The Space Elevator Reference

Clarifications on Space Elevator Games Media

In the last 24 hours, since the end of the space elevator games, the media has been reporting on the games and of course trying to make it interesting - controversy, arguments, questionable actions,... I am happy to say the games were a little less interesting along those lines and more so along the lines of advancing technology. Below are clarifications on some of the material showing up in the press.

Some of the items reported included:

"But organizers soon realized they did not know whether the ribbon used in the competition was 50 metres or 60 metres long." CBC News

The length of the ribbon was known, knowing if the climber ascended at 1 m/s takes a little more calculation. The length of travel depends on where the climber starts, the length of the ribbon, the stretch in the ribbon, where it stops at the top, the size of the climber, etc. In a competition like this things must be done carefully and that is what was done and so we took a day to do it properly. There was no uncertainty but 57 seconds was so close to the requirement that we had to check everything twice. Had we simply used the known length of the ribbon we would have come up with an incorrect speed of over 1 m/s. Correcting for the starting point, ending point and size of climber we find that the speed was correctly less than 1 m/s. The speed was calculated correctly and carefully. Had the climber ascended in 30 seconds we could have made the decision immediately but 57 seconds was borderline. It was also stated in the press that the speed requirement was unclear. To win the prize a climber must travel at 1 m/s. A simple statement of X seconds would be be a different performance for each climber and clearly unfair. I should state that the organizers were also frustrated and disappointed that they were unable to give USST the prize - they hoped to award the prize, thought USST was the closest to winning it and had tried to be as flexible as possible in trying to award the prize. I would also like to state that all of my discussions with USST during this was positive and the team extremely gracious. Even when told they were on the edge and offered another run to insure they made it, they turned it down to allow another team to take another shot at the climb. This was the part of the event that was very rewarding. The teams worked together sharing parts and resources to see someone win even if it might be a competitor. I was proud of several teams for how the carried themselves.

"Sometimes the games got a bit ragged around the edges: The Climber Competition had to be extended to Sunday at the fairgrounds because some of the qualifying teams didn't get a chance to make their three allotted runs on Friday and Saturday. The frustration of dealing with the delays, the debates over the rules, and gusty desert winds (which were blamed for most of Sunday's breakdowns) caused tempers to flare." MSNBC

There was never a specification or implication that the teams each got three runs. UBC, the team that has complained the most publically, received the most attempts and time on the ribbon while several others never made it on the ribbon due to their own technical difficulties. Every team was given as much time as possible. The extra day was added because X-Prize Cup made a decision on Saturday to not allow the elevator games to operate the microwave teams because it might interfere with the Armadillo flight. Otherwise no activities would have been held on Sunday. The steady winds, which occurred on all days did make the ribbon oscillate - this is expected but no climber was damaged due to this. It was also seen that the oscillations were largely damped out as soon as a climber began ascending the ribbon. The oscillation shook climbers but they largely seemed to do fine.

"One of the sorest points came when the teams were asked to collect trash at the fairgrounds staging area before the start of Sunday's attempts. "Is this science or is this garbage collection?" one onlooker complained heatedly." MSNBC

The fairgrounds were where the climber teams set-up, modified and worked on their climbers for the entire week before the event. This was not where spectators had been or anyone else. With the dozen teams and perhaps a hundred people the place had a lot of activity, hardware and, yes, trash. Imagine a mountain of pizza boxes. This was generated by the teams and partially by the organizers not by spectators or other individuals. I was not there but I would be surprized if everyone were not asked to clean up the area.

There have also been reports of controversy on the tether competition because one team felt they were unfairly disqualified because their tether was too short. The rule was clear - 2 meters. The standard for measuring the tethers was actually shorter than 2 meters to give the entrants the shadow of a doubt. So even though it has been stated that UBC was disqualified because they were short by "half a millimeter", they were actually much shorter because of the extra leaway given by the organizers in the measurement. I made the house tether and made the mistake of making it too short initially. I checked it prior to the event, found my mistake, threw it out and started again. Another entrant that was disqualified was a professional. His tether was too short, he admitted his mistake, made a joke at his own expense and accepted the judgement. No displaced blame, no complaints.

I would like to get feedback from spectators and the teams as to their opinion of the event. We each have our unique perspective and I would like to understand the others.

Rules:

- 2006 Climber (Power Beaming) Competition Rules (Bottom of page)
- Space Elevator Tether Competition Rules (Bottom of page)

Space Elevator Games 2006 Wrap-up by Dr. Brad Edwards

The Space Elevator games just finished up today and it was quite an event. In this post I would like to summarize the games, both the results and the behind the scenes, what it implies and what we can expect in the future.

Pulling together an event of this scale takes a lot of work, time and effort. The Spaceward organization and all the volunteers that pulled this off should be thanked and congratulated – none were paid. The Space Elevator Games area at the X-Prize Cup consisted of a climber row, two large tents lined with the competing teams and their climbers, and a large competition area.

As stated in an earlier post there were a number of activities and some excitement in the climber competition. Well, on Friday, the first day of the event, the operations were worked out and by the time we got to yesterday things were running pretty smoothly though there was still an amazing amount left to accomplish. On Saturday, the climber teams jumped onto the ribbon one after another – nine times total during the day. We had a climber from the USST team race up the ribbon in 58 seconds, a spectacular job though just short of the 1 meter per second required speed (I will discuss this further in future posts since this was a complex decision). The USST team also had a slight issue with their braking system and they had to be lowered back down. This climber did more than any previous climber and was one step beyond the excellent performance of the Michigan team the day before who made it up in under six minutes. Both of these teams put together very mature and similar designs - the engineering on both were clearly the result of a design focused on minimizing weight and maximizing the power through the system. The USST team not only took their system from last year and greatly improved it but they also brought in a kilowatt laser that they had working briefly and almost ran on. This is the ultimate system in my mind and would have been impressive to see. This combination and USST’s demonstrated ability to learn and improve their system will make them a very serious competitor next year.

Saturday continued with the German team, the Litewon, and the Kansas City Space Pirates all ascending the ribbon in times from two to seven minutes. The German team was organized and obviously prepared with a climber that will perpetuate the stereotype of German engineering being some of the most refined. As a team they would hold cheers and run through checklists working in unison.

Both Litewon and the Kansas City Space Pirates used solar power but in different ways. Litewon took the most direct approach and used very lightweight solar panels to run off the New Mexico sun and move the climber up the ribbon. It worked well though was slow potentially from a lack of power.

The Pirates brought in a massive set of mirrors, over a dozen roughly 4 foot by 8 foot panels, that were about 100 feet away on the ground and all focused on a collector on the climber. As perhaps the most unique design it made it up the ribbon and when they first arrived struck a little fear into a couple of the other teams. The possibility of that much solar power on a climber equaled many of the spot light systems that were used.

Besides the teams that were able to ascend the ribbon there were a number of other teams that put in a lot of effort and succeeded in bringing in good systems but just couldn’t get through all the details to run them.

Due to a change of policy by the X-Prize Cup the microwave run teams were not allowed to attempt their climbs on sight so the climbers were given another day (today Sunday) to make attempts. The USST tried once more and quickly raced up the ribbon though they were unable to maintain the light alignment and lost their speed part way up the climb.

The other aspect of the games was the tremendous public exposure. The crowds around the games and strolling through climber row often numbered in the thousands. It was not unusual to see a climber team surrounded by a large group of children asking questions.

After the day ended at the climber competition on Saturday attention turned to the tether competition. In spite of the more glamorous appearance of the climber competition the tether competition last year and this has provided an entertaining event. This year it was unfortunate that three of the four entrants were disqualified due to cutting the length requirement too closely and coming in under the required two meters. The remaining team, Astroaraneae, was run against the house tether for the prize money. Last year the house tether broke at 1240 pounds so too win the prize Astroaraneae had to beat this and the current house tether. As the two were pulled head to head the weight rose until it surpassed last years record with neither tether breaking.

Finally the Astroaraneae tether broke at 1331 pounds which would have won the prize money last year. This year the house tether held 1661 pounds before the pull was stopped due to breakage on the tether-pulling machine – the half-inch steel axles were severely bending and their mountings were near failure. The house and Astroaraneae tethers both essentially achieved over 80% of the expected theoretical strength of the raw material. This event has established that the prize will only be won by a new material and not by a commercially available material – a key objective of the challenge itself which is to develop new materials.

Overall, I was extremely pleased with the event though it is not fully mature. The issues that arose during the event stemmed from the difficulty of the challenge itself. Setting up the challenge is serious – a several hundred-foot ribbon under tension and all the logistics of running climbers are not trivial. The difficulty of the challenge has also forced Spaceward to be flexible on many of the rules in terms of qualifying climbers. The plan for next year, which will have a taller ribbon, is to obtain sponsorship and real resources then recruit teams and set very strict rules on the procedures of qualifying and operations. It is also likely that the event next year will run multiple ribbons.

The challenges and events are doing what they were intended – pushing the engineering and available materials for the space elevator needs. The challenges have not achieved their goals yet, however, if this event is any indication during the next three to five years I have little doubt these events will produce a very high caliber climber and extreme strength materials.

Space Elevator Games Over for this Year

Well the Space Elevator Games are over and there was no winner in either the Climber (Power Beaming) Competition or the Tether Strength Competition. In the Climber competition the University of Saskatchewan team (USST) came the closest to winning as they actually climbed the ribbon in 58 seconds which was under the one minute requirement however they did not meet all of the requirements to win.

In the Tether competition the Astroaraneae team sponsored by Aerojet based out of Sacramento came the closet and did very well.

By all accounts the competition was very successful. We'll have a complete report within a few days.

Space Elevator Update - Day 2 - USST Has Winning Run

It's an exciting day at the Space Elevator Games as the University of Saskatchewan Space Design Team (USST) has just posted a 58 second climb meaning that unless someone beats there time and the judges rule that all elements of the team are within the rules then we will have our first NASA Centenial Challenge winner and they will head home with $200k. More to come ... Stay tuned.

Editor's Update: Ben Shelef reports that the judges are confering on one issue that came up with USST's climb. It seems they needed some assitance on the way down. The decision is pending.

Space Elevator Games Update from Dr. Brad Edwards

After a week of qualifying activities and lots of work, the space elevator games opened at the X-Prize Cup today. Six teams qualified for the climber competition though it is possible that another may qualify tonight. The one attempting to qualify tonight is unique in that it uses a microwave power system. The tether competition will be held tomorrow and will have four competitors - three of the four that previously registered and one additional one.

The climber competition today was interesting from several aspects. Several teams made attempts at climbing the 200 foot ribbon though only one had substantial success. The Michigan team managed to run on spotlight power and ascend the ribbon in 6 minutes - 5 minutes longer than required to win the $200k purse. However, the story is a little more complex than that. The attempts today were all made in a situation where strong winds existed all day at the 130 foot plus altitude. What this meant is that there was a serious oscillation in the ribbon - often moving 5 feet or more with a period of less than a second. This oscillation was seriously shaking the climbers at the base and was sufficient to dissuade two teams from attempting a climb today.

The interesting aspect of the Michigan climb was that as the climber ascended the ribbon it damped out most of the oscillation and made it to the top. The speed was impacted by the challenge of actively aiming eight-7kW spot lights on the bottom of the climber to supply power. When the lights did sufficiently illuminate the solar arrays on the climber it ascended at a rate that would have been sufficient to win the purse had they done it consistantly. With some modifications the Michigan team is hopeful that it can have a successful run tomorrow morning.

The other teams that attempted climbs today included the German team and the USST team though the UBC, Pirates and others opted to not climb for various reasons. As one example of the advance in performance, the German team attached two 10 inch by one inch thick steel plates to their climber as payload. Clearly they had confidence that their system would run successfully with the large additional mass. Based on their qualifying runs they had good reason to think this though today complications stopped their climber from ascending even in a good attempt.

One disappointment was the loss of the Spanish entry by UPS someplace in Kentucky. The Spanish team had done a lot of work to enter a quality climber but will be unable to compete due to the loss. The Spanish team was still in attendance and highly supportive of the other teams.

There were also issues arising with access to lights. Some teams were thought to be sharing light sources yet were denied the sources at the last minute. One affected team is USST though they hope to finish qualifying their high power laser system tonight which could put them right back in the competition.

There have been a few smaller operational issues that limited some of the activities today and are still being worked but in general the climber competition went well in the end. The weather was great (other than the wind), crowds were heavy and the tents with the space elevator climbers and material were very well attended. One of the issues, as it could be viewed, was the overabundance of media around the climber competition and throughout the area. As promised NOVA among others were in attendance. At times there were roughly two dozen video cameras and microphones swarming the climbers and teams.

Tonight behind the scenes activities will continue probably late into the night again and the weather is expected to be excellent for climbs early in the morning. Activities start again at 7AM and this should be prime climbing time.

The climbers are much more advanced than last year with lightweight systems and careful design throughout. However, the systems are still evolving and and being changed on site to improve them in many cases. Again, next year should continue to show advances.

Space Elevator Competition Day 1 - Update 2

The competition has ended today with no more attempts made to climb the ribbon due to the high winds. Everyone is regrouping and will try again tomorrow. We'll have another update either later tonight or tomorrow morning.

Space Elevator Competition Update Day 1

Winds at the X Prize Cup are creating havoc today postponing attempts by UBC's Snowstar and the University of Saskatchewan. One team manage to get their climber up the ribbon but unfortunately not in the allocated time.

Another issue that came up was the crane itself being used for the ribbon. It turns out it was too heavy for the airport tarmac so another crane had to be found which delayed the start of today's competition.

Ben Shelef report only the six teams mentioned earlier qualified for the competition. I'm sure the teams that didn't are enjoying themselves none the less and will take the lessons learned and will hopefully be back next year.

UBC Snowstar Team Makes it Six Qualified for Today's Space Elevator Competition

The Snowstar team from the Univeristy of British Columbia qualified yesterday bringing the total number of teams to qualify to six. Ted Semon reports on his blog that perhaps one or two more have a realistic chance at qualifying for today's competition.

The team from Spain, Recens, appears to have had their climber lost by UPS on its way to the games. Another team, the Fischer team with their Beamer entry had their climber crash during weigh in which damaged their lens. That leaves Space Miners, StarClimber, and Punkworks still trying to qualify.

Fifth Teams Qualifies for the Space Elevator Games and In the News

A fifth team, the University of Saskatchewan entry, has just qualified for Friday and Saturday's Space Elevator competion. Several more teams will atempt to qualify today however winds are stronger than hoped which is delaying the qualification of some teams.

In the news, the LA Times published "Space Elevator Visions Going Up" story today while over at Steve Kettman has published this story "Nowhere to Go But Up".

Space Elevator Games Qualification Update

Bryan laubscher has sent in a few pictures from yesterday's qualification by the Kansas City Space Pirates. Also qualified for the competition on Friday are TurboCrawler from Germany, the University of Michigan with Climber 1 and LiteWon from Westmont High School in Campbell (correction, not Pasadena), California.

Space Elevator Games Setup and Qualification Update

I spoke today with Ben Shelef from the Spaceward Foundation whose managing the Space Elevator Games and he reports that the setup is well underway. Ten or eleven teams will go through the qualification process today through Thursday leading up to the actual competition for NASA's Centennial Challenge, dubbed the Space Elevator Games, starting on Friday.

Ben reports that the Kansas City Space Pirates the first team to try and qualify, easily did so, earlier today. Up next is the the University of Saskatchewan Space Design Team (USST).

The weather looks like it will be great this weekend for all the X Prize Cup events. We'll have reports from several sources and you can get updated reports from Ted Semon whose blogging for the Spaceward Foundation.

Winner Selected: VIP Ticket to the X Prize Cup and Space Elevator Games

In a random draw today, Fred Cook, whose Virginia Tech Space Elevator Team was unable to compete this year has won the VIP ticket. Fred will be sending in his first report from the games on Friday. We'll have an update on preparations for this weeks competition tomorrow.

Free VIP Ticket to the X Prize Cup and Space Elevator Games

How would like a VIP ticket to the X Prize Cup featuring the Space Elevator Games? I had hoped to go but can't now so I have 1 VIP ticket which I can transfer to you. All I ask is that you send me pictures during the two day event with your thoughts on what's happening. In other words you would become an official Space Elevator Reference blogger for the event. All you need to do is contact me with your name, age and if you have it your web site address (as we'll promote it) and the ticket is yours. I'll pick one name in a random draw and let the winner know by the end of Monday.

The special VIP two-day package includes special flight line access, gourmet food and drinks throughout the day and special presentations, all inside the VIP chalet. VIPs will have exclusive access to a fenced off VIP only area right by the flight line and in close proximity to the Space Elevator Games. VIPs will receive special VIP on-site parking on a first come, first served basis.

Marc Boucher
{mb.editor AT spaceelevator.com}

And so the Space Elevator Games Media Frenzy Begins

With the Space Elevator Games only a week away the media frenzy has begun. This bodes well for the community as we should see some excellent coverage the next week and half which will help further the message that building a space elevator is a viable option for access to space.

Being from Vancouver, Canada I could not help but notice that the Snowstar team from the University of British Columbia got a prominent article in today's Vancouver Sun and was also featured over at the CBC along with Canadian rivals Punkworks from Toronto and the University of Saskatchewan.

I've also received several media requests from Europe. Unfortunately I won't be able to attend the games next week but both Brad and Bryan will be there. If you are there and want to submit some pictures, video and your thoughts just send them to me and I'll be happy to post them and that includes all you bloggers who can blog using your Blackberry's or smart phones.

This is getting exciting.

Marc Boucher
{mb.editor AT spaceelevator.com}

A Perspective on the Controversy Concerning Liftport's Space Elevator Roadmap

The current controversy over Liftport’s release of a roadmap for the Space Elevator is important because it is allowing for a larger set of issues to be considered. In my opinion, the root of the action by Liftport and the contention to the release of its roadmap point to what is missing in the Space Elevator community.

Because we are in the “infancy” of the Space Elevator, it is not clear what it will grow into in its maturity. Therefore, we have a broad range of work that is valid, ranging from speculative visions to detailed scientific and engineering research. Unfortunately, not all of it is of high quality nor does all of it further the Space Elevator. In short, we have exuberant individuals and small teams working independently and in concert, some for the positive and some for the negative! There has been no oversight, criticism or acclimation of effort, no matter how well carried out or how shabbily executed. This must change!

As a community we need to work more closely together to encourage and support good work while discouraging shoddy work. And we need to do this out of the public eye. All of us need to be willing to have our work reviewed. Indeed, my most talented scientific colleagues insist on having their work reviewed by peers because they know the importance of their work and they honor their reputations! This level of activity is for adults with serious intentions. It is not for the insincere or insecure. Through this process we will all be called to a higher standard of work.

Moreover, the release by Liftport of a roadmap, does an important service by, in fact, pointing toward the need for a roadmap for the Space Elevator effort. I am taking a stand that a roadmap must be generated by the community, be of appropriate depth and call out milestones. In this way, our now separate efforts can be focused to produce a greater, cumulative effect. This will not be easy or without dissent, but it is important and necessary.

I call upon the Space Elevator community to attend the 2nd Biennial Space Elevator Workshop (which is a part of the Space Exploration 2007 Conference sesinstitute.org). If the community responds, we will set aside an afternoon to have first a structured discussion and then a more free-ranging session concerning a roadmap outline. We must quickly and efficiently determine the intent, timescale, scope and depth of the document. Then we can select the major milestones and finally elect a small group to draft a first draft for posting on spaceelevator.com for review.

In the meantime and as preparation for the workshop, I call upon every space elevator group to discuss the roadmap concept and to distill the most important milestones they see as necessary for Space Elevator development. As a guide, I refer everyone to NASA’s roadmaps a few examples of which are:

• Astrobiology Roadmap
• Exploration of Neighboring Planetary System
• NASA Origins Map

These are available on line and usually are the result of a process in which the interested scientific and engineering community was heavily involved in the development of the roadmap.

When you come to the workshop, be prepared to roll up your sleeves and get to work.

Challenges in Designing the Best Climber for the Space Elevator

One of the most critical components of the space elevator is the climber. It is second only to the ribbon in importance and perfection of design. As we will see shortly at the X-Prize Cup, building the perfect climber is not an easy task but getting close is well within grasp.

The baseline climber consists of a few basic components: the power system, the drive system, the payload and the infrastructure. We will get into each of these but before we do we need to understand the goal – hauling cargo, whatever it may be, up the ribbon. The climber meets this goal by lifting the maximum payload at a specified ascent speed. A quick glance at the basic layout of a climber and we quickly understand that to maximize the payload at a given speed we need to minimize the mass of the other components – the power system, the drive system and the infrastructure. This means optimizing the systems to work together and for their precise purpose.

In the available publications the baseline climber has been discussed and laid out. Variations on this are being proposed but we will work with the baseline climber today. To optimize this system we have to reduce mass everywhere possible without creating too much risk of failure. In the original designs and in most of the climbers at last year’s competition the climbers were rigid frame made from aluminum. The drive motors and rollers were hard mounted in these frames and the photovoltaic cells were set in rigid arrays sometimes backed with solid sheets of metal. The control units ranged from very simple switches to computers in boxes.

During the competition last year I had some detailed discussions with one of the teams after their first failed attempt. The discussions targeted the mass of their climber directly and after cutting off various components including a compressed gas braking system the climber passed breakeven and began to ascend the ribbon on the next attempt. For a first design they did well and I expect them to do well again in the coming event. But I hope to see a different design at the competition this year and believe it will lead to an optimized design that can eventually be used on the real space elevator.

To reduce the mass of the systems, advanced materials (composites) are needed in all structural components. For mounting the motors, fiber sandwich panels are needed. The motors themselves should have their cases replaced by thin composite shells where possible. The rollers might be spoked assemblies within composite tubes. The rollers should also lean toward the multiple offset roller design (even though I show a pinch roller design in the image below) to reduce the compression on the ribbon required and the losses there.

The primary frame running from the drive down to the secondary rollers and power array, if this design is used, should be thin composite components in a truss type design. All tension components such as the supports for the photovoltaic array need to be thin polymer threads (a CNT or metal thread will be needed on the real climbers due to radiation and UV damage) simply strong enough to hold the array flat. These same tensile components can provide the structural support for the photovoltaic array though careful handling will be required due to the fragile nature of the cells. The photovoltaic arrays should also be held in an open-backed structure to reduce mass and allow radiative (and in the competition conductive) cooling of the cells. The designs we have done along these lines look like they will meet the requirements for the competition and the real system.

For the control system, simple is best. Simple switches to allow the climber to fulfill its duties. The control can be done through RF controls designed for model airplanes.

The second target of optimization is in the power system. At last year’s competition a large spotlight was used due to it availability and ease of use. The problem with white light is that much of it falls outside the useable spectrum for silicon of GaAs cells. The result is low efficiency (<20%) and excess heating of the receiving array – enough to melt solder. The answer is a different system. A tuned laser can provide a receiver efficiency above 60% and minimal heating with silicon or GaAs and on short distances microwave can also be a viable energy source. By selecting the right system the array can be minimized and thermal issues eliminated. The second part is a highly efficient motor at all of the required speeds. Fortunately, electric motors have been tuned and perfected over years and regularly have efficiencies well over 80%. The key in the motor is minimizing the mass.

The key is to minimize and optimize all the components and as we see here this is primarily focused on the mass and power.

The Centennial Challenges and the Space Elevator

Less than two weeks from now the Centennial Challenge-sponsored power beaming and tether events will be held at the X-Prize Cups. These events, which have also been called the elevator games and climber challenge for the power beaming event, have been mentioned before on this site and will be covered in detail after they occur. The interest in these events is because they directly relate to the construction of a real space elevator.

The tether challenge focuses on the primary hurdle for the space elevator – macroscopic material with the strength sufficient to build the space elevator ribbon. Plenty of places now produce carbon nanotubes in bulk but no commercial entity is producing any threads, fibers or bulk material that can be used for structures. The distinction is critical and so is the progress on this front. The initial competition with a $50k prize was not sufficient to spur development but the recently announced increase in the prizes for the two challenges to $4M over the next few years should help increase interest.

The climber challenge directly relates to perhaps the second most critical component of the space elevator – the climbers. The challenge is to build a climber that can ascend a ribbon at 1m/s using only power beaming and to do this carrying a payload. This is about 2 miles per hour, not blazing fast but a good start. Design considerations show that a climber ascending at this speed with a mass of 25 kg should be able to do it and carry a couple times its mass as its payload. This challenge demonstrates the viability of complete power beaming system but only on a small scale, the overall control and drive
systems and the performance capabilities.

In the best design with off-the-shelf parts a climber at the competition could win the challenge and carrying 100 kg up the ribbon at 1m/s. How does this relate to a real climber? The climbers laid out as the baseline travel at about 20 miles per hour deep in Earth’s gravity well, weigh in at 7 tons and carry a payload of 13 tons. Obviously there is scaling up to be done but let’s assume that we simply use more of the same motors, arrays and components. Based on this and adjusting for the difference in payloads we get a full-size climber that can do 4 mph. This is just scaling the expected performance for a climber built for the competition – potentially this year. If we imagine the competition becoming more aggressive in the coming years with composite frames, customized motors, lightweight arrays, higher power lasers, etc. and going to much longer ribbons suspended from a large aerostat (balloon). I think we will see this competition produce climbers that will meet the basic operating requirements of the real space elevator. The short falls of the climber competition in addressing the climber come in terms of operation in a vacuum, high-speed operation out of the gravity well, and the operating life requirements of the real climbers. These will require additional tests.

The upcoming climber and tether competitions are great platforms for everyone to get involved and work to develop the technology required for the space elevator.

Analysis of Liftport’s Space Elevator Roadmap

A few days ago Liftport released a document titled “Road Map to the LiftPort Space Elevator”. The document is written to be a plan to develop the space elevator. It is a good idea to assemble the components for the space elevator that have been developed into a publicly available roadmap. This will help people understand and get involved in the effort. Unfortunately, the Liftport roadmap has little relevance to the space elevator development effort as a whole. Liftport apparently has not read or understood the literature on the space elevator and had no input from technical experts on the space elevator or large space or civil projects.

The team that compiled this roadmap consisted of: Michael Laine who has no technical background, Tom Nugent is a recent graduate with limited experience on the space elevator, and two student interns at Liftport. The three people they list as having supplied helpful input have extremely limited involvement in the space elevator development and have their own competing concepts. A video posted on the web shows Michael Laine, one of the authors of the document, giving a talk on the elevator (my old video playing the background) where he states he doesn’t know how the components work so don’t embarrass him by asking.

The major pitfalls of this roadmap include but are not limited to:

At the end of August an announcement came out from Los Alamos National Laboratory stating they had produced material 100 times stronger than steel (pound for pound). This is about 50GPa or about 15 times Kevlar, Vectran or Spectran. Efforts to produce large commercial quantities of material with these characteristics are underway. Liftport has this material strength milestone at the year 2020 and this drives much of their roadmap.

The laser tracking test in the roadmap listed for completion the end of 2009 were completed about ten years ago out of the Starfire Range in New Mexico and laser tracking and ranging have been done since the early 1970’s. These results have been referenced in several prominent space elevator documents.

Much of the finite element analysis proposed to be finished by 2010 has been done. This work covers deployment, wind loading, oscillations, ribbon breakage, climber traverse and all the details associated with these (David Lang, ISDC 2006).

The balloon tethers have very limited use but play a large role in the Liftport roadmap. In the form that Liftport has been doing these, with batteries, the experiments have practically no value. The small climbers with batteries do not lead to a viable space elevator climber. Whereas, the much larger and better development efforts resulting from the NASA-sponsored climber challenge will produce climbers demonstrating the climbing, power beaming and operations in a form that is applicable to a real space elevator. This effort was ignored in the roadmap.

The roadmap discusses a tether experiment billed as demonstrating the ability to dodge satellites but it is at an orbit where they shouldn’t expect to collide with a satellite for hundreds or thousands of years unless they purposely place their system on a collision course with one. I would also be very surprised if Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Defense or the State Department allows Liftport to launch a tether to see is they can dodge active satellites. An alternative is to launch a second satellite and dance around it. However, the dodging techniques in any orbital system are completely different from those required for the anchored space elevator and thus of no value in a space elevator development program. The act of deploying is valuable but not the dodging as proposed here. The on orbit tether moving is a mission that Robert Hoyt (one of the advisors on this document) has proposed and would help develop his specific system.

The orbital environment test proposed was done on NASA’s Long Duration Exposure Facility spacecraft many years ago for most materials and testing of the carbon nanotubes would be best done at the numerous plasma labs around the country set up for this purpose. Due to the orbital velocity a satellite can not realistically test atomic oxygen degradation. Radiation tests would also be best done in a lab for a small fraction of the cost and for the better results that can be obtained on orbit. Other environmental tests have been done on other materials and doing them with carbon nanotubes will not provide additional information.

What is not on the roadmap is acquisition of financing, regulatory approvals for deployment and power beaming, ribbon design studies and testing, deployment spacecraft design, ribbon deployment studies, detailed laser and power beaming studies, system protection, system trade-off, system integration, etc. These are more critical than most of the items on the roadmap and they are not mentioned or listed.

Much of the schedule and development requirements have been done by people working on the space elevator and this roadmap would have benefited greatly from the information if Liftport would have decided to incorporate it. Unfortunately, with the faults and omissions of the Liftport roadmap there is no valuable material here. The schedule and suggested efforts are completely erroneous. To build a roadmap for the space elevator it would be much better to start with a clean slate that use this one as a template.

I would suggest that Liftport become part of the real effort to build the space elevator and work with members of the community instead simply trying to claim they are the effort.

Leaving the Planet by Space Elevator a New Book by Brad Edwards and Philip Ragan

Leaving the Planet by Space Elevator is a new book by our very own editor Brad Edwards and Philip Ragan. It's not a technical book and is geared as an introduction to the Space Elevator concept so that everyone can grasp what the community is trying to do.

It's available from Lulu for $15.26 as a PDF download or in print for $25.00. If you're mystified by what a Space Elevator is and how it might one day get you into space it's worth a read.

Here's the promo for the book from the site:

"An easy guide to the most exciting development in space travel since the rocket. Stripped of the technical jargon, this is a laymans guide to the breathtaking developments surrounding the space elevator: a plan to string a 100,000 km from Earth to space, revolutionising space access."

Running the Line - Stories of the Space Elevator

Running the Line is a new book edited by Brad Edwards and David Raitt. The book is a result of the second Clarke-Bradbury International Science Fiction Competition organized by the European Space Agency's Technology Transfer and Promotion Office with the theme of Space Elevators. The competition generated 109 stories and images submitted from 29 different countries. It's available from Lulu for $14.95. A must have book for any Space Elevator fan.

Here's the promo for the book from the site:

"Science fiction is the realm of dreams, ambitions, hopes and fears. Science is what separates fiction from reality. But what happens when science and technology progress to the point where we can make science fiction reality? That junction is currently where we find the space elevator - poised at the brink of existence. Works of science fiction first fleshed out the concept of a space elevator and we have called upon the brightest young writers to explore the possibilities of a future with the space elevator.

In Running the Line the dawning of the space elevator, the far distant future and every place in between is examined. Young authors tackle construction of the first elevator, skydiving from space, regattas, colonizing the galaxy to returning home. These brilliant stories give us a glimpse of what will happen and perhaps a warning of what to prepare for."

NASA Ups Prize Funding for Space Elevator Challenges to $4 Million Over 5 Years

In a forward-looking move NASA has decided there is enough merit in the Space Elevator concept to offer more substantial prizes to help motivate teams to innovate further. This is truly exciting news and comes just about two weeks before the Space Elevator Games.

Here's an excerpt from the press release issued by the Spaceward Foundation;

"The new agreement expands the time-frame of both the Beam Power and the Tether Challenges from one year to five years through the year 2010, and provides incrementally larger total purses for years two through five above the $200K purse in year one for each contest. For the second through the fifth years, the total prize purses to be offered for each competition each year are$300K, $400K, $500K, and $600K, respectively."

Space Elevator Games Turbo Crawler Video

Max Born College from Ruhrarea, Germany has posted a video of their Turbo Crawler in action.

Space Elevator Games Sponsorship Part 2

The other day Brad Edwards posted a message discussing sponsorship opportunities for the Space Elevator Games being held in 18 days as part of the X Prize Cup in Las Cruces, New Mexico. Today Ben Shelef also provides an update on sponsorship opportunities.

"Sponsorship Opportunities

We have been shy so far about getting sponsorship for the games, frankly, because we did not know how well the competition will shape up. (Rather go unsponsored than not deliver on what we promise - right?) Well - we are now very confident that the competition will be spectacular, so are opening up sponsorship opportunities.

If you or your company like Space Education projects, think the Space Elevator is important, and would like exposure to 25,000 of space-curious spectators and all the who's who of Space 2.0 - please check out the information at http://www.elevator2010.org/site/sponsorshipXP.html

Large business or small, private or corporate, we have an option that will work for you. "

Space Elevator Games Update T-Minus 18 Days

Ben Shelef at the Spaceward Foundation has issued an update to the Space Elevator Games. With only 18 days before the games it looks like things are coming together nicely.

Here's an excerpt from the update.

"Probably the most interesting part of the games this year will not happen during the competition itself, but during the week leading to it.

In this week, we will set up a little "Olympic village", at the county fairgrounds next to the airport. The purpose of this week is for the teams to assemble and integrate their Space Elevator climbers with our track infrastructure. "