A BIT OF HISTORY

THE LAW OF COMPATIBILITY OF CABLE-STAYED NETWORKS

The number of contour waves	Forming the contour with the help of sine-function	Forming the contour with the help of cosine-function
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

6, 8
10, 12
14, 16
18, 20

PREPARATION FOR CONSTRUCTION IN SPACE

Name	Image	Hyperlink
Makarov's Trojka		File CellTrojka.jpg at "Wikimedia Commons".
Makarov's Quartet		File CellQuartet.jpg at "Wikimedia Commons".
Makarov's Five		File CellFive.jpg at "Wikimedia Commons".
Makarov's Six		File CellSix.jpg at "Wikimedia Commons".
Modules blocking		File BuckyBlock.jpg at "Wikimedia Commons".

MY SPACE ARCHITECTURE

1. I single-handedly invented the "quasi-orthogonal networks on undulating contours".

2. I got on such constructions the sole inventor's certificate, not even enjoying the no funding, no official company, no public institution.

3. I have developed (invented) a series of quasi-orthogonal cable-stayed networks for circuits with different number of contour waves (up to nine inclusive).

4. I decided to mathematically correct interior Dirichlet problem to an analytical description of wavy surface that approximates the cable network for all its original parameters.

5. I found an analytical expression for the wavy support contour (for the vertical contour on a circular cylinder) with any of its input parameters.

6. I have stated and written analytically "law compatibility of quasi-orthogonal tangentially-undulated cable-stayed networks", which allows you to make a cable-stayed network on the contours with any preassigned number of waves on the contour.

7. I replaced the wavy contour with the contour of the straight elements and with the experiment convinced that the joint network is preserved.

8. I suggested that, if necessary, to apply to my constructions affine transformations of compression, tension and shear.

9. I have developed a series of designs based on cable-stayed their networks with the contours of the linear elements, which may themselves be disclosed in the space (full factory readiness, then - the disclosure of them in space).

10. I suggested to build from identical modules multi-storey buildings in the open space and on the surfaces of other planets.

11. I offered to create on the basis of my platforms spatial volumes with the help of the additional networks, which are made also along the second and third directions of three-dimensional space.

12. I suggested on the basis of my networks to create the closed volumes, followed by blowing inside these volumes film self-hardening resin to create a sealed volume.

13. I offered to create on the basis of my networks large size platforms that can serve as a basis for posting on them multi-modular self-contained space colonies of the modules of "conventional hermetic type".

14. I offered to use my constructions (including the self-opening ones) as a framework for space reflectors, solar sails, space antennas, fields of solar panels.

15. I offered to use some my modular constructions to create a prefabricated ring-shaped or sphere-type covering around the Earth or other planets (eg, Dyson Sphere).

16. I suggested that, if necessary, my large-scale platforms to build directly in the open space from the individual elements. At the same time cables can be created directly in space, with the help of extraction self-hardening resin from a special tank.

17. I offered to use my space platforms as sites to send and receive space ships, as well as a "cosmic beacons".

18. Through vertical and horizontal lock my constructions, you can build large structures, for example, on the surfaces of other planets, and then such facilities may be transformed into hermetically closed volume. In the future these may no restrictions grow in any direction.

19. Separately, it should be said about sphere-type construction based on a series of long elements, which intersect like in the "Shukhov's Tower". This is the foundation of artificial sphere-type planet, which gets its initial stiffness due to a single cable-ties between the poles.

20. Inside this sphere-type planet you can build a system of multi-storey living rooms and laboratories by making more and more new cable-stayed floors.

1. Firstly, I certainly can not know all their constructions, so I can only speak about the comparison with those that are known to me.

2. I am talking about the "space architecture", ie, I want to suggest the "main direction of architecture for cosmic construction". As far as I know, before me all space vehicles have been created only as a "unique product" for a particular purpose, or for limited series of tasks. On the "architecture of the cosmos" theme, as well as about long-term construction and life in space earlier usually spoke only fiction writers, and even then without any major structural elaborations. My own architecture is based on specific engineering constructions.

3. I, unlike the mentioned above, do not seek to target my constructions to address any very narrow technical problems. The main purpose of my constructions I see in the creation of "building fields" for the residing men into space for many years. At these "fields" can be placed any skimpy specialized technical modules. Thus, the question of navigation in space does not need to decide separately for each module. The cable-stayed field will be considered , namely, as "Space Station", but placed on it modules are only elements of such a space station.

4. If you compare my constructions with such as "umbrella-reflector CSRI PSC" or Japanese cosmic sail, it is easy to see that my constructions are clearly more rigid and more suitable for reconditioning.

5. If you look at my cosmic architecture as a whole, it is not difficult to see that it focuses on the capture of "cosmic flat areas" and "cosmic volumes". I think, modern space vehicles "afraid" of large volumes and areas, because any damage to them, by such event, for example, as a meteorite blow, will be for such "fully closed apparatus" a complete disaster.

6. Not hard to imagine the network-cable field, at which are placed, for example, 50 closed modules to address specific problems. If these independent modules were flying in cosmic space separate from each other, then apart from the problems of navigation, the problems of autonomous motors, they certainly would represent a great danger in space for other vehicles and even for each other.

7. If a series of modules is placed on the same network field, even the organization of rescue operations in such a community, if some of the modules are damaged, can be solved in the most efficient manner.

8. On my cable-stayed fields can be created long-term stations-warehouses for refueling separate spacecraft by the various "consumables" (air, water, fuel, etc.).

9. I note that even while the capture of large areas and large volumes my constructions have a low vulnerability. Cable-stayed fields (cable-stayed networks), for example, can without losing their properties to pass through itself many meteorites. Even in the case of damage to one or more shrouds, the stiffness of whole design fundamentally be unchanged. Then damaged network hawsers can be quickly replaced at new ones. This should be done with the help of special fitters who can move along the ropes of the cable-stayed field.

10. In conclusion I would say that my constructions in most cases does not oppose themselves to the already known ones. My constructions just open up endless new perspectives, about many of whom nobody had not thought. In this case, if we analyze the economy, such as material consumption per unit of captured area (volume) or cost per unit of captured area (volume), then the economical performance of my constructions simply nothing to oppose. My constructions, by and large, are "pioneering constructions" in this area.»

MY REPORT IN THE SVERDLOVSK

      In conclusion, I want to give you two quotes from the book, L.G. Dmitriev and A.V. Kasilov "Cable-stayed cover nets" (Kiev. Budivelnik. 1974). On page 32 we can read: "However, a rational orthogonal cable-stayed networks at supporting contour of three or more inclined to the horizontal arches, using only two strands directions on all the surface is not possible to create.
      On page 31 we read: "... there are justified the searches for new rational solutions of cable-stayed networks, which would possess the advantages of networks of a hyperbolic paraboloid, and do not contain any rigid elements, except the support contour.
      I hope that in light of my report's information, these targets, which were set in 1974 by leading experts in this field can now be considered as resolved.
      Thank you for your attention!

LET'S TALK ABOUT THE PRIORITIES

Base patents USSR. Description of the patent SU №1270256 А1.

Description of the patent SU № 1270256 A1 of the Federal Service for Intellectual Property of the Russian Federation.

Description of the patent SU № 1270256 A1 of the European Patent Agency

DO THIS IS USEFUL TO RUSSIA?

, because the theme of my address was quite serious. This theme was related to the space program in Russia, while in the interrogative part of the question itself sounded something like this: "What is your personal opinion, Mr President, in the Russian space program have any needs in my constructions, projects and proposals in the field of space architecture?" This question I asked the President Rosii May 24, 2010. In this case, I very specifically directed him to my achieve: http://hammer.bas.lv/, the section "Space Architecture".
      For those who are interested in it, I say: channel direct appeal to the President of Russia has been working very well. Shortly after my letter I received by e-mail the notification that my statement the president's administration received and forwarded for consideration by the Federal Space Agency.
Less than two months I received a registered letter answer to my question. However, this answer for some reason was signed not by the President, to whom I appealed, but it was signed by the Chief Scientific Secretary of the NTS Space Agency. Photocopies of the text notification letter and the text of reply letter I show below.


      I will not deny that I was shocked by the answer. I immediately thought of the Bible, namely, the Gospel of Matthew: "But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil".(Matthew 5:37)
      So I got "from evil ..." I began to analyze the situation and the more I analyze it, the more amazed. Firstly, why it was necessary to clarify: "to the President personally" or "to the President's administration", if in fact my answer does not matter? Secondly: whether the president saw my question? If seen, the information, which I have, more evidence to the contrary. Third: my aim was: to know the opinion of the President of Russia on the issues raised. I learned it? Of course not. That is, the problem, which I posed, is not solved. Why, then, all these "games" with the "personal appeal to the President"? But this is only "one side of the coin." But the other side is even more interesting.
      I am in great detail described all the nuances of my structures, added many of clear photos, each photo was separately described. And now I think: am I really such a "stupid" that in my description of "nothing is impossible to understand" (like this was written in the official response).

      Verbatim response from the Russian Space Agency has been reduced to the following:
"Information contained in the materials on the topic "Space Architecture" does not allow experts to draw a conclusion about the usefulness and applicability of your constructions".

Consideration of my proposals "as if it was", but the result of this consideration, "like as do not have..."
      Maybe, of course, I "stupid", but on-site office of the President of Russia, I'll don't solve questions regarding the space program of the country without a President (I'll be afraid). Now, as I understand it, the basic concept, the basic strategy is born for which will go into the next decade the whole process of population of space by mankind. In the history of humanity it's a "node point". Error in the assessment of "key moments" of the space strategy in the future can be very expensive.
      I appealed to the President. The President could attract anyone to analyze the facts. Specialists could formulate their proposals for the intended response. But these experts are in any case should not have to send their reply to me personally. The answer I had to get namely from the President. Otherwise the whole idea of "personal appeal ..." is just a "futile step", which also undermined the prestige of the incumbent President of Russia.

Am I not right?

Go to the top of section



Go to the top of page

ABOUT THE SPACE STRATEGY

«At that time we had the motivation, the state order and the Korolev's identity.
The Korolev became dead -
and the space program became dead with him».
S.P. Kapitza
(see: «Kapitza. This is a great policy. And besides,
we have no policy on science» site: http://badnews.org.ru/)

      I am often reminded of my teacher of physics and mathematics of the boarding school № 45 Kobushkin Victor Kirillovich. At his lessons, in addition to the curriculum, we often could hear a variety of very useful wise thoughts. One of these wise thoughts was: "If a man stumbled once - it happens to everyone and if tripped a second time - (?!); if he stumbled a third time - for sure, he is a fool".

      My cable-stayed structures, I began to develop in 1982. In 1986, I got for them an inventor's certificate. Already in my correspondence with the Patent Institute, I indicated that my structures, because of their lack of thrust, may be used for construction in space and on the surfaces of other planets. Naturally, at that time on it no one paid attention.
      In 1988 through the center of STCY "Nadezda" ("Hope") I had sent materials on my designs to Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR N.I. Ryzhkov. As a result, my stuff got in the NPO Energia, the cooperation with which ended for me with anything.
      In 1989 I with the help of an intermediary delivered a package with materials on my project to the advisor Soviet President on Science, Space Research Institute Director R.Z. Sagdeev. He's on my call did not answer, although the witness said that my materials Sagdeev was very interested in.
      In May 2010 I sent information about my designs in address of the current president of Russia D.A. Medvedev. I have asked the Russian president to tell me his opinion on the applicability of my designs in the Russian space program. My message to the president was not delivered, but Roskosmos (state customer of the Space projects) sent me such an unintelligible answer, that it would be better that there was no answer at all.
      I could not understand a reason why all of my spase appeals did not lead to any intelligible results. This a reason I opened a few days ago. You can read it as the epigraph to this article. S.P. Kapitsa, in the mentioned above article wrote directly: «The Korolev became dead - and the space program became dead with him». If you translate this into everyday language, you get something like this. In the space industry of Russia there are too many administrators, many technology managers, a lot of technical engineers, but there is NO ONE STRATEG Korolev's level. Great constructors Sergei Korolev and Wernher von Braun revealed to the world the way into space, but after their departure from life, in space department was no one significant event.
      About the scale of the S.P. Korolev's personality can be judged, for example, by one story, which I will tell below. I heared about it a long time ago, I can not tell the details, so expounding on the memory without reference to the source.
      At one meeting, chaired by himself General Designer Sergei Korolev, considered the question of why so slowly flows the development of the lander to fly to the moon. Engineers told the Korolev that currently there are no data on lunar soil. Perhaps the moon is covered with a thick layer of dust, in which the module will be drowned, possibly, the Moon is hard, and perhaps it is covered with a thick paste with consistency of sour cream. Different variants of the surface need various technical landing facilities. Without the serious intelligence there is no way to design the necessary equipment for the lander.
      Korolev asked to give him a blank sheet of paper. On this sheet, he wrote: "The Moon is hard. S. Korolev." Then he asked to insert this sheet into the project as "baseline data" and more to this issue has not come back. Tell me who of contemporary leaders would have acted similarly? Any one of them is likely to say verbally: "Let's consider, that the Moon is hard". But Korolev knew perfectly, what financial and human resources he manages. He knew the value of his words, aware the consequences of his actions and never hid himself from responsibility. Many modern leaders have their distance to the Korolev - "as till the Moon."
      For the development of new directions in space, one must possess a strong will, a freedom of thinking and extraordinary imagination. Need to constantly generate new ideas and not be afraid to defend them in the higher echelons of power. By "ideas" I do not mean partial improvement of a structure, but namely the "new directions". I think I have to believe in the opinion of my esteemed S.P. Kapitza, and with regret constate: there are no one strateg among the planners of the Russian space program.. The most great achievment of the Russian imagination in space is the creation of satellite navigation, but the idea of creating such a system belongs not them.
      I can "to the grave" knocking my forehead into the closed doors "the Russian space program" and clear answer to my proposals, in principle, I can not get. The thing is that I'm not trying to give "a push" to some particular improvement of a particular mechanism. I'm trying to achieve the acceptance of a long-term new concept and opening new scientific and technical direction, which is called "space architecture". Apparently, in this my desire, I represent from myself some sort of fossil unusual eccentrics, such as the schoolteacher Tsiolkovsky.
      Ask ourselves the question: "To whom could have to offer his ideas on space exploration schoolteacher Tsiolkovsky?" Answer: "No one". Was not then either the terms or interested organizations or spaceports, or even understanding what it offers and why. Apparently, the only one "worthy consumer of information" from the Tsiolkovsky became S.P. Korolev in the very beginning of his "space activities". He personally met with Tsiolkovsky and "absorbed" from him all, what he was needed for his further studies.
      Some readers will exclaim: What about the American space program, why did not fit into their researches, if my native Russia "can not do anything and wants nothing?" I answer. To the American organizations concerned with space exploration, I too have repeatedly offered my designs. All "descended on the brakes". The reason for this, I learned not long ago from the U.S. space agency (NASA). This reason lies in the fact that under U.S. law, no foreigner has the right to participate in American public space program. Thus, I have the "right" to send him my suggestions, designs, ideas, etc., but everything else will happen without me. All that seem them interesting, they'll "suck" from me and apply, without even informing me about it.
      Compassionate reader will say: Well, you "got"; deadlock in which you are, no weaker than the impasse into which was once Tsiolkovski. To this I reply: No, my deadlock a little bit weaker. Guided by the rule of "hope dies last", I will try to achieve some more recognition for me during my life…

      From the newswire: "In the U.S., 8 December 2010 was successfully launched the first ever spacecraft, built by a private company. Starting apparatus "Dragon" production company "SpaceX" ("Space Exploration Technologies") was held at the spaceport at Cape Canaveral (Florida) at 15:43 GMT".

      Help from the "Wikipedia": "Virgin Galactic" - a company in "Virgin Group", and plans to organize tourist suborbital space flights (from 2011) and launch small satellites. In the future the company plans to offer its customers and orbital flights.
      Group of companies "Virgin Group" led the British billionaire Richard Branson, who is also its private owner and a financial investor. This is the first in the history of astronautics, "private man", which moved into space exploration. Let's see, to what will this lead.

      My proposals on space policy in July 2010 I sent the head of "Virgin Galactic". I have no any answer.
      Into the company "Space Exploration Technologies" I also decided to send my proposals. Today, 21 January 2011 such a letter was sent.
We can consider, that the Russian president "blessed" me to this steps (see above).

      It's been two years... the Head of the "Space Exploration Technologies" Elon Musk is also not answered me anything.

P.S. About the current state of space branch of Russia I recommend the reader to read a very good article by Yury Karash "Russian space: pride and lack of self-esteem" , that recently appeared on the Russian language website "Voice of America".

Segrim

Go to the top of section



Go to the top of page

TENSEGRITY - A NEW DIRECTION IN ARCHITECTURE

"Source: Architectural portal "Form" March 9, 2011, 10:42 am"
Author of article's text and design's photo © Sergey Makarov

      Many architects is known concept of «Tensegrity». Coined this word famous American architect Buckminster Fuller. However, many engineers and architects understand the term is not quite true, as the author intended it. For example, in English edition of Wikipedia one of the proofreaders is absolutely sure, that «Tensegrity - this is non-contiguous compressed elements joined by a continuous net of tensioned members on the boundary of the structure». He believes that tensegrity-design shall consist solely of non-contiguous linear elements, which work only in compression. It is this understanding is shown on the page «Tensegrity» English edition of «Wikipedia». Do the right English Wikipedia? Let us turn to the author term - Buckminster Fuller. The author defined this term as follows:

"The word 'tensegrity' is an invention: a contraction of 'tensional integrity.' Tensegrity describes a structural-relationship principle in which structural shape is guarenteed by the finitely closed, comprehensively continuous, tensional behaviors of the system and not by the discontinuous and exclusively local compressional member behaviors. Tensegrity provides the ability to yield increasingly without ultimately breaking or coming asunder" [Look: Richard Buckminster Fuller (exerpt from Synergetics, p. 372)].

      Since the book itself I do not have, I took this quote with English-language site. Meticulous reader can go to this site and make sure I'm right. And if so, the concept of "Tensegrity" we must classify as "tense laconic unity" rather than "set of non-contiguous rods strapped together by threads." If someone does not agree with me, I'll bet.
      In 1986, I received the sole inventor's certificate hanging on "suspension roof". Since I was the only author and I have not had any co-authors, from filing to a positive decision on my request, passed a few years. My suspension roofs are the cable-stayed networks on undulating support contours. I am a long time to develop such designs and, finally, grasped "the secret of their formation". After that, I have formulated (legally: "opened") significant law. It said this: "the law of compatibility of quasi-orthogonal tangentially-undulated cable-stayed networks." Because over experience debilitating "war" with the patent, I just went to a notary and registered the date of the wording of the law. Of course, I realized, that this discovery has a great future, but I just do not have the forces to once again appeal to the Patent Institute.
      Feature of this law is that it is pioneering discovery in this area. Before its appearance all the cable-stayed designs invented “as one piece”. With the advent of this law it was possible to make "quasiorthogonal (ie, "almost orthogonal" and consisting of only two families of cables) cabling network on the support contour with ANY arbitrary preassigned number of waves. This opened up tremendous prospects that, as has often happened in Russia, nobody needed.
      Recently (in February), I contacted an American professor Mason Peck (Mason A. Peck, Associate Professor Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering 212 Upson Hall Cornell University Ithaca, NY). He was really professional in this field and indifferent man. Through him I learned that virtually all of my cabling structure (and all they have force thrust closed within themselves) is precisely "tensegrity-structures". It turned out that it is my engineer aspiration to a "closed laconic structures" spiritually kinship me with famous by Buckminster Fuller.

      What has been done in this area before me, you can see, for example, visiting «Tensegrity» English encyclopedia «Wikimedia Commons». What I suggest, can be seen, for example, in the accompanying photo.
      The rest of my designs inquisitive reader can find on my personal website in the section "Space Architecture". Interest to the site already expressed by the representatives of some 20 countries across the globe, because the information in it is presented in Russian and English.
      I am not afraid to say it bluntly: My designs are a completely new direction in architecture and engineering. The novelty is in the form, and in the methodology for their creation. It's true, I suggest "an infinite series of designs". Such suggestion in this area has never happened before. There are no My innovations only in the "principle", which yet earlier was formulated by the genius Buckminster Fuller.
It turned out that namely this principle all the time led me through my inventive path, although this principle I learned only recently.
      It is possible that a "Makarov's networks" soon be in demand and to create "artificial planets" when moving humanity into space, as on television likes to talk us American Professor Michio Kaku.
      To those people, who understand as a tensegrity structures only of the "pencils and ropes", I want to remind, that as the most genious tensegrity-structure, created by nature, Fuller believed the ordinary spreading tree.

Sources:
Photography of Buckminster Fuller was copied from the website: http://www.hippox.com/.
Picture of "tree" - from the website: http://www.landscape.ru/.

March 10, 2011 Segrim

Go to the top of section



Go to the top of page

FOR THE CURIOUS MEN

• About the long journey of the author into the space architecture you can read on this site at subsection "My SPACE".

• About technology of forming Makarov's structures and about the electronic creation of Makarov's cable-stayed nets you can read in subsection "Makarov's Structures".

• How many different structures were created by author, you can see, for example, on a page "The contribution of Sergey Grigoryevich Makarov (Segrim) into the encyclopedia «Wikimedia Commons»".

• About the main law of the world around us you can read in the "Wikimedia Commons" or on the website of the author in the subsection "The World Harmony Law".

• Recently my personal webpage, which is dedicated only to my space architecture, appeared on one serious cosmic site of Russia. To go to this webpage enough to click on the banner here:

Thanks for your attention!

Go to the top of page


Link to the site start page