3 ms·
I'm with you here - I'm really not sure how a load of lab studies [in a gravity well], theoretical papers [also in a gravity well] and some fairly predictable p
by detritus 8y ago
I'm with you here - I'm really not sure how a load of lab studies [in a gravity well], theoretical papers [also in a gravity well] and some fairly predictable processes in low gravity equate to humanity's 'knowing' how to 'do' a wide range of heavy industrial processes that haven't, for the very most part, ever even been attempted.
I have a fairly hands on job in many ways - one that allows me to explore and develop techniques - so whilst I can often envisage solutions in advance, I'd think it absolute hubris to claim I 'know' much until I've actually done it and proven it.
As far as I'm aware, I can't think of anything in even the light industrial range of development that's actually been tried in orbit or low gravity, off-surface.
Certainly not enough to deserve being smeared by accusations of ignorance... .
- ed
I suppose construction of the ISS from pre-made components might qualify as 'light industrial'.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- Robotbeat 8y agoIt's pretty simple, actually. You put the process you developed in a centrifuge if it doesn't work in microgravity. Much of the life support (and water recovery) system on ISS (which is just a large collection of several industrial processes) uses centrifuges for this purpose.
- detritus 8y agoYou make it sound so easy! Consider a 'simple' example — what might the effect be of a high speed, high mass 'drilling widget' be in such a body? Not much, probably, at least in the very short term. Cumulatively though? A device weighing a few hundred KG, rotating at a few thousand RPM for a few hours or days or weeks at a time? What effect do you think that might have on your 'quite simple' centripetal environment, floating as it is in zero g? Sure, it can be accounted for — but it's not 'pretty simple, actually'. Anything but.