Doesn't the Japanese module have some centrifuges?
I wonder whether there are any plans to create a centrifuge, a gravity simulator in space, a rotating space module or something similar?
Quote from: michaelwy on 02/17/2013 01:33 pmI wonder whether there are any plans to create a centrifuge, a gravity simulator in space, a rotating space module or something similar?But of course there is.
Quote from: R7 on 02/18/2013 03:00 pmBut of course there is.Starting with a 6U cubesat.
But of course there is.
The amount of time and money being spent on mitigating effects of microgravity make the massive burden of a space-centrifuge seem silly.
Quote from: JimOman on 02/21/2013 04:05 amThe amount of time and money being spent on mitigating effects of microgravity make the massive burden of a space-centrifuge seem silly. Assuming they work.. I think they will do the job for a Mars exploration mission, but colonization of free space is almost certainly going to require some sort of artificial gravity.
Quote from: QuantumG on 02/21/2013 04:31 amQuote from: JimOman on 02/21/2013 04:05 amThe amount of time and money being spent on mitigating effects of microgravity make the massive burden of a space-centrifuge seem silly. Assuming they work.. I think they will do the job for a Mars exploration mission, but colonization of free space is almost certainly going to require some sort of artificial gravity.btw, does anyone know if zero g health issues would eventually kill someone, or make them unable to function even in zero g? Would there be issues apart from not being able to return to earth?
Super Space Germs Could Threaten Astronauts
btw, does anyone know if zero g health issues would eventually kill someone, or make them unable to function even in zero g? Would there be issues apart from not being able to return to earth?
In the mean time, we have significant evidence already that mammals can't conceive and come to term in zero-g. The bigger the mammal, the harder it becomes. No babies, no colonization.
Before they kill someone they are likely to create a lot of mission risks. There's a big problem with calcium loss from bones. It comes out of the bones and ends up in the bloodstream before getting purged from the body. One of the results is possible kidney stones. Not good in space. Bone brittleness is another issue. What happens if one year into a two-year Mars mission one of your astronauts breaks a leg or an arm? That person could effectively become useless on the mission.
Let's add something else to that--bones become brittle and then an astronaut breaks a leg and the break punctures the skin. Now you have bleeding. In zero-gee. Suppose it happens during an EVA. I imagine that it is much easier to go from a broken bone to a fatality in a zero-gee environment than it is on the ground.
The reason is that from a scientific point of view, the centrifuge was very high priority and many people thought that without it the scientific value of ISS was zero. Many people still think that.)
2)Recent results suggest we're doing very good on the bone density issue, either using just exercise or a combination of standard drugs and exercise.
Quote from: Robotbeat on 02/24/2013 12:36 am2)Recent results suggest we're doing very good on the bone density issue, either using just exercise or a combination of standard drugs and exercise.The context was long-term exposure.. decades, not years. Drugs and exercise are not going to carry you through a lifetime.
On a slightly different note, it might be interesting for an enterprising grad student to research the history of NASA's centrifuge and what really happened to it. It was a very high priority item. Officially it got canceled due to "cost overruns." However, back around 2005 or 2006 I was in a meeting where a senior ISS official was pressed on this issue by some scientists. (The reason is that from a scientific point of view, the centrifuge was very high priority and many people thought that without it the scientific value of ISS was zero. Many people still think that.) Anyway, the ISS official was really cagey about the whole thing. I thought that seemed odd. Why not simply state "we couldn't afford it" and leave it at that? So I asked one of my colleagues, who was very familiar with life and microgravity research issues on ISS. She said that they were never able to get a straight answer out of NASA, but that there was a general belief that the Japanese, who were building the centrifuge, were having major technical problems, such as isolating it from the station. Yeah, it was killed for cost reasons, but they were covering for an ally. Space stuff is hard. It would be interesting if somebody could dig through records and interview people and find out what really killed the centrifuge.
Quote from: QuantumG on 02/24/2013 02:28 amQuote from: Robotbeat on 02/24/2013 12:36 am2)Recent results suggest we're doing very good on the bone density issue, either using just exercise or a combination of standard drugs and exercise.The context was long-term exposure.. decades, not years. Drugs and exercise are not going to carry you through a lifetime.Precisely. I'm continually amazed at the disconnect between the relevance of mitigations for "short" (i.e., year or two) zero-G exposure vs. permananet settlement. Low G, or zero-G, both are huge uncertainties with regard to permanent settlement...
On a slightly different note, it might be interesting for an enterprising grad student to research the history of...
Quote from: QuantumG on 02/24/2013 02:28 amQuote from: Robotbeat on 02/24/2013 12:36 am2)Recent results suggest we're doing very good on the bone density issue, either using just exercise or a combination of standard drugs and exercise.The context was long-term exposure.. decades, not years. Drugs and exercise are not going to carry you through a lifetime.A pet sci-fi idea: everyone has little chips with accelerometers embedded near nerves. Any bone that hasn't received a healthy ration of impacts develops 'bone ache' that grows with time. It also gives instant momentary relief when it receives an impact, for rapid feedback. The result is a society mad about impact sports and competition, like a society populated from Nike commercials. Board rooms would also be squash courts and so on. No sitting in classrooms, kids would learn to think while chucking a medicine ball around.
I am so glad you posted this. It squares mostly with what I've heard from within the program. (The flip perspective was that JAXA started from a NASA design, discovered the flaws partway through, couldn't fix it without a budget increase, and were unwilling to ask the Diet for the money since Japan's ISS participation was skating on thin ice as it was. So it wasn't just NASA covering for JAXA, it was both partners covering for each other.)
Blood clotting is not gravity dependent. Neither is managing an open fracture.
Quote from: Blackstar on 02/24/2013 12:21 amOn a slightly different note, it might be interesting for an enterprising grad student to research the history of NASA's centrifuge and what really happened to it. It was a very high priority item. Officially it got canceled due to "cost overruns." However, back around 2005 or 2006 I was in a meeting where a senior ISS official was pressed on this issue by some scientists. (The reason is that from a scientific point of view, the centrifuge was very high priority and many people thought that without it the scientific value of ISS was zero. Many people still think that.) Anyway, the ISS official was really cagey about the whole thing. I thought that seemed odd. Why not simply state "we couldn't afford it" and leave it at that? So I asked one of my colleagues, who was very familiar with life and microgravity research issues on ISS. She said that they were never able to get a straight answer out of NASA, but that there was a general belief that the Japanese, who were building the centrifuge, were having major technical problems, such as isolating it from the station. Yeah, it was killed for cost reasons, but they were covering for an ally. Space stuff is hard. It would be interesting if somebody could dig through records and interview people and find out what really killed the centrifuge.I am so glad you posted this. It squares mostly with what I've heard from within the program. (The flip perspective was that JAXA started from a NASA design, discovered the flaws partway through, couldn't fix it without a budget increase, and were unwilling to ask the Diet for the money since Japan's ISS participation was skating on thin ice as it was. So it wasn't just NASA covering for JAXA, it was both partners covering for each other.)
As costs continued to rise, Congress voted to legislate a $25 billion cap on development of the ISS program, plus $17.7 billion for associated shuttle launches, in the FY2000-FY2002 NASA authorization act (P.L. 106-391). In January 2001, however, NASA announced that the cost would be over $30 billion, 72% above the 1993 estimate, and $5 billion above the legislated cap. NASA explained that program managers had underestimated the complexity of building and operating the station. The Bush Administration signaled it supported the legislated cap, would not provide additional funds, and NASA would have to find what it needed from within its Human Space Flight account."Core Complete" ConfigurationIn February 2001, the Bush Administration announced it would cancel or defer some ISS hardware to stay within the cap and control space station costs. The decision truncated construction of the space station at a stage the Administration called "core complete." In 2001, the space station program office at Johnson Space Center (JSC) estimated that it would cost $8.3 billion from FY2002 toFY2006 to build the core complete configuration, described at that time as all the U.S. hardware planned for launch through "Node 2," plus the launch of laboratories being built by Europe and Japan. NASA subsequently began distinguishing between "U.S. Core Complete" (the launches through Node 2, which, prior to the Columbia tragedy, was scheduled for February 2004) and "International Partner (IP) Core Complete" which included the addition of European and Japanese laboratory modules (then anticipated in 2008).