Design and Validation of a Compact Radius Centrifuge Artificial Gravity Test Platform
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Design and Validation of a Compact Radius Centrifuge Artificial Gravity Test Platform by Chris Trigg B.S. Environmental Engineering Northwestern University, 2008 M.S. Environmental Engineering Stanford University, 2009 SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF AERONAUTICS AND ASTRONAUTICS IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE IN AERONAUTICS AND ASTRONAUTICS AT THE MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TEHCNOLOGY MAY 2013 ©2013 Massachusetts Institute of Technology All Rights Reserved Signature of Author: ____________________________________________________________________ Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics May 23, 2013 Certified by: __________________________________________________________________________ Prof. Laurence R. Young Apollo Program Professor of Astronautics Professor of Health Sciences and Technology Thesis Supervisor Accepted by: __________________________________________________________________________ Prof. Eytan H. Modiano Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics Chair, Graduate Program Committee 2 Design and Validation of a Compact Radius Centrifuge Artificial Gravity Test Platform by Chris Trigg Submitted to the Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics on 23 May, 2013 in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Aeronautics and Astronautics ABSTRACT Intermittent exposure to artificial gravity on a short radius centrifuge (SRC) with exercise is a promising, comprehensive countermeasure to the cardiovascular and musculoskeletal deconditioning that occurs as a result of prolonged exposure to microgravity. To date, the study of artificial gravity has been done using bedrest and SRC’s with subjects positioned radially with the head at the center of rotation. A recent proposal to put a human centrifuge on the International Space Station (ISS) highlighted the reality that near-term inflight SRC’s will likely be confined to radii shorter than has been typically used in terrestrial analogs. The unique positioning required by such a constraint would result in physiological effects such as accelerations on the head, a change in blood pressure gradient across the body, and potential changes in muscle activation during exercise. In this project, we define a compact radius centrifuge (CRC) as a centrifuge with a radius of less than 1.95 meters, the height of the 99th percentile male astronaut. Based on this definition, CRC’s represent a class of centrifuges that cannot accommodate all subjects in a supine, radial position as is typically done in SRC’s A CRC test platform is designed and fabricated on the MIT human centrifuge, which is constrained to a radius of 1.4 meters, the upper radial limit for a centrifuge to fit within an ISS module. The CRC includes a cycle ergometer for exercise during centrifugation, and also positions the subject sideways with the interaural axis parallel to the axis of rotation. Such positioning aligns the direction of the legs while exercising with the Coriolis forces, thereby eliminating lateral deflection at the knees and reducing the risk of a knee or hip injury. The CRC platform’s design process is discussed, and the final design is described in detail. Finally, motor performance is characterized, and the CRC test platform and all associated systems are validated through a pilot run. The validated CRC will serve as a versatile platform on which future studies will be able to investigate physiological and mechanical responses to this unique, realistic centrifuge configuration. Thesis Supervisor: Prof. Laurence Young Title: Apollo Program Professor of Astronautics, Professor of Health Sciences and Technology This work was supported by NASA grant NNX09AE50G and the Skolkovo Foundation grant 6925991. 3 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I have to first and foremost thank Dr. Larry Young for taking a chance on me, allowing me to join MVL, and giving me the opportunity to work on this fun and engaging project. Larry, I’ve truly enjoyed my time in MVL and was glad to be part of its 50th anniversary. I will pay it forward. Had it not been for two additional faculty members I would not have made it to MVL to begin with; thanks to Dr. Ed Crawley and Dr. Steven Barrett for giving me the chance to be part of AeroAstro and accommodating me as interests changed. To the faculty of MVL, Dr. Dava Newman, Dr. Chuck Oman, and Dr. Jeff Hoffman, I have thoroughly enjoyed taking your classes and learning from your many anecdotes and insights. There are several other individuals who deserve particular thanks. To Liz Zotos: you have been extraordinarily helpful and made the large amount of administrative aspects to this project extremely easy and efficient. Thanks to Mark Belanger in the Edgerton shop for his help and patience. And to the UROP’s who helped on this project, Jacob Rothman and Ben Evans: thank you for so much interest and hard work. It was thanks to all that you took on and rapidly completed that we finished as much as we did. Friends are the reason grad school is bearable despite all that it entails. Thank you to all my many labmates in Space Architects, the lab formerly known as PARTNER, and MVL. Thanks to Bradley and Andy for many a fun night out. To Morgan: #here’stoDCT. And to Ana: you’re up next! Thank you for all your help and best of luck with your upcoming dissertation. The centrifuge comes with a warranty so contact me anytime. Perhaps the most important thank-you’s are to my family, mom, dad, and Patrick, for all their support. And to Tim, you’ve been the best part of MIT, Boston, and the last two years. To many more. 5 6 7 8 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................... 13 1.1 Motivation ................................................................................................................................... 15 1.2 Objectives and Methods ............................................................................................................. 16 1.3 Thesis Organization ..................................................................................................................... 17 2 BACKGROUND ..................................................................................................................................... 19 2.1 Physiological Effects of Spaceflight ............................................................................................. 19 2.1.1 Cardiovascular Deconditioning ........................................................................................... 19 2.1.2 Muscular Deconditioning .................................................................................................... 20 2.1.3 Skeletal Deconditioning ...................................................................................................... 22 2.1.4 Vestibular and Psychological Effects ................................................................................... 23 2.2 Current ISS Countermeasures ..................................................................................................... 24 2.2.1 Effectiveness of Current Inflight Countermeasures ............................................................ 27 2.3 Artificial Gravity as an Alternative Countermeasure .................................................................. 28 2.3.1 Implementation of Artificial Gravity ................................................................................... 28 2.3.2 Effectiveness of Artificial Gravity ........................................................................................ 30 2.4 Review of Previous SRC/CRC Designs ......................................................................................... 31 3 COMPACT RADIUS TEST PLATFORM DESIGN AND FABRICATION ....................................................... 37 3.1 MIT SRC ....................................................................................................................................... 37 3.2 AGREE and Requirements Definition .......................................................................................... 39 3.3 Concept Design ........................................................................................................................... 44 3.4 Design Development ................................................................................................................... 47 3.5 Final Design and Fabrication ....................................................................................................... 54 3.5.1 Sliding Base ......................................................................................................................... 56 3.5.2 Chair .................................................................................................................................... 58 3.5.3 Exerciser Baseplate ............................................................................................................. 61 3.5.4 Leg Cuffs and Frame ............................................................................................................ 62 3.5.5 Cycle Ergometer .................................................................................................................. 63 3.5.6 Instrumentation Suite ......................................................................................................... 64 4 PLATFORM MECHANICAL CHARACTERIZATION AND VALIDATION .................................................... 67