Space elevator - Revision history

Michel Lamontagne: /* Standard concept */

2022-10-05T19:17:59Z

Standard concept

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:17, 5 October 2022
Line 15:		Line 15:
	The standard concept is for a system with a cabin, otherwise known as a climber, moving up or down a cable, often called a tether. The cable extends beyond the geostationary orbit to act as a counterweight to the cable.		The standard concept is for a system with a cabin, otherwise known as a climber, moving up or down a cable, often called a tether. The cable extends beyond the geostationary orbit to act as a counterweight to the cable.

	There are already competitions to build climbing technologies, aiming to construct a machine that is able to climb a cable with a velocity of at least 1 meter per second.		*There are already competitions to build climbing technologies, aiming to construct a machine that is able to climb a cable with a velocity of at least 1 meter per second.

	The space elevator uses less energy than a chemical rocket for the same service. On Mars, propellant is produced from electricity so the costs are directly comparable. Due to the rocket equation, a rocket necessary requires more energy than a space elevator. However, the mass ratio to reach orbit on Mars is 3, while the mass ratio for Earth is 19. So the advantage on Mars is less important than for the Earth.		*The space elevator uses less energy than a chemical rocket for the same service. On Mars, propellant is produced from electricity so the costs are directly comparable. Due to the rocket equation, a rocket necessary requires more energy than a space elevator. However, the mass ratio to reach orbit on Mars is 3, while the mass ratio for Earth is 19. So the advantage on Mars is less important than for the Earth.

	An interesting complement to the elevator concept is that the end can serve as an economical launch platform, as it is moving faster than Mars escape velocity.		*An interesting complement to the elevator concept is that the end can serve as an economical launch platform, as it is moving faster than Mars escape velocity.

	===The moon problem===		===The moon problem===

Michel Lamontagne: /* Calculation of taper ratio */

2019-06-03T01:00:48Z

Calculation of taper ratio

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:00, 3 June 2019
Line 34:		Line 34:

	Where:		Where:

			T: Material yield strength (GPa)

			p: density of material (kg/m3)
	{\| class="wikitable"		{\| class="wikitable"
			\| colspan="5" \|'''Taper ratios'''
			\|-
	\|		\|
	\|		\|

Michel Lamontagne: /* The moon problem */

2019-06-03T00:56:29Z

The moon problem

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:56, 3 June 2019
Line 22:		Line 22:

	===The moon problem===		===The moon problem===
	The moons [[Phobos]] and [[Deimos]] are in low orbit and intersect the cable in intervals. To cope with this situation an active adjustment of the cable's position might be required to avoid a collision. [[Bringing down Phobos]] would abolish part of the problem. The Deimos problem might be solved by replacing the extension of the elevator by a counterweight located below Deimos' orbit. A non equatorial space tether<ref>https://gassend.net/publications/NonEquatorialUniformStressSpaceElevators.pdf</ref> might allow for sufficient distance from the orbit of Phobos, if such an infrastructure can be build and put in place. There should be few additional costs for a non equatorial cable. The tether anchoring force required to move the attachment point away from the equator does not seem to be excessive and the change in length is minimal.		The moons [[Phobos]] and [[Deimos]] are in low orbit and intersect the cable in intervals. To cope with this situation an active adjustment of the cable's position might be required to avoid a collision. [[Bringing down Phobos]] would abolish part of the problem. The Deimos problem might be solved by replacing the extension of the elevator by a counterweight located below Deimos' orbit. A non equatorial space tether<ref>https://gassend.net/publications/NonEquatorialUniformStressSpaceElevators.pdf</ref> might allow for sufficient distance from the orbit of Phobos, if such an infrastructure can be build and put in place. There should be few additional costs for a non equatorial cable. The tether anchoring force required to move the attachment point away from the equator does not seem to be excessive and the change in length is minimal. However, since the cable does not pass by the equator, there are no orbits that intercept the cable at non zero velocity. This introduces added complications to docking with the cable.

	Providing the Deimos problem can be solved, a space elevator is much easier on Mars than on the Earth. Due to the lower gravity and smaller length, a Mars elevator could be made from existing materials.		Providing the Deimos problem can be solved, a space elevator is much easier on Mars than on the Earth. Due to the lower gravity and smaller length, a Mars elevator could be made from existing materials.

Michel Lamontagne: /* See also */

2019-05-25T02:32:45Z

Michel Lamontagne: /* Original concept */

2019-05-25T02:31:54Z

Original concept

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:31, 25 May 2019
Line 4:		Line 4:
	Since the [[gravity]] of Mars is lower than the gravity of [[Earth]] the requirements to the tensile strength of the rope is less, making this construction easier.		Since the [[gravity]] of Mars is lower than the gravity of [[Earth]] the requirements to the tensile strength of the rope is less, making this construction easier.

	==~~Original concept~~==		==History==
	The original concept for a "Space Tower" can be traced back to Konstantin Tsiolkovsky,<ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konstantin_Tsiolkovsky Wikipedia article about Konstantin Tsiolkovsky]</ref> a Russian rocket and space pioneer. He is quoted as saying in 1895:<ref>[http://www.enterprisemission.com/moon5.htm ''Moon with a View: Or, What Did Arthur Know... and When Did He Know it?'' - Richard C. Hoagland, 2005.]</ref>		The original concept for a "Space Tower" can be traced back to Konstantin Tsiolkovsky,<ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konstantin_Tsiolkovsky Wikipedia article about Konstantin Tsiolkovsky]</ref> a Russian rocket and space pioneer. He is quoted as saying in 1895:<ref>[http://www.enterprisemission.com/moon5.htm ''Moon with a View: Or, What Did Arthur Know... and When Did He Know it?'' - Richard C. Hoagland, 2005.]</ref>

Line 11:		Line 11:
	Naturally, the Space ''Tower'' would be crushed under it's own weight, so the idea of a Space ''Elevator'' was born. In 1960, Yuri N. Artsutanov,<ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuri_N._Artsutanov Wikipedia article about Yuri N. Artsutanov]</ref> a Russian engineer, conceived the possibility of using a "skyhook" where a satellite is inserted into geosynchronous orbit and a cable lowered to the Earth's surface. As the cable is lowered, a counterweight is attached to the satellite and pushed into higher and higher orbit, thus keeping the cable's center-of-mass in a constant position. Once attached, the cable would be under tension, allowing payloads to be transported into the satellite's orbit.		Naturally, the Space ''Tower'' would be crushed under it's own weight, so the idea of a Space ''Elevator'' was born. In 1960, Yuri N. Artsutanov,<ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuri_N._Artsutanov Wikipedia article about Yuri N. Artsutanov]</ref> a Russian engineer, conceived the possibility of using a "skyhook" where a satellite is inserted into geosynchronous orbit and a cable lowered to the Earth's surface. As the cable is lowered, a counterweight is attached to the satellite and pushed into higher and higher orbit, thus keeping the cable's center-of-mass in a constant position. Once attached, the cable would be under tension, allowing payloads to be transported into the satellite's orbit.

	~~==Orbit-to-surface concept==~~
	[[File:Mars space elevator.jpg\|thumb\|550x550px\|Space elevator and radius of Martian moons.\|alt=]]		[[File:Mars space elevator.jpg\|thumb\|550x550px\|Space elevator and radius of Martian moons.\|alt=]]
	~~For the purpose of building an [[autonomous colony]] the transportation from orbit down to the Martian surface~~ is ~~the main focus. For this use case~~ a ~~climbing technology is not necessary~~, ~~and the elevator is much simpler. Only~~ a ~~brake needs to be installed in the cabin~~, ~~preventing free falling~~. ~~In this case every transport down~~ the ~~rope consumes~~ a ~~new cabin~~.		==Standard concept==
			The standard concept is for a system with a cabin, otherwise known as a climber, moving up or down a cable, often called a tether. The cable extends beyond the geostationary orbit to act as a counterweight to the cable.

	~~===Advantages===~~		There are already competitions to build climbing technologies, aiming to construct a machine that is able to climb a cable with a velocity of at least 1 meter per second.

	*No fuel is ~~required~~ to ~~be burnt~~. ~~This concept might be cheaper than traditional [[rocketry]]~~, ~~and potentially reduces~~ the mass to ~~launch off Earth.~~		The space elevator uses less energy than a chemical rocket for the same service. On Mars, propellant is produced from electricity so the costs are directly comparable. Due to the rocket equation, a rocket necessary requires more energy than a space elevator. However, the mass ratio to reach orbit on Mars is 3, while the mass ratio for Earth is 19. So the advantage on Mars is less important than for the Earth.
	*Smooth landing, ~~suitable~~ for ~~fragile machinery~~.
	*If surface to orbit is implemented, the ~~elevator end can serve as a launch platform, as it~~ is ~~moving faster~~ than ~~Mars escape velocity~~.

	~~===Challenges===~~		An interesting complement to the elevator concept is that the end can serve as an economical launch platform, as it is moving faster than Mars escape velocity.
	~~The moons [[Phobos]] and [[Deimos]] are in low orbit and intersect~~ the ~~cable in intervals. To cope with this situation~~ an ~~active adjustment of the cable's position~~ is ~~required to avoid a collision. [[Bringing down Phobos]] would abolish part of the problem~~.

	The Deimos problem might be solved by replacing the extension of the elevator by a counterweight located below Deimos' orbit.		===The moon problem===
			The moons [[Phobos]] and [[Deimos]] are in low orbit and intersect the cable in intervals. To cope with this situation an active adjustment of the cable's position might be required to avoid a collision. [[Bringing down Phobos]] would abolish part of the problem. The Deimos problem might be solved by replacing the extension of the elevator by a counterweight located below Deimos' orbit. A non equatorial space tether<ref>https://gassend.net/publications/NonEquatorialUniformStressSpaceElevators.pdf</ref> might allow for sufficient distance from the orbit of Phobos, if such an infrastructure can be build and put in place. There should be few additional costs for a non equatorial cable. The tether anchoring force required to move the attachment point away from the equator does not seem to be excessive and the change in length is minimal.
	~~Alternatively, a~~ non equatorial space tether<ref>https://gassend.net/publications/NonEquatorialUniformStressSpaceElevators.pdf</ref> might allow for sufficient distance from the orbit of Phobos, if such an infrastructure can be build and put in place. There should be few additional costs for a non equatorial cable. The tether anchoring force required to move the attachment point away from the equator does not seem to be excessive and the change in length is minimal.

	~~==Phobos elevator==~~
	A variation on the space elevator idea is the Phobos elevator<ref>https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20030065879.pdf</ref>. This would significantly reduce the cost of lifting material from the Surface of Mars by using a suspended tether down into the martian atmosphere and an extended tether up towards space. Phobos itself would serve as source of the construction material for the elevator.

	~~==Standard concept==~~
	~~the standard concept is for a system with a cabin, otherwise known as a climber~~. ~~There are already competitions to build climbing technologies, aiming to construct a machine that is able to climb a cable with a velocity of at least 1 meter per second.~~

	Providing the Deimos problem can be solved, a space elevator is much easier on Mars than on the Earth. Due to the lower gravity and smaller length, a Mars elevator could be made from existing materials.		Providing the Deimos problem can be solved, a space elevator is much easier on Mars than on the Earth. Due to the lower gravity and smaller length, a Mars elevator could be made from existing materials.

	The space elevator uses less energy than a chemical rocket for the same service. On Mars, propellant is produced from electricity so the costs are directly comparable. Due to the rocket equation, a rocket necessary requires more energy than a space elevator. However, the mass ratio to reach orbit on Mars is 3, while the mass ratio for Earth is 19. So the advantage on Mars is less important than for the Earth.
	===Technical analysis===		===Technical analysis===
	This section is derived from a paper by P. K. Aravind Department of Physics, Worcester Polytechnic Institute<ref>http://users.wpi.edu/~paravind/Publications/PKASpace%20Elevators.pdf</ref>		This section is derived from a paper by P. K. Aravind Department of Physics, Worcester Polytechnic Institute<ref>http://users.wpi.edu/~paravind/Publications/PKASpace%20Elevators.pdf</ref>

	==== '''Calculation of taper ratio''' ====		===='''Calculation of taper ratio'''====
	A tapered cable offers better performance than a constant section cable. The taper ratio equation is the following:		A tapered cable offers better performance than a constant section cable. The taper ratio equation is the following:

Line 107:		Line 95:
	\|}		\|}

	==== '''Calculation of cable length''' ====		===='''Calculation of cable length'''====
	The calculation for the cable length, with the external cable acting as a counterweight for the internal cable, is the following:		The calculation for the cable length, with the external cable acting as a counterweight for the internal cable, is the following:

Line 123:		Line 111:

	In the short term, the Mars space elevator seems costly and less effective than chemical rocketry. Once an important in-situ production capacity is in place, the transportation costs go away and the structure might be more interesting economically. The development of carbon nanotubes in practical wires would also favor the space elevator.		In the short term, the Mars space elevator seems costly and less effective than chemical rocketry. Once an important in-situ production capacity is in place, the transportation costs go away and the structure might be more interesting economically. The development of carbon nanotubes in practical wires would also favor the space elevator.

			==Orbit-to-surface concept==
			For the purpose of building an [[autonomous colony]] the transportation from orbit down to the Martian surface is the main focus. For this use case a climbing technology is not necessary, and the elevator is much simpler. Only a brake needs to be installed in the cabin, preventing free falling. In this case every transport down the rope consumes a new cabin

			=== Advantages ===

			*No fuel is required to be burnt. This concept might be cheaper than traditional [[rocketry]], and potentially reduces the mass to launch off Earth.
			*Smooth landing, suitable for fragile machinery.
			*Could have a high traffic volume as the movement is only one way.

			=== Disadvantages ===

			* Remains heavy.
			* Fuel is required to match velocity with the cable. This may use more fuel than direct entry and aerodynamic braking.

			==Phobos elevator concept==
			A variation on the space elevator idea is the Phobos elevator<ref>https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20030065879.pdf</ref>. This would significantly reduce the cost of lifting material from the Surface of Mars by using a suspended tether down into the martian atmosphere and an extended tether up towards space. Phobos itself would serve as source of the construction material for the elevator.

	==In Science-Fiction==		==In Science-Fiction==

Michel Lamontagne: /* Current Technological Approach */

2019-05-24T18:21:03Z

Current Technological Approach

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:21, 24 May 2019
Line 31:		Line 31:
	A variation on the space elevator idea is the Phobos elevator<ref>https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20030065879.pdf</ref>. This would significantly reduce the cost of lifting material from the Surface of Mars by using a suspended tether down into the martian atmosphere and an extended tether up towards space. Phobos itself would serve as source of the construction material for the elevator.		A variation on the space elevator idea is the Phobos elevator<ref>https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20030065879.pdf</ref>. This would significantly reduce the cost of lifting material from the Surface of Mars by using a suspended tether down into the martian atmosphere and an extended tether up towards space. Phobos itself would serve as source of the construction material for the elevator.

	==~~Current Technological Approach~~==		==Standard concept==
	There are already competitions to build climbing technologies, aiming to construct a machine that is able to climb a cable with a velocity of at least 1 meter per second.		the standard concept is for a system with a cabin, otherwise known as a climber. There are already competitions to build climbing technologies, aiming to construct a machine that is able to climb a cable with a velocity of at least 1 meter per second.

	Providing the Deimos problem can be solved, a space elevator is much easier on Mars than on the Earth. Due to the lower gravity and smaller length, a Mars elevator could be made from existing materials.		Providing the Deimos problem can be solved, a space elevator is much easier on Mars than on the Earth. Due to the lower gravity and smaller length, a Mars elevator could be made from existing materials.

	The space elevator uses less energy than a chemical rocket for the same service. On Mars, propellant is produced from electricity so the costs are directly comparable. Due to the rocket equation, a rocket necessary requires more energy than a space elevator. However, the mass ratio to reach orbit on Mars is 3, while the mass ratio for Earth is 19. So the advantage on Mars is less important than for the Earth.		The space elevator uses less energy than a chemical rocket for the same service. On Mars, propellant is produced from electricity so the costs are directly comparable. Due to the rocket equation, a rocket necessary requires more energy than a space elevator. However, the mass ratio to reach orbit on Mars is 3, while the mass ratio for Earth is 19. So the advantage on Mars is less important than for the Earth.
	==Technical analysis==		===Technical analysis===
	This section is derived from a paper by P. K. Aravind Department of Physics, Worcester Polytechnic Institute<ref>http://users.wpi.edu/~paravind/Publications/PKASpace%20Elevators.pdf</ref>		This section is derived from a paper by P. K. Aravind Department of Physics, Worcester Polytechnic Institute<ref>http://users.wpi.edu/~paravind/Publications/PKASpace%20Elevators.pdf</ref>

	'''Calculation of taper ratio'''		==== '''Calculation of taper ratio''' ====

	A tapered cable offers better performance than a constant section cable. The taper ratio equation is the following:		A tapered cable offers better performance than a constant section cable. The taper ratio equation is the following:

Line 107:		Line 106:
	\|1.6		\|1.6
	\|}		\|}
	~~'''Calculation of cable length'''~~

	The calculation for ~~hte~~ cable length, with the external cable acting as a counterweight for the internal cable, is the following:		==== '''Calculation of cable length''' ====
			The calculation for the cable length, with the external cable acting as a counterweight for the internal cable, is the following:

	H=R/2*(sqrt(1+8(Rg/R)<sup>3</sup>)-1)		H=R/2*(sqrt(1+8(Rg/R)<sup>3</sup>)-1)
Line 117:		Line 116:
	Based on these numbers, the author finds that a counterweighted carbon nanotubes cable capable of supporting a 1000 kg lifter would mass 150 tonnes.		Based on these numbers, the author finds that a counterweighted carbon nanotubes cable capable of supporting a 1000 kg lifter would mass 150 tonnes.

	Based on these proportions, a similar cable on Mars would mass about 75 tonnes. A cable made from Zylon , for the same capabilities, might mass 1000 tonnes.		Based on these proportions, a similar cable on Mars would mass about 75 tonnes. A cable made from Zylon, for the same capabilities, might mass 1000 tonnes, since the tapper ratio is 13 times higher.

	The throughput of such a cable would be quite low. Supposing a velocity of 1000 km per hour travel on the cable would require 69 hours~~, or almost 3 days~~. With a cargo of 500 kg on the climber, the yearly transfer rate would be about ~~120~~ trips per year, or about 60 tonnes. This is clearly inadequate for a space settlement and such a structure would need to support a number of vehicles moving simultaneously, carrying higher masses and probably at higher velocities. For ~~600~~ tonnes per year the cable might mass 10 000 tonnes, and for ~~6000~~ tonnes per year 60 000 tonnes.		The throughput of such a cable would be quite low. Supposing a velocity of 1000 km per hour travel on the cable would require 20 hours. With a cargo of 500 kg on the climber, the yearly transfer rate would be about 360 trips per year, or about 200 tonnes. This is clearly inadequate for a space settlement and such a structure would need to support a number of vehicles moving simultaneously, carrying higher masses and probably at higher velocities. For 2000 tonnes per year the cable might mass 10 000 tonnes, and for 20 000 tonnes per year 100 000 tonnes.

	The cost of the cable, if fabricated on Earth, would be mostly transportation. At 500$ per kg, for example, the 600 tonnes per year capacity cable would cost a minimum of 5 billion dollars. Plus fabrication costs. This does not seem cost effective compared to chemical rocketry. In particular if the vehicles uses aerobraking for landing, and therefore very little propellant.		The cost of the cable, if fabricated on Earth, would be mostly transportation. At 500$ per kg, for example, the 600 tonnes per year capacity cable would cost a minimum of 5 billion dollars. Plus fabrication costs. This does not seem cost effective compared to chemical rocketry. In particular if the vehicles uses aerobraking for landing, and therefore very little propellant.

Michel Lamontagne at 20:45, 16 May 2019

2019-05-16T20:45:20Z

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 [[Image:Space_elevator.jpg|thumb|300px|right|An artists impression of a "climber" ascending a '''space elevator''' from Earth. A similar model can be used on Mars.]]
 The transport from Mars' surface to Mars' orbit and vice versa can be achieved by a '''Space Elevator'''. The idea is to install a high-tensile rope from the surface to the [[synchronous orbit]] and a certain length beyond, connected to a counter weight.
@@ Line 12: / Line 11: @@
 Naturally, the Space ''Tower'' would be crushed under it's own weight, so the idea of a Space ''Elevator'' was born. In 1960, Yuri N. Artsutanov,<ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuri_N._Artsutanov Wikipedia article about Yuri N. Artsutanov]</ref> a Russian engineer, conceived the possibility of using a "skyhook" where a satellite is inserted into geosynchronous orbit and a cable lowered to the Earth's surface. As the cable is lowered, a counterweight is attached to the satellite and pushed into higher and higher orbit, thus keeping the cable's center-of-mass in a constant position. Once attached, the cable would be under tension, allowing payloads to be transported into the satellite's orbit.
-==Equations==
+==Orbit-to-surface concept==
 This section is derived from a paper by P. K. Aravind Department of Physics, Worcester Polytechnic Institute<ref>http://users.wpi.edu/~paravind/Publications/PKASpace%20Elevators.pdf</ref>
@@ Line 96: / Line 121: @@
 The throughput of such a cable would be quite low. Supposing a velocity of 1000 km per hour travel on the cable would require 69 hours, or almost 3 days.  With a cargo of 500 kg on the climber, the yearly transfer rate would be about 120 trips per year, or about 60 tonnes.  This is clearly inadequate for a space settlement and such a structure would need to support a number of vehicles moving simultaneously, carrying higher masses and probably at higher velocities.  For 600 tonnes per year the cable might mass 10 000 tonnes, and for 6000 tonnes per year 60 000 tonnes.
-==Orbit-to-surface concept==
+The cost of the cable, if fabricated on Earth, would be mostly transportation.  At 500$ per kg, for example, the 600 tonnes per year capacity cable would cost a minimum of 5 billion dollars.  Plus fabrication costs.  This does not seem cost effective compared to chemical rocketry.  In particular if the vehicles uses aerobraking for landing, and therefore very little propellant.
-==Phobos elevator==
+In the short term, the Mars space elevator seems costly and less effective than chemical rocketry.  Once an important in-situ production capacity is in place, the transportation costs go away and the structure might be more interesting economically.  The development of carbon nanotubes in practical wires would also favor the space elevator.
 ==In Science-Fiction==
@@ Line 130: / Line 130: @@
 *In '''Star Trek: Voyager''' episode ''Rise'' the idea of a space elevator is part the story.<ref>[http://www.startrek.com/startrek/view/news/article/6019.html Space Elevator in Star Trek]</ref>
 ==See also==

Michel Lamontagne at 20:31, 16 May 2019

2019-05-16T20:31:32Z

Show changes

Michel Lamontagne: /* Orbit-to-surface concept */

2019-05-16T18:53:59Z

Orbit-to-surface concept

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:53, 16 May 2019
Line 11:		Line 11:

	Naturally, the Space ''Tower'' would be crushed under it's own weight, so the idea of a Space ''Elevator'' was born. In 1960, Yuri N. Artsutanov,<ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuri_N._Artsutanov Wikipedia article about Yuri N. Artsutanov]</ref> a Russian engineer, conceived the possibility of using a "skyhook" where a satellite is inserted into geosynchronous orbit and a cable lowered to the Earth's surface. As the cable is lowered, a counterweight is attached to the satellite and pushed into higher and higher orbit, thus keeping the cable's center-of-mass in a constant position. Once attached, the cable would be under tension, allowing payloads to be transported into the satellite's orbit.		Naturally, the Space ''Tower'' would be crushed under it's own weight, so the idea of a Space ''Elevator'' was born. In 1960, Yuri N. Artsutanov,<ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuri_N._Artsutanov Wikipedia article about Yuri N. Artsutanov]</ref> a Russian engineer, conceived the possibility of using a "skyhook" where a satellite is inserted into geosynchronous orbit and a cable lowered to the Earth's surface. As the cable is lowered, a counterweight is attached to the satellite and pushed into higher and higher orbit, thus keeping the cable's center-of-mass in a constant position. Once attached, the cable would be under tension, allowing payloads to be transported into the satellite's orbit.

			== Equations ==
			This section is derived from a paper by P. K. Aravind Department of Physics, Worcester Polytechnic Institute<ref>http://users.wpi.edu/~paravind/Publications/PKASpace%20Elevators.pdf</ref>

			Taper ratio

			Mass of cable

	==Orbit-to-surface concept==		==Orbit-to-surface concept==
	For the purpose of building an [[autonomous colony]] the transportation from orbit down to the Martian surface is the main focus. For this use case a climbing technology is not necessary, and the elevator is much simpler. Only a brake needs to be installed in the cabin, preventing free falling. In this case every transport down the rope consumes a new cabin. Advantages ~~can be:~~		For the purpose of building an [[autonomous colony]] the transportation from orbit down to the Martian surface is the main focus. For this use case a climbing technology is not necessary, and the elevator is much simpler. Only a brake needs to be installed in the cabin, preventing free falling. In this case every transport down the rope consumes a new cabin.

			=== Advantages ===

	*No fuel is required to be burnt. This concept might be cheaper than traditional [[rocketry]], and potentially reduces the mass to launch off Earth.		*No fuel is required to be burnt. This concept might be cheaper than traditional [[rocketry]], and potentially reduces the mass to launch off Earth.

Michel Lamontagne at 15:51, 16 May 2019

2019-05-16T15:51:01Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:51, 16 May 2019
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[Image:Space_elevator.jpg\|thumb\|300px\|right\|An artists impression of a "climber" ascending a '''space elevator''' from Earth. A similar model can be used on Mars.]]		[[Image:Space_elevator.jpg\|thumb\|300px\|right\|An artists impression of a "climber" ascending a '''space elevator''' from Earth. A similar model can be used on Mars.]]
	[[File:Mars space elevator.jpg\|thumb\|550x550px\|Space elevator and Martian moons.\|alt=]]		[[File:Mars space elevator.jpg\|thumb\|550x550px\|Space elevator and radius of Martian moons.\|alt=]]
	The transport from Mars' surface to Mars' orbit and vice versa can be achieved by a '''Space Elevator'''. The idea is to install a high-tensile rope from the surface to the [[synchronous orbit]] and a certain length beyond, connected to a counter weight.		The transport from Mars' surface to Mars' orbit and vice versa can be achieved by a '''Space Elevator'''. The idea is to install a high-tensile rope from the surface to the [[synchronous orbit]] and a certain length beyond, connected to a counter weight.

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:32, 25 May 2019
Line 115:		Line 115:
	For the purpose of building an [[autonomous colony]] the transportation from orbit down to the Martian surface is the main focus. For this use case a climbing technology is not necessary, and the elevator is much simpler. Only a brake needs to be installed in the cabin, preventing free falling. In this case every transport down the rope consumes a new cabin		For the purpose of building an [[autonomous colony]] the transportation from orbit down to the Martian surface is the main focus. For this use case a climbing technology is not necessary, and the elevator is much simpler. Only a brake needs to be installed in the cabin, preventing free falling. In this case every transport down the rope consumes a new cabin

	=== Advantages ===		===Advantages===

	*No fuel is required to be burnt. This concept might be cheaper than traditional [[rocketry]], and potentially reduces the mass to launch off Earth.		*No fuel is required to be burnt. This concept might be cheaper than traditional [[rocketry]], and potentially reduces the mass to launch off Earth.
Line 121:		Line 121:
	*Could have a high traffic volume as the movement is only one way.		*Could have a high traffic volume as the movement is only one way.

	=== Disadvantages ===		===Disadvantages===

	* Remains heavy.		*Remains heavy.
	* Fuel is required to match velocity with the cable. This may use more fuel than direct entry and aerodynamic braking.		*Fuel is required to match velocity with the cable. This may use more fuel than direct entry and aerodynamic braking.

	==Phobos elevator concept==		==Phobos elevator concept==
Line 138:		Line 138:

	*[[Space access]]		*[[Space access]]
			*Space elevator calculation spreadsheet

	==External links==		==External links==