they
> be folded independently ?
Not currently. I was looking at pictures of the ISS and it does seem the
solar panels are independently mobile. I would need to calculate the
optimal angle between each panel and the sun and I don't know how to do
that.
> The length of the support of the agridomes also seems to be unjustified.
> What about some agridome in construction or some docking station at the
> very end ?
I have an idea for the domes: create a ring around the station with the
agridomes facing inward. Inside this ring place a parabolic torus that
reflects the sunlight from outside into the agridomes. (I'm probably
going to work on this next.)
> Powerful solar panels but the distance to the users seems huge: the lost
> by joule effect might be important. It might be interesting for the
> agridome that some solar panels act as mirror to provide more lights (so
> they should be orientable to perform such purpose).
>
> Last: how do you protect agridome from strong solar wind ? (in case of
> solar eruption) Could the solar panels provide some shielding ?
I hadn't consider this. Shielding the agridomes would be difficult.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mike Horvath <mik### [at] gmail com> wrote:
> On 2/9/2015 7:06 PM, Alain wrote:
> > I see two solutions:
> > 1 - Place the domes closer to the station's body, maybe in a circle
> > around it and push the pannels outward beyong the domes.
>
> This is interesting. This would induce "gravity", but the exposure to
> the sun would not be as good since the domes would all face inwards.
>
>
>
>
>
> > 2 - Keep the current geometry, but rotate the domes or pannels 90°
> > arount the main axis of the station.
> >
> > Alain
>
> Not sure if I understand. You mean at right angles with respect to each
> other? I think Le_Forgeron has a better idea in this case.
>
> Except that I think both of you misunderstand. The *entire* station does
> not rotate around the central axis. Just the inner shell (currently
> colored blue) rotates. The outer shell remains fixed. I don't have a
> good explanation why I chose to do it this way.
>
> Anyway, I've attached my latest design. The panels and domes are no
> longer blocking each other. But I think it is ugly. :(
>
> What do you think?
certain features of your design need attention drawn to i think.
having a non-rotating nacelle over the rotating pseudo-gee habitat can provide
for shielding. figure up to two meters of concrete/regolith/plastic. with the
shielding separate from the hab, you do not have to invest in the angular
momentum. however, your design is a 'long tom'; rotating cylinders on such a
long axis are inherently unstable and will seek to precess to a rotation around
a more stable principle axis, with disastrous results. the instability can be
overcome i think by carefully orchestrated counterweights moving radially from
the axis of rotation, but clearance with your nacelle might be a problem. most
designs that deal with the stability problem just make the cylinder shorter,
more like 'square', diameter=length. 'kalpana one' is such a design; it is near
the size of yours.
if you intend to have near-earth-strength artificial illumination, then
consider the basic efficiency of photon-in (to the solar cell) vs photon-out
(from the lighting). ten percent is ridiculously high i suspect; but that would
mean having ten times the surface area of your hab in solar cell area, just for
lighting alone. usually this problem is solved with natural sunlight and
mirrors. a good example is the o'neill-type cylinders in alexis gilliland's
'rosinante' trilogy (available for kindle). instead of giant whirling plane
mirrors (at ten or twenty gees at the tips) gilliland embeds the habs in vast
conical arrays of small mirrors, each steerable. as a bonus, since the mirrors
are stationary, they can be heavy, and are dichroric mirrors reflecting only
visible light, no heat or u.v. also, since the novels are set in the asteroid
belt, much larger surface areas are needed than can be provided by the mirrors
of the classic o'neill cylinder.
you can hypothesize food plants that thrive in zero gee but that is a big leap
of faith. the classic o'neill cylinder had a ring of 'small' 'farm modules' to
feed the cylinder (the gilliland habs were in the business of agriculture). the
o'neill farms were rotating structures about the size of your spinner. even
stipulating zero gee crops, i am wondering, why the domes instead of flat
coverings (tho they do look cool). radiation protection is another concern; i
have forgotten if o'neill's 'high frontier' addressed it. in a 'current state
of the art' pragmatic cop-out, it might be necessary to move agriculture into
the main hab, send everybody 'underground'. coolness counts, tho, and every
design feature, or bug, can be rationalized away.
i fear my ideas seem limiting and stifling whereas i hope they inspire and help.
there are a lot of divergent ideas out there, and that is a good thing.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 15-02-10 13:11, Mike Horvath a écrit :
> On 2/9/2015 7:06 PM, Alain wrote:
>> I see two solutions:
>> 1 - Place the domes closer to the station's body, maybe in a circle
>> around it and push the pannels outward beyong the domes.
>
> This is interesting. This would induce "gravity", but the exposure to
> the sun would not be as good since the domes would all face inwards.
I did not mention turning the domes around, just move them around in a
circle pattern keeping the orientation the same.
By the way, you do need at least some gravity for the agridomes. Plants
don't grow correctly without some gravity.
If there is no gravity, you'll probably be limites to unicellular algae,
and the agridomes would be changed into agritanks...
>
>
>
>
>
>> 2 - Keep the current geometry, but rotate the domes or pannels 90°
>> arount the main axis of the station.
>>
>> Alain
>
> Not sure if I understand. You mean at right angles with respect to each
> other? I think Le_Forgeron has a better idea in this case.
Just keep the solar pannels as they are, and place the domes on an arm
going up and down relative to the present image.
>
> Except that I think both of you misunderstand. The *entire* station does
> not rotate around the central axis. Just the inner shell (currently
> colored blue) rotates. The outer shell remains fixed. I don't have a
> good explanation why I chose to do it this way.
I clearly remember that.
>
> Anyway, I've attached my latest design. The panels and domes are no
> longer blocking each other. But I think it is ugly. :(
>
> What do you think?
A third solution made possible by the stationary outer shell:
Have one or more "agri-arm" holding the agridomes or agritanks.
Have one or more "energy arm" holding the solar pannels.
Those two kinds of arms can be set in any non-obstructing pattern.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
