1American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

INTERIOR DESIGN FOR A SPACE MODULE

Martina Pinni, Arch.IUAV, Istituto Universitario di Architettura di Venezia, Venice, Italy

Phone: +1.713.526.3693mpinni@uh.edu

ABSTRACT

The paper discusses considerations and concepts for the development of an interior design for a typical ISS module, using a “rack-standoff system”configuration, alternative to the current 4-standoff configuration.The idea is based on two main observations:

1) Room shape: “ irregularly shaped rooms are perceived to have more volume than compact or regular shaped rooms of equal volume” 3

(NASA STD 3000, Vol.1, 8.6.22 b).2) Orientation: a consistent visual orientation

should be provided inside the module, but theorientation (general and local) could be suggested in a more intuitive, complex way than using simple flat, orthogonal surfaces.

The project has been developed maintaining the principal features of the 4 standoff configuration’s subsystems, re-arranging the cross section in a 6 standoff configuration. The design of the lighting system and airflow system inside the module are also important considerations.

Extensive analysis of requirements has been focused on four main goals of the study: mobility, autonomy, environmental comfort and ergonomics for microgravity boundary conditions, based upon NASA STD 3000 requirements.

INTRODUCTION

The habitation modulesThe history of pressurized space modules began in

1969 when it was necessary for the Shuttle program to develop an independent laboratory module. The dimensions of the module were constrained by the Shuttle Orbiter’s cargo bay, so it had to be designed as a cylinder about 4 meters in diameter and 8 meters in length. This first concept was called Sortie Lab but it was never developed.

∗ Student Member, AIAACopyright 2003 by SICSA. Published by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc., with permission.

The “Spacelab” program began in 1973 to support scientific Shuttle missions. This module was almost 7 meters in length(Fig.1). The Italian company Alenia Spazio completed it in 1980, and the missions were flown between 1983 and 1997. It was based upon the concept of modularity, and it introduced the first concept of “racks” and “standoffs” 7.

Fig.1: The Spacelab module, 1973 (courtesy: Alenia Spazio/Vallerani).

Later, another module concept was developed involving a small compartment with flat end walls instead of the usual cones(Fig.2), which left structural engineers perplexed. To be pressurized and of minimal weight, a container should ideally be as similar as possible to a sphere, or at least it should not have flat walls, which need to be very rigid. However, the idea was very simple, and consequently, in 1983, the “Spacehab” program adopted the design.

Fig.2: The Spacehab module, 1983 (courtesy: Alenia Spazio/Vallerani).

Space 200323 - 25 September 2003, Long Beach, California

AIAA 2003-6352

Copyright © 2003 by SICSA. Published by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc., with permission.

2American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

A revolution took place during the design phasewhen astronauts expressed the need to see the “cargo bay” in order to have a visual control of the payload. They proposed to cut flat the top part of the module. This led to a “D” section that characterizes the current Spacehab and which caused further structural problems even though an increase of functionality was evident.However despite the complaints of some engineers, the “D” section was accepted. Missions have been flownsince 1993, and Spacehab has had a big role in the Shuttle-MIR missions.

Due to many features including relatively low costand compactness, the Spacehab has been an ideal “basic module” to accommodatevaried functions. Modularity has enabled different geometric configurations, enabling the module to becomea laboratory, home, workshop, or logistic stowage volume. This module concept was eventually included in the Space StationFreedom program.

A module for Freedom, and then for International Space Station, had to be designed with more stringentrequirements than previous ones. Because itwould remain in space for a long time, reliability was vital, and new subsystems had to be provided, including a special thermal protection system and a protectivedebris shield.

In comparison with the Spacelab configuration, the interior concept also changed. For example, the concept of “floor” disappeared and was replaced by a more flexible structurethat could be assembled and integrated on orbit7.

Fig. 3: The Columbus laboratory module (courtesy: Alenia Spazio/Vallerani).

A new configuration conceptthat has been developed over decades of studies responds to a need totransfer and integrate transportable racks in orbit. The

subsystems are organized respectively in structures that support fluid and electric lines and structures to contain equipment.

The module is transported in Earth low orbit (LEO) by the Shuttle, taken from the cargo bay and joined to the station by a Remote Manipulating Arm at a point of force called a grapple fixture.The module is equipped with sophisticated subsystems that offer high levels of safetyand reliability: control, life support, electrical power,thermal control, and data management systems.All US modules of the ISS, US Lab, Nodes, European Lab Columbus, MPLM, and Habitation module aresimilarly equipped (Fig.3 and 4).

Fig. 4: The MPLM logistic module (courtesy: Alenia Spazio/Vallerani).

A proposed Habitation Module contains all the living functions and serves as “home” for the astronauts in orbit. A similar concepthas been considered as basis for this interior design.

DESIGN PROCESS: GOALS FOR HABITATS IN EXTREME CONDITIONS

Design goalsA typical design process is based on the sequence

needs, requirements and performances objectives.While the planning of any structure to be inhabited under extreme conditions must be analyzed ona case by case basis, it is possible to identify some common needs. These needs concern both technological and environmental systems5:Technological systems (built space):

• Mobility• Autonomy

Environmental systems (empty space):• Environmental comfort• Ergonomics for microgravityMost structures destined for use in extreme

conditions cannot be built on site, but have to be made

3American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

elsewhere, transported and then made operational. This requirementdemands planning for mobility, which is influenced by other factors such as modularity and prefabrication, size, transportation systems and logistics, protection from extreme conditions anddurability of materials.

Second key requirement is autonomy to support independent human presence on-board,including such needs as power supply, resource recycling and remote communications. Most of these habitats get the power they need by exploiting solar energy; they have sophisticated partially closed recycling systems, and rely for their functioning on automated control and communication systems.

Third requirement is environmental comfort: a typical consequence of mass and volume restrictions for launch is a scarcity of living space. This requirement relates to the multi-functionality of the habitat, creation of artificial environments and human factors/confinement issues.

A fourth requirement is to optimize ergonomics for microgravity and involves provisions for exercise, restraint systems and visual orientation. Microgravity demands particular attention because it has important implications that can challenge our traditional idea of ergonomics.

MODULE CONSTRUCTION AND DIMENSIONING

Module positioningThe ISS is a very complex facility, designed to

maintain an Earth-oriented flight attitude. The dynamics of the flight requires much propellant to maintain this attitude (Fig.5). Nevertheless, this attitude and the position of the modules provide a “consistent” orientation of the living volume in the “XY” plane, while the inter-modular circulation can take place along the “Z” direction.

Fig. 5: ISS exploded view (courtesy: NASA)

This facilitates many operations such as EVA and makes it easy and quick for the crew to get a “mental map of” the station.

The modules are designed to be transported in the Orbiter’s cargo bayandtheir mass and dimensions are limited to launch capabilities. The position of the Habitation Module, as originally designed for ISS is shown (Fig.6).

Fig. 6: The position of the habitation module at the US On-orbit Segment (project)

Primary structure designThe “module” is a pressurized compartment that

provides a habitat with an atmosphere similar to that on Earth, living and work equipment and supporting subsystems. Modules are designed according to basic requirements such as modularity and structural lightweight7.

Different configurations of the system are possible by various combinations of the basic elements, called segments. The Habitation Module of ISS is a three-segment module. The shell (Fig.7) is the part of the module made up of cylindrical segments ending with a flange held by a device, called Gask-O-Seal, which incorporates two special profiles called O-Rings 7.

Fig. 7: Habitation module external shell(project)

The shell endings are made up of two elements, called cones, in which the utility connections and docking ports for the passage of people and equipment are placed. The three segment configuration has a net weight of about 3000 Kg.The entire shell structure is made of an aluminium alloy, with machine-processed

4American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

stiffeners, welded together longitudinally, and to the head flange created by rolling.

The aluminium rings are worked byhot pre-forming and hot rolling until they reach the required diameter. The waffle panelswhich constitute the shell are obtained out of the full through digital control cutters. Cylinders and cone panels are bent through processes called age creep forming and brake forming.

Shell materials, conforming with the requirements for lightness stiffness, and resistance to corrosion, are special aluminium alloys such asAl 2219 T851. Some parts that are more subjected to larger stresses are made of Titanium that isfused in a special alloy which is extraordinarily resistant to corrosion.

Since the orbital environment is characterized by absence of gravity, atmospheric pressure and the presence of radiation, atomic oxygen, meteoroids and dust, the module has to be equipped with multi-layerthermal blankets (MLI) and a meteoroid and debris protection system (MDPS). The radiant barrier is a multi-layer of polymers, while the shielding is made of Kevlar and Nextel, two composite materials7.

Secondary structure designAccording to the specific function, the inner space

is divided qualitatively into three parts:• Atriums to place technical infrastructures (“stand-

offs”)• Racks for habitation functions (“racks” for

equipment or “compartments” for people). They can be “active”, if connected with the unit network or “passive” if they are for storage of food, toolsand clothes. Racks and stand-offs constitute the so-called “secondary structure”.

• Habitable spaceThe volume to be used for these parts should be

designed according to a principle of distributive efficiency.

The organization of the inner volumes for “Freedom” modules and for ISS is simple and functional, suitable for the needs of scientific missions. The inner space is organized in a square section, called 4-stand-off, that creates the sensation of being in “rooms” (Fig.8).

Equipment is placed in racks conforming with curved walls that are linked to infrastructure elements placed in special atriums called stand-offs.

Fig. 8: “4-stand-offs” interior (courtesy: NASA).

To accommodate movement through docking ports, each of the system components has a standard dimensionof 1.1 m (Fig.9).

Fig.9: The “4-stand off” configuration

Rack and equipment mass positioned between human bodies and the module shell provides additional radiation protection.

INTERIOR DESIGN

Design goalThe secondary structure is the system which most

directly influences the habitation quality and is therefore the most critical from an interior architecturalpoint of view. The configuration chosen for the modules of the ISS is guided by functional objectives, which necessarily have to be predominant. However, if we look at the inner habitability, excessive attention on machines rather thanupon people is not desirable.

A concept is proposedas an alternative to the square configuration and suggests a different approach to the design of a microgravity environment.Thisproposal has been formulated to take into account not only general habitat requirements, but also more complex comfort and psychological well-being needs, because “confined living volumes must be compensated for by higher architectural comfort standards”.

The alternative configuration should offer comfort and hospitality to four people over a 90-day period,

5American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

while the habitation module is joined to the Node 3 of the International Space Station. A three segment module has been judged to be sufficient to suit the needs of these missions. State of the art (precedents)

Researchon the state-of-the-art (precedents)has been conducted to evaluate previous interior configurations of rigid modules. The “Spacelab” represents the first configuration that has been studied. These units were all placed under the “floor” and the racks extended towards the ceiling, where tools and stowage were placed (Fig.10).

Another variant of the 4 stand-off scheme was proposed in a concept by Boeing. The configuration generally conformed to the cylindrical shape, introducing two small ceiling racks with curved surfaces.All these concepts considered microgravity human factors issues, but did not achieve optimum results.

Fig. 10: Spacelab interior organization (courtesy: Alenia Spazio/Vallerani)

A more original concept dated 1989 was proposed by David Nixon and the Future Systems and was realized in a full-scale mock-up (Fig.11). Following simple reasoning (with no gravity the floor is notfunctionally needed) the square section was “turned over” on its corner demonstrating an alternative way to use internal space4.

Fig. 11: Nixon and the Future System project, 1989(courtesy: David Nixon)

Separation of electrical and fluid lines is essential, and was accomplished using different profiles for the stand-offs; and racks were projected in two different shapes to obtain two circulation levels (a “corridor” and a “living room”).

Mobili ty and perception of form and spaceIn weightlessness the body moves differently and

can therefore use space more freely than on Earth. Built and empty spaces are therefore in different relationshipswhich are well know on Earth but needs to be redefinedin space1. Moreover, mobility in a weightlessenvironment has a different correlation with perception of space. The possibility to access all surfaces instead of being anchored only to the floorenablesa sensation of spaciousness to be optimized. If an environment is perceived to be more spacious, it can reduce the feelingof confinement and increase the sense of well-being of crewmembers.

According to NASA STD, the factors that determine the sensation of spaciousness are: • Maximum distance of the observerto enclosure

walls• Shape of the habitat• Habitat factors influences such as lights and

colours• Presence of openings (windows, especially if they

focus on an outer target like Earth)The observation that: “ irregular shaped rooms

are perceived to have more volume than compact or regular shaped rooms of equal volume” 3 (NASA STD 8.6.2.2. p.8-13) presents interesting possibilitiesin the development of interior module configurations. Project development

The thesis of thispaper is that the interior living volume can be designed to utilize curved surfacesfor taking fuller advantage of the shape of a cylindrical shell from a formal point of view, and alsoto improve ergonomics in microgravity Instead of a square, the shape of reference is a polygon (Fig.12.1) thatapproximates the circle. Expansion occurs in the horizontal direction, since to have a “horizon” is more important than vertical reference (Fig.12.2).

Six racks are arranged inside the circumference and the broken contour is softened by introducing curve lines (Fig.12.3). Some racks serve as “compartments” that can be used as “rooms”, such asthe crew quarters, which are large enough to suit one crewmember (Fig.12.4). Fluid and electrical lines are alternately separated for safety reasons. Each rack is connected to both, thus allowing interchange (Fig.12.5).

Ease of positioning equipment and means to inspect it, is afforded by a hinge system, that enables

6American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

racks be connected and rotated inwards for maintenance(Fig.12.6). The two lateral elements are interrupted to provide room for two windows. To complete the configurationtwo small racks and four lines of lateralunitsare provided (Fig.12.7).

Particular attention is given to the quality of illumination. A lighting system incorporated behind the side racks can considerably improve the habitat quality. For this reason, it is necessary to revise the profile of the side stand-offs to provide for the diffusion of light(Fig.12.8).

The use of inflatable compartments can further increase and diversify habitable volumes (Fig.12.9).

Fig.12: Project development

Many functional requirements have to be simultaneously taken into account. In addition togeometric features, mobility and transportation, means for assembling and maintaining modalities should be addressed in the following text. They are discussedseparately both for technological (built space) and environmental (empty space) system.

TECHNOLOGICAL SYSTEM

UtilitiesUtilit y stand-offs run along the entire length of the

module up to the “bottleneck” of the end cones, which collect the control boards (Fig.13). Their structure, fixed to the external shell, is the supporting point for the racks. Stand-offs must to be easily designed to be easily inspected for ordinary maintenance and also to permit good access in case of needed repairs. For this reason they have to be composed of elements that can be disassembled and removed with common tools. Such

utility elements include fluid (water, atmosphere and vacuum) and electrical lines (high and low voltage, data and audio-video cables).

The stand-off profiles, containing lines and cables, are of two kinds: flat and hollow. Atmosphere supply is placed in the upper stand-offs, while atmosphere return is placed in the floor stand-off. Red indicates electrical lines; blue represents fluid lines, and arrows identifyequipment interfaces5.

Fig.13: Utilities distribution

Dimensional verification requirements for air conduits (Fig.14) are similar to those of the pressurized cabin of the Shuttle and the logistic module MPLM.The cabin of the Orbiter has a volume of 65 m3, and the air is completely changed 8.5 times per hour. The logistic module has an air volume of 45 m3 and 6 air changes per hour.The flow through conduits of exchange between adjoining modules is between 3.8 and 5.95 m3 per minute (0.06 and 0.099 m3/second).Therefore, the section of the conduit is 12 cm (0.0144 m2) per side.

Fig.14: Utility architecture

Knowing that: V = Aw, where, V is the volume flow rate, A the section of the conduit, w the velocity of air, then, the velocity of air is between: w = V/a = 4.16 e 6.785 m/s. The number of air changes per hour depends on the free volume inside the module. The Habitation Module with all the racks has an air volume of about 50m3, which corresponds to 4.5 / 7 changes per hour5.

7American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Mobility of racks and compartmentsEquipment is organized in racks and compartments

as in the square configuration. Racks are designed as“space frames” made of an aluminium alloy which is also used for the shell with its lateral enforcements.

The crewmembers must perform cleaning and routine maintenance of the racks andmust also be able to repair possible breakdowns. These operations mustbe planned tobe carried outundersafe and reasonably comfortable conditions. In order for the racks to be easily checked and repaired, they are provided with a hinge mechanism that pivots off on stand-offs(Fig.15).

Fig.15: Hinge system

Storage systemThe storage of food, tools, experiments and

personal equipment is organized through a system of standardized drawers (lockers and trays) that allows transportation from the Shuttleand prevents materials from freely floating. The proposed design uses the same modularity as the standard ISS system (Fig.16).

Fig.16: Storage system

VibrationsSound can propagate directly in air or can induce

mechanical stress to structures, which in turn reverberate in air and originate other secondaryvibrations. Vibrations in space operations are frequent,and take place at many amplitudes and frequencies.

Since structurally transmitted vibrations can cause damage to the structure, each piece of the module and of a space system in general, has to be designed with concern for the static and dynamic envelopes. Tolerances are of the order of an inch.

A secondary structure provides equipment and free volume in different proportion with respect to the 4-stand-off configuration. This has to be correlated withthe distribution of living functions and equipment volume. ISS provides a free volume about 40% of the total. This concept inverts the proportionalvolume to47% (Fig.17).

Fig.17: Sections comparison (project on the right)

ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEM

Living functions distributionSince the interior has to serve as a home, essential

living functions have to be designed for comfort, convenience and safety, taking the sequence of daily operations, volume required and occupancy duration, privacy and special requirements into account. The goals of the inner layout of the module must beconsistent with NASA STD 8.2.2.4 (p.8.2):• Minimizing the transit time between different

locations or activities.• Combining “noisy” and “tranquil” centres of

activity• Providing some isolated places for privacy.• Creating a safe, efficient and comfortable habitat

Defining living functions and requirements relatesto the field of space anthropology. In the limited space of the module it is necessary to recognize the elements that make the “home”: a well-marked threshold, a personal space to rest, a recreation, and a meeting point to socialize9. Habitat functions are usually grouped according to circulation, work, common functions and private activities. They have been divided in six areas:common areas, private areas, food preparation areas, study and observation areas, and exercise and personal hygiene areas.

The space is limited; therefore we cannot separate living functions the way we generally do on Earth. Multi-functionality is needed to increase the utility and the efficiency of a habitat.

8American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

All functions should be distributed according to the requirement of non-interference as regards physical interference, noise, light, privacy, vibrations and contamination and to other factors such as sequence of operations3.

The distribution of usable volumes inside the racksfor food, personal effects, and living functionsgenerally is based upon the volumes of the ISS habitation modulewith some modifications. A major change has been made with regard to the medical equipment. The volume assigned to first aid equipment has been reduced by half because this was judged to be sufficient for emergencies, with supplementary equipment provided in the laboratory (Fig.18).

Fig.18: Adjacencies and volumes (project)

To afford good traffic flow, circulation in the central passageis open and freeof obstacles that might interfere with ways of escape(Fig.19).

Fig.19: Longitudinal horizontal section (circulation)

While in weightlessness it is possible to overcome an obstacle by floating above it, this operation is not always considered opportune. Other solutions are often preferred as was demonstrated on Skylab, where crew members frequently elected to take turns to eat rather than perform complicated or unpleasant operationsaround the table2.

Fig.20: Longitudinal vertical section

WardroomThe plan provides a wardroom located in the

middle of a multifunctional living area. It consists of a square table, which deemed to be the most ideal shape for socialization, and also suitable for the 4 members crew, based upon Skylab mission experience. The tableis placed in a location that will enable the crew towatch the Earth through two small windows, as well as take part in teleconferences through a video placed on one of the side panels (Fig.21). Each place must be easily reachable by passing along the side (never above), and there should be noseating hierarchy (head of the table) to differentiate special status2. A portable water line is provided for re-hydration of food.

Fig.21: Wardroom

WorkstationThe habitation module it is not intended to house

the general control systems of the overall station, but is proposed to provide forthe insertion of one workstation located in a single rack (Fig.22). It will have an interface with the data management system of the station, so that access to subsystems data of the overall facility is available from inside the Habitation Module.

WindowsWindowsare very important architectural elements

in modules. They can have technical functions forscientific astronomicand Earth observations, provide psychological support to the crewto reduce sensations

9American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

of confinement, and offer a much enjoyed recreational benefit (during the Skylab missions the crew spent a great deal of free timewatching the Earth) 2. Appropriate window placement is important, as well as the availability of equipment both for observation and relaxation. Positions inside the module should not interfere with circulation. They should be surrounded by an adequate occupant viewing space and be compatible with the adjoining activities. They shouldnot to be placed near direct il lumination sources that diminish visibility3.

Windows also provide the only direct source of lighting with solar light.

The window-workstationin our concept is located near an equipment workshop for processing observationdata. Included are displays, side drawers and passive restraints. The window enables photography, observation and measurement of colours and natural phenomena8, as well as the recording of data through keyboards. The surrounding area must be adequate to ensure freedom of movement.

Fig.22: Workstation

As regards physical exercise, it is assumed that the major part of this activity will be performed in other modules. Here, two deployable ergometers are placed by the windows, for the entertainment provided by looking outside, and for comfortable proximity to the airflow from air supply opening placed opposite.

Crew quartersSince missions are planned to last up to 120 days,

the Space Station Freedom design provided private compartments for each member of the crew. On ISS, they have been reduced due to volume limitations tosleeping bags, with little privacy. The problem of privacy should be solved, especially in the case of long duration missions.

Each of the private areas should be equipped with all that is necessary to sleep, from restraints to sleeping bags, with a space for personal effects andcommunications (Fig.23). The inner covering of each

compartmentshould be modular and easily removable in order to allow personalizing one’s own “territory” with colours and textures.

Fig.23: Crew compartments

Private compartments in this designare placed in four special racks, in which the crewmember assumes a position compatible with the general orientation of the module. A “sleeping back-pack” concept is based upona Richard Horden design. This position can be rearranged and personalized to create spatial variety.

Recreate an artificial environment: lighting and airContemporary humans spend much of their lives in

natural habitats that are built or modified by man. These environments are typically configured on the basis of psychological, sociological and anthropologic influences well known and understood.

Artificial habitats can be total or partial. In the first case, they create self-contained conditions for supporting life in extreme conditions. They are called partial if they are not separated from the outside world which they “overlap” to create different conditions or to induce desired behaviours6.

The goal of this artificial habitat concept is to allow the crew to optimally live and work in space.Such provisions as ventilation, lighting systems and colour must be carefully planned to produce a comfortable and supportive environment.

Fan-drivers forced utilizes two side airflows through stand-offs and one at the floor (Fig.24). The air supply parameters and circulation are similar to those provided in many offices. The removal of contaminants and of particulates is accomplished through filters.

10American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Fig.24: Air distribution

The illumination of modules should bedesignedto create a pleasant effect and, in absence of natural light, they should have a variable intensity to support circadian rhythm of sleep6. Fluorescent lamps are proposed to be incorporatedinto the lateral racks,obtaining an effect similar to that of airplanes cabins (Fig.25). The surfaces of the ceiling compartments are treated with high reflection index textures so that lightis diffused in the habitat.

Fig.25: Lighting system

Orientation Providing a visual consistent orientation is a

fundamental psychological requirement to avoid confusion. In this regard, defininga clear horizontal reference is considered to be more important than the vertical one3 (NASA STD 8.4.2.d).

If orientation is not clearly defined, it is difficult for occupants to visualize a “mental map” both of their enclosure habitat and of the structure of the entire station. Disorientation may worsen the symptoms of space sickness syndrome and can cause crew to waste precious time in the event of emergencies.In microgravity, orientation is defined primarily through visual cues which are under the control of the system designer3 (NASA STD 8.4.2 pag.8-7).

In this proposal, a perpendicular reference has been defined through geometry where a symmetry marked horizontal referenceis clearly perceivable (Fig.26). While separate centres of activity can have different local orientations, or local verticals, group activities are consistent with the general orientation of the module.

Fig.26: orientation inside the module

Design and coloursAlthough much research and planning has

addressed functional design requirements, much less attention has been devoted to architectonic quality. Yet the pleasantness and acceptability of a habitat has can have major influences on the crew’s sense of well beingand resulting productivity. As regards the design of interiors, some general guide lines are given.• Simplicity: the habitat should be relatively simple;

it is better not to use too many or too saturated colours or too complex shapes.

• Variety: Too much simplicity however is not good, if it becomes monotonous and leads to boredom.

• Flexibility: means to modify the interior with timecan enhance utility and offer a sense of control.

• Maintenance: simple surfaces are obviously easier to clean.The use of colours in a simple and direct way can

offer a large degree of habitat variety. Their numbersshould be restrained to about 4-5 3 (NASA STD 8.12.2.2 pag.8-39).

The colours used in this proposal follow the NASA STD recommendations for the chromatic adequacy requirement.Warm light colours are suitable for high activity areas and common areas. Warm and saturated colours should be emphasized in small areas and used for detailed elements such as tools and displays. Moderately cold colours are mostsuitable for low activity areas such as private compartments, while cold and saturated colours are to be used in limited areas.For large surfaces, beige or pale neutral tonesare proposed for the floors, and ivory, which is lighter, for the ceilings. Yellowish and bluish colours are preferredbecause those are the colours that astronauts miss the most during long permanence in space (Fig.27-28).

11American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

REFERENCES

1. Colasson-Binot: Habitability,architecture concepts for a non –g world, in ESA Space Habitability Workshop, ESTEC, Netherlands, March 1990

2. Connors, M., Harrison, A., and Akins, F.:Living Aloft: Human Requirements for Extended Spaceflight. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, DC, 1985

3. NASA-STD 3000: Man-Systems Interface Standards, Volumes I and II, revision B, NASA, July, 1995

4. Nixon, David: Full-scale study of crew room facilities for orbital modules, Space Projects Group and Future Systems, in ESA Space Habitability Workshop, ESTEC, Netherlands, March 1990

5. Pinni, Martina: Graduation thesis, IUAV Venice, Italy, July 2000

6. Scuri, P.: Gli ambienti artificiali, Le Scienze, N°241, 1998

7. Vallerani, E.: L’Italia e lo spazio: i moduli abitativi, Mc Graw Hill, Milan 1995

8. Vasjutin-Tisˇcˇenko: La coloristica spaziale, Le Scienze N°253, September 1989, p.70

9. Zahle-Mortensen, Dwelling culture on the orbit,ESA Space Habitability Workshop, ESTEC, Netherlands, March 1990

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Prof. Larry Bell, SICSA Professor/Director, for revising and editingProf. Nicola Sinopoli, IUAV, Venice, for advising and support in system designProf. Pierfrancesco Brunello, IUAV, Venice, for support in technical system designProf. Giannandrea Bianchini, CISAS, Colombo Center of Studies and Activities for Space, Padova, Italy, for general information and supportEng. Enrico Gaia, Arch. Giorgio Musso, Eng. RiccardoBosca, Alenia Spazio, Human Factors Office, for technical information, material and support.

Fig. 27: Render

Fig. 28: Mock-up views