Established geometric consequence; structural implementation remains working.
| Classification | 600.20:30:02 |
|---|---|
| Model state | Established geometry / working structural application |
| Recovered | 23 September 2026 |
| Parent | 600.20:30 — primary structure, rings, segmentation and structural interfaces |
| Open parameters | Final inner-rim depth, radial layer spacing, support-member dimensions, taper ratios, load paths, materials and relationship to pressure-cell boundaries. |
The inhabited surface is the smallest circumference.
The habitable inner rim occupies the minimum radius of the rotating structural stack. Moving downward/outward through several kilometres of Station depth increases radius and therefore circumference. The increase is small relative to the roughly 1.5 million km global radius, but it is systematic and becomes locally useful engineering volume rather than a correction to be ignored.
The recovered discussion used a provisional depth of roughly 8–9 km as an illustrative structural section. That depth is not yet a fixed Station specification.
Deep supports can widen toward the outer structure.
Because successively deeper layers have slightly more circumferential space, major load-bearing members need not be constant-section columns. Truncated-pyramidal, conical or otherwise radially widening supports can place a narrower footprint near the inhabited/geological side and spread load into a broader base toward deeper structural layers.
This is a working design direction rather than a prescribed universal column shape. The important recovered principle is that the Station's radial geometry naturally permits support members to broaden in the direction of load distribution.
The geometry can be used rather than merely tolerated.
A constant-width structural grid would leave the increasing circumference to be absorbed through spacing changes, voids or repeated offsets. Tapered members offer another option: some of the gained circumference can be consumed by progressively broader structural footprints, potentially improving load distribution while preserving narrower interfaces near sensitive geological and occupied layers.
The idea complements, but does not replace, segmentation and geological decoupling. Primary supports still have to respect fracture boundaries, pressure-bed cells, service penetrations and differential movement.
A broad base does not justify a continuous rigid bridge.
Radial widening may improve ordinary load distribution, but an uninterrupted member spanning mechanically independent layers could also transmit displacement across interfaces intended to isolate faults. Supports therefore cannot be treated simply as enormous monolithic cones. Their joints, segmentation, compliant interfaces or termination points remain unresolved and must be designed with the Station's sacrificial and pressure-supported architecture.
This is a cross-section problem.
The model depends on global radius and final rim depth (600.20:10), segmented primary structure (600.20:30:01), geological pressure support (600.20:40:01, 600.20:40:02) and fault containment (600.20:90). It is particularly suitable for testing in future functional sectional drawings because support taper, pressure cells, access trunks and fracture interfaces must coexist in the same physical volume.
The recovered conclusion remains deliberately incomplete.
The originating discussion identified the increasing radius of deeper levels and proposed truncated-pyramidal or conical supports as a way to exploit it for improved weight distribution. No detailed member calculation or universal support geometry was established. Future structural calculations belong in Model Records; the design evolution belongs in Development Records; external structural precedents belong in Factual References; and Tribunal engineering drawings belong in Universe Records.