00:02
As repairing, as any repairing can be diferent levels, and if as an example we do not have or it is too hard for us to implement for (roboarm as an example, or motherboard or whatever) detecting what's broken in a particular device and replace few parts to fix it
, then smelting it as a whole may be a solution, just less eficient one, but we do not lack energy as resource, or territory or materials, we lack human attencion, human time as a resource, then it may be an option
, to be the process of a repair of production node , where parts are whole devices. As wholesale smelting, resolving it, is not that much different from a fundamental problem - one has wholesale lump of rocks from mercury-asteroids-moon and has to separate it
, refine in to elements which then become parts or are used in production cycles. And as energy is less valuable resource then we can be fine with a process which consumes few times more energy, but is simplier to manage
, so as we can design the system in the way which helps us. If we apply that idealogy to an combustion engine, not that we need to use them it just example, it is a mix of mostly 2 metals aluminium and steel alloys and they dissolve in each other when melted,
, but if we replace alumnum part(that block) of it with cast basalt then separating is simplier(not that it was hard to begin with, different melting temperatures, not a great example)
, no degradation of steel you melt the thing as a whole and get one component as slag, and another as steel both are ready to be cast.
We do put a lot of efforts in designing factories and their processes, even if it uses a fraction of energy available on earth, chip manufacturing is an example of that, but here we have a factory node which not necesarly has to produce sofisticated things, and it is millions of millions copies of it
, and considering reward we can spend a little bit more efforts than usual to design it in a way it has to be.
Again it worth some efforts even if it is hard, because that design will be reused in trillions of production nodes, and it does not to be like that from the start, it can evolve over time to a state where 1 guy can take descisions about millions of nodes which are under his supervison.
That problem was what I meant as one which needs a lever - a team of 10 has to oversee 10-20 million of production nodes. We do not have such problems on earth, and won't have, closest we have is nodes in datacenters and clouds, but not a production installations.
There are some close examples a level below, mass production using industrial 3d printing, so as I may find a link later about matrix production. In general, sure enough challenges, but may it worth for 10 million people to work on that problem - yeah sure, considering the benefits. Can they solve the problems at current state of technologies - with proper paradigm - yes, sure.
I think you're maybe using the wrong word when saying "smelting"? Modular replacement doesn't make assembly any easier! Something ultimately needs to make the individual modules.
And by definition they need to be sophisticated. Throwing more energy at a problem does not solve it. It potentially makes it easier, but unlimited energy doesn't let you make a solar panel on a blacksmith's anvil.
Also, "even if it is hard" is still dismissing the issue I had with the design in the first place. Unsupervised automation is the holy grail of manufacturing. If it was possible with current technology, we would already be doing it. It is a problem that is currently insurmountable, because we aren't doing it.
8 hours later…
08:25
@MolbOrg I did not mess up an order of magnitude. At Mercury orbit, the solar irradiation is 10x what it is on Earth, so you need roughly 1/10 the area
@jdunlop nobody said this is "easy", but we are on the verge of self-driving cars finally, and I specifically stated that I don't expect that sort of automation technology to be available for a few decades yet, I believe I said it's likely 30-40 years away. Considering where we were with computers and automation in 1980...
08:43
@SerbanTanasa ah, yeah, totally slipped from my mind that it mercury orbit action, sorry, spend few hours on writing my answer and it trapped my mind in that setting, yeah, getting old, loosing skills, brain degradation on a display, lol
@jdunlop i mean it in a sense "Smelting is a process of applying heat to ore in order to extract a base metal. It is a form of extractive metallurgy. It is used to extract many metals from their ores, including silver, iron, copper, and other base metals." - one discards a device with complex composition and has to extract metals back.
@jdunlop sure, production of parts which a device is made of as per usual, part by part basis and all that, not suggesting something unusual here. By using more energy to solve problems, it more than just merely replacing repair of parts by parts basis to a device to a device basis
but if we focus on this one, it easy to see that replacing parts is not necessarily easy to standardize the process, however production of a new device is easier to fit in some rigid steps of operations. That way to simplify cost energy.
@jdunlop in that sense it easier to see things if we use less sophisticated to convert energy, as we can have a full picture of what makes that means and what it tools we need, what are steps involved. thinking about solar panels in that context does not clear the picture.
there are machines that make nails(nail making machine?), a principle is simple - good timing, hard punches, sharp knives, more oil, and the thing will spew them like M16. it requires one worker per shift to supervise it, when it jams he kicks it, when it does not help he calls the smart guy. it requires replacement of knifes each shift and regular maintenance every million nails(this one I'm not sure)
in space, you may not need nails, but it can be the rivets as well, if it is part of things, so not a totally random pick. Oh yeah, that dummy who stares at it the whole shift, and moves buckets full of nails also replace the wire.
what are the things it optimized for - space, footprint, speed, mass
what it relies on - constant external service preferably of one unit.
it is sold as one unit, it is operated as one unit etc.
what it relies on - constant external service preferably of one unit.
it is sold as one unit, it is operated as one unit etc.
but all that creates quite a piece of equipment from a mechanical point of view. Not the most complex one, but things have to be right, and it all tightly packed, so when gear breaks, in bad case you take half of that sht apart and it not necessarily a consistent process, to replace just one part, and you piece it together back, but parts are worn, u may need non-standard fiddling as well. Not a problem with a smart guy present, and everyone happy here - a producer of that tool, a businessman nail maker, a dummy, a smart guy
But the same process can be unpacked in separate devices, which will take more space but you can replace them module by module, independently, at any time, even when it runs, if you have a matrix production approach, so as you not necessarily in a need of million rivets per month, or not from one device at least. So as your supply chain isn't across half of the continent, so you may abandon that wire part as well, then raw materials take more space but you not necessarily mind it, etc.
All that brings some space to optimize things in a different way, are there incentives to take more space and use more materials for tools in regular production - no there are no such incentives, as we have a smart guy. Yes, we do have problems replacing a smart guy with an automatic solution, because it few times more expensive than that guy, not only that for sure, but in plenty of cases
09:27
@MolbOrg the reason we don't have better automation on Earth today is the labor is relatively plentiful, and therefore relatively cheap. It is not because stuff cannot be automated, it is simply not cost-effective to do so at the current margin.
However, if your cost of labor is a lot higher (oh, your humans need these expensive habitats and need to arrive in special low-g accelerated ships) you can almost always substitute capital. Moreover, with sufficient praxis (praxis = you get better at things as you do them more and at larger scale), the cost of capital to replace that unit of labor might actually end up dropping even below the cost of labor on Earth
@jdunlop high automation does not need to mean complete automation. One technician in oribit can control drones with high-level instructions and if need be can take direct control of a unit via telepresence, and in-extremis, can actually go down in person and do whatever the drones/exoskeletons cannot
abandon that human in orbit thing, it all has to be teleoperated or automated, before you really get therre. Nothing we do today, we do directly by hands, we use our hands with tools - there is no ways to do anything without tools those days. And what manages a tool - is it authentic human hand or a gripper in roboarm - there is not that much difference.
A reason why you start the thing closer to earth is that teleoperation thing - no one has to be in space, and when we get there the thing is already waits us - to provide to us.
A reason why you start the thing closer to earth is that teleoperation thing - no one has to be in space, and when we get there the thing is already waits us - to provide to us.
« first day next day → last day (16 days later) »
Transcript for
Apr9
Apr '2110
Apr11
Discussion between jdunlop and MolbOrg
Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...
