Acta Astronautica 60 (2007) 588–593www.elsevier.com/locate/actaastro

Architecture for space habitats. Role of architectural design inplanning artificial environment for long time manned

space missionsVera Martinez

Fachgebiet Entwerfen und Raumgestaltung und Entwerfen und Baugestaltung, Faculty of Architecture,Technical University Darmstadt, Germany

Abstract

The paper discusses concepts about the role of architecture in the design of space habitats and the development of ageneral evaluation criteria of architectural design contribution. Besides the existing feasibility studies, the general requisites, thedevelopment studies, and the critical design review which are mainly based on the experience of human space missions andthe standards of the NASA-STD-3000 manual and which analyze and evaluate the relation between man and environment andbetween man and machine mainly in its functionality, there is very few material about design of comfort and wellbeing of man inspace habitat. Architecture for space habitat means the design of an artificial environment with much comfort in an “atmosphere”of wellbeing. These are mainly psychological effects of human factors which are very important in the case of a long timespace mission. How can the degree of comfort and “wellbeing atmosphere” in an artificial environment be measured? How canthe quality of the architectural contribution in space design be quantified? Definition of a criteria catalogue to reach a largerobjectivity in architectural design evaluation. Definition of constant parameters as a result of project necessities to quantify thequality of the design. Architectural design analysis due the application and verification within the parameters and consequentlyoverlapping and evaluating results. Interdisciplinary work between architects, astronautics, engineers, psychologists, etc. All thedisciplines needed for planning a high quality habitat for humans in space. Analysis of the principles of well designed artificialenvironment. Good quality design for space architecture is the result of the interaction and interrelation between many differentproject necessities (technological, environmental, human factors, transportation, costs, etc.). Each of this necessities is interrelatedin the design project and cannot be evaluated on its own. Therefore, the design process needs constant check ups to choose eachtime the best solution in relation to the whole. As well as for the main disciplines around human factors, architectural designfor space has to be largely tested to produce scientific improvement.© 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Two aspects of the planning of space habitats canreach a further depths through architecture: the design

E-mail address: fg_raum@hrzpub.tu-darmstadt.de.

0094-5765/$ - see front matter © 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.doi:10.1016/j.actaastro.2006.09.034

of the space for the group (the micro community of thecrew) and the one for the single person.

Architecture can provide answers for the needs of thesocial community as well as the needs for the wellbeingof the single person in a totally artificial environment.

Architecture defines the “build” rules for the culturallife of a community [1]. The division into public, semi

V. Martinez / Acta Astronautica 60 (2007) 588–593 589

public and private spaces shows the changing relation-ships between group and individual person [2]. Thesearchitectural rules extend further than the plain func-tional organization. Help to interpret the patterns of be-havior that are important for the group.

In a totally isolated environment, that is character-ized by dangers there is no other choice for the indi-vidual person but to subscribe to the condition that arevalid for the whole group. This means that the rulesfor the life within the community have to be easily un-derstood and acceptable to everyone [3], even in thecase of an international crew with varied cultural back-ground. The wellbeing of the individual person in spacerelates to the condition between human being and envi-ronment. It is also based on the experience of the senses[4–6].

In comparison with the diversity which can be experi-enced by man on earth a severe reduction in the artificialhabitat (relation between natural and man-made places,[7]) will be incremental. To give quality to human lifein the space habitat, despite its restriction, a sensitivedesign of the environment is absolutely necessary [8].

To give an answer to the problems of human factoron space missions the design process has to take intoaccount aspects of sociology (the portrayal of microcommunities: “city planning”) and psychology (for thedefinition of environment: architecture).

A range of criteria for the main design aspects con-cerning the communal live of the crew as well as thewell being of the individual in the artificial environmenthelps to evaluate architectural designs.

Since 2001, the architecture department of the Tech-nical University Darmstadt has been working on thesethemes. In the projects students have intuitively askedthese questions and looked for answers. The picturesthat accompany my talk have been developed by stu-dents as part of their design projects.

Technical aspects of realization are the main part ofdesigning a space habitat, in which we worked interdis-ciplinary with the institute of astronautics Prof. WalterTUM. Aspects of design support the necessary technol-ogy for the planning of space habitats.

2. Assessment strategies and catalogue of criteria

The catalogue of assessment criteria for the “space”architecture will be based on various qualities, whichwill correspond to various design criteria. Following isa list of criteria, which will describe the problems ofarchitecture and design of space habitats. The proposalof the criteria catalogue enables the assessment of thepredefined topics, so for obtaining more objectivity in

the evaluation. It is the aim to be able to better analyzethe advantages and disadvantages in comparison.

An essential starting point for the planning will arrivefrom the prescription of the mission design and willbe developed corresponding to aims and expectations.The more precise the mission is defined, the better thearchitectonical design process can be used and thereforea qualitatively better solution can be developed.

The number of people, their composition and thecountries they come from, their cultural background,their necessary activities and their expectations will playa big role in the architectonical design of their lives en-vironment. The design will correspond to the composi-tion, space, order, room, program and organization ofthe habitat [9].

Questions of definition of city planning (intended asbuilt expression of community live) will have their ef-fect on the design from the very start. Traditionally cityplanning is used to represent the accepted forms of com-munity organization on an urban level [10]. Also themicro community of the astronauts will not be able tomiss the portrayal of the social aspects of communallife.

The consideration of the conditions of environment orthe conditions of limits and expectations, which dependon the position in space (Moon, Mars or etc.), will influ-ence the design from the very first sketch. The follow-ing parameter will form the base for successfully usingthe habitat. They include protection from radiation andmeteorites, protection from heat or cold, adjustment togravitation [11], in situ use of resources, topographyand atmosphere of planets etc. Each one of these de-mands will set borders for the planning and influencesthe options for design decisions.

The concept defines the inherent idea of the design.The search for the concept will facilitate the decisionmaking in the design process, for example the conceptof an “oasis” (see Fig. 2) in the design of team yellow inthe task of planning a lunar base station is a clearly con-ceptual approach. The design was developed accordingto the reference image. The use of the concept helpsin finding simple and clear strategies for the planningprocess.

Another important criteria will be the design qualityof the habitat, the architecture. Here not the portrayalof the dramaturgy of the living conditions of the groupis important, but the special qualities of the artificialspaces in which the human being will be forced to stayfor quite a long time [8]. The compulsion in isolationand confinement and the impossibility of leaving makethe difference: light, material, definition of space, de-sign of space, definition of volume and form have to be

590 V. Martinez / Acta Astronautica 60 (2007) 588–593

used for the composition of a comfortable surrounding.Architecture alone has to substitute the diversity of thenatural environment that the human being is used to, onthe face of the earth [7]. For the planning of space habi-tats can be chosen from the diversity of architecturaldesign possibilities. The pure aesthetic will play a muchbigger role in space than on earth because mankind cando without beauty only for a short while [12].

The habitat has to be functional. Ergonomics [13],the right measurements for working, handling have tobe solved in a highly successful manner, therefore, notrisking the success of the mission. A lot has been re-searched on this subject in the past years (as for ISS),but a lot more can be done.

2.1. Energy efficiency

Space habitats are closed systems. Water, oxygen andenergy, which are necessary for substain life, have toreusable to a high degree. Waste in solid and liquidform has to be minimized, for it cannot be disposed ofin space or on foreign planets. On developing a microclosed cycle on biological basis is being worked at themoment. Planning a habitat with “greenhouse” as partof a closed cycle can facilitate life in space and shouldbe included in the design process [12].

The realization of the project should be possible (inarchitectural design for space feasibility often faults).The observance of technical necessitie [14] has tobe included in the planning from the beginning [15].Questions of realization as well as design issues haveto be part of the design process from the start, often thetwo aspects benefit from each other. The problems canbe solved effectively only through consequential andcooperative integration. The cooperation between thedepartment architecture Entwerfen and Baugestaltung(design and room planning) Prof. Johann Eisele andEntwerfen und Raumgestaltung (design and spaceplanning) Lehrbeauftragte Vera Martinez TechnicalUniversity Darmstadt and the Astronautics InstituteProf. Ulrich Walter Technical University of MunichHAAL) was formed in order to develop this integrationduring the studies.

Integral part of the design are questions about the nec-essary tools, which are to be integrated into the archi-tecture of the habitat to perform certain tasks (speciallyin microgravity), beginning with a chair (the best exam-ple is the “Munich Space Chair”) to shower, bed, stor-age facilities, waste containers, etc. Good design meansa precise adaptation to function and quality (aesthetics)of the objects. The ergonomic qualities have to ensurecomfort and cosines [16].

Awareness of costs should influence the design fromthe start. The limitation of costs would help to evaluatethe quality of designs, instead of only evaluating thedesign quality of the project. Even during the designprocess the estimate of costs can lead to optimizationin a lot of respects without jeopardizing the quality.Whereas the optimization of projects according to costsat the end of the design process often influences thequality of the design.

Good quality space architecture if integrated in themission design process from the beginning will not pro-duce higher costs just higher ambiance quality.

One of most interesting feed-back by teaching to in-terdisciplinary student teams is to see that they take ad-vantage from the collaboration and respect the differentcompetences of each.

City planning, environmental conditions, concept,architecture, function, energy efficiency, realization,costing.

Each one of the aforementioned criteria leads to thedefinition of parameter which help to evaluate the qual-ity of design, to reach more objectivity and to minimizemistakes in the decision making. Through these criteriathe quality of design can be more clearly explained toa team of people from various professional fields.

The principle of introducing certain criteria reflectsthe successful principle of judging Architectural com-petitions. The various criteria can have different impor-tance in the decision process, therefore, adjusting to theparticular needs of the mission. The various fields ofscience involved will define the different parameters.

For the planning of space habitats is a definition of amicro world basically all the different fields of sciencegain importance.

To speak with Norberg Schultz, architecture and thework of architects can contribute to the design of a“genius loci” for space habitat.

3. Sociological aspects of the design of spacehabitats

The design of space habitats is a highly complex task,for it touches various important aspects of human life[17]. The main assumption is that architecture (urban-ism) represents physically the social rules of a commu-nity and therefore influences behavior.

The architecture of space habitats does not imply thedefinition of housing for human beings in a natural en-vironment in which the human being is able to surviveon his own, but the design of a life ensuring environ-ment in the void of space. Various fields of science,arts, humanities, technics, have to be implemented into

V. Martinez / Acta Astronautica 60 (2007) 588–593 591

the design therefore creating a comfortable “home inspace” for human beings. Technics are being used toensure the possibility of life outside the atmosphere ofthe earth whereas psychology and sociology refer to thefield of human factors, in particular the psychologicalcondition of the individual person and the social com-munity of the group (particularly important for longermissions). Architecture defines the environment whichinfluences a society and its culture [18]. The human be-ing can reflect the nature of its environment. Unwrittenrules define the face of urban and rural life. The rela-tion between public and private is important, in this therules of the sociologically accepted life are defined. Themicro society which will live in a space ship or in thebase station on a foreign planet, will reflect itself in anenvironment which is defined through rules in publicand private life. Only functional approach cannot ful-fill the demands of space design in a hostile environ-ment. The architectural definition of the living environ-ment of the group begins at the position and relation ofthe rooms to each other (also question of quantity) [19]and reaches the design of the public, semipublic andprivate areas (question of quality) [2]. Questions arise:how extensive should be the private space in compari-son to the public ones? In the common design the pub-lic spaces are rather smaller in order to provide moreroom for laboratories, work and training facilities. Canthis relation work for extended time missions? If yes,then why? Which architectural criteria define the publicspace compared to the private room? How much per-sonal quality can be admitted to public life? How openor flexible has the habitat to be in order to adapt to thechanging needs of public life? How much room can beallocated to specialized functions and how much roomcan be given over to multifunctional tasks. Can in situresource (in case of stations on moon or mars) be usedfor extending the habitat? Which new forms of sociallife can develop through the new environment in space?(for example permanent fear) How are these architec-tonically expressed? How is the room composed whichreflects the community? How extensive does the spacehave to be in order to create comfort, shelter and alsorepresentation. A lot of the functions will overlap dueto the limitation of space. Many functions will be usedlike tools [20] in various spaces therefore rooms willbe multifunctional. A clear distinction will be made forprivate rooms (for recreation and diminishing of aggres-sion). Because manned space travel will be done in in-ternational cooperation the different cultural demandswill influence the design. This means the design hasto be clear and unmistakably interpretable. This couldlead to a natural understanding of space not fixed to a

Fig. 1. Studentwork “space city”. Source: J. Vogel, T. von Makensen,Technische Universität Darmstadt 2004.

Fig. 2. Studentwork “lunar base OASIS”. Source: F. Larisch,S. Kassekert, G. Tagisade, D. Weirauch, Technische UniversitätDarmstadt (architecture) in cooperation with Technische UniversitätMünchen (astronautics) 2005.

Fig. 3. Studentwork “space habitat”. Source: J. Vogel, T. von Mak-ensen, Technische Universität Darmstadt 2004.

particular cultural interpretation and could also lead toa wider acceptance. Signals should be used for orien-tation purposes in particular situations and for working

592 V. Martinez / Acta Astronautica 60 (2007) 588–593

Fig. 4. Studentwork “lunar base”. Source: A. Dietrich, S. Rapp, S.Reuss, Technische Universität Darmstadt (architecture) in coopera-tion with Technische Universität München (astronautics) 2005.

the steering panels (but not reflect the only possibilityof orientation). The search for a common denominatorin various cultural backgrounds should help to mini-mize misunderstanding and uncomfortable feeling or tocreate a basis for discussion (Figs. 1–4).

4. Psychological aspects of the design of spacehabitats

The environment is experienced by human beingsthrough the senses. To see, hear, taste, smell and feelare used to experience the environment. The sense giveinformation to the space where the human being is sit-uated. The definition of a so-called “green zone” con-cerning the term of comfort for each sense is an aimof this study (“green zone” means the sector of a scale,in which the state of comfortableness of one of the fivesenses is proven).

An ideal situation would be to develop an ambiancein which every sense reaches the “green zone” andwhich is harmonic in the whole design at the same time.Normally a good design is developed through sensitivecomposition of the space under regards of all prede-fined conditions. This would not suffice to adjust tothe perception influenced by psychological factors. Thephysical environment and the psychologically felt en-vironment can be quite different. To define a “greenzone” for the psychological perception is more difficult,because this touches the “gray area” of the subjectiveindividuality of each single person. Even though in oursociety the environment is mainly explored through the

eye [21], in the background connections develop be-tween the seen, the felt, the smelt and the heard. Thenature of the things and the living beings, which arefound in our environment, are not experienced only bythe eye. To the seen corresponds a certain “materiality”.We connect a certain smell with certain things, for ex-ample with wood: a certain material quality, a certaintemperature, a certain noise. The same is true for eachmaterial which plays a role in our life: stone, glass, steel,etc. The relation of all experiences is felt as a certainty.The question of materiality plays a big role in mannedspace travel, because the astronauts live in an environ-ment which is artificial to a high degree. The sensualquality of the materials could be used to harmonize thespace or the artificial environment.

Though widely used throughout architecture and de-sign the knowledge of the sensual perception of the en-vironment hardly influences the design process.

The color design of the interior of space ships couldbe used as an example (compare [14]). The use of neu-tral colors, nonsaturated and gray, is also found in thedesign of airplanes, trains, etc., because it works bestin contrast to the colorful environment. It is different inspace where the void is endless and effects should bequestioned. Perception is as well defined through cul-tural background (Think of the different use of colorsto express joy or mourning).

Analytical studies should show stronger connectionsand offer a theoretical construct as base for further em-pirical studies. Partial areas can be empirically studiedto gain objectivity even through minor factors (com-pare [22]). The development of a questionnaire (forastronauts and cosmonauts) to research factors of envi-ronment quality in manned space travel could providesupport for various aspects of design. For the designof certain areas the sensual awareness is consideredand already used in a particular way: color, light, tem-perature, acoustics, smell, surface conditions. Aim:concentration, comfort, safety, freedom of interference,relaxation, personality, use, fun.

Use of these studies can be made in the earthly everyday life (compare [23]).

References

[1] K. Frampton, Reflections on the autonomy of architecture: acritique of contemporary production, in: G. Diane (Ed.), Outof Site: A Social Criticism of Architecture, Bay Press, 1991,pp. 17–26.

[2] G. Consonni, L’internitá dell’esterno: scritti sull’abitare e ilcostruire, clup, 1989.

[3] C. Norberg-Schulz, Genius Loci: Towards a Phenomenologyof Architecture, Rizzoli, 1980.

V. Martinez / Acta Astronautica 60 (2007) 588–593 593

[4] S. Hesselgren, Man’s Perception of Man-Made Environment:An Architectural Theory, Studentlitteratur, Lund, Sweden, 1975,p. 179.

[5] S. Hesselgren, The Language of Architecture, Studentlitteratur,Lund, Sweden, 1967.

[6] N.L. Prak, The Language of Architecture: A Contribution toArchitectural Theory, Mouton, The Hague, The Netherlands,1968.

[7] V. Scully, Architecture: The Natural and the Manmade, St.Martin’s Press, 1991.

[8] T. Thiis-Evensen, Archetypes in Architecture, NorwegianUniversity Press, 1987.

[9] Vitruvio “De Architectura”, The Ten Books on Architecture,Book 1, Chapter 3, Section 2. Translated by Morris HickyMorgan, Dover, 1960. Reprint of translation published byHarvard University, 1914. Originally written by Vitruvius forthe Roman emperor Augustus Caesar (23 a.C.).

[10] M.N. Auge, Introduzione a una antropologia della surmodernitá,2005 eleuthera (traduction rolland d.).

[11] T.W. Hall, The Architecture of Artificial-Gravity, Environmentsfor Long-Duration Space Habitation, University of Michigan,1994.

[12] M. Heidegger, Die Zeit des Weltbildes, 1938.[13] B.L. Bandini, Ergonomia e progetto dell’utile e del piacevole,

Maggioli Editore, Rimini, 1998.

[14] Man-Systems Integration Standards, NASA-STD-3000Handbook, 1994.

[15] R. Banham, Theory and Design in the First Machine Age,second ed., Praeger Publishers, 1967.

[16] A. Dominioni, Industrial Design for Space, 2002 SilvanaEditoriale Spa, Milano, 2002.

[17] W. Benjamin, Passagen-werk, 1962 (published after death).[18] A. Rossi, L’architettura della cittá, citta studi, 1994.[19] Isolation NASA Experiments in: H.W. Lane, R.L. Sauer, D.L.

Feeback (Eds.), Closed-Environment Living Advanced HumanLife Support Enclosed System, Science and Technology Series,A Supplement to Advances in the Astronautical Sciences, vol.104, Published for the American Astronautical Society byUnivelt, Incorporated, P.O. Box 28130, San Diego, CA 92198,USA.

[20] T. Maldonado, Il futuro della modernitá, Feltrinelli, Milano, 4’edizione, 1988.

[21] M. Foucault, The eye of power, 1974 excerpt.[22] M. Hassenzahl, R. Wessler, Capturing design space from a

user perspective: the repertory technique revisited, InternationalJournal of Human-computer Interaction (2000) 441–459.

[23] Space Architecture, AD Architectural Design, Wiley-Academy,London, 2000.