Search Results

Over the past two decades, the emergence of mature associative geometry modeling tools and the related sophistication in connected design/manufacture processes has enabled the design and realization of more complex, nonlinear structures. These techniques, first applied in the aerospace industry and currently being explored by architects, have matured into tools that can be used to optimize complex structural systems with irregular geometry. Potential advantages of this approach include: reduced mass penalty; optimized ECLSS and power sizing and performance; lower risk and lower cost in manufacturing; and flexibility, or the ability to customize individual vehicles according to function. One area of space architecture where constraint driven design can become an invaluable tool is in the optimization of space inflatable habitats. The first endoskeletal hybrid space module - TransHab – was developed in the late 1990s at NASA’s Johnson Space Center.

In the period between mid-1997 and 2000, a team at NASA's Johnson Space Center broke with historical paradigms by developing the first endoskeletal space module. The value of this design was cost-effectiveness and efficiency, and also the possibilities its technical success has created for new forms to support human-rated vehicles and modules for exploration missions. The “TransHab Paradigm” is a complex, semi-inflatable vehicle whose two basic configurations - launch and deployed - are each optimized for their respective environments while retaining fundamental system integration for autonomy and efficient deployment. An early lesson of this new paradigm is its adaptability to a wide array of formal solutions for different sets of requirements.

In this, the third and final segment of our preliminary investigation into the impact of providing for good habitability in an advanced space mission, we review the findings of our assessment of existing vehicle and facility types. From these findings, three things are clear: first, that launch constraints tend to drive the available dimensions for all space payloads and thus also for potential habitats; and secondly, that a habitat configuration which is successful at one dimension is not equally successful at another scale. Finally, the principle of economy and optimization clearly prohibits the effective use of a single component for both microgravity and surface habitation. Based on these findings and keeping habitability foremost in our criteria, we will attempt in this paper to propose a reference mission concept whose components are optimal for habitability and thus represent a first step in reducing risks inherent in the human system.

Habitability and human factors are necessary criteria to include in the iterative process of Tier-one vehicle and mission design. Bringing these criteria in at the first, conceptual stage of design for exploration and other human-rated missions can greatly reduce mission development costs, raise the level of efficiency and viability, and improve the chances of success. In offering a rationale for this argument, the authors give an example of how the habitability expert can contribute to early mission and vehicle architecture by defining the formal implications of a habitable vehicle, assessing the viability of units already proposed for exploration missions on the basis of these criteria, and finally, by offering an optimal set of solutions for an example mission.

The presence of windows in various building designs (e.g., offices, hospitals, houses, etc.) has been correlated with improved psychological well-being and performance. The application in hermetic environments of “virtual windows,” an electronic monitor integrated into an interior environment for viewing external landscapes, is expected to correlate with similar positive effects. In order to properly install virtual windows, the display content and the display characteristics need to be considered.

In designing habitats for long-duration space missions, one of the primary issues to address is that of sleep spaces, commonly known as Crew Quarters. While ergonomic design plays a major role in short-duration crew quarters (CQ) design, longer term missions must take into account the significant effect which environmental factors have on crew productivity; to that end, the establishment of private space for each individual crew member, as well as a range of semiprivate work and rest areas represents a significant departure from established norms in space habitat design. Both for proposed planetary habitats and microgravity habitats, various systems must be studied to enhance the wellbeing of the crewmembers.

Long-duration space facilities--or space habitats--pose a particular challenge to the Architect. The duration of the project's development, the breadth and intensity of effort required of all the associated engineering disciplines, and the comparative paucity of hard data available on long-duration habitability in microgravity environments: these factors require an intensive approach to project management, and one which must begin during the very first stages of preliminary design. By streamlining project management with the design process into a continuous dialectic of analysis, design, reassessment and action, the architectural integration of a space habitat can be effected. This hybrid process describes a new kind of design discipline which is uniquely suited to the nature of its domain.