Re: [Fwd: starship-design: HIGHLY OPTIMIZED TOLERANCE]

[Ben Franchuk <bfranchuk@jetnet.ab.ca>]

> As Steve already pointed out is isn't necessarily how simple the technology
> is, but how robust and rugged. The two are not equivalent. My entire
> question when I posted the article was how are we going to design for
> robustness (or as someone else put it - mediocrity)? In a ship whose systems
> are supposed to last for several human lifetimes, adaptability, ruggedness
> and robustness become engineering design criteria that are more important
> than sheer cutting edge state of the art design.
>

The way to do it is to keep the stress down on the components, by having
them
to work at a steady state. Being able to repair - reuse - recycle
components.
Finding a scale factor such that you are using the right size design, as
a larger
ship ( to a point ) can mean less compact items. The best way to design
a inter-stellar star ship is to design a inter-planetary ship as that
will be the
stepping stone to the larger ship.

This will be a great job for computer simulation and spread sheets.
Take AC power   -- 120 volts 60Hz  big - heavy - power generation long
life span?
Air-craft power? -- 96 volts 600Hz small high speed short life span?
star ship-power system -- ?? volts ???Hz medium speed, long life span.

-- 
"We do not inherit our time on this planet from our parents...
 We borrow it from our children."
The Lagging edge of technology:
http://www.jetnet.ab.ca/users/bfranchuk/woodelf/index.html