Quote from: Coastal Ron on 10/23/2017 05:29 amBesides, at this point artificial gravity doesn't seem to be a goal for the DSG, especially since the notional missions all seem to be short duration ones, meaning zero G won't be a big problem for missions to our Moon.People are about 2 m tall so splitting the DSH down the middle into two 4m high modules should work. Expand a truss to separate the two modules. NASA has developed trusses that expand.
Besides, at this point artificial gravity doesn't seem to be a goal for the DSG, especially since the notional missions all seem to be short duration ones, meaning zero G won't be a big problem for missions to our Moon.
Maybe we could tether a couple of Dragon/Orions and put a couple of crew in them for 1-2-3 month missions.
I would argue though that we can simulate these loads. And something no one here has picked up on is that in a space ship with modest spin gravity its a lot easier to do this. You don't need to be strapped into place with rubber bands. All you do is wear enough mass. Now you've got 1g equivalent loads but you have mobility.
Test it with mice in centrifuge at 0.4G, in ISS?
In short a spacecraft with a sense of up and down is more orderly and less stressful and people are less likely to be sick or suffer psycholigical issues.
Since I've argued for a modest level of spin g it also follows that you do not need long structures. A structure that is 40m long rotated st 4.2rpm will deliver Mars equivalent g.
Quote from: Russel on 01/10/2018 04:31 amI would argue though that we can simulate these loads. And something no one here has picked up on is that in a space ship with modest spin gravity its a lot easier to do this. You don't need to be strapped into place with rubber bands. All you do is wear enough mass. Now you've got 1g equivalent loads but you have mobility. That is so wrong. That does nothing for internal organs, brain, and the vestibular system. And it doesn't over the whole muscular skeleton system.
Globus and Hall write that rotations up to 10 rpm may be acceptable with training.If you only want Mars gravity for transit, 8.2 rpm would be fine.
Nonetheless; they should strive to make any rotating artificial-grav structure large as practically possible
In the Engle, Simon & Clark presentation above, they were able to crank the rpm tolerance up to 17RPM for the most queasy subjective after training, and they still retained their adaptation after 30 days.