Space Elevator Patented By Canadian Company

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
I wonder how they come get you if the elevator decides to stop half way. Thanks to xJ321x for the link.

Once operational, the ThothX Tower would be able to lift up to 10 tonnes of parts for space plane and rocket construction. Spacecraft would then launch from its platform in a single stage and return to the top of the tower for refueling. This allows for great energy savings over conventional rocketry blasting off from the Earth’s surface. The tower would also be a hot tourism destination, Roberts says, with tickets to the top expected to be offered for about $1,000 CAD.
 
Last edited:
And they have a working model I presume....................................

napkin-idea_juice-marketing-and-design.jpg
 
America vs Canada space elevator race? Or will America elect Trump who thinks we'll build a wall around Mexico and have them pay for it?
 
I would imagine it would be some sort of tethered system hooked up to a large geostationary satellite platform.

If they do this, they could probably generate a lot of power with those tethers moving through the magnetic fields, as well.
 
Zarathustra[H];1041929761 said:
I would imagine it would be some sort of tethered system hooked up to a large geostationary satellite platform.
Click to expand...

Not at all like that. This is more of a high-altitude staging platform than an "elevator" that goes all the way to space.
 
the economic situation on this country is bad... and they are thinking about building a stupid elevator.....????
 
AndreRio said:
the economic situation on this country is bad... and they are thinking about building a stupid elevator.....????
Click to expand...

Put it this way.

According to NASA it currently costs about $10,000 per pound to put cargo into space. Likely, with ancillary costs, it's actually higher.

Now, given that a space elevator could, theoretically, be in more or less constant use, So, depending on the lift method, you could conceivably bring the price down to $500/lb.

You could charge $1000/lb, make a killing, and STILL be saving your clients 90% on orbital cargo fees.

And, because the price is so much lower, clients can afford to send loads more often, or just send larger loads, or both.
 
Skip this landing space planes on the top of the tower stuff.
Get together with the hyperloop people, vacuum out the tower's hollow core and rail-gun payloads direct to orbit.
 
Kueller said:
Skip this landing space planes on the top of the tower stuff.
Get together with the hyperloop people, vacuum out the tower's hollow core and rail-gun payloads direct to orbit.
Click to expand...

Yeah. Probably not a good idea.

First off, maintaining the vacuum on a space that big would be a bitch. And how would you repair a hole a couple miles up?

Also, the main problem with railguns that large? They tend to destroy the rails on firing. And the power requirements are ludicrous.

Now maybe magnetic elevator tech, sure. But actually SHOOTING stuff into orbit would probably damage lots of types of cargo.
 
sfsuphysics said:
Ever since they changed the rules to first to patent instead of first to invent it doesn't matter that they don't have a working model.
Click to expand...

It was far before that.

First to invent changed to first to file only changed in 2013.
 
chenw said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_model

Patent model requirement was removed since 1880.
Click to expand...

Didn't say they needed a model, although in the case of a space elevator building a miniature would certainly be easier to do than the whole thing. But you theoretically needed a working product, they just never checked it which I'm guessing is why first to file went as the rule because they figured everyone was doing that anyways.
 
westrock2000 said:
And they have a working model I presume....................................

napkin-idea_juice-marketing-and-design.jpg
Click to expand...

Instead of finding a stupid picture and thinking of something inflammatory to say you could've spent that time reading the article which points out that they only patented their version of a space elevator which they're planning a small scale 1.5 kilometer proof of concept for now.
 
I don't want to be living anywhere within a 30km (19 miles for the U.S. folks) radius of that thing if it's 20km (12.5 miles) tall. Personally I don't think it will ever be built.
 
freeloader1969 said:
I don't want to be living anywhere within a 30km (19 miles for the U.S. folks) radius of that thing if it's 20km (12.5 miles) tall. Personally I don't think it will ever be built.
Click to expand...

Actually, due to the earth's rotational speed (just north of 1000 miles an hour), even at 30+ km, you're still in danger of getting hit by falling debris.

Depending on where along the elevator things fell, you're talking 0-8 minutes of freefall.

Assuming enough energy to put it into a ballistic trajectory, a fall from the top, you have a rough maximum of 130-140 miles west of the site.
 
Chas said:
Yeah. Probably not a good idea.

First off, maintaining the vacuum on a space that big would be a bitch. And how would you repair a hole a couple miles up?

Also, the main problem with railguns that large? They tend to destroy the rails on firing. And the power requirements are ludicrous.

Now maybe magnetic elevator tech, sure. But actually SHOOTING stuff into orbit would probably damage lots of types of cargo.
Click to expand...
Ok, 'railgun' was a bit hyperbolic (though less egregious than calling this a space elevator), let's go with 'electromagnetic accelerator'.

Did you read the article? The whole tower concept is a big balloon. Well technically, thousands of washer-shaped inflatable cells with a hollow core. The cells are designed to be pressurized to 100 atmospheres. Subtracting one atmosphere (at sea level) would hardly matter. The article discusses that the tower is designed with segmented cells to allow partial depressurization for repairs.

Yes, launching straight up would cause problems, like pancake-shaped astronauts due to acceleration (~160 g's). Which is why I said they should get together with the hyperloop people. The vacuum tower would only be the final stage, to get above the densest atmosphere. You'd have much of the acceleration done in a vacuum tunnel on(in?) the ground. Say you wouldn't want acceleration to be more than 5 g's, to reach Low Earth Orbit velocity ~8km/s, that works out to 640km of run-up at 50m/s.

50m/s acceleration would be pretty sedate for an electromagnetic accelerator. Power requirements would obviously be dependent on the mass being launched, but not unattainable.
 
Chas said:
Actually, due to the earth's rotational speed (just north of 1000 miles an hour), even at 30+ km, you're still in danger of getting hit by falling debris.

Depending on where along the elevator things fell, you're talking 0-8 minutes of freefall.

Assuming enough energy to put it into a ballistic trajectory, a fall from the top, you have a rough maximum of 130-140 miles west of the site.
Click to expand...

And that's why I'm not a scientist/physics major. :)

Thanks for that. Interesting to know.
 
Kueller said:
Ok, 'railgun' was a bit hyperbolic (though less egregious than calling this a space elevator), let's go with 'electromagnetic accelerator'.

Did you read the article? The whole tower concept is a big balloon. Well technically, thousands of washer-shaped inflatable cells with a hollow core. The cells are designed to be pressurized to 100 atmospheres. Subtracting one atmosphere (at sea level) would hardly matter. The article discusses that the tower is designed with segmented cells to allow partial depressurization for repairs.

Yes, launching straight up would cause problems, like pancake-shaped astronauts due to acceleration (~160 g's). Which is why I said they should get together with the hyperloop people. The vacuum tower would only be the final stage, to get above the densest atmosphere. You'd have much of the acceleration done in a vacuum tunnel on(in?) the ground. Say you wouldn't want acceleration to be more than 5 g's, to reach Low Earth Orbit velocity ~8km/s, that works out to 640km of run-up at 50m/s.

50m/s acceleration would be pretty sedate for an electromagnetic accelerator. Power requirements would obviously be dependent on the mass being launched, but not unattainable.
Click to expand...

Calculate how much energy it will take to keep a structure that large at 100 atmospheres and then get back to me. The technical challenges of introducing high pressure to a structure are pretty much the same as introducing a vacuum. Of all the 'space elevator' concepts I have seen, this might be the most far fetched.
 
Grahamkracka said:
Calculate how much energy it will take to keep a structure that large at 100 atmospheres and then get back to me. The technical challenges of introducing high pressure to a structure are pretty much the same as introducing a vacuum. Of all the 'space elevator' concepts I have seen, this might be the most far fetched.
Click to expand...

This seems like a question better directed at the company that patented the tower concept.

Although I would guess that once it's pressurized initially, as long as the seals are good and the material is non-permeable, it shouldn't take any appreciable amount of energy.

I mean, how much energy does it take to keep a balloon inflated once it's filled? Since I don't usually see balloons sold with batteries or pumps, I'm going with: zero.
 
Honestly, I seriously doubt we're going to see the huge "tower into space" concept any time soon.

The materials requirements for something like that are essentially unobtanium right now. Not to mention the fact that the sheer MASS of such a thing would probably lead to crust deformation and trigger earthquakes in the region.

More than likely, what we'd wind up seeing is something that STARTS are a large tower or possibly a slightly broader structure. It'd go up somewhat similar to a skyscraper. But, at a certain point, superstructure would give way to cables.

Then, you'd have a stabilized mass up in orbit on the far end of the cables.

The big problems there are still:

  • Maintaining cable tension
  • Materials strength of the cables
  • Limiting damage to the cables
  • Limiting ionizing induction (electrical charges) on/between the cables.
 
Chas said:
Honestly, I seriously doubt we're going to see the huge "tower into space" concept any time soon.
Click to expand...
You really need to read the article.
The patented concept is nothing close to a tower 'into space'. It gets nowhere near space. It's just a tall launch platform.

I agree with what you're saying though, we don't have the materials necessary to either build a tower to space or suspend a cable from space.
Suspending a cable seems more manageable at first because tensile strength for most materials is much greater than compressive strength...But the problem is a cable must be suspended from a geostationary orbit, which means it's got to be really long and incredibly strong just to support it's own weight.


Everest is 8.5km
This inflatable tower for potentially launching space planes from, would only be 20km.
The ISS in LEO (Low Earth Orbit) is at ~410km.
Geostationary orbit is ~35,800km.

Some people work better with visuals, let's call each dash 4km.
Everest:
--
The patented tower concept featured in this thread:
-----
ISS Orbit:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Geostationary Orbit:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
They need to hire Nelix. For that matter skip the elevator and just get out those Heisenberg compensators and beam me up.
 
Kueller said:
This seems like a question better directed at the company that patented the tower concept.

Although I would guess that once it's pressurized initially, as long as the seals are good and the material is non-permeable, it shouldn't take any appreciable amount of energy.

I mean, how much energy does it take to keep a balloon inflated once it's filled? Since I don't usually see balloons sold with batteries or pumps, I'm going with: zero.
Click to expand...

Blow up a balloon, tie it off, and then let it sit for a few weeks/months. Tell me how inflated it is then (hint, there will be less gas in the balloon)....keep in mind the pressure inside the balloon is barely over 1atm. There is no such thing as a perfect seal in any engineering application, they all eventually fail or leak. This thing is not realistic in any sense of the word. Theoretically possible? Sure. Realistically feasible? No.
 
Grahamkracka said:
Blow up a balloon, tie it off, and then let it sit for a few weeks/months. Tell me how inflated it is then (hint, there will be less gas in the balloon)....keep in mind the pressure inside the balloon is barely over 1atm. There is no such thing as a perfect seal in any engineering application, they all eventually fail or leak. This thing is not realistic in any sense of the word. Theoretically possible? Sure. Realistically feasible? No.
Click to expand...

They're planning to build a small version that will take three to five years to complete, so I guess we'll see. The thing is supposed to cost about a billion dollars so I imagine if they go ahead with that plan that they know something you don't. Either that, or you should give them a heads up - think of all the money you could help them save!
 
Spewn said:
They're planning to build a small version that will take three to five years to complete, so I guess we'll see. The thing is supposed to cost about a billion dollars so I imagine if they go ahead with that plan that they know something you don't. Either that, or you should give them a heads up - think of all the money you could help them save!
Click to expand...

It will never see the light of day, small scale or no.
 
Grahamkracka said:
Blow up a balloon, tie it off, and then let it sit for a few weeks/months. Tell me how inflated it is then (hint, there will be less gas in the balloon)....keep in mind the pressure inside the balloon is barely over 1atm. There is no such thing as a perfect seal in any engineering application, they all eventually fail or leak. This thing is not realistic in any sense of the word. Theoretically possible? Sure. Realistically feasible? No.
Click to expand...
Depends on the balloon material.
Rubber? Yeah, rubber sucks.
A single-atom thick sheet of graphene? Completely impermeable, even to helium.
 
Kueller said:
Depends on the balloon material.
Rubber? Yeah, rubber sucks.
A single-atom thick sheet of graphene? Completely impermeable, even to helium.
Click to expand...

Here someone goes, talking about graphene as if it were the goddamn miracle engineering material. Let's ignore the fact that graphene still isn't even remotely usable on any industrial scale. How do you suppose you pressurize a graphene pressure vessel? Oh, you need an opening...that will require seals that have to survive in a structure that sways (introducing stresses in all directions) and exposed to any number of corrosive outdoor elements. Do you have even remotely a clue as to how high of a pressure 100atm is? Propane tanks are filled to about 14atm, ever seen a valve fail on one of those? SCUBA tanks are filled anywhere between 130atm and 260atm. Ever have a seal fail on one of those (hint: it starts out really inconspicuous before turning into a goddamn disaster in short order)? A 20km tall stack of ultra-pressurized pressure vessels? No thanks.
 
Sounds like someone just took away any real hope I had of seeing a space elevator in my lifetime.


Thanks Obama.
 
sfsuphysics said:
Didn't say they needed a model, although in the case of a space elevator building a miniature would certainly be easier to do than the whole thing. But you theoretically needed a working product, they just never checked it which I'm guessing is why first to file went as the rule because they figured everyone was doing that anyways.
Click to expand...

They switched to first to file because US was the only patent system in the entire world that was using the first to invent rules, everywhere else was using first to file.

The change was to realign that perculiarity (as well as a gaping prior art hole).

A working product is not feasible in a lot of the patents, and there is always the issue of proving the product is actually an embodiment of your patent, especially when you are dealing with things on a microscope/nanoscopic levels (EG medicine).

It was required before, but USPTO completely stopped enforcing it on any level.
 
Grahamkracka said:
Here someone goes, talking about graphene as if it were the goddamn miracle engineering material. Let's ignore the fact that graphene still isn't even remotely usable on any industrial scale. How do you suppose you pressurize a graphene pressure vessel? Oh, you need an opening...that will require seals that have to survive in a structure that sways (introducing stresses in all directions) and exposed to any number of corrosive outdoor elements. Do you have even remotely a clue as to how high of a pressure 100atm is? Propane tanks are filled to about 14atm, ever seen a valve fail on one of those? SCUBA tanks are filled anywhere between 130atm and 260atm. Ever have a seal fail on one of those (hint: it starts out really inconspicuous before turning into a goddamn disaster in short order)? A 20km tall stack of ultra-pressurized pressure vessels? No thanks.
Click to expand...

The graphene would not be structural, just present as a gas barrier to ensure negligible gas loss with a very low mass penalty.

The pressure cells themselves are to be "made of polyethylene and kevlar" according to the linked article, presumably in a fiber-epoxy composite with Dyneema or something similar. NASA has been using leak before burst (LBB) designed composite-overwrapped pressure vessels (COPVs) since the 60's at pressures up to 5000psi (over 300 atm). But don't let proven engineering practices get in the way of your nay-saying.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top