Introduction to Habitability
• Required Crew Volumes
• Human Physiological Adaptation to 0G
• Workstation Design
• Restraint Design
• Ideal Cabin Layout
• Habitability in Partial Gravity
• Stowage
• Various Examples
© 2013 David L. Akin - All rights reserved
http://spacecraft.ssl.umd.edu
UNIVERSITY OF Spacecraft Habitability
MARYLAND 1
ENAE 697 - Space Human Factors and Life Support
Interior Accommodations
• Partial gravity habitats use conventional interior
spaces
– Tasks divided between “standing”, “seated”, “reclining”
– Orientation is fixed by gravity vector
• Microgravity workstations organized around neutral
body posture
– Pose assumed by body in microgravity when postural
muscles are relaxed
– Relative orientation fixed mostly by convention and need
UNIVERSITY OF Space Systems Laboratory
MARYLAND 2 Clark School of Engineering
Microgravity Neutral Body Posture
UNIVERSITY OF Space Systems Laboratory
MARYLAND 3 Clark School of Engineering
Microgravity Neutral Body Posture
UNIVERSITY OF Space Systems Laboratory
MARYLAND 3 Clark School of Engineering
Other Examples of ISS Body Posture
UNIVERSITY OF Space Systems Laboratory
MARYLAND 4 Clark School of Engineering
Other Examples of ISS Body Posture
UNIVERSITY OF Space Systems Laboratory
MARYLAND 4 Clark School of Engineering
Other Examples of ISS Body Posture
UNIVERSITY OF Space Systems Laboratory
MARYLAND 4 Clark School of Engineering
Other Examples of ISS Body Posture
UNIVERSITY OF Space Systems Laboratory
MARYLAND 4 Clark School of Engineering
Other Examples of ISS Body Posture
UNIVERSITY OF Space Systems Laboratory
MARYLAND 4 Clark School of Engineering
Other Examples of ISS Body Posture
UNIVERSITY OF Space Systems Laboratory
MARYLAND 4 Clark School of Engineering
Other Examples of ISS Body Posture
UNIVERSITY OF Space Systems Laboratory
MARYLAND 4 Clark School of Engineering
Other Examples of ISS Body Posture
UNIVERSITY OF Space Systems Laboratory
MARYLAND 4 Clark School of Engineering
Other Examples of ISS Body Posture
UNIVERSITY OF Space Systems Laboratory
MARYLAND 4 Clark School of Engineering
Other Examples of ISS Body Posture
UNIVERSITY OF Space Systems Laboratory
MARYLAND 4 Clark School of Engineering
Conclusion on Interior Accommodations
• Gravitational architecture only utilizes vertical
surfaces
– Floor and ceiling are used for support, transit, and
secondary systems (e.g., lighting)
– Strong desire in space architecture to take advantage of
interstitial volumes created by fitting rectangular living
volumes into cylindrical/ellipsoidal pressure vessels
• ISS experience indicates that crew readily
performs in situ servicing rather than requiring
fixed workstations with nominal neutral body
posture
UNIVERSITY OF Space Systems Laboratory
MARYLAND 5 Clark School of Engineering
0G Workstation Layout
From Nicogossian et. al., Space Biology and Medicine, Vol. II: Life Support and Habitability, AIAA, 1994
UNIVERSITY OF Spacecraft Habitability
MARYLAND 6
ENAE 697 - Space Human Factors and Life Support
Skylab Chair Restraint
From MSFC Skylab Crew Systems Mission Evaluation, NASA TM X-64825, 1974
UNIVERSITY OF Spacecraft Habitability
MARYLAND 7
ENAE 697 - Space Human Factors and Life Support
Skylab Table Restraints
From MSFC Skylab Crew Systems Mission Evaluation, NASA TM X-64825, 1974
UNIVERSITY OF Spacecraft Habitability
MARYLAND 8
ENAE 697 - Space Human Factors and Life Support
Isogrid Flooring Design
From MSFC Skylab Crew Systems Mission Evaluation, NASA TM X-64825, 1974
UNIVERSITY OF Spacecraft Habitability
MARYLAND 9
ENAE 697 - Space Human Factors and Life Support
Skylab Orbital Workshop Module
UNIVERSITY OF Spacecraft Habitability
MARYLAND 10
ENAE 697 - Space Human Factors and Life Support
Cleat Restraint System
From MSFC Skylab Crew Systems Mission Evaluation, NASA TM X-64825, 1974
UNIVERSITY OF Spacecraft Habitability
MARYLAND 11
ENAE 697 - Space Human Factors and Life Support
Skylab Triangle-Cleat Shoe
UNIVERSITY OF Spacecraft Habitability
MARYLAND 12
ENAE 697 - Space Human Factors and Life Support
EVA Foot Restraints
From MSFC Skylab Crew Systems Mission Evaluation, NASA TM X-64825, 1974
UNIVERSITY OF Spacecraft Habitability
MARYLAND 13
ENAE 697 - Space Human Factors and Life Support
Skylab Exterior Configuration
UNIVERSITY OF Spacecraft Habitability
MARYLAND 14
ENAE 697 - Space Human Factors and Life Support
Skylab Orbital Work Shop Interior
UNIVERSITY OF Spacecraft Habitability
MARYLAND 15
ENAE 697 - Space Human Factors and Life Support
Skylab Multiple Docking Adapter Layout
From MSFC Skylab Crew Systems Mission Evaluation, NASA TM X-64825, 1974
UNIVERSITY OF Spacecraft Habitability
MARYLAND 16
ENAE 697 - Space Human Factors and Life Support
Skylab Living Quarters Layout
UNIVERSITY OF Spacecraft Habitability
MARYLAND 17
ENAE 697 - Space Human Factors and Life Support
Skylab Sleeping Compartments
UNIVERSITY OF Spacecraft Habitability
MARYLAND 18
ENAE 697 - Space Human Factors and Life Support
Skylab Wardroom Layout
From MSFC Skylab Crew Systems Mission Evaluation, NASA TM X-64825, 1974
UNIVERSITY OF Spacecraft Habitability
MARYLAND 19
ENAE 697 - Space Human Factors and Life Support
Skylab Waste Management Compartment
UNIVERSITY OF Spacecraft Habitability
MARYLAND 20
ENAE 697 - Space Human Factors and Life Support
Stowage
• Number of items stowed proportional to volume,
crew size, duration, complexity of mission
– Mercury: 48 items
– Gemini: 196
– Apollo: 1727
– Shuttle: 2600
– Skylab: 10,160
– ISS: >20,000
• After you stow it, how do you find it?
UNIVERSITY OF Spacecraft Habitability
MARYLAND 21
ENAE 697 - Space Human Factors and Life Support
Internal Cargo Integration
Angela Hart/0C4
281-244-2308
22
Cargo Transfer Bag (CTB)
• Cargo Transfer Bags (CTBs) are Nomex stowage bags that contain removable,
reconfigurable dividers used for packaging cargo for launch, disposal or
return.
• CTBs are available in half, single, double, and triple sizes.
• Each configuration has a zipper closure and a removable mesh netting restraint
system located inside of the CTB.
23
Cargo Transfer Bags
P/N 33111836-40
• Reference JSC 39207, Cargo Transfer Bag (CTB)
Certification and Acceptance Requirements
Document and JSC-39233 Rev. D, Cargo
Transfer Bag (CTB) Interface Design Document
(IDD) for actual CTB design, installation,
volume, and interface requirements, ground
handling, packaging and stowage requirements
• CTBs are certified for launch/return stowage
configurations inside hard side lockers (RSR/
Middeck) and TBD ATV/HTV strapping
configurations.
24
Historical CTB Weights
CTB Total Bags Bag Tare Cargo Avg. Crew
Used Kg (lbs) Kg (lbs) Provision
Kg (lbs)
Half 239 1.0 (2.2) 5.13 (11.3) 5.07 (11.2)
Single 223 1.81 (4.0) 10.26 (22.6) 9.42 (20.8)
Double 21 2.04 (4.5) 20.51 (45.2) N/A
Triple 15 2.81 (6.2) 30.76 (67.8) N/A
25
Example Oversized Item
HX and FSE
Dimensions: 38.5” x 24.5” x 17.5”
Mass: 116 lbs
26
M01 Bags
P/N SEG32105875-301
• JSC 28169, Interface Control Document (ICD) for International Space
Station (ISS) Resupply Stowage Platform 1 Stowage System.
• M01 bag is certified to carry 300 lbs of cargo (includes cargo and
associated installation hardware) for RSP MPLM strapping configuration
and TBD lbs for ATV/HTV strapping configuration.
• Weight 10.64 lbs (empty bag).
• Volume of M01 bag is 13 ft3.
• A total of 6 Cargo Transfer Bag Equivalents
• (CTBEs) can be stowed inside an M01 bag.
• The external dimensions are:
35.3” (W) x 21.0” (D) x 32.2” (H).
27
M02 Bags
P/N SEG32105876-301
• JSC 28169, Interface Control Document (ICD) for International Space
Station (ISS) Resupply Stowage Platform 1 Stowage System.
• M02 bag is certified to carry 90.8 kg (200 lbs) of cargo (includes cargo and
associated installation hardware) for RSP MPLM strapping configuration and
TBD lbs for ATV/HTV strapping configuration.
• Weight 6.83 lbs (empty bag).
• Volume of M02 bags is 8 ft3.
• A total of 4 CTBEs can be stowed
• inside an M02 Bag.
• The external dimensions are:
35.3” (W) x 21.0” (D) x 20.0” (H).
28
M03 Bags
P/N 33117683
• JSC 28169, Interface Control Document (ICD) for International Space
Station (ISS) Resupply Stowage Platform 1 Stowage System.
• M03 bag is certified to carry 226.8 kg (500 lbs) of cargo (includes cargo and
associated installation hardware) for RSP MPLM strapping configuration and
TBD lbs for ATV/HTV strapping configuration.
• Weight 16.5 lbs (empty bag).
• Volume of M03 bags is 22.0 ft3.
• A total of 10 CTBEs can be stowed
• inside an M03 Bag.
• The external dimensions are:
35.3“ (W) x 21“ (D) x 52.5“ (L)
29
Example Oversized Item
IELK (M1 Bag)
Dimensions: 43.7” x 20.5” x 16.3”
Mass: 79.4 lbs
30
M03 Bag Installation
31
• Some oversized hardware/bags may require special FSE.
Food Containers
• Food Containers –
– US Non-Collapsible, SEG48101834-301
15” x 12.0” x 4.85”
– Collapsible, 17!".260# 3200-0
14.875” x 12” x 4.875” (Collapsed)
14.875” X 12” X .59” (Uncollapsed)
• Mass (Full) – 14.3 lbs
• Mass (Empty) –
– Non-Collapsible – 3.75 lbs
– Collapsible – 2.2 lbs
32
Standard Waste Containers
• Bags (compressible)
– KBO-M generally use for dry trash
– Table Food Bag (TFB) and/or Rubber-Lined
Bag (RLB) used for wet trash
• Human waste containers (hard)
– EDV and KTO
• Hardware (ORUs, filters, fans, etc.)
– Odd sizes and shapes
33
KBO-M
• Soft Trash Bag, OpNOM: KBO-M
• PN: 11! 615.8715-OA15-01
• Heavy duty rubberized cloth bag.
Metal band around the top and rubber
flaps to keep the trash inside.
• Acceptable for undamaged alkaline
batteries, some bio waste directly into
container – i.e. kleenex; hazardous
waste must be properly contained prior
to insertion
• Dimensions (Stowed) -
11.75” x 11.75” x 2”
• Dimensions (Full) - 17” long x 11.5”
diameter ring x 8” diameter
• Mass (Full) – 17.5 to 20 lbs
34
Food Waste Bag
• Food Waste Bag, OpNOM:
Food Waste Bag
PN: 11 ! 615.8716-OA15
• Soft, rubberized cloth bag used
to place table scraps, and other
small wet waste items. This bag
can be used for wet or dry trash.
• Dimensions (Stowed) –
10” x 5” x 0.2”
• Dimensions (Full) –
8” x 5” diameter
• Mass (Full) – 2 lbs
35
Rubber Lined Bag
• Rubber Lined Bag, OpNOM: Rubber
Lined Bag PN: 11!615.8716-20A15,
• Rubberized cloth lined bag can contain
up to 3 full KBO-M bags or
approximately 8 table bags. It has a
draw string closure and is nominally
closed tighter with the rubber ties
known as “szkoo’tee”. Can be wiped
down and reused. Preferred by crew
for wet trash. Not as heavy duty as the
KBO-M, but larger.
• Dimensions (Stowed) - 11.75” x 11.75”
x 2.2” (folded around KBO-M)
• Dimensions (Full) – 25” x 15”
• Mass (Full) – 23.7 lbs 36
EDV
• EDV, OpNOM: EDV
PN: 11! 615.8711-0$15-1
• Primarily used for urine and wastewater collection.
Limited Life: 90-days of on-orbit operations (defined
as any operations where the hydro-connector is
connected/disconnected).
• Dimensions (Stowed) - EDVs usually launched in set
of 6 buckets and separately 6 lids. With rack
attachment spike and lid
– Top - 13.1” (Diameter) x 21.57” (H)
– Bottom 9” (diameter)
– EDV Bucket - 17.3” (H) x 13” (Diameter)
– EDV lid - 4.1” (H) x 13” (Diameter)
• Dimensions (Full) - Without rack attachment spike
and lid
– Top - 13” (Diameter) x 15.7” (H)
– Bottom - 9”( Diameter) 37
• Mass (Full) – 58.4 lbs
KTO
• Solid Waste Container, OpNOM: KTO
PN: 11 ! 615.8720A55-0,
• The KTO is used for solid waste and
can contain biological waste.
• Dimensions (Stowed) –
– Body - 13” (H) x 13 “ (diameter)
– Lid - 2” (H) x 13” diameter
• Dimensions (Full) – 15” (H) x 13”
diameter
• Mass (Full) – 25.4 lbs
38
Example Stowage in
Progress for Disposal
Rubber lined bags
Strapped
ORUs
39
Example Stowage in
MPLM for Launch
40
Historical Delivery Dates
for Launch Integration
% Cargo Delivery Template Type Cargo
40 Launch minus (L-) 4 to 3 All cargo types, Hard mounted items
months
10 L- 2 months All size CTBs/Mbags
35 L – 1 month All size CTBs/5 and 10 MLE bag, some
hardmount, Middeck lockers
10 L-2 weeks All size CTBs/5 and 10 MLE bag, Middeck
lockers
5 L-24 to 6 hours All size CTBs, Middeck lockers
41
Estimated Delivery
Internal Cargo Types
% Cargo by % Cargo by Type Cargo
Item Volume
<5 <5 Hardmounted Items
15 35 Oversized Items (larger than triple CTB)
75 50 Cargo Transfer Bags (1/2, single, double, triple)
10 10 Non-bag items (food containers, waste containers, etc)
42
On-Orbit Estimates
for Cargo Transfer
• Cargo operations minimum stay time is based on the time required to
unload (Internal and External)
– Internal Estimates:
• Typical MPLM flight transfer estimated between 80 and 120 hours transfer
(Approximately 200 CTBe) depending on the amount of cargo, that
includes transferring the resupply items to ISS and stowing the return items
in MPLM.
• Cannot necessarily increase crew participation to increase hours.
Inefficiencies in the operations due to limited working space.
• Typically no more than 3 - 4 crew members dedicated to transfer
• Typically no more than 6 hours per day/ 5 days per week.
• Rack Transfer Estimates – Approximately 2 crew - 1 hour (2 crew hours)
together to transfer 1 rack to ISS. Not including connecting up to the ISS
utlities
• Maximum stay time is the time to fill the vehicle with waste based on waste
generation rates.
– Increased capability improves operational flexibility
43
Psychosocial Issues
• Scheduling and planning
• Recreation
• Command structure
• Issues affecting crew morale
– Environment
– Food and drink
– Exercise
– Hygiene
– Noise
– Lighting
UNIVERSITY OF Spacecraft Habitability
MARYLAND 44
ENAE 697 - Space Human Factors and Life Support
Analogue Habitats - NR-1 Submarine
UNIVERSITY OF Spacecraft Habitability
MARYLAND 45
ENAE 697 - Space Human Factors and Life Support
Interior Mockup of Alvin
UNIVERSITY OF Spacecraft Habitability
MARYLAND 46
ENAE 697 - Space Human Factors and Life Support
Apollo Lunar Module Interior
UNIVERSITY OF Spacecraft Habitability
MARYLAND 47
ENAE 697 - Space Human Factors and Life Support
Apollo Lunar Module Interior
UNIVERSITY OF Spacecraft Habitability
MARYLAND 48
ENAE 697 - Space Human Factors and Life Support
Segmented Rover - Inboard Plan
Bhardwaj et. al., “Design of a Pressurized Lunar Rover - Final Report” NASA CR-192033, Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State University, 1992.
UNIVERSITY OF Spacecraft Habitability
MARYLAND 49
ENAE 697 - Space Human Factors and Life Support
Segmented Rover - Inboard Profiles
Bhardwaj et. al., “Design of a Pressurized Lunar Rover - Final Report” NASA CR-192033, Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State University, 1992.
UNIVERSITY OF Spacecraft Habitability
MARYLAND 50
ENAE 697 - Space Human Factors and Life Support
TURTLE Interior Mockup - ENAE 484
UNIVERSITY OF Spacecraft Habitability
MARYLAND 51
ENAE 697 - Space Human Factors and Life Support
LER Interior - Driving Stations
UNIVERSITY OF Spacecraft Habitability
MARYLAND 52
ENAE 697 - Space Human Factors and Life Support
Analysis of Sight Lines
Bhardwaj et. al., “Design of a Pressurized Lunar Rover - Final Report” NASA CR-192033, Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State University, 1992.
UNIVERSITY OF Spacecraft Habitability
MARYLAND 53
ENAE 697 - Space Human Factors and Life Support
Shuttle Windows (Fwd Flight Deck)
UNIVERSITY OF Spacecraft Habitability
MARYLAND 54
ENAE 697 - Space Human Factors and Life Support
ISS Cupola (External)
UNIVERSITY OF Spacecraft Habitability
MARYLAND 55
ENAE 697 - Space Human Factors and Life Support
ISS Cupola (Internal)
UNIVERSITY OF Spacecraft Habitability
MARYLAND 56
ENAE 697 - Space Human Factors and Life Support
LER Interior - Bunks and Suitports
UNIVERSITY OF Spacecraft Habitability
MARYLAND 57
ENAE 697 - Space Human Factors and Life Support
Minimum Functional Habitats
UNIVERSITY OF Spacecraft Habitability
MARYLAND 58
ENAE 697 - Space Human Factors and Life Support
