Timeline for Tradeoffs using a battery/motor/gyro versus tangential thrusters to spin a spherical shell in space?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 1, 2018 at 22:52 | comment | added | uhoh | @NathanTuggy Ah, I understand what you mean now. | |
| Feb 1, 2018 at 16:09 | comment | added | Nathan Tuggy | @uhoh: True, but in general the failure rates for these come because they have to frequently rotate at tens of thousands of RPM (or even higher). "Mechanisms" in general do not have such a failure rate; it's specifically flywheel-type devices that are being referred to. | |
| Feb 1, 2018 at 16:02 | comment | added | uhoh | @NathanTuggy this disposable satellite is an empty shell, and possibly quite light, so in this particular case it might not need very high speed. Because it is spherically symmetric, it also is not likely to pick up much angular momentum, so it won't be accumulating angular momentum until a "maxed-out" wheel can be unloaded. It just needs a nudge, so that it looks 'pretty" when it slowly rotates. | |
| Feb 1, 2018 at 15:59 | comment | added | Nathan Tuggy | You might want to rephrase "mechanism" to emphasize the high rotational speed that is so characteristic of these. | |
| Feb 1, 2018 at 15:30 | comment | added | Uwe | Some electric power will be necessary for ignition of the solid boosters. | |
| Feb 1, 2018 at 15:25 | review | First posts | |||
| Feb 1, 2018 at 15:59 | |||||
| Feb 1, 2018 at 15:21 | history | answered | Harry Detsis | CC BY-SA 3.0 |