nasa science and exploration is not for the betterment of "human kind" and just discovery and pretty pictures..
its for water exploitation. as they want to be the moons water "reserves" owner. much like the US wants to control earths oils reserves
knowing private companies will need space fuel(hydrogen) and oxygen for asteroid mining. US gov wants to own and corner the market of the fuel and air market of space.
the colonists is not putting families on the moon for "expanding the human race". its going to be maintenance guys, engineers.
nasa has to get their first before elon/putin/xi takes the market.
elon want to be the space taxi but could with a few trips on starship get more stuff set up on the moon to corner the market. so nasa are now running at double speed and trying to contract its competitors via Artemis project to have a non compete in exchange for grants and privilege of other space industries
Topic: NASA Gives ICON $57 Million to Build a 3D Printer for Structures on the Moon (Read 131 times)
December 08, 2022, 06:33:12 AM
December 08, 2022, 02:49:08 AM
NASA can't even go to the moon, but they plan to spend 57 million USD for a 3D printer for "structures on the Moon"? Sounds hilarious to me.
The landing on the Moon back in 1969 was fake. Even Stanley Kubrick admitted that NASA hired him to shoot the "moon landings".
50 years later they can't land on the moon, even with more advanced technologies they have right now.
The 1969 "landing" on the moon was pure Cold War propaganda, simply because Kennedy promised this BS in the early 60s, NASA had to fake it and declare a "victory" against the USSR.
NASA is a bureaucratic organization, which has the whole purpose of stealing taxpayer's money and putting them into the pockets of corrupted government officials and a bunch of "chosen" companies.
Why Elon Musk wants to go to Mars instead of the Moon? The Moon seems like a way more achievable goal compared to Mars.
The landing on the Moon back in 1969 was fake. Even Stanley Kubrick admitted that NASA hired him to shoot the "moon landings".
50 years later they can't land on the moon, even with more advanced technologies they have right now.
The 1969 "landing" on the moon was pure Cold War propaganda, simply because Kennedy promised this BS in the early 60s, NASA had to fake it and declare a "victory" against the USSR.
NASA is a bureaucratic organization, which has the whole purpose of stealing taxpayer's money and putting them into the pockets of corrupted government officials and a bunch of "chosen" companies.
Why Elon Musk wants to go to Mars instead of the Moon? The Moon seems like a way more achievable goal compared to Mars.
December 08, 2022, 02:26:40 AM
for power.
dont imagine large fields of solar panels or a large nuclear power station the size of a football field
instead imagine a submarine engine..
yep you know the engines the navy use for housing and work space for 100+ sailors in a small colony metal tube in the sea where there is no air outside of the tube
so dont think "biodome" of a football field size green house of glass..
phase 1 would be submarine style living. in cylinder capsules with only a few port windows the size of a football(not a field)
as for the 3d printing. dont think "housing"
think concrete reservoirs to hold liquids in
water silos.. not houses
dont imagine large fields of solar panels or a large nuclear power station the size of a football field
instead imagine a submarine engine..
yep you know the engines the navy use for housing and work space for 100+ sailors in a small colony metal tube in the sea where there is no air outside of the tube
so dont think "biodome" of a football field size green house of glass..
phase 1 would be submarine style living. in cylinder capsules with only a few port windows the size of a football(not a field)
as for the 3d printing. dont think "housing"
think concrete reservoirs to hold liquids in
water silos.. not houses
December 08, 2022, 12:09:06 AM
That is true but I think is not efficient if we bring from earth since blast off from earth need energy too. The only way to split water into hydrogen and oxygen is by using electric that we can gather directly from sun. Right??
It's not just hydrogen, you need liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen for the booster stage on most rockets, not only you will need to melt water (if enough is available) you will also need to produce and store these fuels, with equipment that has to be brought from Earth. We have problems sending small stuff there, not 20 meters tall cooling and distillation columns that even with lower gravity would need heavy machinery to be installed, which will again have to be shipped from Earth.
The moment we can ship such loads there it's also the moment carrying the fuel for the return trip is no longer a concern.
December 07, 2022, 11:22:14 PM
You need more energy to split water into hydrogen and oxygen via electrolysis than the energy released by burning hydrogen, so it would be more efficient to ship the fuel from Earth directly, not even mentioning the fact that you're basically wasting a way more scarce resource which would need to be shipped in.
That is true but I think is not efficient if we bring from earth since blast off from earth need energy too. The only way to split water into hydrogen and oxygen is by using electric that we can gather directly from sun. Right??
December 07, 2022, 10:09:02 PM
Well, correct me if I am wrong..... but for the fusion to take place, would they not have to burn a lot of oxygen too? (Fire needs oxygen to burn ...right?)
You don't need oxygen for nuclear fusion as it's not chemical combustion where two elements react binding carbon to oxygen, in fusion you fuse together the nuclei of the atom releasing energy, the sun is not burning oxygen, it's fusing hydrogen into helium.
and you know that water is H20 combine between oxygen and hydrogen can be use as fusion and rocket fuel to transfer between Earth and Lunar Space Station. a
You need more energy to split water into hydrogen and oxygen via electrolysis than the energy released by burning hydrogen, so it would be more efficient to ship the fuel from Earth directly, not even mentioning the fact that you're basically wasting a way more scarce resource which would need to be shipped in.
December 07, 2022, 01:56:31 PM
Well, correct me if I am wrong..... but for the fusion to take place, would they not have to burn a lot of oxygen too? (Fire needs oxygen to burn ...right?)
A better method would possibly be to just build a underground settlement with a small window to the stars and the Sun for solar power. That way, you have much less exposure to the cold and elements (corrosion) and you burn less oxygen.
I hope they will also create a Moon coin for a currency, because work that are done from home....can also be done from the Moon... and a Moon currency can compete with a Mars coin in the future.
A better method would possibly be to just build a underground settlement with a small window to the stars and the Sun for solar power. That way, you have much less exposure to the cold and elements (corrosion) and you burn less oxygen.
I hope they will also create a Moon coin for a currency, because work that are done from home....can also be done from the Moon... and a Moon currency can compete with a Mars coin in the future.
As far as I have heard, scientists have researched that the moon has layers of ice, in this case, we can melt these layers and provide oxygen if we want to. We would be far from our most important energy sources if we stayed underground. Energy would be the most valuable commodity anywhere outside of Earth. So it seems more appropriate to build surfaced inhabitants than make an underground moon city.
December 07, 2022, 06:08:09 AM
Well, correct me if I am wrong..... but for the fusion to take place, would they not have to burn a lot of oxygen too? (Fire needs oxygen to burn ...right?)
As Far that I know Chinese Scientist and NASA has found water on surface of the Moon but of course this need to be reviewed again. (https://www.reuters.com/lifestyle/science/china-finds-signs-water-moons-ocean-storms-2022-06-17/#:~:text=BEIJING%2C%20June%2017%20(Reuters),question%20for%20future%20lunar%20exploration.)
and you know that water is H20 combine between oxygen and hydrogen can be use as fusion and rocket fuel to transfer between Earth and Lunar Space Station. and in fact I just knew it recently that some of meteorites have water in it
December 07, 2022, 01:40:28 AM
Well, correct me if I am wrong..... but for the fusion to take place, would they not have to burn a lot of oxygen too? (Fire needs oxygen to burn ...right?)
A better method would possibly be to just build a underground settlement with a small window to the stars and the Sun for solar power. That way, you have much less exposure to the cold and elements (corrosion) and you burn less oxygen.
I hope they will also create a Moon coin for a currency, because work that are done from home....can also be done from the Moon... and a Moon currency can compete with a Mars coin in the future.
A better method would possibly be to just build a underground settlement with a small window to the stars and the Sun for solar power. That way, you have much less exposure to the cold and elements (corrosion) and you burn less oxygen.
I hope they will also create a Moon coin for a currency, because work that are done from home....can also be done from the Moon... and a Moon currency can compete with a Mars coin in the future.
December 06, 2022, 09:34:45 AM
Quote
Austin, Texas-based 3D printing construction company ICON has gotten some pretty significant projects off the ground in recent years, from a 50-home development in Mexico to a 100-home neighborhood in Texas. This week the company won a NASA contract that will help it get an even bigger project much further off the ground—all the way to the moon, in fact.
The $57.2 million contract is intended to help ICON develop technologies for building infrastructure on the moon, like landing pads, houses, and roads. The goal is for ICON to build these lunar structures using local material—that is, moon houses built out of moon dust and moon rocks.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anBl7HEo5pY
“To change the space exploration paradigm from ‘there and back again’ to ‘there to stay,’ we’re going to need robust, resilient, and broadly capable systems that can use the local resources of the moon and other planetary bodies,” said ICON co-founder and CEO Jason Ballard in a press release.
Doing anything in space is ultra-expensive because you have to bring the materials and tools you need up from Earth. Imagine loading rockets with bricks or cement mix for 100 houses and flying them to the moon. Not only would this be cost-prohibitive, it could very well be a waste of time and resources because those building materials wouldn’t hold up on the lunar surface the same way they do on Earth.
“If you tried to plan a lunar settlement or a moon base and you had to bring everything with you, every time you wanted to build a new thing it’s like another $100M,” Ballard said. “But once you’ve got a system that can build almost anything—landing pads, roadways, habitats—and it uses local material, you are probably two or three orders of magnitude cheaper to build a permanent lunar presence than you would be in any other way that we can think of.”
ICON engineers plan to study lunar regolith to determine how it might behave when used as a building material. According to Payload, ICON’s regolith-based building process would look something like this: they’d put down an initial layer of moon dust and rocks in the shape of whatever they’re trying to build—say, the walls of a lunar habitat—then use a purpose-built laser to melt the regolith so that it would be permanently stuck together. Once the first layer solidified, they’d add another; it’s not so different from the way their 3D printers work on Earth.
The “printer” ICON is developing for use on the moon is called Olympus, and it looks something like a giant mechanical spider with a crane attached. It would land on the moon via commercial lander and drive itself to the build site to start processing regolith for construction.
Similar to how soil on different parts of Earth can vary greatly in composition—in some places it’s rockier, in others it’s sandier, in yet others it contains clay (and that’s not even to mention the differences in its chemical makeup)—the moon’s regolith isn’t quite the same all over. ICON will need to test how Olympus functions with different materials to make sure the tool will be usable on various parts of the moon.
The new NASA contract is actually a continuation of an existing US Air Force contract, partially funded by NASA, under which ICON was tasked with exploring commonalities between Earth-based and off-Earth applications of 3D printing construction. The contract runs through 2028 and includes a demonstration on the moon’s surface in 2026.
It all sounds pretty ambitious, and like something straight out of a sci-fi film. We’ll see how ICON’s plans play out over the next four years; various wrenches could get tossed into the project’s spokes and slow things down.
But Ballard is characteristically optimistic. “The final deliverable of this contract will be humanity’s first construction on another world, and that is going to be a pretty special achievement,” he said.
https://singularityhub.com/2022/12/01/nasa-gave-icon-57-million-to-build-a-3d-printer-for-structures-on-the-moon/
The $57.2 million contract is intended to help ICON develop technologies for building infrastructure on the moon, like landing pads, houses, and roads. The goal is for ICON to build these lunar structures using local material—that is, moon houses built out of moon dust and moon rocks.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anBl7HEo5pY
“To change the space exploration paradigm from ‘there and back again’ to ‘there to stay,’ we’re going to need robust, resilient, and broadly capable systems that can use the local resources of the moon and other planetary bodies,” said ICON co-founder and CEO Jason Ballard in a press release.
Doing anything in space is ultra-expensive because you have to bring the materials and tools you need up from Earth. Imagine loading rockets with bricks or cement mix for 100 houses and flying them to the moon. Not only would this be cost-prohibitive, it could very well be a waste of time and resources because those building materials wouldn’t hold up on the lunar surface the same way they do on Earth.
“If you tried to plan a lunar settlement or a moon base and you had to bring everything with you, every time you wanted to build a new thing it’s like another $100M,” Ballard said. “But once you’ve got a system that can build almost anything—landing pads, roadways, habitats—and it uses local material, you are probably two or three orders of magnitude cheaper to build a permanent lunar presence than you would be in any other way that we can think of.”
ICON engineers plan to study lunar regolith to determine how it might behave when used as a building material. According to Payload, ICON’s regolith-based building process would look something like this: they’d put down an initial layer of moon dust and rocks in the shape of whatever they’re trying to build—say, the walls of a lunar habitat—then use a purpose-built laser to melt the regolith so that it would be permanently stuck together. Once the first layer solidified, they’d add another; it’s not so different from the way their 3D printers work on Earth.
The “printer” ICON is developing for use on the moon is called Olympus, and it looks something like a giant mechanical spider with a crane attached. It would land on the moon via commercial lander and drive itself to the build site to start processing regolith for construction.
Similar to how soil on different parts of Earth can vary greatly in composition—in some places it’s rockier, in others it’s sandier, in yet others it contains clay (and that’s not even to mention the differences in its chemical makeup)—the moon’s regolith isn’t quite the same all over. ICON will need to test how Olympus functions with different materials to make sure the tool will be usable on various parts of the moon.
The new NASA contract is actually a continuation of an existing US Air Force contract, partially funded by NASA, under which ICON was tasked with exploring commonalities between Earth-based and off-Earth applications of 3D printing construction. The contract runs through 2028 and includes a demonstration on the moon’s surface in 2026.
It all sounds pretty ambitious, and like something straight out of a sci-fi film. We’ll see how ICON’s plans play out over the next four years; various wrenches could get tossed into the project’s spokes and slow things down.
But Ballard is characteristically optimistic. “The final deliverable of this contract will be humanity’s first construction on another world, and that is going to be a pretty special achievement,” he said.
https://singularityhub.com/2022/12/01/nasa-gave-icon-57-million-to-build-a-3d-printer-for-structures-on-the-moon/
....
Their version of 3d printing sounds a little different from standard norms:
Quote
According to Payload, ICON’s regolith-based building process would look something like this: they’d put down an initial layer of moon dust and rocks in the shape of whatever they’re trying to build—say, the walls of a lunar habitat—then use a purpose-built laser to melt the regolith so that it would be permanently stuck together. Once the first layer solidified, they’d add another; it’s not so different from the way their 3D printers work on Earth.
They plan to rearrange moon dust and moon rocks into the architectural shape they want to create. Then shoot the moon dust and moon rocks with a laser to melt it into a single unified structural mass.
The temperature at which dust and rocks melt coupled with the production quality of materials which can be achieved through this process. Crossed with the energy consumption of a laser powerful enough to have a chance of producing enough cubic yards of material for construction within a reasonable timeframe. Would appear to indicate engineers involved in this project have a few interesting problems to solve.
A better approach might be pack brick molds with moon dust to produce standardized interlocking bricks which could be used to construct both habitats and aerospace structures.
Jump to: