DOCSLIB.ORG

THE VERNACULAR of SPACE ARCHITECTURE Kriss J

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
THE VERNACULAR of SPACE ARCHITECTURE Kriss J AIAA Space Architecture Symposium AIAA 2002-6102 10-11 October 2002, Houston, Texas THE VERNACULAR OF SPACE ARCHITECTURE Kriss J. Kennedy, Space Architect NASA Johnson Space Center ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION Space architecture is a unique, undeveloped Space structures—whether a space station, an field. There have been many glimpses into the interplanetary transfer spacecraft, a Moon or future of space architecture via comic books, Mars base, or some futuristic space hotel—all cartoons, and movies that conjure up fanciful share common architectural elements. These massive stations and 100-kilometer Moon or elements are pressure vessels (for living, Mars domes. However, realistic space working, and logistics), docking or berthing architecture started when the space race put connections for spacecraft, transition spaces humans into orbit, then progressed with the (airlocks and nodes), support structure, power Apollo moon missions and the initial space collection and distribution, thermal control, stations. Space Architecture has now evolved communications, and propulsion with guidance into the International Space Station that is 220 and control. This paper focuses on the pressure nautical miles in orbit above Earth. As NASA vessels or habitats, but gives a brief overview of and the space community look beyond low Earth the other elements of space architecture. orbit to interplanetary spacecraft, space facilities at libration points, and Moon and Mars bases, The space environment heavily influences the the beginnings of a true and real space design of the space architecture elements. architecture vernacular of the early twenty-first Pressure vessels can consist of laboratories, century takes shape. habitats, interconnecting modules (nodes), airlocks, and areas for logistics, storage, and This paper describes the current vernacular of work. Currently all of these large and heavy Space Architecture of the early twenty-first preintegrated pressure vessels are brought from century. At this juncture of the century, Space Earth on a launch vehicle. Eventually, as our Architecture is comprised of launch vehicles, space civilization evolves, we will be able to live pressure vessels (modules) and the systems to off the “land,” producing and manufacturing support human life. Of course many elements, habitats on other planetary bodies. systems, and hardware are involved within these broad categories. The launch vehicles are a part SPACE ARCHITECTURE ELEMENTS of this vernacular because they constrain the size and mass that will be transported to orbit. The basic vernacular of space architecture draws This paper focuses mainly on the habitable its vocabulary from a modular kit of space systems of space architecture—the pressure elements. An orbital station, an interplanetary vessels or modules that provide the primary spacecraft, and a planetary surface base have structures and contain the atmosphere to enable common elements. All architectural solutions humans to live and work in space. require a transportation system to take these elements to space, an infrastructure to provide structural support, and utilities to provide functionality. The transportation system places constraints on the size and mass of the element being delivered to space—much as ground 1 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Copyright © 2002 by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc. No copyright is asserted in the United States under Title 17, U.S. Code. The U.S. Government has a royalty-free license to exercise all rights under the copyright claimed herein for Governmental purposes. All other rights are reserved by the copyright owner. transportation does for terrestrial building Microgravity, with its absence of a strong components. gravitational force, presents challenges and opportunities for designers of orbital and transfer The infrastructure for a n orbital facility or an habitats. The microgravity environment interplanetary spacecraft includes structural arrays eliminates the physical need for normal up and or a truss system to attach power systems, down orientation and the typical area method of radiators, berthing ports, airlocks, and living space allocation. It provides an opportunity to modules. Utilities include power generation and use volume rather than area. The International distribution, removal of excess waste h eat through Space Station (ISS) is a good exam ple of the use radiators, communications, and propulsion with of volume. guidance and control (GN&C). The infrastructure for a planetary surface base includes living Induced artificial gravity on transportation modules, airlocks, power generation and systems incurs a mass penalty over microgravity distribution, radiators, berthing/docking ports, systems, depending on configuration and communications , and surface transportation. propulsion system selection (Capps, 1991). It There are many papers and books about the has not been conclusively proven that these design of these space elements. The following are syste ms are required for Mars transportation, but major elements in space architecture. if they are, since mass translates to cost in space transportation, the added mass translates to at • Habitat least 5 -15% additional development cost. • Laboratory Environments with less gravity than that on Earth • Node (transition element) pose interesting ha bitat design challenges. Human physical reactions and performance in a • Airlock reduced gravity environment differ from those in • Berthing/docking systems Earth gravity. The main difference is that microgravity places less restriction on human • Logistic supply locomotion than does the gravity of Earth, whe re • Structural system the specific up and down orientation and reach envelopes increase volume requirements. • Power system • Thermal system Planetary dust is a potential problem for any planetary surface element system or activity that • Communications system is repetitive or has long -term exposure. A layer of fine dust -like pa rticles (regolith) covers the • Propulsion with GN&C Moon's surface. Lunar dust is very abrasive and Space Environmental Factors can cause many problems if it gets into mechanical equipment or the human lungs. The Space habitats are designed to sustain human Apollo missions experienced many problems life in the inhospitable environment of space. associated with lunar dust contaminating the These habitats are pressurized vessels which Luna r Module and surface equipment. Mars dust include laboratories, living facilities, support is much less understood than lunar dust. The systems, and repair/maintenance facilities. The Viking landers provided data that lead scientists space environment is characterized by its to believe that Mars dust is much like dirt on vacuum, orbital debris, microgravity (on orbital Earth. This suggests that Mars dust will be less space stations and transfer missions), partial of a design issue th an lunar dust, but certainly gravity, radi ation, and planetary dust. These not something to ignore. Lunar and Mars dust characteristics are the major design challenges can adhere to most objects and cause problems for space habitation. that will influence design of new exploration systems. 2 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics The goal of dust control is to limit dust • Space-delivered with immediate capability penetration into a mechanism or envir onment. If an effective dust control program is not • Volume and mass limited to launch payload implemented, the results will be a higher number size capability and mass capability of mechanism failures, and increases in risks, CLASS II: Prefabricated – Space/Surface- maintenance, repairs, resupply, and contamination Assembled Characteristics of the living environment. The latter is of particular concern because of its effect on the crew's health • Earth -manufactured and the crew accommodation systems. Dust characteristics and design solutions are • Requires space assembly or deployment discussed in many articles, reports, and papers. • Requires robotic and human time during assembly Space Habitats • Partial integration capability fo r subsystems Space habitats are categorized into three • Requires some or all internal outfitting classes. Class I i s preintegrated —entirely emplacement manufactured, integrated, and ready to operate when delivered to space. Class II is prefabricated • Critical subsystems are Earth -based and and is space- or surface-deployed with some tested prior to launch assembly or setup required. Class III is in -situ • Requires assembly prior to operability derived, with its structure manufacture d using local resources available on the Moon or Mars. • Allows for larger volumes Figure 1 shows the relationship of habitat • Less restricted to launch vehicle size or mass technology, habitat classes, and time. The next capability few sections present a top -level discussion of space habitat design considerations for the CLA SS III: In -Situ Derived and Constructed various elements t hat make up space Characteristics architecture. • Manufactured in -situ with space resources • Space-constructed • Requires manufacturing capability and infrastructure • Requires robotic and human time during construction • Requires integration of subsystems • Requires all internal outfitting emplacement • Critical subsystems are Earth -based and tested prior to launch • Requires assembly to become operable Figure 1. Habitat Classifications • Allows for larger volumes • Not restricted to launch vehicle size or
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Continuum of Space Architecture: from Earth to Orbit
    42nd International Conference on Environmental Systems AIAA 2012-3575 15 - 19 July 2012, San Diego, California The Continuum of Space Architecture: From Earth to Orbit Marc M. Cohen1 Marc M. Cohen Architect P.C. – Astrotecture™, Palo Alto, CA, 94306 Space architects and engineers alike tend to see spacecraft and space habitat design as an entirely new departure, disconnected from the Earth. However, at least for Space Architecture, there is a continuum of development since the earliest formalizations of terrestrial architecture. Moving out from 1-G, Space Architecture enables the continuum from 1-G to other gravity regimes. The history of Architecture on Earth involves finding new ways to resist Gravity with non-orthogonal structures. Space Architecture represents a new milestone in this progression, in which gravity is reduced or altogether absent from the habitable environment. I. Introduction EOMETRY is Truth2. Gravity is the constant.3 Gravity G is the constant – perhaps the only constant – in the evolution of life on Earth and the human response to the Earth’s environment.4 The Continuum of Architecture arises from geometry in building as a primary human response to gravity. It leads to the development of fundamental components of construction on Earth: Column, Wall, Floor, and Roof. According to the theoretician Abbe Laugier, the column developed from trees; the column engendered the wall, as shown in FIGURE 1 his famous illustration of “The Primitive Hut.” The column aligns with the human bipedal posture, where the spine, pelvis, and legs are the gravity- resisting structure. Caryatids are the highly literal interpretation of this phenomenon of standing to resist gravity, shown in FIGURE 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Windows to the World - Doors to Space - a Reflection on the Psychology and Anthropology of Space Architecture
    Space: Science, Technology and the Arts (7th Workshop on Space and the Arts) 18-21 May 2004, ESA/ESTEC, Noordwijk, The Netherlands Windows to the world - Doors to Space - a reflection on the psychology and anthropology of space architecture. Andreas Vogler, Architect(1), Jesper Jørgensen, Psychologist(2) (1)Architecture and Vision / SpaceArch Hohenstaufenstrasse 10, D-80801 MUNICH GERMANY [email protected], [email protected] (2) SpaceArch c/o Kristian von Bengtson Prinsessegade 7A, st.tv DK - 1422 Copenhagen K, Denmark [email protected] ABSTRACT Living in a confined environment as a space habitat is a strain on normal human life. Astronauts have to adapt to an environment characterized by restricted sensory stimulation and the lack of “key points” in normal human life: seasons, weather change, smell of nature, visual, audible and other normal sensory inputs which give us a fixation in time and place. Living in a confined environment with minimal external stimuli available, gives a strong pressure on group and individuals, leading to commonly experienced symptoms: tendency to depression, irritability and social tensions. It is known, that perception adapts to the environment. A person living in an environment with restricted sensory stimulation will adapt to this situation by giving more unconscious and conscious attention to the present sensory stimuli. Newest neurobiological research (neuroaestetics) shows that visual representations (like Art) have a remarkable impact in the brain, giving knowledge that these representations both function as usual information and as information on a higher symbolic level (Zeki). Therefore designing a space habitat must take into consideration the importance of design, not only in its functional role, but also as a combination of functionality, mental representation and its symbolic meaning, seen as a function of its anthropological meaning.
    [Show full text]
  • The Outer Space Also Needs Architects
    Paper ID #31322 The Outer Space Also Needs Architects Dr. Sudarshan Krishnan, University of Illinois at Urbana - Champaign Sudarshan Krishnan specializes in the area of lightweight structures. His current research focuses on the structural design and stability behavior of cable-strut systems and transformable structures. He teaches courses on the planning, analysis and design of structural systems. As an architect and structural designer, he has worked on a range of projects that included houses, hospitals, recreation centers, institutional buildings, and conservation of historic buildings/monuments. Professor Sudarshan is an active member of Working Group-6: Tensile and Membrane Structures, and Working Group-15: Structural Morphology, of the International Association of Shell and Spatial Struc- tures (IASS). He serves on the Aerospace Division’s Space Engineering and Construction Technical Com- mittee of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), and the ASCE/ACI-421 Reinforced Concrete Slabs Committee. He is the past Program Chair of the Architectural Engineering Division of the Ameri- can Society for Engineering Education (ASEE). He is also a member of the Structural Stability Research Council (SSRC). From 2004-2007, Professor Sudarshan served on the faculty of the School of Architecture and ENSAV- Versailles Study Abroad Program (2004-06) in France. He was a recipient of the School of Architec- ture’s ”Excellence in Teaching Award,” the College of Fine and Applied Arts’ ”Faculty Award for Ex- cellence in Teaching,” and has been
    [Show full text]
  • Future Military Space from Procurement to the Tactical Fight
    MONOGRAPH Future Military Space From Procurement to the Tactical Fight MAJ JUSTIN H. DEIFEL, USAF MAJ NICHOLAS M. SOMERMAN, USAF MAJ MARK D. THIEME, USA General Issue Current space acquisition, vehicle processing, and operations are too cumber- some and expensive to meet future emerging war fighter needs. The cost associ- ated with placing assets into orbit has been the greatest problem to the United States (US) fully recognizing its potential in space. With the emergence of com- mercially available reusable launch vehicles, the military must consider the pos- sibility of building an internal space lift capability as a core competency. Also, the military must develop and integrate new capabilities from space that will enable strategic capabilities, down to tactical war fighter implementation. Launch costs currently represent a third to half the cost of fielding a space system.1 Additionally, the current bureaucratic model for the Department of De- fense (DOD) space architecture does not enable a rapid approach to space for the US to gain space supremacy and prevent further loss of space superiority. Key hurdles must be removed and new methods utilized to accomplish this goal. This process requires a change in acquisitions, operations, doctrine, and organizational structure. Requirements for space systems are developed on a five to ten-year time hori- zon, which does not allow the development of systems that can be utilized on demand in an area of responsibility (AOR). New systems must be developed that can be deployed on demand to AORs and utilized by ground, sea, air, cyber, and space forces. Problem Statement Space access and capabilities are rapidly evolving, and the US military must pos- ture itself to utilize these capabilities to protect and defend US national security.
    [Show full text]
  • Seeking a Human Spaceflight Program Worthy of a Great Nation
    SEEKING A HUMAN SPACEFLIGHT PROGRAM WORTHY OF A GREAT NATION Review of U.S. HUMAN SPACEFLIGHT Plans Committee Review of U.S. Human Spaceflight Plans Committee 1 SEEKING A HUMAN SPACEFLIGHT PROGRAM WORTHY OF A GREAT NATION 2 Review of U.S. Human Spaceflight Plans Committee SEEKING A HUMAN SPACEFLIGHT PROGRAM WORTHY OF A GREAT NATION “We choose...to do [these] things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard...” John F. Kennedy September 12, 1962 Review of U.S. Human Spaceflight Plans Committee 3 SEEKING A HUMAN SPACEFLIGHT PROGRAM WORTHY OF A GREAT NATION Table of Contents Preface .......................... ...................................................................................................................................... 7 Executive Summary ..... ...................................................................................................................................... 9 Chapter 1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 19 Chapter 2.0 U.S. Human Spaceflight: Historical Review ............................................................................ 27 Chapter 3.0 Goals and Future Destinations for Exploration ........................................................................ 33 3.1 Goals for Exploration ............................................................................................................... 33 3.2 Overview of Destinations and Approach .................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Human Spaceflight: Phobos Base
    2017 AIAA Student Design Competition HUMAN SPACEFLIGHT: PHOBOS BASE Timothy Bishop Victor Kitmanyen Thomas Lagarde Zachary Taylor Faculty Advisor: Olga Bannova, Ph.D. Sasakawa International Center for Space Architecture (SICSA) Cullen College of Engineering, University of Houston Houston, Texas, USA ~ 2 ~ Copyright © 2017 by Timothy Bishop, Victor Kitmanyen, Thomas Lagarde & Zachary Taylor. All Rights Reserved. Published with express permission, by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc. ~ 3 ~ Signature Page Timothy Bishop Project Manager AIAA #: 677333 Victor Kitmanyen Microgravity Countermeasures Architect AIAA #: 819885 Zachary Taylor Space Architect AIAA #: 819283 Thomas Lagarde RECLSS Architect AIAA #: 819864 Dr. Olga Bannova Faculty & Project Advisor Copyright © 2017 by Timothy Bishop, Victor Kitmanyen, Thomas Lagarde & Zachary Taylor. All Rights Reserved. Published with express permission, by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc. ~ 4 ~ Table of Contents LIST OF FIGURES ___________________________________________________________________________ 6 ACRONYMS _________________________________________________________________________________ 8 1.0 ABSTRACT _______________________________________________________________________________ 9 2.0 PROJECT INTRODUCTION ______________________________________________________________ 10 3.0 REQUIREMENTS: ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION ____________________________________ 11 3.1 SITE ___________________________________________________________________________________
    [Show full text]
  • Tomás Saraceno's Art Work
    arts Article Tomás Saraceno’s Art Work “In Orbit” (2013) against the Backdrop of Space Architecture Eva Wattolik Institut für Kunstgeschichte, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, 91054 Erlangen, Germany; [email protected] Received: 31 October 2018; Accepted: 11 January 2019; Published: 15 January 2019 Abstract: When discussing the correlation between technological progress and the development of modern architecture, case studies from the fine arts can be instructive. This article undertakes a close architectural analysis of Tomás Saraceno’s walkable art installation “In Orbit” (2013) by releasing previously unpublished technical specifications. A brief history of envisioned and constructed space architecture of the last hundred years—which can be divided into three phases—serves to locate the installation within the currents of predictive utopia, realized architecture and technological development. It becomes clear that Saraceno not only takes up pre-existing architectural techniques, but also develops them further. Keywords: Tomás Saraceno; “In Orbit”; utopia; space architecture; lightweight structure; flying city; aerospace; art installation; spider web 1. Introduction In vertiginous heights beneath the glass roof of K21 Düsseldorf, a major museum for contemporary art in Düsseldorf (Germany), a giant spider seems to have woven a horizontal web in different layers. People walk, lie or stand unsteadily within it. “In Orbit” (Figure1) is a daring walk-in installation by the Argentinian artist Tomás Saraceno (*1973), which was installed with the help of numerous specialists in 2013 and renewed in 2017. It provides the experience of virtually hovering—without a backup device—25 m above the courtyard’s ground floor. As I will argue, this installation can be regarded as a self-sufficient artistic creation as much as it addresses the ideas of flying cities as they have been passed down throughout the history of utopia.
    [Show full text]
  • HIVE: a Space Architecture Concept
    SMALL SAT 2020 HIVE: A Space Architecture Concept Allison B. Taylor (Systems Engineering Division), [email protected] Henry Helvajian (Physical Sciences Laboratories), [email protected] The Aerospace Corporation El Segundo, CA Abstract The increasing number of spacefaring nations and agendas, miniaturization of subsystems, and trend toward integrated systems are no doubt influencing the evolution of space systems. The diversification of space architectures has surged at an unprecedented rate in recent history with initial deployments of planned mega-constellations. This paper explores HIVE - a reconfigurable small satellite system primed to revolutionize the concept of modular space systems and future space architectures. Based on a mass producible functioning unit consisting of nested rings, HIVE is a comprehensive satellite design harnessing advancement in robotics, software and machine learning, precision scale manufacturing, and novel materials with multifunctional properties. HIVE is addressing solutions for detailed design of interconnected hardware, engineering analysis for multi-payload applications, and policy to accomplish modularized, in-space deployment and reconfiguration. The HIVE unit design lends itself to the “infinite possibilities” of space mission architectures and presents a revolutionary way to design, integrate, and operate missions from space. This paper provides and overview of the HIVE concept development and provides examples of applications for HIVE to showcase the range of possible systems and
    [Show full text]
  • Inhabiting the Solar System
    Cent. Eur. J. Eng. • 1(1) • 2011 • 38-58 DOI: 10.2478/s13531-011-0004-y Central European Journal of Engineering Inhabiting the Solar System Research Article Brent Sherwood∗ Strategic Planning and Project Formulation, NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, USA Received 8 January 2011; accepted 19 February 2011 Abstract: The new field of space architecture is introduced. Defined as the “theory and practice of designing and building inhabited environments in outer space,” the field synthesizes human space flight systems engineering subjects with the long tradition of making environments that support human living, work, and aspiration. The scope of the field is outlined, and its three principal domains differentiated. The current state of the art is described in terms of executed projects. Foreseeable options for 21st century developments in human space flight provide a framework to tease out potential space architecture opportunities for the next century. Keywords: Architecture • Space architecture • Human space flight • Space exploration • Offworld • Space tourism • Space manufacturing • Habitation • Habitat • Habitability • System engineering • System architecture • ISS • Moon • Mars • Orbital • Simulator • Analogue • NASA • Commercial space • Passenger travel • Space solar power • Space settlement • Space colonization • Planet • Inner Solar System © Versita Sp. z o.o. 1. What is Space Architecture? of NASA’s first space station Skylab, incidentally estab- lishing the field of space architecture (Figure 1). Long- duration Earth-orbital missions forced the American and Soviet space agencies to address real problems posed by Humans have been using permanent materials to make humans living and working–not just camping–in space. architecture–the willful shaping of the physical human In the last two decades of the 20th century, diverse environment–for about ten millennia.
    [Show full text]
  • Human Spaceflight: Phobos Base
    AIAA STUDENT DESIGN COMPETITION HUMAN SPACEFLIGHT: PHOBOS BASE Submitted By: Team Supervisor: Team PHOBIANS Assistant Prof. Sudip Bhattrai Arjun Magar Raj Kumar Gurung Rajan Bhandari Sanjeev Adhikari Institute of Engineering, Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu, Nepal Page 1 Table of Contents: List of figures List of Abbreviations Acknowledgement Preface Abstract Objectives 1. Introduction 8 2. Requirement Analysis 8 2.1 Technology Requirements 8 2.2 Human power requirements 9 2.3 Cost requirements 9 3. Key features of the project 10 3.1 Architecture 10 3.2 Engineering systems and vehicle design 11 3.2.1 software and hardware 11 3.2.2 thermal heating 12 3.2.3 Avionics 12 3.2.4 Integrate vehicle health monitoring 13 3.2.5 Safety of spacecraft and reliability 13 3.3 Mission timeline and trajectory 13 3.4 Life science provisions and regenerative life support system 14 4. Launch from earth 15 5. Interplanetary transfer 16 5.1 From Earth to Mars system 16 5.2 Approach to Phobos 18 5.3 Arrival at Phobos 21 5.4 Delivery and landing of payloads 24 6. Brief description of module 24 7. Base assembly and construction process 26 7.1 Assembly of first two modules 27 7.2 Assembly after crew arrival 28 7.3 Making of launch pads 29 8. Space architecture of the base 31 8.1 Central hub 31 8.2 Module 1 32 Page 2 8.2.1 Compartment 1 33 8.2.2 Compartment 2 33 8.2.3 Compartment 3 34 8.3 Module 2 35 8.4 Module 3 36 8.5 Module 4 37 8.6 Module 5 38 8.7 Docking Module 38 9.
    [Show full text]
  • SELF-AWARE SELF-ASSEMBLY for SPACE ARCHITECTURE: Growth Paradigms for In-Space Manufacturing
    SELF-AWARE SELF-ASSEMBLY for SPACE ARCHITECTURE: Growth Paradigms for In-SpaCe Manufacturing by Ariel Ekblaw B.S., Yale University (2014) M.S., MassaChusetts Institute of TeChnology (2017) Submitted to the Program in Media Arts and Sciences, School of ArChitecture and Planning, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY September 2020 © MassaChusetts Institute of TeChnology, 2020. All rights reserved Author ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… Ariel Ekblaw Program in Media Arts and Sciences August 17, 2020 Certified by ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… Joseph Paradiso Alexander W. Dreyfoos (1954) Professor of Media Arts and Sciences Thesis Supervisor ACCepted by ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… Tod MaChover ACademic Head, Program in Media Arts and Sciences SELF-AWARE SELF-ASSEMBLY for SPACE ARCHITECTURE: Growth Paradigms for In-Space Manufacturing by Ariel Ekblaw Submitted to the Program in Media Arts and Sciences, School of ArChitecture and Planning, on August 17th, 2020 in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy AbstraCt Humanity stands on the Cusp of interplanetary Civilization. As we prepare to venture into deep space, we faCe what appears to be an irreConcilable Conundrum: at once a majestic domain for human exploration, while also a domain of unrelenting Challenges, posing dangers that are fundamentally at odds with our evolved biology. The field of space arChitecture struggles with
    [Show full text]
  • Microgravity Playscapes Play in Long-Term Space Missions S M L E A
    Microgravity Playscapes Play in Long-Term Space Missions s M L E A e authors examine the potential impact of play on astronauts adapting to the extreme conditions of space travel. ey cite research showing that welltrained astronauts, though in general physically t and emotionally stable, can suer from—among other things—boredom and sensory deprivation in the connes of the microgravity capsules of space ight. Astronauts on duty, the authors argue, are overscheduled, understimulated, isolated, and—importantly—play deprived. Introducing play into space ight routines, they contend, keeps astronauts saner, boosts their morale, and provides leisuretime pleasure. ey discuss the impor- tance of play and its uses in Ackermann’s Whole Child Development Guide, which, they argue, is also suitable for adult space travelers. And they provide guidelines for designing a playscape in microgravity that taps the unique, inherently playful qualities of weightlessness itself. Key words: Microgravity Playscape Adaptation approach ; play and astronauts; playscapes in microgravity; space travel and play Introduction S has long captured the human imagination. e very notion of breaking away from the Earth’s ultimate constraint of gravity and oating around in weightlessness is inherently playful. Hence the attraction—not just to children but, increasingly, to grown-ups—to embark! Yet, scientists report that living and working for long periods in a conned, isolated microgravity habitat take a toll on those real space travelers, astronauts. In this article, we suggest that play alleviates the boredom, sensory deprivation, connement, isolation, apathy, and conict that make up life in a crowded capsule beyond Earth’s orbit. Levitating in a man-made station adri in space epitomizes the displacements and disorientation characteristic of play.
    [Show full text]