Destination Moon – Part 1 - Future Living and Working Spaces - Design Studio 2012

Destination

MOON

Department for Building

Construction and Design – HB2

Vienna University of Technology

Editor

Das Buch kann über die Abteilung Hochbau 2 unter http://www.hb2.tuwien.a c.at/shop/index.php?rr=6 59269

oder bei shop@hb2.tuwien.ac.at erworben werden. Get the book at the Department for Building Construction and Design - HB2 at http://www.hb2.tuwien.a c.at/shop/index.php?rr=6 59269

or mail to shop@hb2.tuwien.a c.at

DESTINATION MOON

Future Living and Working Spaces

DESIGN STUDIO 2012

Department for Building Construction and Design – HB2

Institute of Architecture and Design

Vienna University of Technology

Destination Moon

Published by Vienna University of Technology Institute of Architecture and Design Department for Building Construction and Design – HB2

Prof. Gerhard Steixner

http://www.hb2.tuwien.a c.at

Authors and final editing: Dr. Sandra Häuplik-Meusburger Dipl. Ing. San-Hwan Lu

Original text and projects by students

External project evaluation: Dr. Marc M. Cohen

Cover design: Petra Nagy

Copyright: Students, Authors, Department

Printing: Vicadruck Vienna

ISBN: 978-3-200-02861-6

Supported by:

Stude nts, Instructo rs, Consultants, Lecturers, Guest Critics

The Studio Approach

Sandra Häuplik-Meusburger & San-Hwan Lu

Theme

Just a three-day journey via spaceship from Earth, the Moon beckons. Only 12 people have set foot on the Moon so far, and since December 1972 no one has been there at all....

During the 2012 spring term students in the Master of Architecture program realized their vision of a future research base on the Moon. This topic was new in every respect to all stude nts. Lunar conditions are completely different to those on Earth, from a physical point of view (gravity, radiation, atmosphere, micrometeorites, etc.) as well as from a social and psychological point of view (limited space, microsocieties, isolation, etc.). Re-thinking design challenges through a change of perspective has been a critical part of this design studio.

“When introducing architecture students to a design studio in Space Architecture, it is always a challenge to orient them to the unique and peculiar characteristics of designing human habitation in vacuum and reduced gravity regimes. Typically, the faculty presents a broad overview of the Space Architecture discipline, and to introduce the students to leading conce pts and accomplishme nts. The challenge is a difficult one, given the shortness of time for a quarter or semester, and the variety of the students’ backgrounds, with some stronger or weaker in engineering, human factors, materials science, and physics. Also, the students often start from differing levels of professional preparation and training, so it is inevitable that each one interprets the information differently and takes an individual and often idiosyncratic approach.” [Marc M.

Cohen]

Strategy

To prepare for this challenge the students were initially tasked with analyzing selected topics related to building on the Moon, including the physical and geographical characteristics of the Moon, lunar habi tats, human factors and habitability. A comprehensive list of the papers and literature in our library was provided, as well as relevant publications from spacearchitect.org. In the first phase of the studio a settlement strategy based on a hypothetical scenario derived from astronauts’ experiences was developed by the stude nts. The emphasis of the second phase of the studio was on the design and impleme ntation of a lunar research station.

This course has been accompanied by theme-specific lectures and workshops with space experts (p.8). The ‘Moon Day‘ launched a series of lectures from notable researchers, architects and other experts in the field of space science accompanying the studio and providing the necessary scientific support. Guest speakers included space experts from UNOOSA, OEWF, DLR, ESA and NASA amongst others. This panel of experts also served as guest critics during the whole process and were invited to give comments at various stages of the design process.

„The challenge for them is to develop and pursue that concept while also providing for other programmatic needs and protecting the crew against the severe environmental threats of the space environment.“

[Marc M. Cohen]

1-3 ‚moonday‘

4-9 concept presentation

10-13 midterm presentation with Franz Viehböck

14 final critic with Marc M. Cohen

15 OctoTV interview

Structure of the Booklet

The wide range of projects in this booklet reflect the diverse backgrounds of the stude nts, coming from Austria, Bulgaria, Romania and Turkey as well as an aerospace engineer from Italy participating in the program as part of his thesis.

In contrast to standard studio publications, this booklet introduces all presented projects with an adjacent evaluation by our external reviewer and space expert Marc M. Cohen.

Evaluation

Marc M. Cohen

Introduction

The studio system has been serving as the primary forum for teaching architecture as a profession and as an art since the mid-19th Century. Faculty approaches vary widely in posing the design problem and critiquing the students as they attempt to solve it. However, there are certain fundamentals that are generally constant. There is one or more faculty who teach the studio. These “home faculty” write a design brief or program that poses a design problem and challenges the students to solve it with architectural concepts and building or landscape design. Students work progressively on the design problem and bring their work to the studio to show the faculty and receive periodic (often weekly) crits. The premise is that the students respond to the crits, revise their drawings or models, and then show them again to the faculty. This process leads through various and optional reviews until the final review at the end of the studio term. Then, a formal review of all the student work takes place.

This review follows an approach to teaching in the studio that the faculty or design critic gives the best service to the student by being absolutely honest and stating the assessment directly, fairly, and impartially. It is the duty of the reviewer to identify errors, flaws, and weaknesses in a project and then point them out to the student. Only in this way can the student learn to overcome obstacles and failures. The reviewer would do a disservice to the student by soft-pedaling the analysis and evaluation. At the same time, it is also the responsibility to point out to the student the successes of the project. This duty is important because the students tend to be much more aware of their deficiencies than they are of what they did right.

Identifying and describing these successes helps the student understand her or his strengths as a designer and architect, which will help focus the design effort the next time.

None of this pedagogy means that the critic, faculty, or reviewer should be harsh or unkind to the stude nts. On the contrary, it is the responsibility of the reviewer to study the student project well before the review so that the reviewer can address the project as the student presents it, rather than needing to psychoanalyze everything the student thought and did to arrive at the initial concept. The reviewer should prepare to offer assessments of each project before the review begins, filling in the blanks with statements the students make and the answers that they give during the prese ntation. This knowledge beforehand, and the insight to ask questions that are concise and to the point enable the reviewer to address the review discussion with empathy and kindness.

Evaluation

This review takes place in the classic tradition of the architecture studio. In the traditional studio review, the “home faculty” evaluates how well the students solve the problem, meet the requirements of the program, and assess how good their solutions are. This review takes a different approach and offers two kinds of evaluations: of the individual projects and of the set of projects as a whole. Thus, this review offers also an evaluation of the student work, but not within the context of the design brief. Instead, this review takes the perspective of the larger world of Space Architecture and human spaceflight. It assesses how well the students develop solutions that might be reasonable and feasible in the professional practice of Space Architecture.

The evaluation of the twelve projects as a set goes to another set of considerations. It poses the question of how students learn when presented with unfamiliar and novel ideas and constraints in a Space

Architecture studio. When exposed to so much new and often difficult knowledge, rarely is it possible for the students to absorb and process it all when “drinking from the fire hose” of information. The concepts and knowledge that the students do retain show up in their Space Architecture studio projects. The extents to which students absorb and then apply these ideas, criteria, and functions often vary radically from one project to another.

Project Evaluation

The evaluations cover twelve of the Destination Moon proje cts. The assessment methodology is to identify first what the student Space Architects put into their proje cts. There are three broad domains of evaluation: Concept, Represe ntation, and Space Architecture Features. Concept encompasses the generative or inspirational ideas that the students bring to their proje cts, and derives both from their life experience and the broad sweep of ideas presented to the class. Representation covers the ways in which the students present their ideas through sketches, studies, diagrams, scale drawings whether by hand or by CAD, and scale models; it is a metric for the skill and craft that the students bring to the project, without which there can be no product or result. Finally, the Space Architecture Features make visible the specific knowledge that the students gained and applied in deciding what is important to include in the project and how these elements relate to one another.

This set of reviews provides an assessment of each project. The evaluations depend upon the completeness of content, degree of detail, and specificity about function and purpose that the students provide. Where this information is deficient, it is not possible to give as in depth an assessment .

Students and Instructors

Vienna UT

Sandra Häuplik-Meusburger

INSTRUCTOR

Sandra HäuplikMeusburger is an architect and expert in the field Habitability in Extreme Environment. She is Assistant Professor at the Institute for Architecture and Design, Department for Building Construction and Design - HB2 at the Vienna UT. Sandra is a member of the Space Architecture Technical Committee of the AIAA, and has worked and collaborated on several aerospace design projects. Her book Architecture for Astronauts has been published by Springer in 2011.

INSTRUCTOR

San-Hwan Lu is an architect and Assistant Professor at the Institute for Architecture and Design, Department for Building Construction and Design - HB2 at the Vienna UT. His field of expertise is building technology and design. He has been working with international firms for over ten years in the realization of complex building envelope geometries of large scale projects. Currently he is writing his PhD thesis on the development of sustainability from an international perspective.

San-Hwan Lu

Tarik Demirtas Betül Küpeli

Petra Nagy Shi Yin

Maximilian Urs Abele Christian Heshmatpour

Amine Khouni Kerstin Pluch

Julia Klaus Christian Mörtl

Karl Hengl Mark Steinschifter

Miran Badzak Dario Krljes

Aida Mulic

Alexander Kolaritsch David Lukacs

Daniela Siedler

Yoana Lazarova Alexander Nanu

Stefan Kristoffer

Marcus Czech Elisabeth Lang

Ottokar Benesch Daniel Galonja

Thomas Milchram Vittorio Rossetti

Consultants Lecturers

Guest Critics

alphabetically

LECTURER

After a degree in Industrial Design at the Polytechnic of Milan, Manuela Aguzzi achieved a PhD on the topic Research and Design for Space Exploration, during which she analyzed exploration scenarios, design of habitat modules, logistic systems and auxiliary robotic structures. Since 2007 she is working at the Astronaut Center of the European Space Agency as Astronaut Instructor. Her main role is to train the assigned astronauts to perform scientific activities on board of the ISS.

LECTURER

Werner Balogh works for the United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs at the United Nations Office at Vienna. Prior to this he was with the Austrian Space Agency, responsible for human spaceflight and space science activities and representing Austria in the ESA Programme Board for Human Spaceflight, Microgravity and Exploration. He holds degrees from the Vienna University of Technology, the International Space University and the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy.

LECTURER / CRITIC

Walter Bein has studied psychology and meteorology in Graz. He is a qualified expert for flight psychology for the Austrian Aviation Authority with a focus on crew fitness and aircraft accident analysis in close cooperation with flight medicine. He was head of the department for flight psychology of the Austrian ministry of defense as well as military pilot. His work encompassed human resources as well as safety in military aviation. In this context he was also the leading psychologist for the AustroMIR 1991 mission.

Manuela Aguzzi

Werner Balogh

Walter Bein

LECTURER / CRITIC

Marc M. Cohen is a licensed architect who has d evoted his career to design research and development in aerospace, particularly human spaceflight. He worked at the NASA Ames Research Center for 26 years. He was Project Architect for the ‘Habot Mobile Lunar Base Project’, the Inventor and Team Lead of the ‘Suitport Extra-VehicularActivity Access Facility’ and ‘Human Engineering Lead’ amongst other proje cts. With ‘Cohen Astrotecture’ he consults in Human Systems Integration and Space Architecture to provide services to NASA and the Space Community.

CRITIC

Sue Fairburn has been a Design Lecturer/ Researcher at Robert Gordon University, Scotland in 2007. Prior to that, she held a variety of research and management posts in International Health, Design for Extreme Environme nts, and Design for Development. Sue holds post-graduate degrees in Industrial Design and Environmental Physiology. Her eclectic work history has helped inform Sue‘s broad ranging research interests, with an approach consistently focused on bridging design and applied human sciences and working between the extremes and the everyday.

LECTURER

Norbert Frischauf is a High Energy Physicist (Astrophysics and Particle Physics) by education and a Future Studies Systems Engineer by training. Being highly interested in all sorts of technologies as well as the micro and macro cosmos his educational and vocational career led him to several distinct places, such as CERN, ESTEC and the European Commission. At the moment he is involved within Galileo and EGNOS, supporting the development and roll-out of the European Global Navigation Satellite System. Norbert is a leading member in various associations (like the OEWF) and is active as science communicator.

CONSULTANT

Prof. Foing obtained his PhD in Astrophysics and Space Techniques. In 1993 he joined ESA as staff scientist, where his varied roles have included being a co-investigator for missions such as SOHO, Mars Express, Expose-Organics on ISS and COROT. He has been Project Scientist for SMART-1, the first ESA spacecraft to travel to the Moon. He serves as Executive Director of the International Lunar Exploration Working Group (ILEWG), Prof. at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam and member of the IAA. He coordinated ILEWG design studies and field campaigns to support the preparation to future Moon-Mars bases.

Sue Fairburn

Norbert Frischauf

Bernard H. Foing

Marc Cohen

LECTURER / CRITIC

Michaela Gitsch joined the Austrian Space Agency in 1986 and has worked for more than 20 years in space administration. She is responsible for communication, education and outreach at the Aeronautics and Space Agency of FFG and acts as Austrian ISU Liaison Officer. She acted as Chairperson of the Advisory Committee on Education of ESA in 2008 and 2009. She also led the workpackage Education & Outreach of ERA-STAR Regions, within the EU Framework. She has been organizing the Summer School Alpbach since 1986 and took directorship in 2010 from the Founder and Father Johannes Ortner.

LECTURER / CRITIC

Gernot Groemer holds a MSc in astronomy and a PhD in Astrobiology. He teaches and does research at the University of Innsbruck in the field of human Mars exploration and Astrobiology. He is also a lecturer at ISU and a member of the Space Generation Advisory Council (Board of Mentors). Various research sojourns in Italy, USA and Chile include being an Outreach coordinator of the European lunar mission LunarSat, a Simulation of a crewed expedition on Mars in Utah and the Flight Crew 37th ESA Parabolic Flight Campaign. He is part of the Programme Management Group for AustroMars and PolAres.

LECTURER

Petra Gruber is an architect and expert in biomimetics and building science with a focus on construction and sustainability. She received her PhD in biomimetics in architecture - architecture of life and buildings and has been an Assistant Professor at the Vienna UT until she founded her own company transarch in 2008. She is currently Professor of Urban Design and Development at the Ethiopian Institute of Architecture and is engaged in various projects in e.g. Indonesia and Saudi-Arabia. Her research focuses on inn ovation, evolution and adaption of architecture in the context of natural, economic and socio-cultural environment.

LECTURER

Michael Hajek studied physical engineering in Vienna and received his Ph.D. in radiation protection, dosimetry and nuclear safety. He is Assistant Professor at the Institute of Atomic and Subatomic Physics of the Vienna UT since 2006 and holder of the International Sold State Dosimetry Organization (ISSDO) Award. Guest scientist at accelerator centres in Germany, Japan and Switzerland. Head of multiple research projects assessing radiation exposure in space. Long-established cooperation with the German Aerospace Centre (DLR) and the European Space Agency (ESA).

Petra Gruber

Michael Hajek

Michaela Gitsch

Gernot Groemer

LECTURER

Dr. Joachim Huber completed his studies to become a trained specialist in internal medicine and cardiology in Vienna. He was educated as Flight Surgeon in Fürstenfeldbruck and at the NATO and became specialist for aerospace medicine in Moscow and St. Petersburg. He is an emergency physician with his practice based in Vienna. He is long-term consultant for ESA, NASA, NASDA and the Russian space agency based on his experiences as Flight Surgeon and Aerospace Medicine Specialist.

CRITIC

Kabru has studied technical physics and industrial design (University for Applied Arts) as well as architecture (Vienna University of Technology). He graduated with honors from the University of Applied Arts and received the recognition award of the ministry of science and arts for his diploma thesis in 1995. He is a member of propeller z since 1994. Apart from being a practicing architect he also has a long-standing involvement in teaching and lecturing, both at a national and international level. Since 2012 Kabru is a guest professor at the NDU Sankt Pölten.

After having obtained a Master of Electronics and Telecommunications Engineering in 2001, Olivier Lamborelle floated in the space business and never left it. After working in Paris and Brussels, he is astronaut instructor at the European Astronaut Center in Cologne (Germany) since 2007, teaching space travelers how to perform science on-board the International Space Station. When performing his additional Eurocom duties, he has then the chance to talk to the astronauts while they fly on the ISS.

Regina Peldszus is a design researcher focusing on soft human factor aspects in extreme en vironme nts, particularly spaceflight. She has worked with the European space industry and contributed design applications to mission simulations in Russia and the US. Most recently, she has completed AHRC funded doctoral research into design aspects for the behavioral dimension of deep space missions. A member of AIAA‘s Space Architectural Technical Committee, she lives and works in London and Berlin.

Olivier Lamborelle LECTURER

Joachim Huber

Kabru

Regina Peldszus CRITIC

LECTURER

Tomas Rousek has studied architecture at the Czech Technical University and International Space University. As a founder of Futura Pragensis he has organized various international exhibitions. He has helped NASA Habitation Team at the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory and is an international collaborator of the NASA Media Innovation Team at the NASA Ames Research Center. He founded A-ETC in 2005, a design company with teams in Prague, Tokyo and London where he currently lives.

LECTURER

Daniel Schubert is section head (RY-SR) at the Institute of Space Systems (DLR-RY) where he has been working since 2007. He has contributed to several CE-studies on bio-regenerative life support systems. He is also part of the DLR CROP project. Since 2010, he is project leader of the DLR research initiative EDEN, which investigates different Controlled Environmental Agriculture (CEA) technologies for the transformation into space proven hardw are conce pts.

CONSULTANT

Born in 1944, P. Michael Schultes graduated from the Vienna UT with a degree in architecture. His main area of interest is membrane building shells. In 2007 he and colleagues founded experimonde in order to create a space for e xperime ntation in the area of sustainable construction. P.M.Schultes lives and works in Austria and France.

CRITIC

Mag. Dr. Ulrike Schmitzer is a science editor at Radio Ö1 (ORF – Austrian Broadcasting Company), an independent film maker and author. Her documentaries in the fields of architecture and space for 3sat include „SpaceArchitecture“ (45 min) and „Space-Medicine“ (45 min). She has received various awards including the Inge-Morath-Award for Science Publishing 2012. Her debut novel „Die falsche Witwe“ (“The false widow”) has been published in the “edition atelier” in 2011.

P. Michael Schultes

Ulrike Schmitzer

Tomas Rousek

Daniel Schubert

LECTURER

Dr. Gerhard Paul Julius Thiele is a German physicist and a former ESA astronaut. He received a doctorate degree in physics at the University of Heidelberg and conducted postdoctoral studies at Princeton University. He joined the DLR as a science astronaut in 1987, serving as the alternate payload specialist of the German spacelab D-2 Mission in 1993. From 1996 to 2001 he served as a NASA astronaut and flew on the Space Shuttle SRTM mission as a mission specialist in 2000. He was the Head of ESA Astronauts Division until 2010 and is currently Resident Fellow at the ESPI in Vienna.

CRITIC

Franz Viehböck is a scientist and astronaut. He studied electrical engineering at the Vienna UT and was selected to serve as the first Austrian astronaut aboard the Austromir 91 mission. Subsequently he worked for Rockwell as ProgramDevelopment Manager of the Space-SystemsDivision and for Boeing as Director for International Business Development of the Space Systems Group. Since 2000 he is also technology consultant of the province of Lower Austria. He has been working for the Austrian company Berndorf since 2002 where he currently is a member of the board of directors.

LECTURER / CRITIC

Andreas Vogler studied architecture at the ETH Zürich and has worked in London, at the TU Munich, TU Delft and as Guest professor at the Royal Academy in Kopenhagen. His fields of research include pre-fabricated building, light-weight construction and space architecture. In 2003 he founded the research and design studio “Architecture and Vision” together with Arturo Vittori. His works in architecture and aerospace have been exhibited at the Centre Pompidou and are part of the collections of the MoMA in New York as well as the MSI in Chicago. He is a member of the ByAK and of the AIAA.

Franz Viehböck

Andreas Vogler

Gerhard Thiele

2031: the preliminary habitat

basic habitability and research functions will be later converted to the surface research laboratory

2050: extended science facilities using lunar topological features

plants labaratory biological science

private crewquarters sleeping private space

social space living, cooking, sport, ....

private crewquarters sleeping private space

galler natur

AYMARA

Project by Karl Hengl and Mark Steinschifter

Location Shackleton Crater

Year 2031

Mission Objective research and mining

Mission Length 6 months

Crew members 3 permanent / 3 temporary Typology multifunctional / mobile, surface stationary, underground

Specific Characteristics

Multifunctional inflatable station, which has an adaptable interior for different functions and uses. Additional permanent underground base with greenhouse and safe-haven.

DESTINATION MOON

Storyboard

2018 - automatic scan mission: surfacescans and scan for lavatubes in the region of the shackleton crater. scan for water and other important resources

step 01

tempora ry human mission, not longer tha n 6 month per team.

2026 - automatic robotic mission: by robtots who prepare the lunar surface for the landing and the habitat module. the also look etc.

step 02

solar energy

robotic missions

step 03

production for the habitat and space telemetry. habitat

nuclear energy

solar energy

solar farm energyproduction in space for moon and earth...

pure solar energy, no atmosphere

groundbase I

habitat

medical and sport

greenhouse biological science food production

mobile habitat

energybeaming to the earth

energybeamingtothe

roverdock and storage lab and science

geological science

biometrical science

biomedical research

2050 - fully expandable ground base I get the mobile habitat in the parking position and dock it on the connection tunnel to gound base I.

install

power production of the moon and earth with a beaming system for the power transfer. full operation of the resourc e extraction. extension of the lunar mission...

2039 - infrastructure expansion

expand the solar energy production on the moon surface and reduce the atomic energy to a minimum.

dig in the biggest lavatube and break out to the edge of the shackleton crater.

i ty research....

+

earth

solar sail

green transport system for more we ight transporting

step 04

solar energy mobile habitat

roverdock and storage labor and science

solar energy

greenhouse

nuclear energy

science and transpor to mobil bases

helium III production

+

step 05

nuclear energy

labor and science

recycling hygienicscommunication

DESTINATION MOON

Starting Situation

The planning phase starts in 2012. All nations agree to incorporate private companies in order to settle on the Moon, explore it and begin research for a later Mars mission by 2050.

5 Stepping Stones

The goal is a functioning lunar base for 12 people by the year 2050. The preliminary research tasks are to study the environmental and physical properties of the Moon, to research possibilities in situ resource-utilisation, to produce Helium-3, and to prepare the way to Mars.

Step 1: The surface is scanned for lava tubes and an optimal site near the Shackleton-crater

Step 2: Robotic missions prepare the site for human missions

Step 3: In 2031 a multifunctional base, called “Aymara3“ is installed. It is sufficient for 3–6 people and an interval of up to 180 days. The base will be the safe-haven, home, and work and leisure site of the inhabitants

Step 4: The preparation of the lava tubes / tunnels is complete and the permanent lunar base is installed

Step 5: The station will be a permanent living and working space in the year 2050 and should include a large greenhouse etc.

but now back in the year 2031....

suitlock module air locks

suitlock and rover docking airtan

living space

private crewquarters connecting lift

entry and wardroomlaboratory, control and communication center

cupola connecting lift

building services floor nks - fresh and stagnant air

watertanks - drinking water

watertanks - grey water

DESTINATION MOON

Ground floor 1:50 - Working

The main ground floor plan has two docking possibilities for rovers, two suitlock options and one additional docking possibility. The rover, EVA entry, and wardroom are equipped with flexible storage racks for tools, instruments and materials. The medical room is situated next to the EVA area for immediate help. Two laboratories and a communications area are situated next to the passageway to the upper floor and to the lava tube underground station.

movable racks for storage

suitlocks

airlock for rover docking

airlock for rover docking

area II

control of building services, climate and exible walls for separation working area V

room

First floor 1:50 - Public and Private

The first floor contains the living functions for a permanent crew of 3 lunarnauts for a maxium stay of 180 days. Temporary crewquarters are available for the shift-turn-over period. The social area, which contains a mobile kitchen, table, benches and public storage space, is located upstairs. The toilet and the bathroom include an infra-red shower and steam function for wellness. The private rooms will be entered through a semi-private space.

Evaluation by Marc M. Cohen

The Aymara combines a sequence of three missions: an automatic scan, then robotic exploration, then human arrival and habitation. It comprises a lander or lander system that stacks two toruses – smaller one on top – on six landing legs with six round windows. On the center vertical “Z-axis” the Ayamara positions a drilling shaft. It is built into the crater rim wall in a manner reminiscent of William Sims’ seminal master thesis in architecture at Princeton in the early 1960s.

The architects intend to install the preliminary habitat on a crater rim and the extended habitat in a lavatube. Unfortunately, it is extremely unlikely that a lava tube would occur in an impact crater rim such as Shackleton’s.*

“The region around the Lunar south pole was selected as the preferred building site for the studio and the team was informed that there is no evidence for lavatubes. ** H owever, when this team came up with their approach for the typology of building in a lava tube or ‘holes underground’, we let them work in this setting due to the limited time frame of this studio and in order to have a wider project range. The initial intention to place part of the habitat underground was to protect the living quarters from radiation.” [Instructors]

The Aymara floor plan of the preliminary habitat is a classic radial layout. It seeks maximum flexibility using movable radial walls made from textiles. The vertical circulation core runs down into the crater walls, with a sort of movable platform as the main vertical movement system. The habitat will receive light at depth through solar illumination tubes, although it is not stated whether this device is based on internal reflectivity or a fiber-optic bundle such as the Himawari system.

The model is built as a complete transverse building section that articulates the two toroidal inflatables of different diameters. There could have been much more design exploration in working out the relationship and connections between these two diameters and the diameter of the descent stage ring.

The vertical circulation system provides single access and egress. The relationship of the habitat to the surface in terms of EVA access for ingress and egress appears to be unresolved. Part of the reason for this lack of resolution maybe that the architects present the lower 2050 addition only in section.

*A lava tube is a remnant of a volcano, which on the Moon tend to be relatively low and flat shield-types. While these volcanoes may have craters, they do not have tall, steep rims. An impact crater such as Shackleton is created by the impact of a large meteoroid or asteroid hitting the lunar surface, throwing up ejecta that form the crater rim. If there were a lava tube before the impact, the crater formation would obliterate it.

**Based on a conversation with lunar expert Bernard Foing

lunar biodiversity data base

Project by Julia Klaus and Christian Mörtl

Location Shackleton crater and rim

Year 2050

Mission Objective Research habitat and seed bank

Mission Length 2050 - 2150

Crew members 24 (to 80)

Typology underground and permanent station on the surface

Specific Characteristics

electromagnetic lunar dust shielding, inflatable structure including internal landscape

DESTINATION MOON

Storyboard

Starting point

1. Species richness: There are about 1.75 million known species on our planet (UNEP 1995). This richness decreases every year

2. Mankind is using the Earth`s resources 1.3 times faster than our planet is able to provide them (WWF)

3. Conclusion = from 2050 on we may need another planet

Possible future

4. Seed banks: There are about 1400 seedbanks around the world - similar to global gene banks, they store seeds as a source for planting in case seed reserves elsewhere are destroyed

5. Moon seed banks?

We suggest a structure for research to build up a biodiversity database in outer space conditions ...

ISRU

Lunar dust: Positive usage of negative conditions

The problem of charged electrostatic lunar dust is used in a positive way: The dust is attracted by an electromagnetic net.

Building the protection shielding: In situ resource utilization is used to produce building materials:

- Cellular structure: A multi-layered shell is plotted as the basic structure in situ.

- Inner cell: An inflatable with atmospheric protection is produced and later programmed with different functions.

- Outermost layer, electromagnetic protection net: it begins to fluctuate and determine the outer shell, later on building up a protective shield against radiation.

The habitat is designed as a spatial landscape with a sweeping spiral upon which the various functions are arranged.

anakin 2 - building robot protection layer lunar dust seed tanks ISRU electromagnetic cell connecting

habitat &lab

earth & space moon robot

seedtank

seed sample collec on start anakin 1&2 test phase

shield space tests seed tanks space tests anakin 1&2 start ISRU on moon

seed tanks sended to moon anakin 1&2 builded rst basic shells

human lifesupport units transfered seed data base start

mars mission tests

research & human habitat start 6 humans12 humans24 humans

research & human habitat start

habitat expansion new species created basic shell & electromagne c protec on net

100 % earth independent

total automated robo c building by anakin 1&2 robot maintaince and lifesupport

aince and

private capsules provide researchers with an individual atmosphere

1 gland - airlock and mobile lab dock

2 tunnel - for filling the shell

3 semi atmosphere - infrastructure

4 biolab

5 physical lab

6 geolab

7 algae garden

8 experimental garden

9 greenhouse

10 sanitary unit

11 waste unit

12 control unit

13 food bowl - recreation

14 food unit

algae pads are connected with “air lounges” inside the atmospheric shell

Evaluation

aluation by Marc M. Cohen

Biodiversity Base is a project with a 100-year timeline to establish a facility on the Moon to protect botanical seeds from many species of plant on Earth against a catastrophe that destroys the terrestrial ecosystem. Researchers at Biodiversity Base would also grow plants and “develop new species,” although the reason for breeding new varieties is not stated.

diversity Base is a p roject 100-ye ar r e line th h e Moon to tect b otanica l see d s from many s sp ecies of f nt a catastrop p he e h that s troys terre st s rial e co o c sy s stem m Res s ea a rc h he e r rs s B io di d i ve v rsity B a se e s wou u l ld d a l so g row ow p la l a ntts s a an n d ve l op p o n ew spe ci es e s, ” a lt t ho h o u ug h th t h e r re e a as s on o n foor r e d i ng g n ew varietti i e es is n noot t statte d

“The idea for a Biodiversity Base derives from the students concerns how human kind cares about our planet. Although their chosen scenario might seem like science fiction, the students took the effort to transfer their thoughts into their design.”

e i d e a fo o r a B io d i ivveerrsi ty y B a as e de d e ri ve e s frroom t he e dents c o on n ce c rns h hoow w hu u ma m a n k ki n nd c arres s e a bo o b ut t u r p l an et t . A Al th t oug h t he e i ir c ho o s se e n sc en n ar r a io i o m ig i h ht t e m l i ke sc c ie n nc c e fi f i ct io o i n n, t h e s tu u d de e nt nts to o ok o t he o rt to traan n sffer t h he e ir r t ho ug g ht hts innto t h he ir r s i g n .” [I [ I ns tructo rss]

e ha a bi table po o rt i io n of t he h b ase resides under i nf f l latabl e d do o m me e l -l i ke s tr uct u re. roof of t he me e woou u ld d l inc l u d e severa l inc l u d ing ki i n ng t h e inner or outer s h e ll structure from a r rego l it h concrete wit h a system of ctrostatic antennae” to attract l unar d ust, reby p ect, t h e arc h itects h a d t h e on l y project wit h ove l an d potentia ll y feasi bl e p hysics i d ea.

The habitable portion of the base resides under an inflatable dome-like structure. The roof of the dome would include several options, including making the inner or outer shell structure from lunar regolith concrete with a system of “electrostatic antennae” to attract lunar dust, thereby making the base “self-covering.” In this respect, the architects had the only project with a novel and potentially feasible physics idea.

algae pads produce oxygen and provide the habitat diatoms can survive without light and oxygen

aerobic greenhouses connect the levels and act as green lungs of the habitat

Although the architects had no estimate of rate of electrostatic deposition, or the time needed to achieve a measurable amount of radiation shielding. The suggestion of this dust-deposition concept shows some original and creative thinking.

The plan co nveys a “f ree organization” with “movable cells.” It is easy to assert the claim of “flexibility” in the absence of a definite design, but in fact this plan offers no clear functional organization. The architects assign the functions of Habitat, Seed-Bank, and Mobile Lab and separate them clearly, but very little within the Habitat presents a raison d’être for where it is positioned or why it is a particular shape or size. Within the habitat dome is a greenhouse tower that features changes of level and sloping floors cum ramps between them.

“This team had the ambition to create their architecture as a living organism, to reflect changing needs of future inhabitants. They worked on interesting conceptual models for the ‘habitatscape’. Unfortunately their many ideas were not converted to a credible architectural layout.” [Instructors]

One inexplicable feature of the concept was that the actual Seed-Bank modules would be located in tunnel bores situated remotely from the Biodiversity Base habitat, in some distant, unspecified crater. The crew at the base would use robots to store and retrieve seeds from these distant containers. In describing this system, the architects mentioned “mobile atmospheres” and an “infinite plane,” but the connection of these abstractions to the project-as-drawn was not clear.

light tube

spikes electrostatically attract lunar dust

regolith concrete (for shielding)

diatoms in treacle pads outer shell layered construction

CyclopsHUB

Project by Ottokar Benesch, Daniel Galonja, Thomas Milchram, Vittorio Rossetti

Location south pole/Mons Malapert

Year 2025

Mission Objective Research

Mission Length 25 years

Crew members 8

Typology Surface stationary, partly moveable

Specific Characteristics

Ten inflatable modules

DESTINATION MOON

Abstract

The Moon ... 2025 ... Phase I

In the near future ten inflatable CYCLOPS modules will be sent to the Moon. This will be Phase I:

A crew of eight astronauts, supported by a proposed artificial intelligence named A.M.E.L.I., will explore the surface of the Moon and will research materials for building larger structures, gaining water, metal, etc. until 2050. During this research period, phase II begins. In this phase, the first large lunar greenhouse with a diameter of about 60 meters will be built. It will be able to supply sufficient air and food for a much larger crew. After the greenhouse is installed, a lot more CYCLOPS modules will be sent to the Moon. These new modules will dock with the greenhouse and form artificial clusters, such as research, sports and living-clusters. Afterwards phase III starts – building more greenhouses and CYCLOPS-clusters to build up a city-like Moon base where you can do everything you can do on Earth ... and even more!

Transport

Phase IExpansion Options

DESTINATION MOON

Example of use

The surface of the inner material is coated with a nano-silicon layer. In addition, due to the porosity of the membrane, it acts as an exhaust and provides the fresh air supply. It also filters the water bound in the air and using the utility lines, the water and air will then be forwarded to the Greenhouse. From there, fresh air is sent back to the modules and blown across the membrane again.

Evaluation by Marc M. Cohen

CyclopsHub was the largest team, and so it is not surprising that they produced the largest output in terms of drawings and particularly scale models. They coined an acronym Artificial Multiple Enhanced Linguistic Intelligence (AMELI), but the connection of this acronym to the architectural project was not clear. Perhaps the creation of this secondary title reflects how ambitious this project was. The team stated their approach as “supply by AMELI.”

This project took the most truly 3D approach. The design centered on 14-sided (tetradecahedral) truncated octahedron modules. The size of each module is 8.5m in diameter, to fit the dynamic envelope of a 10m, Ares V class of heavy lift vehicle.

On the lunar surface, the team applied these modules in a space-filling manner, stacking them vertically and diagonally to build up a matrix of structure and living environment. Each of the CyclopsHub modules would contain a spherical inflatable that houses a living or working environment function. The team demonstrated the erection and deployment of a module by inflating a balloon inside a collapsed structure, deploying it as the balloon expanded to assume its spherical form.

The module-to-module interfaces can occur where the CyclopsHubs stack together. However, the team did not d evelop a systematic approach to determining which faces of the CyclopsHubs would provide module-to-module ports, which would have only flat or blank bulkheads, and which would provide external berthing or EVA ports.

The CyclopsHub team thought about inn ovative approaches to the life support system. They proposed to grow Beema bamboo as the most

effective plant to absorb CO2 and return oxygen to the living environment. The team apparently read about the forward osmosis membrane and its use in life support (Cohen, Flynn, Matossian, 2012), so they proposed to employ a “superduper membrane” as part of their life support system. In addition, they considered air distribution and water vapor collection as part of integrating life support into each CyclopsHub.

The CyclopsHub team did the most to compose their project in three dimensions, and to integrate subsystems into the modularization.

Unfortunately, the selection of a single, uniform module type leads to functional restrictions, because all the spaces occur in volumes of the same size and shape, the primary architectural tool of varying the dimensions and proportions of a room were not available for this project. In a future iteration the team could consider an approach using modules in two sizes where the larger unit is another Archimedean or a Fuller geodesic solid that provide faces that (with the judicious use of flex-tunnels) can align to the joining planes of the original CyclopsHub truncated octahedra.

“This team consisted of three architecture and one aerospace engineer student, who came especially for this studio to Vienna to work on his thesis. This cooperation proved to be a fruitful challenge, overcoming differences in their professional and personal way of thinking. The students succeeded in working as an interdisciplinary team resulting in a project integrating engineering input with architectural vision.” [Instructors]