Jump to content

Space Station construction


strudo76

Recommended Posts

Hi all

Just wondering about how space stations in real life are constructed. In KSP I generally build something with docking ports on the ends and connect new modules to those, and build out the station that way. Is that how it's generally done on something like the IIS? Also thought about using something like KAS to hard joint new parts on the end, but that seems to me to be something of an unlikely method for real life constructions. The construction docking ports included with some mod (MKS maybe? Can't remember exactly) seem like a good idea, but also seem like a more magic method as opposed to something that might actually happen.

Just thinking about things to keep things in the realm of possibilities, in a Kerbal style way :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Short answer: Yes.

Long answer: Huh. Why i can't paste a YouTube link to relevant animation now? Sorry for that. Just type "ISS building animation" in YT search bar.

 

Edited by Scotius
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In real life? Either on the ground, and then launched in one piece, or launched in separate pieces.

Mir used docking ports, while the ISS uses the Common Berthing Mechanism and docking ports. Berthing is generally more complex.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mir and the Russian section of the ISS, were built that way. This is the simplest method, but can be seen as wasteful, because each module is its own autonomous spacecraft, and therefore expensive, with manœuvering engines, RCS, docking computers, solar panels, comms, etc... 

The US section of the ISS was built with the Shuttle. Each module is a "dumb canister" that cannot survive on its own but is much simpler and cheaper. The drawback is that it required an expensive Shuttle flight and manual assembly. The Shuttle brought up each module and assembled it with the Canadarm.

An alternative is the reusable space tug. You launch a module into orbit, then you send a reusable tug to retrieve it, bring it to the station, and dock. Then you can release the tug for the next module. The drawback of this is that you need to refuel the tug, which makes operations more complex.

Edited by Nibb31
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Nibb31 said:

Each module is a "dumb canister" that cannot survive on its own but is much simpler and cheaper. The drawback is that it required an expensive Shuttle flight and manual assembly.

I think I read somewhere that they had to be "connected" manually at some point, and is now non-separable ? I know the russian modules all have probe-and-drogue, but how does that one works ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, YNM said:

I think I read somewhere that they had to be "connected" manually at some point, and is now non-separable ? I know the russian modules all have probe-and-drogue, but how does that one works ?

The berthing was done with the arm, either on shuttle or on station itself. Assume they had to connect piping and cabling together afterward, good chance for some extra bolts for safety and stability. 
And if you disconnect one of the modules they would simply be space junk unless you used an tug on them 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, YNM said:

I think I read somewhere that they had to be "connected" manually at some point, and is now non-separable ?

As Magnemoe said, the US modules are connected via CBM ports and permanently bolted, but there are also external and internal connections for coolant loops, cables, fluids, etc... Removing all those connections isn't impossible, but would be stupidly long and difficult process involving many EVAs. EVAs are complicated, expensive, and risky, so they are to be avoided as much as possible.

However, NASA has relocated the Leonardo PMM module (ex-MPLM) and the PMA adapters (docking ports), which are less permanently installed.

Quote

I know the russian modules all have probe-and-drogue, but how does that one works ?

Probe and drogue can usually be disconnected without any problems, but they might also have some external power and fluid linkages that would need to be disconnected first.

Note that on Mir, most of the modules were disconnected and moved around at one point. Each module docked to the Mir Core using the central port. Then they were moved with a robotic arm to the radial ports. Presumably this is because only the central port was equipped for automatic docking.

By the way, Zarya is actually a US module. It was purchased by NASA from the Russians to avoid developing their own service module and it uses APAS to connect with Unity/Node 1.

Edited by Nibb31
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Afaik, originally, Almaz's docking port (that one for FGB-derived) was equipped with several (eight?) bolts to be manually wrenched on docking/undocking operations. Probably, they are still there.

Mir base module originally was planned to have all six ports dockable, and have them not on a sphere/cube, but just on fuselage.
But when it had appeared to be significantly overmassed, they used this 2 m docking sphere/cube from a cancelled station project.
Also only the axial port stayed dockable, while four radial ones became only berthable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Nibb31 said:

the US modules are connected via CBM ports and permanently bolted

Do they retain separate bulkheads, or do they now exist as if the whole thing is one ? If one module was to leak, could they seal it ?

 

IMO this variety of docking and connectors is what we miss from our beloved space 'game'...

Edited by YNM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They can still close hatches and seal off modules if there is a leak or a fire.

In this photo, you can see the door is stored on a pair of rails so that they can slide it down and close the hatch.

171e32247d0b7a7c0a58bb2ab16c2ba5.jpg

(it actually looks like this particular astronaut is about to have an unfortunate accident involving a treadmill, and a rogue pair of scissors)

Edited by Nibb31
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/11/2018 at 10:53 PM, Nibb31 said:

and a rogue pair of scissors

I can confirm those are not scissors, differs from what they have on their food table (?).

On 7/11/2018 at 11:50 PM, tater said:

Wonder what the hemostat (needle driver?) is for.

Aren't some of them taught surgical procedures ?

Edited by YNM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Russian/Chinese space station segments are litterly their own spacecraft. They have to be launched, generate their own power, radiate their own heat, move themselves to their own orbit, etc. This increases the mass of the segment and, thus,   it also has to decrease the pressurized volume to compensate for the maximum payload mass.

The Americans on the other hand, because of the Space Shuttle, didn't need to launch separate spacecraft, because the shuttle provided all the necessary power and propulsion to sustain its cargo. This allowed to Americans to make much simpler and roomier modules. This is why the non-Russian segment of the ISS consists of a bunch tin cans and a giant truss with solar panels and radiators.

And yes, the Shuttle-Launched modules are really oversized tin cans, i hope these images are convincing enough.

1200px-Columbus_module_-_cropped.jpgYuri_Gidzenko_ISS_Leonardo_Module.jpg

So to anyone who ever wondered why Russian modules are cramped and the non-Russian ones are quite roomy, here is your answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, NSEP said:

This increases the mass of the segment, and thus it also has to decrease the pressurized volume to compensate for the maximum payload mass.

Yeah, I think they have a lot of structure inside it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

Does that empty space above the cases stay empty?

Not sure what yo umean.

But if I understand the question correctly, nah. Space stations contains a lot of experiment that requires special tools. These are supplied either with the crew or by resupply ships. Some setups cost quite some space, like the robots on board the ISS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Xd the great said:

Not sure what yo umean.

Spoiler

2540477709_fbb4505d99_z.jpg?zz=1iss030e177225_cropped.jpg

So, the Harmony-like modules have 2.5x2.5 m empty corridor, inside a 4.5 m cylinder and equipment between the corridor and the outer wall.

Mir-like modules (type 77) has a corridor ~2x2 m inside a 3 m cylinder. Less empty space.

Typical mass of a Mir-like module ~19 t.
Typical mass of a Harmony-like module ~10-15 t.

So, Mir modules just have less useless space.

Edited by kerbiloid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, kerbiloid said:
  Hide contents

2540477709_fbb4505d99_z.jpg?zz=1iss030e177225_cropped.jpg

So, the Harmony-like modules have 2.5x2.5 m empty corridor, inside a 4.5 m cylinder and equipment between the corridor and the outer wall.

Mir-like modules (type 77) has a corridor ~2x2 m inside a 3 m cylinder. Less empty space.

Typical mass of a Mir-like module ~19 t.
Typical mass of a Harmony-like module ~10-15 t.

So, Mir modules just have less useless space.

I wont really call it useless, but I see what you mean.

More space means more food means more CRS missions can blow up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Xd the great said:

I wont really call it useless

As they anyway breathe with air injected by fans, any space excessive to this 

Spoiler

300px-Da_Vinci_Vitruve_Luc_Viatour.jpg

is useless for that price.

They have to have 27..28 m3 per person, and they have.

Also, Mir-style modules have a lot of equipment outside the pressurized volume, fitting a virtual 4.1 m wide cylinder.

Edited by kerbiloid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...