Advertisement

A smart mockup for a small habitat

  • Mario Ivan ZignegoEmail author
  • Paolo Gemelli
Original Paper
  • 13 Downloads

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to propose an innovative process in small habitats design based on the use of smart material and structures. Space flights represents the extreme challenge in design for long time life support systems, nevertheless a number of analogues of space mission exists: submarines, terrestrial explorations, supertankers, mountaineering, natural and built simulators, small remote community and Antarctic winter bases. The concept proposed here is based on the use of a mockup enhanced by the utilization of smart materials and smart structures that permits to track the user experience and consequently optimize shapes, volumes, lights, color and the others characteristics. After a review of habitats users’ needs and specification from the space industry, a list of recommendations for the small habitat design is proposed. This work represent a preliminary research useful to address the components of the problem: the needs of people that will use the habitat for long time (onboard submarines, ships, or other confined situation), the psycho-environmental variables to be used in the design process to achieve the well-being of crew and guest, and the related technological issues.

Keywords

Small habitat Habitat design Smart structures User experience Simulation Prototyping 

Notes

Authors’ contribution

Within the work here presented MIZ wrote Sect. 1 Introduction and Sect. 2 Defining needs for small habitat design; while PG wrote Sect. 1 Introduction and Sect. 3 Simulation, virtual reality and smart mockup

References

  1. 1.
    Benaroya, H.: Building Habitats on the Moon: Engineering Approaches to Lunar Settlements, 1st edn. Springer, New York, NY (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rondoni, F.: IUH Avalon, Immersive Underwater Habitat. University of Genoa, DAD, Genoa (2018)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jones, P.M.: Human performance in space. Rev. Hum. Fact. Ergonom. 6, 172–197 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mohanty, S., Jørgensen, J., Nyström, M.: Psychological factors associated with habitat design for planetary mission simulators. Space (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cohen M.M.: Human factors in space. NASA Technical Memorandum 86702 (1985)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zignego, M.I.: Human factors in the design of naval vessels. In: Proceedings of the 5th international conference on applied human factors and ergonomics AHFE 2014, Kraków, Poland (2014)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fraser, T.M.: The intangibles of habitability during long duration space missions, NASA CR-1084 (1968)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Connors, M.M., Harrison, A.A., Akins, F.R.: Living aloft–human requirements for extended spaceflight. NASA (1985)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Burattini, C., Bisegna, F., Gugliermetti, F., Marchetti, M.: A new conceptual design approach for habitative space modules. Acta Astronaut. 97, 1–8 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    NASA Space Flight Human-System Standard, Volume 2: Human Factors, Habitability, and Environmental Health, NASA, Washington, DC (2011)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    MacElroy, R.D., Kliss, M., Straight, C.: Life support systems for Mars transit. Adv. Sp. Res. 12(5), 159–166 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Suedfeld, P.: Antarctica and space as psychosocial analogues. REACH 9–12, 1–4 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Suedfeld, P.: Extreme and unusual environments: challenges and Responses. In: Clayton, S. (ed.) The Oxford Handbook of Environmental and Conservation Psychology, pp. 348–371. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2012)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Peldszus, R., Dalke, H., Pretlove, S., Welch, C.: The perfect boring situation—addressing the experience of monotony during crewed deep space missions through habitability design. Acta Astronaut. 94(1), 262–276 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Martinez, V.: Architectural design for space tourism. Acta Astronaut. 64(2–3), 382–390 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Drayer, G.E., Howard, A.M.: Modeling and simulation of an aquatic habitat for bioregenerative life support research. Acta Astronaut. 93, 138–147 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Clipson, C.: Simulation for planning and design. In: Marans, R.W., Stokols, D. (eds.) Environmental Simulation, pp. 23–57. Springer, Boston, MA (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bjoerkli, L.E.: A review of virtual prototyping approaches for design evaluation. https://www.ntnu.no/documents/10401/1264435841/TPD4505_LeifErikBjoerkli_Final.pdf/4255e7a2-f5f5-4591-b201-b0f14d3d466a
  19. 19.
    Mansutti, A., Covarrubias Rodriguez, M., Bordegoni, M., Cugini, U.: Tactile Display for Virtual 3D Shape Rendering. Springer, Cham (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Breeze, R.K.: Space Vehicle Environmental Control Requirements Based on Equipment and Physiological Criteria, WADD-ASD-TR-61-161, (Pt. l) (1961)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rade, D.A., Steffen, V.: Introduction to smart materials and structures. In: Lopes Junior, V., Steffen, V., Savi, M.A. (eds.) Dynamics of Smart Systems and Structures, pp. 121–134. Springer, Cham (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Leo, D.J.: Engineering Analysis of Smart Material Systems: Leo/Smart Material Systems. Wiley, Hoboken (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Architecture and DesignUniversity of GenoaGenoaItaly

Personalised recommendations