Creating Artificial Gravity for Spacecraft Travel

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of creating artificial gravity for spacecraft travel, focusing on various methods such as centrifuges and rotating spacecraft. Participants explore theoretical designs, practical challenges, and implications for long-term space missions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant shares a technical paper on using centrifuges for artificial gravity, inviting feedback on the subject.
  • Another participant appreciates the design of the paper but does not comment on its content due to time constraints.
  • Some participants propose spinning the entire spacecraft as a method for generating artificial gravity, suggesting that a control system could manage mass distribution effectively.
  • Concerns are raised about the power requirements for managing torque and orientation corrections when using a centrifuge intermittently.
  • One participant highlights the issue of hard radiation exposure during long space missions, suggesting it poses a significant challenge for travel to Mars.
  • Another participant supports the idea of rotating the whole craft, arguing that it could reduce dynamic stresses and provide constant 1g conditions for the crew.
  • There are references to alternative designs, such as "long arm" artificial gravity using tethers, and suggestions to explore existing literature on the topic.
  • One participant advocates for a linear acceleration approach, noting its potential to provide uniform gravity while minimizing radiation exposure during shorter trips.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views on the best method for creating artificial gravity, with no consensus reached on a single approach. Concerns about radiation exposure and energy requirements are also discussed without resolution.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention various assumptions regarding the feasibility of different designs and the implications of radiation exposure, but these assumptions remain unresolved within the discussion.

Astronomy news on Phys.org
That is a very cool design and layout. You did a really good job with that. I can't comment on the content though since I don't have time to read it now.
 
I kind of favor spinning the whole craft - constant availability of the benefit, conserved motion after initial spin up. The only thing needed special is a control system to monitor and adjust the distribution of mass as people and equipment move around... but that can be easily done by automatically pumping stored water from one tank to another (this is going to be part of house keeping plumbing anyway, so just let the program manage it to keep the spin rate constant and the axis of rotation aligned).

A centrifuge poses a torque on the craft doesn't it? Dynamic corrections to the orientation of the craft would be going on during each use of the centrifuge if the schedule is to use it intermittently winding it up and down to speed.. The spin up, spin down, and torque corrections would use a lot of power, and I'm not sure how productive people can be during the treatments.

The biggest problem is hard radiation exposure... lifetime maximum exposure is reached before finishing a one way trip to Mars... no one is going anywhere for long without a solution to that.
 
I see no reason why the whole craft shouldn't rotate. Whilst it would be true that the stresses may be greater if the whole mass is to be rotated but the majority of the craft mass could be located at the centre of rotation to reduce these forces. The living quarters would be the only parts that would need to be operated at 1g. An advantage would be that the rotation speed could be very low and dynamic stresses would also be low, compared with a fast rotating centrifuge. Also, the crew would be constantly under 1g instead of being stuck in a box for their daily dose of normal gravity.
There is no limit to the radius that could be used for this kind of structure.
 
I prefer the linear acceleration approach. The energy requirements are higher but it kills 2 birds with one stone. You have nice uniform gravity during your trip, and the trip to Mars falls into the 2 - 5 day ballpark so radiation exposure is minimized as well
 

Similar threads

NASA Why isn't NASA using artificial gravity for manned space travel?
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
4K
Undergrad How Does Spinning a Ship in Space Create Artificial Gravity?
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Undergrad Interstellar travel/centrifugal couching
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Need someone to help check my work -- Artificial Gravity Report
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
Undergrad Space Travel to Mars: Overcoming Atmosphere & Creating a Bus Stop in Space
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Undergrad Would space stations of sci-fi fame actually work?
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
Graduate Is Fatio–Le Sage's theory of gravitation an entropic gravity?
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
Fictitious forces and artificial gravity
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Undergrad How can artificial gravity be created on space stations using rotating rings?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
Undergrad The standard model from loop quantum gravity via spinors octonions
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
6K