Content uploaded by Daniel Akinwumi
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Daniel Akinwumi on Nov 05, 2023
Content may be subject to copyright.
Student No. 202254301
Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering
Design and Analysis of the Technical Infrastructure for a
Self-Sufficient and Sustainable Intergalactic Hub
Author: Daniel Boluwatife Akinwumi
Supervisor: Prof. Massimiliano Vasile
A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment for the requirement of degree in
Master of Science in Advanced Mechanical Engineering with Aerospace.
2023
Word count: 14,917
Student No. 202254301
II
Copyright Declaration
This thesis is the result of the author’s original research. It has been composed by the author
and has not been previously submitted for examination which has led to the award of a
degree.
The copyright of this thesis belongs to the author under the terms of the United Kingdom
Copyright Acts as qualified by University of Strathclyde Regulation 3.50. Due
acknowledgement must always be made of the use of any material contained in, or derived
from, this thesis.
Signed: DANIEL BOLUWATIFE AKINWUMI. Date: 08/08/2023
Student No. 202254301
III
Abstract
This thesis examines the design and technical challenges of creating a viable and sustainable
long-term space habitat, specifically focusing on a conceptual design, the Intergalactic Hub
(I-HUB). As humanity stands on the precipice of a new era of space exploration, a
comprehensive understanding of the complexities of prolonged human habitation in outer
space is pivotal.
The study conducts an in-depth analysis of the key design parameters of I-HUB, including
advanced life support systems, artificial gravity, food production, habitat structural design,
and autonomous operations. It illuminates the critical aspects of these parameters and
elucidates the challenges each presents, such as efficient resource recycling, sustainable
energy provision, radiation protection, psychological well-being, and habitat resilience.
The research further identifies potential areas for future exploration and investigation
essential to advancing space habitat design. Emphasizing multidisciplinary design
optimization, the study proposes synergies across multiple disciplines to address these
challenges, including bioengineering, environmental science, nanotechnology, astrophysics,
sociology, and more.
Moreover, it offers impeccable recommendations to overcome these identified challenges,
integrating state-of-the-art technologies and innovative design principles. By integrating
forward technologies, leveraging AI-driven power management, harnessing artificial gravity,
and incorporating a human-centered design approach, this study provides a blueprint for
effectively addressing the critical needs of a self-sufficient and sustainable space habitat.
Through this detailed investigation, the thesis underscores the significance and potential
impact of pursuing research in these areas and their implications for sustainable human
spaceflight. It offers valuable insights into the broader objectives of space exploration and the
vision of transitioning humanity from mere space explorers to established denizens of the
cosmos.
Student No. 202254301
IV
Acknowledgements
I would like to convey my most profound appreciation to my supervisor, Prof. Massimiliano
Vasile, and my co-advisor, Dr. Christie Maddock, for their invaluable mentorship,
unwavering support, and consistent guidance throughout my research journey. I'm grateful to
the StrathAIS Cubesat team for their insightful feedback and collaborative spirit. My sincere
thanks also go to my colleagues and the Department of Mechanical and Aerospace
Engineering staff for fostering an environment conducive to growth, learning, and innovation.
To my family and friends, your constant encouragement, faith, and patience have been my
bedrock; I am immensely grateful. Concurrently with my MSc studies, I have successfully
submitted my MSc thesis and achieved a comprehensive professional certification in
"Architecture and Systems Engineering: Models and Methods to Manage Complex Systems,"
which positions me to implement my ideas within the real world.
Student No. 202254301
V
Table of Contents
Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... III
Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................... IV
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ VII
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................ VIII
List of Symbols and Abbreviations ............................................................................................... IX
1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 1
1.1. Background ........................................................................................................................... 1
1.2. Purpose and Objectives ....................................................................................................... 1
1.3. Significance and Value of the Research ............................................................................. 2
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW & METHODOLOGY ............................................................... 4
2.1. Literature Review ....................................................................................................................... 4
2.1.1. Design and Feasibility Studies of Similar Space Structures ................................................................ 4
2.1.2. Existing Technologies and Their Limitations ...................................................................................... 5
2.1.3. Innovations in Space Habitat Design ................................................................................................... 8
2.2. Methodology................................................................................................................................ 9
2.2.1. Defining Objectives and Requirements ................................................................................................ 9
2.2.2. Functional Analysis and Allocation ................................................................................................... 11
2.2.3. Trade-off Studies and Decision Making ............................................................................................. 13
3.0 FEASIBILITY, DESIGN AND SYSTEMS ..................................................................... 19
3.1. Feasibility Assessment .............................................................................................................. 19
3.1.1. Technical Feasibility .......................................................................................................................... 19
3.1.2. Programmatic Feasibility .................................................................................................................... 20
3.2. Environmental Assessment ...................................................................................................... 21
3.2.1. Proposed Location for The Intergalactic Hub .................................................................................... 21
3.2.2. Environmental Factors and Challenges .............................................................................................. 23
3.3. Design Requirements and Factors .......................................................................................... 23
3.3.1. Design Concept and Scalability .......................................................................................................... 24
3.3.2. Modular Configuration ....................................................................................................................... 27
3.4. Habitat Design .......................................................................................................................... 30
3.4.1. Living Quarters ................................................................................................................................... 30
3.4.2. Life Support Systems (ECLSS) .......................................................................................................... 32
3.4.3. Radiation Protection ........................................................................................................................... 33
3.4.4. Structures ............................................................................................................................................ 34
3.4.5. Induced Gravity .................................................................................................................................. 35
3.5. Systems and Infrastructures.................................................................................................... 36
3.5.1. Power and Thermal Systems .............................................................................................................. 36
3.5.2. Communication Systems .................................................................................................................... 37
3.5.3. Waste Management and Recycling Systems ...................................................................................... 38
4.0 SUSTAINABILITY, BUDGET, AND RISK ASSESSMENT ......................................... 40
4.1. Sustainability and Self-Sufficiency ......................................................................................... 40
4.1.1. Resource Generation and Recycling................................................................................................... 40
4.1.2. Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy ......................................................................................... 40
4.1.3. Food and Water Production ................................................................................................................ 41
Student No. 202254301
VI
4.2. Budget and Resource Allocation ............................................................................................. 42
4.2.1. Mass Budget ....................................................................................................................................... 43
4.2.2. Power Budget ..................................................................................................................................... 45
4.3. Risk and Concern Assessment................................................................................................. 46
4.3.1. Technical Concern .............................................................................................................................. 46
4.3.2. Risk Management Strategies .............................................................................................................. 47
5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORKS ...................................................................... 50
5.1. Key Findings ............................................................................................................................. 50
5.2. Recommendation for Overcoming Identified Challenges .................................................... 51
5.3. Potential Area for Future Research........................................................................................ 51
6.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 53
7.0 APPENDICES .................................................................................................................. 59
APPENDIX A .................................................................................................................................. 60
APPENDIX B ................................................................................................................................... 61
APPENDIX C .................................................................................................................................. 61
Student No. 202254301
VII
List of Figures
Figure 1: Radiation dose per astronaut from Mercury through ISS missions [19]. ................... 6
Figure 2: Fundamental ECLSS process functions [20].............................................................. 6
Figure 3: (Section A) Starship Exterior Structure, (Section B) Starship Payload
Configuration. .......................................................................................................................... 14
Figure 4: SMS within the SpaceX Starship payload bay. ........................................................ 19
Figure 5: Cost of space flight since1960 [48]. ......................................................................... 20
Figure 6: FPS of the I-HUB at Sun-Earth L2 point. ................................................................ 22
Figure 7: Fully deployed Telescopic Robotic Arm (TRA). ..................................................... 24
Figure 8: The single module structure SMS. ........................................................................... 25
Figure 9: Assembling the I-HUB from SMS to FPS. .............................................................. 26
Figure 10: Assembling the I-HUB from FPS to EPS. ............................................................. 26
Figure 11: The interior configuration of Alpha Module. ......................................................... 27
Figure 12: The interior configuration of Beta Module. ........................................................... 28
Figure 13: The interior configuration of Delta Module. .......................................................... 28
Figure 14: The interior configuration of Theta Module. .......................................................... 29
Figure 15: The interior configuration of Gamma Module. ...................................................... 29
Figure 16: The interior configuration of Omega Module ........................................................ 30
Figure 17: A diagram illustrating the living quarters of the Alpha Module. ........................... 31
Figure 18: A diagram illustrating the living quarters of the Omega Module. ......................... 32
Figure 19: Deployed photovoltaic cells for CSP generation system. ...................................... 36
Figure 20: SMS deployed thermal radiator. ............................................................................. 37
Figure 21: Fundamental relationships in a regenerative life support system [82]. .................. 39
Figure 22: The I-HUB's functional analysis and allocation tree. ............................................. 60
Student No. 202254301
VIII
List of Tables
Table 1: Objectives of the Intergalactic Hub. .......................................................................... 10
Table 2: High-Level Requirements of the Intergalactic Hub. .................................................. 11
Table 3: Functional analysis and allocation summary. ............................................................ 13
Table 4: Launch vehicle trade-off study. ................................................................................. 14
Table 5: Power generation & energy efficiency trade-off study.............................................. 15
Table 6: Life support system trade-off study. .......................................................................... 16
Table 7: Space agriculture trade-off study. .............................................................................. 17
Table 8: Propulsion system trade-off study. ............................................................................ 18
Table 9: Mass budget summary. .............................................................................................. 43
Table 10: I-HUB design constraint. ......................................................................................... 44
Table 11: The I-HUB subsystems power budget summary. .................................................... 45
Table 12: Risk management strategies for identified technical concerns. ............................... 49
Table 13: Power Analysis. ....................................................................................................... 61
Table 14: Power Analysis continuation. .................................................................................. 61
Student No. 202254301
IX
List of Symbols and Abbreviations
Abbreviations
I-HUB Intergalactic Hub
ECLSS Environmental Control and Life Support System
GCR Galactic Cosmic Radiation
PV Photovoltaic
ISS International Space Station
SPE Solar Particle Events
NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration
DSN Deep Space Network
CBM Common Berthing Mechanism
NDS NASA Docking Systems
SEP Solar Electric Propulsion
TRL Technology Readiness Level
CDMS Communication and Data Management System
GTO Geostationary Transfer Orbit
CSP Concentrated Solar Power
MELiSSA Micro-Ecological Life Support System Alternative
APH Advanced Plant Habitat
OSAM On-orbit Servicing, Assembly and Manufacturing
L-point Lagrange Point
TRA Telescopic Robotic Arm
EVA Extravehicular Activities
IDSS International Docking System Standard
SMS Single Module Structure
FPS Foundation Phase Structure
EPS Expansion Phase Structure
EMCS Environmental Monitoring and Control Systems
Student No. 202254301
1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background
As human species evolve through time, the cosmos above beckon us to explore, innovate, and
perhaps even colonize. The symbiotic relationship between man and the universe is as
undeniable as it is profound. The unfathomable depth of the cosmos holds both our origins
and our potential destinies, with the study of space serving as a testament to our relentless
human curiosity and our quest for knowledge. This curiosity has given rise to diverse fields
such as astronomy, astrophysics, and space science and technology, all seeking to unravel the
mysteries that lay beyond Earth.
Today, space exploration is no longer merely a testament to scientific prowess or a symbol of
national prestige. It represents a practical and pressing concern. The exponential growth in
human population, the increasing depletion of Earth's resources, and the looming threat of
environmental catastrophes have accelerated the need for viable off-world habitats. These
habitats are envisioned not just as temporary shelters or scientific outposts but as self-
sustaining and permanent residences – an "INTERGALACTIC HUB" for humanity. However,
establishing these off-world abodes poses significant design and engineering challenges
which encompasses aspects like life support systems, power generation, radiation protection,
and habitat design, among others.
The growing interest in space habitation is largely driven by advancements in space
technology, increasing understanding of human spaceflight challenges, and the potential for
untapped resources in outer space. The establishment of a fully functional, self-sustaining
space habitat presents an unprecedented opportunity for research, exploration, and potentially
even colonization. Hence, the significance of this research lies in its potential to contribute to
these evolving discussions and to shed light on the technical infrastructure required for such
an ambitious endeavour. It seeks to identify and analyse the key engineering challenges
related to creating an intergalactic hub and propose way to overcome them, thereby
contributing to the development roadmap or the creation of an intergalactic hub.
1.2. Purpose and Objectives
In this context, an intergalactic hub can be conceptualized as a self-sufficient and sustainable
space infrastructure intended to serve as a nerve center for human activities, research, and
exploration in the cosmos beyond Earth. Transcending the notion of a conventional space
station, an intergalactic hub would provide a permanent and fully functional living
environment capable of supporting prolonged human occupancy and propelling scientific
advancements.
Critical requirements must be addressed for the successful conceptualization, design, and
operation of the intergalactic hub (hereafter referred to as the I-HUB). These are tailored to
tackle the key challenges related to life support systems, power generation, radiation
protection, and habitat design associated with creating a sustainable and self-sufficient habitat
conducive to long-duration human occupancy and scientific exploration.
Student No. 202254301
2
I. Sustainability and Self-Sufficiency: The I-HUB must function in a self-sustaining
manner, minimizing dependency on external resources. This necessitates the
incorporation of advanced life support systems, efficient waste management, and
recycling mechanisms coupled with renewable energy sources to ensure its long-term
viability, thereby reducing the need for resource-intensive resupply missions.
II. Deployability and Robotic Assistance: The I-hub should exhibit deployability and
be amenable to an arrangement in space. This minimizes the requirement for direct
human intervention or spacewalks, enhancing operational efficiency and reducing
risks associated with extravehicular activities.
III. Modularity and Expandability: A modular architectural design is vital for the I-
HUB, facilitating future expansion and flexibility. Modular attachments, analogous to
neural links, would enable seamless integration of additional modules, allowing the I-
hub to adapt and grow according to evolving needs and missions. Additionally, the
capacity to deorbit or disconnect modules that have outlived their utility or require
maintenance would optimize resources and ensure efficient utilization of space.
IV. Long-Term Durability: The I-hub should be engineered to withstand the
inhospitable conditions of space, maintaining structural integrity for prolonged
durations. It must be capable of resisting radiation, micrometeoroids, thermal
fluctuations, and other environmental exigencies to ensure the safety and well-being
of its occupants and the reliability of its equipment.
V. Compatibility and Interconnectivity: The I-hub should seamlessly integrate with
existing and prospective space infrastructure, comprising docking capabilities for
visiting spacecraft and interconnectivity with other space habitats or exploration
vehicles. This would facilitate collaborative missions, resource sharing, and enhanced
scientific research opportunities.
By achieving these objectives, this research strives to contribute to developing an advanced
and sophisticated intergalactic hub, paving the way for future human exploration and
habitation of the cosmos.
1.3. Significance and Value of the Research
The significance of this research stems from the escalating global interest in space
exploration, the pressing need for sustainable space habitats, and the transformative potential
of an intergalactic hub for human civilization. Considering the growing challenges of
population growth, resource depletion, and environmental crises on Earth, pursuing the
possibilities of life beyond our planet is not simply a matter of scientific curiosity but a
strategic necessity. This research addresses this need by examining the engineering, technical,
and practical challenges associated with creating a self-sustaining I-HUB and proposing
innovative solutions.
This research's beneficiaries are extensive, including space agencies, private space
companies, scientists, engineers, policymakers, and indeed, all of humanity. The findings
could inform the planning and development of future space habitat design by providing a
comprehensive analysis of key considerations in the design and maintenance of an I-HUB.
Additionally, by identifying gaps in existing solutions, this study can spur technological
advancement in the field.
Student No. 202254301
3
Significantly, the research could drive progress in technology and sustainability strategies on
Earth. Solutions developed for space, such as those concerning renewable energy, waste
management, or life support systems, often find practical applications on Earth. For example,
technologies ensuring self-sufficiency in a space habitat could introduce innovative
sustainability approaches on Earth, potentially addressing issues such as energy scarcity,
waste management, and environmental conservation. Moreover, this research serves as a
comprehensive academic resource, enhancing the knowledge base in space engineering and
exploration. It can inspire future research by highlighting areas needing further exploration
and raising questions for subsequent investigations.
The research is organized into five main chapters following the introduction:
• Chapter 2, 'Literature Review & Methodology,' scrutinizes existing literature on
space habitats, engineering challenges, current technologies, and design concepts. It
also outlines the systems engineering methodology adapted in designing and
analyzing the I-HUB.
• Chapter 3, 'Feasibility, Design, and Systems,' conducts an in-depth feasibility
assessment, examining both technical and programmatic aspects. It evaluates potential
environmental factors and challenges at the proposed location for the I-hub and delves
into the design requirements and factors, including design concepts, scalability, and
modular configuration.
• Chapter 4, 'Sustainability, Budget, and Risk Assessment,' discusses the sustainability
and self-sufficiency of the I-hub, focusing on resource generation, recycling, energy
efficiency, and food and water production. It presents a comprehensive budget and
resource allocation assessment and investigates potential risks and concerns.
• Chapter 5, 'Conclusions and Future Works,' summarizes the key findings of the
research, provides recommendations for overcoming the identified challenges, and
proposes potential areas for future research.
By following this structure, this research ensures a comprehensive and cohesive exploration
of its subject matter, laying the foundation for continued research and practical advancements
in space habitation.
Student No. 202254301
4
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW & METHODOLOGY
2.1. Literature Review
Understanding and innovating upon the fundamental constructs of space habitation is
discussed in this section, which delves into the intricate layers that form the foundation of
space habitats, especially for prolonged missions like the intergalactic hub. Understanding
how past endeavors have set the stage for current developments begins with a closer look at
the historical context. Then explore the challenges faced in space habitation, emphasizing the
crucial need for groundbreaking solutions. To address these challenges, the section
subsequently introduces the latest innovations in space habitat design, shedding light on the
advancements that have the potential to reshape the future of space habitat designs. Together,
these sub-sections form a comprehensive narrative, tracing the evolution of space habitats
from their inception to their potential future, underscoring the interconnectedness of history,
challenges, and innovations.
2.1.1. Design and Feasibility Studies of Similar Space Structures
The exploration of the cosmos and the prospect of extended human habitation in space
necessitate a profound understanding of intricate technologies and systems. Such enduring
human habitation in space can be categorized into two principal domains. The first pertains to
living on planetary bodies, such as the Moon and Mars [1,2,3], while the second corresponds
to habitation in the open vacuum of space [4,5]. The focus of this research is geared towards
the latter.
A crucial component in realizing this ambitious endeavor is the engineering of efficient and
sustainable space structures [6]. Numerous studies have been conducted, offering detailed
designs of space structures with striking similarities to the proposed Intergalactic Hub (I-
HUB) concept. A critical review of these research endeavors provides invaluable insights and
outlines formidable challenges to overcome.
The design principles and challenges associated with non-planetary space habitats have been
thoroughly investigated, as exemplified by the deep space habitat research by Curley et al.
[7]. This study aimed to delineate the prerequisites, develop a system concept, and establish a
preliminary design for an Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) for a
deep space habitat capable of supporting a crew of four in a near-Earth orbit for 388 days.
The insights gleaned from this research could be of immense value to the I-HUB design,
particularly in developing life support systems suitable for deep space conditions.
Another key study sharing significant parallels with the I-HUB concept is "Design and
analysis of a growable artificial gravity space habitat" by Chen, M [8]. This research
demonstrated the potential for creating a space habitat that enables humans to reside in space
for extended durations. Crucial design principles extracted from this study include the
significance of sustainable design factors like artificial gravity, radiation protection,
sustainable agriculture, habitat growth capability, and economic value. These principles could
profoundly influence the design of the I-HUB. Additionally, this research highlights the
challenges inherent in developing expandable structures capable of supporting essential life
requirements, power needs, and reliable life support systems in the harsh environment of
space.
Student No. 202254301
5
Delving into planetary surface bases, the "Human exploration of Mars, design reference
architecture 5.0" study conducted by Drake, G [9] proposed a self-sustaining habitat capable
of housing a crew of six astronauts for 500 earth days. The concept of modular design
principles introduced in this research ensures efficient deployment, setup, and utilization of
the structure, which could influence the design strategy for the I-HUB. Furthermore, the
study underscores the necessity for effective ECLSS, given Mars' harsh conditions, thereby
emphasizing a crucial aspect of the I-HUB design.
Kasaboski's study on galactic cosmic radiation (GCR) in human space missions [10] is
noteworthy, given the critical role radiation protection plays in maintaining human life in
space. The paper discusses the biological effects of GCR and evaluates the effectiveness of
traditional and innovative shielding designs in various space environments. These insights
could guide the design and development of radiation protection for the I-HUB.
Lastly, the feasibility of using photovoltaic (PV) power for deep space missions was
investigated by Piszczor, M. [11]. The study argues that recent advances in solar cell
performance and the ongoing development of lightweight, high-power solar array technology
make PV a viable option for many missions beyond Earth's orbit. This insight holds
considerable significance for the I-HUB, as efficient and sustainable power generation
systems are integral to its design.
An array of design principles and feasibility studies related to space structures resembling the
I-HUB contribute to its potential realization. Key design considerations include self-
sufficiency, long-term sustainable habitation & agriculture, reliable life support systems,
robust power generation, expandable modular structures, and effective radiation protection.
The challenges identified in these studies – including developing life-support systems
suitable for the harsh conditions of space, minimizing process requirements, and achieving
sustainable power – will be further explored in subsequent sections of this literature review.
2.1.2. Existing Technologies and Their Limitations
The concept of space habitats has been an evolving endeavour since the launch of the first-
ever human habitation module in space, Salyut 1, in 1971 [12]. With advancements in space
technology, subsequent initiatives like the International Space Station (ISS), launched in 1998
[13], and the future Lunar Gateway project [14,15], exhibit progressive milestones towards a
sustainable space habitat. While these developments underscore capabilities, the current
technologies utilized in these space habitats carry inherent limitations. Understanding these
limitations is crucial for our ultimate objective – the creation of a self-sufficient and
sustainable intergalactic hub.
In space habitation, one cannot ignore the threat posed by radiation. Solar Particle Events
(SPE) and GCR poses significant risks to human health and electronics in space [18]. The
study by Kasaboski [10] outlines the effectiveness of various traditional and innovative
shielding designs in mitigating these risks. Despite the promising designs, the challenges of
providing sufficient radiation protection to safeguard human life in space remain significant.
This is particularly critical for long-term projects like the I-HUB, where the radiation dose
accumulates over time. The figure below depicts the radiation doses measure in millisievert
experienced by astronaut from Mercury through ISS missions.
Student No. 202254301
6
Figure 1: Radiation dose per astronaut from Mercury through ISS missions [19].
A critical technology employed in space habitats is the environmental control and life support
systems. The ECLSS creates and maintains life-supporting conditions within space habitats,
including providing breathable air, managing waste, and supplying water [16]. Perry et al.
outlined the technological challenges and constraints involved in atmosphere revitalization
for crewed space exploration [17]. Their study underscored the need to minimize the ECLSS
process's equipment mass, power, volume, and logistic requirements as space mission
durations increase. Significant challenges still need to be addressed despite the vast
operational knowledge at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA)
disposal. For example, achieving a robust and efficient cabin atmosphere revitalization
process that can sustainably support life in the hostile space environment over long durations
remains a challenge. Moreover, a unit operation approach to process technology, which
NASA advocates, demands significant energy and volume, which may not be viable on a
resource-limited project like the I-HUB [17]. The figure below illustrates a fundamental
partially closed-loop ECLSS process functions adapted to current space habitat such as the
ISS.
Figure 2: Fundamental ECLSS process functions [20].
Furthermore, space habitats necessitate an effective power generation system. Piszczor et al.
examined the use of photovoltaics in powering deep space missions [11]. Although their
Student No. 202254301
7
study deemed PV a feasible option for many missions beyond Earth orbits due to recent
advances in solar cell performance and solar array technology, several limitations were noted.
Solar arrays' efficiency decreases further from the sun, rendering them less effective in deep
space missions. In addition, power management in the inner solar system becomes a critical
issue when the power generated from the solar array exceeds the spacecraft's requirements.
Therefore, while PV systems may be feasible, there may be better solutions for a project like
the I-HUB, where the distances involved may hamper solar power generation.
Simulating Earth-like gravity, or induced gravity, is an essential technology for maintaining
human physiological and psychological wellbeing over long periods in space [21]. The theory
of centrifugal forces creating an artificial gravity environment has been widely explored [22].
However, the engineering challenges of maintaining a rotating spacecraft are significant and
can lead to complications in spacecraft control and stability.
Sustainable agriculture in space is crucial for long-term missions. While initiatives like the
Vegetable Production System (Veggie) onboard the ISS represent significant strides, this
science is still in its infancy. Challenges include resource-intensive operations, disease
control, and the need for continuous renewal of growth media [23].
Expandable habitats, which can be compactly launched and expanded once in space, provide
larger living areas for astronauts. However, the preservation of structural integrity and
protection from space debris and radiation are notable challenges.
Space communication systems represent another crucial technology, enabling data
transmission between the space habitat and Earth. The Deep Space Network (DSN) currently
provides this capability. However, the increasing distance from Earth introduces delays in
communication and requires increased power for data transmission, a significant limitation
for deep space missions [24].
ISS CASE STUDY
The international space station, representing a significant space habitation program spanning
over two decades, provides invaluable insights into the strengths and weaknesses of existing
technologies. The ISS faced design and operational challenges such as the complexities of
maintenance and repair in a harsh space environment, reliance on Earth for supplies and spare
parts, and the need for frequent crew rotations due to the long-term effects of microgravity
and radiation on human health [25].
While the existing technologies form a substantial foundation for the I-HUB's design,
construction, and operation, they bring along inherent limitations. Addressing these
limitations is crucial in developing a self-sufficient and sustainable intergalactic hub. This
requirement accentuates the need for innovation to navigate these constraints and to develop
resilient and sustainable solutions that can withstand the austere conditions of space over
extended periods.
By evaluating existing technologies and their limitations, the needs and requirements for a
feasible intergalactic hub unveil itself. However, realizing the vision of such an ambitious
project is about more than just overcoming the limitations but pushing the boundaries of what
is currently know and can do. The following section will therefore delve into innovations in
space habitat design, highlighting advancements and novel concepts poised to redefine
innovative approach to space habitation.
Student No. 202254301
8
2.1.3. Innovations in Space Habitat Design
Indeed, the limitations evident in current space habitat technologies underscore the
importance of continuous innovation. A sustainable and self-sufficient approach to space
habitation compels a focus on novel advancements and innovations. This section discusses
emerging concepts, materials, and construction techniques, which bear the potential to elevate
the design and viability of the proposed I-HUB significantly.
i. Docking Technologies: Docking technologies form the bedrock of constructing and
expanding any space habitat. The advent of new systems, such as the Common
Berthing Mechanism (CBM) and NASA Docking Systems (NDS), has revolutionized
the docking process. Offering safe and reliable interfaces for different habitat
modules, these innovations underpin the seamless expansion and maintenance of
space habitats [26,27].
ii. Modular Robotic Arms: Modular robotic arms contribute significantly to the
assembly, maintenance, and operational functionality of space habitats. Their
precision, flexibility, and interchangeable characteristics cater to various
requirements, further facilitating the execution of complex tasks [28].
iii. Inflatable Structures: A novel approach to maximize living and working spaces
aboard space habitats involves utilizing inflatable structures. Pioneered by companies
such as Bigelow Aerospace, these modules are lightweight and compact during launch
and provide spacious environments once inflated in space [29].
iv. 3D Printing: As a ground-breaking technology, 3D printing has been recognized for
its potential in creating components in-situ, using materials found in the space
environment [30, 31]. This technique could drastically reduce the cost and resources
associated with launching materials from Earth.
v. Biomimicry: Applying lessons learned from nature, biomimicry has been explored
for space habitat design, potentially optimizing efficiency and enhancing life-support
systems [32]. Such approaches could significantly improve long-term habitability by
emulating successful adaptations seen in Earth’s ecosystems.
vi. Vertical Farming and Food Production: Vertical farming, hydroponics, and
aeroponics techniques are being explored to provide a sustainable and reliable food
supply in space habitats, optimizing limited space and providing a sustainable source
of fresh produce. This is coupled with advancements in synthetic biology that could
further revolutionize space agriculture [33].
vii. Human-Centered Design: Recent designs of space habitats emphasize the
importance of considering human psychological and physiological needs. Elements
such as lighting, colour, personal space, recreational areas, and window placement for
external views have been recognized as crucial for the productivity and well-being of
inhabitants [34].
viii. Augmented Reality (AR) and Virtual Reality (VR): Augmented reality (AR) and
virtual reality (VR) technologies are finding applications in space habitat design.
These immersive technologies can assist in habitat layout planning, crew training,
maintenance procedures, and the teleoperation of robots. AR and VR interfaces
enhance crew productivity, reduce errors, and improve situational awareness in the
confined environment of a space habitat [35].
ix. Propulsion Systems: Propulsion technologies, particularly Solar Electric Propulsion
(SEP) systems and other high Technology Readiness Level (TRL) systems, promise
to enhance space habitats' mobility and resource efficiency. These advances open new
possibilities for the location and movement of habitats, which are fundamental aspects
of the feasibility of an intergalactic hub.
Student No. 202254301
9
The success of any space mission is predicated on the symbiotic relationship between the
space habitat design and the launch vehicle. This fundamental connection is established from
the inception of the design process and continues to be pivotal throughout the launch and
deployment phases. Launch vehicles are of paramount importance in space missions, serving
as the primary transport mechanism for payloads, which include space habitats, to space. The
task of launching and delivering sizeable structures into orbit poses significant challenges,
often surpassing the payload capacities of existing launch vehicles. This limitation has in turn
influenced space habitat design, promoting the development of compact, lightweight, and
modular structures [36]. Additionally, payload capacity is not the only essential characteristic
of a launch vehicle; considerations such as reusability and cost-effectiveness are becoming
increasingly crucial in launch vehicle design and selection. Selecting an appropriate launch
vehicle entails meticulously analysing mission requirements and habitat design constraints.
The chosen launch vehicle must transport the space habitat to space and support specific
mission parameters such as destination, mission duration, and potential follow-up phases
such as expansion or resupply [37].
Undeniably, the synergy between launch vehicles and space habitat design is instrumental for
the feasibility and success of space missions. As technological advancements push the
boundaries of what is possible, this synergy will continue to play a critical role in dictating
the future of space habitation and ensuring mission sustainability. Subsequent section
examines the methodology adapted in designing and analysing the I-HUB approach. This will
cover the various trade-offs involved in launch vehicle selection and how these shape the
design of the I-HUB. This methodology will provide a structured framework to navigate the
complexity of designing a space habitat, ensuring that every aspect is methodically addressed,
and synergistic relationships are optimally exploited.
2.2. Methodology
This section examines the systems engineering methodology adapted in designing and
analysing the I-HUB. Covering the objectives and requirements, various trade-offs aiding the
decisions made in designing the I-HUB. This methodology will provide a structured
framework to navigate the complexity of designing a space habitat, ensuring that every aspect
is methodically addressed, and synergistic relationships are optimally exploited.
2.2.1. Defining Objectives and Requirements
Building on exploring space habitat design innovations detailed in preceding section, the core
of the I-HUB design process is further explored– establishing clear objectives and
requirements. This understanding forms the bedrock of any system engineering methodology
and paves the way for the subsequent design and selection phases.
The objectives of the I-HUB design span five significant scopes, as outlined in the table
below. Primarily, the design seeks to establish a self-sustaining and habitable space
environment for long-term human habitation, which is intrinsically tied to the overarching
objective of promoting sustainable practices in space exploration. This goal underscores the
necessity of the I-HUB being a closed-loop system where resource generation, waste
management, and life support systems operate synergistically.
Student No. 202254301
10
Objective
Description
Objective 1
Establish a self-sustaining and habitable space environment for long-
term human habitation.
Objective 2
Conduct scientific research, exploration, and technological
advancements in outer space.
Objective 3
Promote space tourism and commercial activities, contributing to the
growth of the industry.
Objective 4
Enable international collaboration and cooperation in space
exploration and habitation.
Objective 5
Develop sustainable technologies and practices for resource utilization
and conservation.
Table 1: Objectives of the Intergalactic Hub.
These objectives have defined a comprehensive set of high-level requirements for the I-HUB
design process (see Table 2 below). These requirements were categorized into functional,
operational, and technical aspects, each with unique priorities. [38]. Functionally, the I-HUB
must be self-sufficient and provide a comfortable and safe living environment. Operationally,
the I-HUB should promote sustainability and prioritize safety and emergency response.
Technically, the design must ensure reliability and redundancy, adaptability and
expandability, and integration and interoperability. Prioritization was also factored into the
requirement definition, guided by scientific objectives, cost implications, and human factors
[39].
Req-ID
Requirement
Description
Category
Priority
RQ-001
Self-
sufficiency
The intergalactic hub shall be self-
sufficient in resource generation,
waste management, and life
support systems.
Functional
High
RQ-002
Sustainability
The intergalactic hub shall
minimize environmental impact,
promote energy efficiency, and
utilize renewable resources.
Operational
High
RQ-003
Habitability
The intergalactic hub shall provide
a comfortable and safe living
environment for long-term
habitation, considering factors such
as gravity simulation, air quality
control, and temperature
regulation.
Functional
High
RQ-004
Reliability and
Redundancy
Critical systems and components
of the intergalactic hub must
demonstrate high reliability, and
redundant measures should be
implemented to ensure continuous
operation of essential functions.
Technical
High
Student No. 202254301
11
RQ-005
Adaptability
and
Expandability
The intergalactic hub shall be
designed to accommodate future
growth, technological
advancements, and changing
needs, using modular design
principles and scalability.
Technical
Medium
RQ-006
Safety and
Emergency
Response
The intergalactic hub shall
prioritize safety measures,
including risk assessment,
contingency planning, emergency
protocols, and provision of medical
facilities.
Operational
High
RQ-007
Integration and
Interoperability
The intergalactic hub should
ensure seamless integration and
interoperability among its systems
and components, adhering to
communication protocols, data
exchange standards, and
compatibility with external
systems.
Technical
High
Table 2: High-Level Requirements of the Intergalactic Hub.
These objectives and requirements collectively serve as a roadmap for the I-HUB design,
informing every decision and evaluation in the subsequent design and selection process.
Venturing further into this process, these guiding elements will ensure that the design of the
I-HUB remains aligned with its overarching objectives, laying a solid foundation for the
development of a self-sufficient, sustainable, and innovative space habitat.
2.2.2. Functional Analysis and Allocation
In the development of I-HUB’s design, the functional analysis and allocation is a process that
dissects the previously established requirements into functional components. This process
aims to align specific functionalities with the broader objectives and to ensure the optimal
distribution of these functionalities within the system, thereby enhancing the principle of
coherence and integrity in the design and operation of I-HUB.
The technique of functional analysis and allocation is an intrinsic methodology in systems
engineering. It facilitates the decomposition of overarching system objectives into smaller,
manageable functions. These functions are then strategically allocated to different
components or subsystems within the I-HUB. This allocation not only provides clarity on
each system component's role but also elucidates their interdependencies.
An in-depth functional analysis was carried out to identify the key functions and capabilities
required for the intergalactic hub. Each identified function was then carefully allocated to
different subsystems within the hub, ensuring that every component contributes effectively to
achieving the overall objectives of I-HUB. For instance, the task of enabling communication
with Earth, inhabitants, and other space assets and managing data transmission and storage
was allocated to the Communication and Data Management System (CDMS). To fulfil its
function, this subsystem integrates elements like communication antennas, transceivers, data
processing units, and more.
Student No. 202254301
12
The functional allocation process considers the intricate interdependencies and interactions
between different subsystems. This comprehensive analysis ensures that the functional
requirements are appropriately allocated and coordinated, resulting in a system where all
components work in accord to achieve the overall objectives of the I-HUB.
Adopting the functional analysis and allocation approach, a detailed architecture for the I-
HUB is illustrated in the functional analysis and allocation tree (refer to Appendix A), which
ensures the design meets its objectives. It acknowledges the need for self-sufficiency,
sustainability, and innovation in space habitats. The table below provides a succinct summary
of the functional analysis and allocation:
Subsystem
Function
Elements
Life Support
System (LSS)
Ensure the well-being and
survival of inhabitants by
providing essential life
support services.
Atmospheric Control System,
Water Management System,
Temperature and Humidity
Regulation, Radiation Shielding,
Food Production System,
Recycling Systems
Power and Energy
System (PES)
Provide reliable and
sustainable power supply for
all I-HUB operations.
Solar Panels, Energy Storage
Systems, Power Distribution and
Management, Power Conversion
and Conditioning, Energy
Efficiency Measures, Backup
Power Sources
Habitat Structure
and Design
Provide a safe and habitable
environment for inhabitants.
Structural Integrity, Living
Quarters, Workspaces, Exercise
Facilities, Space Commercial
Hotel/Monuments, Common
Areas, Storage Areas, Interior
Layout Design
Mechanism &
Robotic System
Enable assembly,
maintenance, expandability,
and docking within the I-
HUB.
Telescopic Robotic Arm, Docking
Technology, Mechanical
Mechanisms
Communication
and Data
Management
System (CDMS)
Enable communication with
Earth, inhabitants, and other
space assets, and manage data
transmission and storage.
Communication Antennas,
Transceivers, Data Processing
Units, Networking Infrastructure,
Data Encryption and Security
Measures, Mission Control
Interfaces, Autonomous Decision-
making Component
Student No. 202254301
13
Environmental
Monitoring and
Control System
(EMCS)
Monitor and maintain optimal
environmental conditions
within the I-HUB.
Temperature and Humidity
Sensors, Air Quality Monitoring,
Warning Systems
Navigation and
Guidance System
(NGS)
Provide accurate positioning,
navigation, and guidance for
the I-HUB.
Autonomous Navigation Systems,
Inertial Measurement Units,
Attitude Control Systems,
Trajectory Planning Algorithms
Waste Management
and Recycling
System (WMRS)
Efficiently manage waste
disposal and recycling to
ensure sustainability and
resource utilization.
Waste Collection Systems,
Composting Systems, Water
Recycling and Purification,
Closed-Loop Resource
Management
Safety and Security
System
Ensure the safety and security
of inhabitants, assets, and
operations within the I-HUB.
Fire Detection and Suppression
Systems, Emergency Response
Protocols, Security Monitoring
Systems, Access Control Measures
Science and
Research
Subsystem
Support scientific research
and experimentation
conducted within the I-HUB.
Laboratory Facilities, Research
Equipment, Data Collection and
Analysis Systems, Medical
Facilities
Table 3: Functional analysis and allocation summary.
With a firm grasp on the functionalities and their allocation to various subsystems, the I-
HUB's design process is set on a clear path toward the vision of a self-sufficient, sustainable,
and innovative space habitat. Subsequent section will utilize this functional allocation to
explore various system design choices and make informed decisions to refine further and
optimize the I-HUB design.
2.2.3. Trade-off Studies and Decision Making
Proceeding from the functional analysis, thorough trade-off studies is necessary in guiding
the selection of specific technologies and methodologies that form the backbone of the I-
HUB's robust design and architectural decisions. These studies form the root of balancing
feasibility, cost, safety, sustainability, and innovation potential. They systematically compare
multiple design alternatives with unique strengths and weaknesses, pinpointing the most
suitable solution for I-HUB. The decision-making process embedded within these trade-off
studies involves quantifying these parameters using decision matrices and subsequent ranking
of the options. Focusing on the primary design drivers, each one underwent a comprehensive
trade-off study, the results of which are succinctly summarized below.
The SpaceX Starship emerges as the top choice for the I-HUB's launch vehicle, attributed to
its unparalleled payload capacity, reusable design, and cost-effectiveness. Starship's
expansive payload bay provides the needed flexibility, permitting the construction of a
voluminous habitable module, thus paving the way for sustainable habitation in outer space.
Student No. 202254301
14
Furthermore, Starship's capability to launch substantial mass to Geostationary Transfer Orbit
(GTO) is a key criterion underpinning its selection as the launch vehicle.
Figure 3: (Section A) Starship Exterior Structure, (Section B) Starship Payload Configuration.
The table below provides a summary of the trade-off study conducted for the selection
process for the launch vehicle.
Funding
Status
Producer
Country
Vehicle
name
Payload
to GTO
(mT)
Fairing
diamete
r(m)
Success
rate
Private
Operational
SpaceX
USA
Falcon
Heavy
26.7
5.2
100%
Private
Under-
development
SpaceX
USA
Starshi
p
100
9
0%
Private
Under-
development
Blue
Origin
USA
New
Glenn
13.6
7
0%
Governm
ent
Under-
development
ULA
USA
Vulcan
14.5
5.4
0%
Governm
ent
Under-
development
Arianespa
ce
Europe
(ESA)
Ariane
6
11.5
5.4
0%
Table 4: Launch vehicle trade-off study.
To secure a sustainable and efficient energy supply for the I-HUB, a hybrid power system
intertwining Concentrated Solar Power (CSP) and fusion reactors has been chosen. CSP
systems, characterized by scalability and high energy efficiency, benefit from mature
technology status, making them ideal for prolonged missions. Though still under
development, Fusion reactors present a future of extraordinarily high energy efficiency and
Student No. 202254301
15
longevity. The integration of these systems ensures a continuous power supply. It introduces
a robust fail-safe mechanism. The table below summarizes the trade-off study on power
generation and energy efficiency.
Power
Generation
Technology
Status
Efficiency
Scalability
Lifespan
(years)
Drawbacks
Multi-Junction
Solar Cells
Mature
High (up to
40%)
Moderate
15-30
Expensive,
performance
degrades in
radiation
Thin Film Solar
Cells
Mature
Moderate
(around 20%)
High
10-15
Lower efficiency,
performance
degrades in
radiation
Concentrated
Solar Power
Mature
High (up to
60% in ideal
conditions)
Moderate
20-25
Requires large
surface area, less
effective in low
sunlight conditions
Radioisotope
Thermoelectric
Generators
(RTGs)
Mature
Low (around
5%)
Low
25-30
Radioactive,
limited scalability,
low power density
Nuclear Fission
Reactors
Under -
Develop
ment
High (30-
40%)
Low
30-40
Requires heavy
radiation shielding,
complex heat
dissipation systems
Fusion Reactors
Concept
ual
Very High
(50-70%
estimated)
High
30-50
Technology not yet
mature, very
complex systems
Table 5: Power generation & energy efficiency trade-off study.
The life support system employs a hybrid life support system due to its remarkable potential
for near-complete resource recycling and high efficiency. It synergizes the reliability of
physicochemical systems like NASA's ECLSS with the sustainability of bioregenerative
systems such as ESA's MELiSSA. This system guarantees a continuous supply of fresh air,
efficient CO2 removal, and maintains temperature and humidity levels optimally, fostering a
comfortable environment for inhabitants (refer to Table 6).
LSS Technology
Status
Efficiency
Scalability
Life
Span
Drawbacks
NASA's ECLSS
Mature
Moderate
High
10-15
years
Requires regular supply
of some consumables,
waste management
systems
MELiSSA
Under
Developme
nt
High
Moderate
15-20
years
Still in testing phase,
complex microbial
management
Student No. 202254301
16
Bio-regenerative
Life Support
Systems (BLSS)
Conceptual
High
High
20-30
years
Complexity in
maintaining ecological
balance, requires
substantial volume and
weight
Physicochemical
Systems
Mature
Low
High
10-15
years
High energy
consumption, requires
regular supply of some
consumables
Hybrid Life
Support Systems
Under
Developme
nt
High
High
15-25
years
Best elements of other
systems, but
complexity in
integrating different
systems
Table 6: Life support system trade-off study.
The I-HUB adopts a hybrid approach to space agriculture by integrating Hydroponics and
Aeroponics with an Advanced Plant Habitat (APH). This system amalgamates the benefits of
soil-less cultivation methods (efficient resource utilization and high yield) with the
environmental parameter control enabled by APH. It ensures a steady fresh food supply,
contributes to life support through 𝑂2 production and 𝐶𝑂2 absorption, and fosters
psychological benefits for inhabitants (refer to Table 7).
Space
Agriculture
Technology
Brief Description
Advantages
Disadvantages
Technology
Readiness
Level (TRL)
NASA's
Vegetable
Production
System
(Veggie)
A deployable plant
growth unit capable
of producing salad-
type crops to provide
inhabitants with a
fresh food source
and to offer
psychological
benefits
Established and
tested in space,
psychological
benefits for
astronauts,
contributes to life
support through
CO2
consumption and
O2 production
Limited to
certain types of
crops, possible
microbial
contamination
issues
9 (flight
proven)
Bio-
regenerative
Life Support
System (BLSS)
A system where
biological processes
of plants are used to
support life by
providing food,
regenerating air, and
recycling water and
waste
Fully
regenerative,
potential for wide
variety of crops,
contributes to life
support
High
complexity,
maintenance
requirements,
energy
consumption
4
(components
and/or
breadboard
validation in
laboratory
environment)
Advanced
Plant Habitat
(APH)
Fully enclosed,
controlled
environment for
plant growth studies,
equipped with
sensors to monitor
High control of
environmental
parameters,
advanced
monitoring
capabilities
Limited growth
volume, high
complexity,
energy
consumption
6
(system/subs
ystem model
or prototype
demonstratio
n in a
Student No. 202254301
17
plant growth and
environmental
conditions
relevant
environment)
Hydroponics
and
Aeroponics
Soil-less agriculture
techniques where
plants are grown in
nutrient-rich water
(hydroponics) or by
misting the roots
with nutrient
solution (aeroponics)
Efficient use of
resources, high
yield, reduced
microbial issues
Requires
nutrient supply,
potential system
failure risks,
energy
consumption
9 (for Earth-
based
applications)
, 6 (for space
applications)
Algae
Photobioreacto
rs
Systems that
cultivate algae for
food and oxygen
production, and CO2
absorption
High
productivity,
contributes to life
support, potential
for biofuel
production
Control and
contamination
issues,
unpalatability
of algae for
some people,
energy
consumption
4
(components
and/or
breadboard
validation in
laboratory
environment)
Table 7: Space agriculture trade-off study.
The I-HUB employs SEP for its propulsion system due to its high specific impulse, fuel
efficiency, and sustainability - drawing energy from the Sun. However, it should be noted
that this system's effectiveness diminishes with increasing distance from the Sun (refer to
Table 8).
Propulsion
Technology
Brief Description
Advantages
Disadvantages
Technology
Readiness
Level (TRL)
Chemical
Propulsion
Propulsion achieved
by the reaction of
chemical propellants
High thrust,
mature
technology,
relatively simple
Lower specific
impulse, requires
significant fuel
volume, potential
hazards associated
with handling
chemical propellants
9 (flight
proven)
Ion
Propulsion
Propulsion method
that generates thrust
by accelerating ions
High specific
impulse, fuel
efficiency,
longer
operational life
Low thrust levels,
high power
requirements,
complex power and
thermal management
9 (flight
proven)
Hall
Thrusters
A type of ion
thruster where the
propellant is
accelerated by an
electric field
High specific
impulse, fuel
efficiency,
longer
operational life
Lower thrust levels
compared to
chemical propulsion,
high power
requirements, wear
and lifetime issues
9 (flight
proven)
Student No. 202254301
18
Solar
Electric
Propulsion
Propulsion method
that uses electricity
from solar panels to
ionize and accelerate
propellant
High specific
impulse, fuel
efficiency,
sustainability as
it relies on the
sun
Lower thrust levels,
dependent on
distance to the sun,
solar array size and
mass could be
significant
9 (flight
proven)
VASIMR
(Variable
Specific
Impulse
Magnetoplas
ma Rocket)
Electrothermal
thruster that uses
radio waves to ionize
a propellant into
plasma
High specific
impulse,
adaptable thrust
levels and
power
consumption,
potentially long
operational life
Not yet proven in
space, high power
requirements,
complex cooling
requirements
4 (component
and/or
breadboard
validation in
laboratory
environment)
Nuclear
Propulsion
Propulsion method
that uses a nuclear
reactor to generate
thrust, either directly
(nuclear thermal
propulsion) or by
generating electricity
for an electric
propulsion system
(nuclear electric
propulsion)
High specific
impulse, can
operate
independently of
the sun,
potentially long
operational life
High complexity,
safety and regulatory
issues, significant
research and
development needed
3 (analytical
and
experimental
critical
function
and/or
characteristic
proof of
concept)
Table 8: Propulsion system trade-off study.
It is important to discern between vital design decisions and architectural decisions. Design
decisions focus predominantly on the selection and optimization of individual systems. These
systems must perform exceptionally in their isolated functions, such as ensuring life support,
power, communication, and so on. Architectural decisions, on the contrary, deal with the
intricate interplay between these systems and the I-HUB's overarching structure. They
emphasize system integration, modularity, redundancy, human-centered design, and
interoperability, ensuring the I-HUB functions not just as a collection of individual systems,
but as a seamless, holistic entity.
Student No. 202254301
19
3.0 FEASIBILITY, DESIGN AND SYSTEMS
3.1. Feasibility Assessment
Having firmly established the theoretical underpinnings space habitat design, this chapter will
delve into the intricate specifics of the project. Initiating this process is scrutinizing the
technical and programmatic feasibility of the design solutions and their implementation for
the proposed I-HUB.
3.1.1. Technical Feasibility
The essence of any successful engineering endeavour lies in its technical viability. When
contemplating an initiative as ambitious as the I-HUB, assessing the technical feasibility
forms the cornerstone of the design [40].
Considering the design of the I-HUB, the need to assess the readiness and compatibility of
the technologies and systems involved is crucial. Given the advancements in space
technology over the past few decades, the proposed I-HUB is grounded in existing
technology and developmental trends. The design involves subsystems such as life support,
power generation, and propulsion, which are backed by substantial research and technology
maturation.
For instance, the launch vehicle choice, the SpaceX Starship, is recognized for its remarkable
payload capacity, reusable design, and cost-effectiveness [41]. Its significant payload bay
offers the adaptability needed for the design of large-volume habitable modules. Similarly,
the hybrid power system, which amalgamates CSP and fusion reactors, benefits from current
advancements in CSP and promising research in fusion energy [42].
Figure 4: SMS within the SpaceX Starship payload bay.
Student No. 202254301
20
The integration of optimal sub-systems with high TRL forming the bedrock of the design,
also underpins the hub’s technical feasibility. Much of the technology adopted has been
effectively demonstrated on the ISS, exhibiting strong performance, with lessons learned to
enhance these technologies [43]. However, a key technical challenge is the integration of
these systems. Each subsystem must perform its intended function and work in accordance
with other systems. Therefore, the I-HUB's technical feasibility hinges on successfully
integrating these subsystems [44].
3.1.2. Programmatic Feasibility
In parallel with technical feasibility, the programmatic feasibility—encompassing cost,
schedule, resources, and management—is an equally vital assessment to the I-HUB's
viability.
Cost has always been a significant consideration in space exploration. However, this trend
has been dramatically altered by the emergence of commercial space companies. SpaceX, for
instance, has revolutionized the cost paradigm of launching payloads into space. Since 2000,
SpaceX's reusable rockets have reduced the cost per kilogram of launch from approximately
$18,000 to a projected $200 per kilogram for the Starship. This drastic reduction reshapes the
economic landscape of space exploration, making the I-HUB more financially feasible.
Further, the costs can be effectively managed by strategically incorporating international
partnerships and public-private alliances. This approach leverages shared financial burden
and a diversified resource base.
Figure 5: Cost of space flight since1960 [48].
Student No. 202254301
21
While confrontational, the schedule for the I-HUB remains within the realm of possibility, by
adopting modular design and progressive construction techniques like in-orbit assembly.
Adopting a phased approach, the I-HUB construction is allowed to grow organically—initial
deployment, followed by systematic expansion and upgrades, effectively managing risks and
uncertainties associated with space habitat deployment.
To Address resources, both human and material aspects are considered. The increase of
professionals specialized in space-related fields and the leverage of autonomous and robotic
systems for in-orbit assembly help meet human resource demands. On the material front,
resources—particularly for in-space manufacturing and construction—can be obtained using
on-orbit servicing, assembly, and manufacturing (OSAM) technologies [45, 46].
Lastly, effective project management strategies are integral to the I-HUB's successful
implementation. Strategies encompass effective stakeholder coordination, robust risk
management, and a clear organizational structure [47]. Through these, the project's
programmatic feasibility is enhanced, effectively navigating the complexities associated with
multi-faceted space projects.
The proposed I-HUB presents a high degree of both technical and programmatic feasibility.
Careful selection of technologies, innovative design principles, and judicious programmatic
planning converge to affirm the viability of the I-HUB. Having explored the I-HUB's
feasibility, the environmental consideration for the I-HUB’s design becomes apparent.
Subsequent section delves into the proposed location for the Intergalactic Hub and the
environmental factors and challenges that may arise.
3.2. Environmental Assessment
A crucial aspect of the I-HUB's blueprint is grasping its potential placement and the complex
environmental factors surrounding it. This section explores the reasoning behind the chosen
location, highlighting its inherent advantages. It then delves into thoroughly examining the
environmental challenges specific to this location. It outlines solutions designed to guarantee
the I-HUB's durability and the safety of its residents.
3.2.1. Proposed Location for The Intergalactic Hub
The location of the I-HUB represents a critical determinant of the project's technical
challenges, overall feasibility, and potential for success. After meticulous evaluation, the
preferred choice for the I-HUB location is a stable Lagrange point (L-point) in the solar
system—specifically, the Sun-Earth L2 point, which lies on the line defined by the Earth and
the Sun, located approximately 1.5 million kilometers from Earth in the direction opposite to
the Sun. This location, and other Lagrange points, have special gravitational properties that
make them unique compared to other vicinity in space.
Student No. 202254301
22
Figure 6: FPS of the I-HUB at Sun-Earth L2 point.
The rationale behind the choice of the Sun-Earth L2 stems from several strategic advantages,
creating an optimal alignment with the overarching goals of the I-HUB:
i. Stable orbital position: The L2 point presents a gravitational equilibrium that allows
the I-HUB to maintain its position with minimal energy expenditure for station-
keeping. This stability is critical for long-duration space missions and has significant
implications for system design and operations.
ii. Gateway to deep space missions: The proximity of the L2 point to Earth makes it a
strategic location for staging both crewed and uncrewed missions to the Moon, Mars,
and beyond. It has the potential to serve as a refuelling and resupply station, thereby
significantly reducing the overall mass and cost of interplanetary missions [49].
iii. Space tourism: The L2 point offers a unique vantage point. Given its proximity to
Earth, the I-HUB at L2 could provide unprecedented views of the cosmos, attracting
space tourists searching for a once-in-a-lifetime experience [50].
iv. Research platform: The L2 point presents an unobstructed panorama of the universe,
making it an excellent location for a variety of scientific research, including
astronomy, astrophysics, and space weather studies.
v. Unique from Other Celestial L2 Points: Each two-body system (like Earth-Sun,
Earth-Moon, or Jupiter-Sun) has its own set of Lagrange points. The properties and
benefits of the Sun-Earth L2 might differ from, the Earth-Moon L2. For instance, the
Earth-Moon L2 would offer a unique vantage point for observing the far side of the
Moon.
By strategically positioning the I-HUB at the L2 point, several technical challenges can be
addressed and mitigated while leveraging the unique benefits of this location. This choice of
location provides a clear research focus on specific design requirements and technological
solutions tailored to the L2 environment.
Student No. 202254301
23
Despite these benefits, the chosen location also poses unique challenges. For instance,
communication delays and thermal management are issues that must be addressed due to the
greater distance from Earth. However, targeted technological developments and systems
engineering approaches can effectively manage these challenges.
3.2.2. Environmental Factors and Challenges
While the L2 point offers numerous advantages as the proposed site for the I-HUB, it also
presents environmental challenges and hazards, crucial among them being radiation,
microgravity, vacuum, temperature extremes, space debris, and micrometeorites.
i. Radiation: Although Earth's bulk shields the I-HUB from some solar radiation,
cosmic rays originating from interstellar space present a significant radiation risk.
Long-term exposure to cosmic radiation can severely impact humans, including
increased risk of cancer and damage to the central nervous system [51, 52]. Therefore,
the I-HUB design should incorporate effective radiation shielding and adopt
preventive measures to safeguard its inhabitants.
ii. Microgravity: Long-term exposure to microgravity conditions can lead to various
health issues, including bone loss, muscle atrophy, and vision changes.
Countermeasures such as artificial gravity, regular exercise regimes, and dietary
modifications may be needed.
iii. Space debris and Micrometeorites: The risk of impact with space debris and
micrometeorites poses a considerable threat to the I-HUB. Advanced tracking systems
and shielding technologies will protect the hub and its inhabitants [53].
iv. Temperature Extremes and Vacuum: The extreme temperatures and vacuum
conditions in space can pose challenges for materials and systems used in the I-HUB.
Suitable materials and design principles must be used to ensure the I-HUB's structural
integrity and internal habitability [54].
An in-depth understanding of these environmental factors and challenges is paramount for the
I-HUB's successful design, construction, and operation. By implementing appropriate
countermeasures and innovative technologies, these risks can be mitigated, ensuring the
safety and well-being of the I-HUB's inhabitants and the robustness of its structures and
systems.
3.3. Design Requirements and Factors
Proceeding into the hub's innovative concept by presenting the design intricacies of the I-
HUB, a symbol of modern space architecture. This section unravels the foundational design
ethos, anchored by integrating the Telescopic Robotic Arm (TRA) and deploying a modular
design paradigm.
The emphasis on these two design elements illuminates the I-HUB's distinctive
characteristics of adaptability and scalability, reshaping the perception of space habitation.
The second sub-section details the I-HUB's modular structure following this foundational
overview, offering insights into their unique functionalities and the strategic design
considerations that ensure the I-HUB's efficacy and sustainability in the challenging
environment of space.
Student No. 202254301
24
3.3.1. Design Concept and Scalability
The design and development of the I-HUB are primarily guided by two paramount principles:
the incorporation of TRA and the deployment of a modular design framework. These design
cornerstones contribute to the novelty and uniqueness of the I-HUB, simultaneously fostering
a scalable and adaptable framework that can aptly respond to the evolving demands of space
habitation and exploration.
The TRA represents a significant stride forward in space architecture, amalgamating
innovation, functionality, and aesthetics into one integral component of the I-HUB. As shown
in Figure 7, the TRA encompasses five segments or tubes of varying diameters, the smallest
having a diameter of approximately one meter to facilitate the passage of at least two
inhabitants simultaneously and can extend up to seven meters.
Figure 7: Fully deployed Telescopic Robotic Arm (TRA).
This feature embodies an inherent efficiency trait, maintaining a compact form when not in
use while having substantial reach when extended. A unique trait of the arm is its dual
functionality. The arm doubles as a sizeable window for inhabitants to view space when not
in use, integrating two thick glass sections into its design. The TRA utilizes an actuator or
motor system at the arm's base to accomplish its telescopic function, which manipulates each
tube or segment according to the desired extension or retraction. The sensors embedded
within the TRA provide crucial data to the control system to regulate its position and
movement. The TRA's design retains careful development to operate optimally in a zero-
gravity, vacuum environment with extreme temperature variations and potential radiation
exposure.
The TRA's utilization extends to various operations within the I-HUB, encompassing
construction, expansion, maintenance, and docking assistance, the capability to manoeuvre
and integrate new modules into the hub transforms the way construction and maintenance
tasks are conducted in space, significantly reducing the need for risky extravehicular
Student No. 202254301
25
activities (EVA). The TRA's docking feature adheres to the international docking system
standard (IDSS), further facilitating capturing and berthing of existing spacecraft.
The design of the I-HUB is inherently modular, integrating distinct functional modules for
optimal flexibility and efficiency. Each module can be independently constructed, launched,
and integrated into the hub, serving specific functions such as living quarters, scientific
research, or space tourism. This concept of modularity brings about the scalability of the I-
HUB, allowing the addition of new modules over time to expand the station's capacity or
functionality. Such scalability facilitates the station's adaptability, enabling the incorporation
of ongoing technological advancements into new modules while upgrading or replacing
outdated ones.
A fundamental aspect of the I-HUB's design is the single module structure (SMS). Each SMS
is precisely optimized to fit within the payload bay of the SpaceX Starship Launch Vehicle,
employing an octagonal geometric form for maximum utilization of the payload volume. This
distinct arrangement ensures optimal use of space and introduces two TRAs at an angle on
each end face of the horizontal and lateral plane of SMS.
Figure 8: The single module structure SMS.
The I-HUB's initial assembly, the foundation phase structure (FPS), comprises six modules
arranged in a unique diamond configuration, as illustrated in the Figure 9 below. The
subsequent stages, known as the expansion phase structure (EPS), add more modules
following the foundational layout, maintaining flexibility and potential for growth.
Student No. 202254301
26
Figure 9: Assembling the I-HUB from SMS to FPS.
The EPS follows a phase naming technique, with each subsequent phase named after a
notable figure in advancing humanity and space exploration, symbolizing the progressive
journey of space habitation.
Figure 10: Assembling the I-HUB from FPS to EPS.
Student No. 202254301
27
The design philosophy behind the I-HUB, marked by integrating the innovative TRA and the
hub's modular character, constructs a highly adaptable, scalable, and flexible solution. This
potent amalgamation of design elements effectively satisfies the high-level functional
requirements and core design objectives. Having established a comprehensive understanding
of the design concept and scalability potential, subsequent section delves into the specifics of
the I-HUB's modular configuration, examining the unique characteristics and roles of each of
the six modules that form the FPS, and expand upon the modular growth manifested in the
EPS. This focused exploration will underscore the tactical importance of each module, further
illustrating the symbiotic relationship between innovation and adaptability that defines the I-
HUB's design.
3.3.2. Modular Configuration
Modularity is the crux of the I-HUB's design strategy, imbuing the structure with
adaptability, scalability, and flexibility. Comprising six distinct but interconnected modules
(Alpha, Beta, Delta, Theta, Gamma, and Omega) the modular configuration seamlessly
unifies these distinct units into the FPS. This FPS serves as the operational nucleus of the I-
HUB, with potential for future expansion into the EPS.
The Alpha Module doubles as the crew command, living, and office module. Acting as the I-
HUB's control centre, it is fully equipped with private quarters, fitness and communal spaces
to support crew wellbeing and facilitate collaboration - essential attributes for long-term
space habitation. The office spaces in this module are strategically designed to enable
efficient mission control and operational management. An added safety feature is a dedicated
docking point for an emergency return vehicle. Furthermore, features such as radiation
protection and induced gravity mechanisms provide a safe environment for the crew.
Figure 11: The interior configuration of Alpha Module.
The Beta Module is the hub's primary science and research laboratory facility. It is a
dedicated zone for spearheading scientific pursuits in diverse fields, ranging from space
physics and astronomy to biochemistry, physiology, and psychology. The meticulous design
of each laboratory and the integrated storage spaces guarantees the safekeeping and
accessibility of scientific equipment.
Student No. 202254301
28
Figure 12: The interior configuration of Beta Module.
The Delta Module is a robust life support and greenhouse unit. Integrating advanced life
support systems with effective waste recycling mechanisms underpins the station's self-
sufficiency and habitability. This module also houses an area for plant cultivation to ensure
continuous oxygen production and food supply.
Figure 13: The interior configuration of Delta Module.
The Theta Module, depicted in Figure 13 below, is dedicated to health and fitness. It houses
fitness equipment for microgravity conditions, a comprehensive medical facility, and health
monitoring systems. This arrangement ensures continuous health surveillance of the crew and
immediate medical assistance when needed.
Student No. 202254301
29
Figure 14: The interior configuration of Theta Module.
The Gamma Module, or the propellant depot and serviceability module, amplifies the hub's
self-sufficiency. This module provides a fuel storage and management system and houses
tools and spare parts essential for maintaining the hub's functionality and reliability.
Additionally, safety systems are installed to prevent accidents during potentially hazardous
operations.
Figure 15: The interior configuration of Gamma Module.
The Omega Module, serving as the space tourism and recreation unit, caters to the emerging
space tourism industry. This module offers comfortable guest quarters, viewing galleries, and
recreational facilities, promising visitors an unforgettable stay. A dedicated training area is
also included to ensure these guests' safety.
Student No. 202254301
30
Figure 16: The interior configuration of Omega Module
A critical element in integrating the modules to form the FPS is the TRA. This initial
configuration establishes the I-HUB's core, capable of independent operation and fulfilling its
high-level requirements. As the I-HUB evolves, the FPS transitions to the EPS with the
seamless integration of additional modules and enhancements, underscoring the scalability
and adaptability of the design.
The EPS's design facilitates the future addition of new modules, technologies, or capabilities
as necessitated by technological advancements or changing mission requirements, thus
enhancing the I-HUB's capabilities. This future-proof design, adhering to modular design
principles and emphasizing scalability, demonstrates the I-HUB's commitment to sustainable
growth and long-term vision.
3.4. Habitat Design
This section unravels a facet of I-HUB's blueprint crafted to ensure safety and well-being,
from the indispensable life support systems to the cutting-edge measures for radiation
protection, the foundational structures, and the avant-garde approach to induced gravity. The
synergy of science and innovation in these sub-sections showcases a pioneering vision for
humanity's future in space.
3.4.1. Living Quarters
In designing the living quarters for the I-HUB, human-centered design principles play a
pivotal role in ensuring the well-being and mental health of both the hub’s inhabitants.
Understanding that space habitation can be psychologically taxing; the design is oriented
towards enhancing habitability and providing a sense of comfort and home in an otherwise
inhospitable environment. Ergonomics, tailored explicitly for microgravity conditions, are
essential to the living quarters' design. Furnishings and storage solutions are innovatively
conceptualized to optimize space usage, balancing practicality, and safety. In the absence of a
traditional gravitational pull, conventional concepts of 'up' and 'down' become obsolete.
Student No. 202254301
31
Consequently, furniture solutions must address usability, safety, and comfort in these unique
conditions.
Emphasis has been placed on the need for personal space within the Alpha module, which
houses four meticulously designed personal living spaces (refer to Figure 17). These havens
are intended for crew members to rest and spend personal time, a significant aspect in
preserving mental health during extended missions. Personalizing these spaces cultivates a
sense of ownership and homeliness, positively impacting crew morale [55]. The personal
living space is complemented with two hygiene facilities that embed efficient systems for
waste management and water usage, acknowledging the resource constraints and distinct
challenges within the space environment.
Figure 17: A diagram illustrating the living quarters of the Alpha Module.
The design also integrates communal areas to stimulate social interaction and nurture a sense
of community. Shared dining, meetings, and recreation spaces act as platforms for
socialization, relaxation, and team-building. The spatial arrangement of these areas promotes
casual interaction yet preserves the possibility of personal space when required. The living
quarters' design subtly incorporates safety considerations, with clear, unimpeded routes to
emergency equipment enabling swift and safe action during emergencies. Such safety
features are subtly blended into the design to minimize visual clutter while prioritizing crew
safety.
Adaptability forms a core characteristic of the living quarters. Recognizing each inhabitant's
diverse needs, tasks, and schedules, the quarters are designed for versatility. Spaces can be
reconfigured as necessary, offering flexibility and personalization [56]. The quarters' layout,
size, and functionality are meticulously planned, factoring in the constraints of the space
environment. Essential amenities such as sleeping quarters, hygiene facilities, recreational
areas, and personal spaces are seamlessly woven into the design. Large windows that offer
Student No. 202254301
32
views off the TRA facilitate mesmerizing glimpses of space, providing a unique visual
experience that can have positive psychological effects [57].
Finally, the Omega module houses comfortable and private guest quarters for visiting space
tourists (refer to Figure 18). Embracing the burgeoning interest in space tourism, these
quarters aim to deliver a memorable and comfortable experience for visitors. Integrated
safety training areas equip guests for their stay, underlining I-HUB's commitment to
hospitality and safety.
Figure 18: A diagram illustrating the living quarters of the Omega Module.
The design of the living quarters within the I-HUB exemplifies thoughtful planning and
innovative application of design principles. It adopts a human-centered approach, prioritizing
the crew's and guests' overall well-being and safety while striving to provide a rewarding
experience of living in space.
3.4.2. Life Support Systems (ECLSS)
A robust and efficient environmental control and life support system is paramount to the
sustainability of the I-HUB. These intricate, multidimensional systems work tirelessly to
replicate Earth's benign conditions within the enclosed and inhospitable space environment.
Within the I-HUB, the ECLSS forms the backbone of all SMS, notably the Delta Module,
which houses a robust ‘Life Support System and Greenhouse’. This system is integral to the I-
Student No. 202254301
33
HUB’s FPS, underscoring the interdependence of technological innovation and human well-
being in off-Earth environments.
Air supply, a fundamental requirement for human life, is a key component of the ECLSS.
Given the absence of breathable air in space, the air supply systems within the I-HUB have
been meticulously engineered to regulate air pressure, maintain an appropriate atmospheric
composition, and eliminate harmful gases such as carbon dioxide [58]. The air's composition
is calibrated to closely mimic Earth's atmosphere, with oxygen levels around 21%, while
nitrogen and trace gases constitute the remainder [59]. The system is equipped to efficiently
absorb exhaled carbon dioxide and scrub other potential contaminants, ensuring inhabitants'
safe and comfortable environment.
The water management systems in the I-HUB follow a cyclical approach, a necessity due to
the limited water supply in space. These systems ingeniously integrate water purification,
recycling, and waste management strategies. They are designed to reclaim water from
multiple sources, including humidity, condensation, and urine, which are then processed,
purified, and reintroduced into the living system. Such processes are essential for maintaining
hydration, ensuring hygiene, and supporting food cultivation systems within the I-HUB.
Despite the external cold void of space, the hub’s temperature and humidity control
represents a unique challenge due to insulation and equipment heat production. Thus, ECLSS
plays a crucial role in maintaining a comfortable temperature and humidity level for the crew,
mirroring Earth-like conditions to the best extent possible.
Each ECLSS component, whether air supply, water management, waste management, or
temperature regulation, is pivotal in sustaining the crew members' health and well-being
within the I-HUB. Long-duration space missions, such as those envisioned for the I-HUB,
bring forth unique challenges around recycling and efficient resource utilization. The ECLSS,
therefore, needs to be resilient, flexible, and engineered to ensure safety and comfort while
reducing dependencies on resupply missions [60]. Operating such complex systems within
the harsh space environment is fraught with risks, underlining the need for system
redundancy and reliability. Ensuring crew safety in such precarious environments demands
contingency measures and backup systems. In response, every ECLSS component within the
I-HUB incorporates multiple redundancies, providing a vital safety net in case of system
failures. The I-HUB's ECLSS leverages a hybrid life support system that combines the
reliability of physicochemical systems with the sustainability of bioregenerative systems,
symbolizing a remarkable leap towards near-complete resource recycling and heightened
efficiency —this innovative fusion of science and engineering crafts an Earth-like haven
within the daunting void of space.
3.4.3. Radiation Protection
Operating in the hostile vacuum of space, the I-HUB places paramount importance on the
safety of its inhabitants. GCR and SPE are high threats - a pervasive, invisible danger beyond
Earth's protective magnetic shield. Consequently, the I-HUB integrates rigorous radiation
protection strategies that conform to the "NASA-STD-3001, Space Flight Human-System
Standard" and the "Human Integration Design Handbook," ensuring robust safeguards
against radiation hazards [61]. The principal constituents of cosmic radiation, high-energy
Student No. 202254301
34
protons, and heavy ions, pose significant biological risks [62]. Thus, the I-HUB's radiation
protection hinges on a two-pronged approach:
a) Effective Shielding
b) Comprehensive Monitoring.
The shielding design, crucial for minimizing radiation exposure, incorporates a layered
strategy. Primarily, an alloy material chosen for its high-Z properties and heavy elements,
forms the structural basis of the I-HUB, providing an effective absorption barrier against
high-energy particles [63]. Furthermore, an intentional 1-meter buffer space between the
habitable interior and the module's exterior offers an additional layer of protection, reducing
the infiltrating radiation.
Air and water tanks are strategically positioned to serve dual roles in the habitable volume.
The air tanks, containing atmospheric gases like oxygen, carbon, and nitrogen, contribute not
only to the ECLSS but also serve as potent radiation shields. Similarly, water tanks offer dual
utility, providing vital life sustenance and radiation protection. The hydrogen atoms within
water molecules are particularly efficient at attenuating neutrons and high-energy protons,
critical components of cosmic radiation. To further fortify radiation protection, the I-HUB
integrates innovative active shielding systems. Notably, the NIAC 6+1 active shielding
system and the LinX vacuum vessel generate and deflect a plasma field, creating an active
defense against incoming cosmic radiation [64].
Nonetheless, shielding measures alone cannot fully guarantee safety against space radiation.
It is imperative to continuously monitor radiation levels to assess and manage radiation
exposure effectively. Thus, the I-HUB houses integrated radiation monitoring systems,
continually tracking radiation levels within the habitat, and promptly alerting the crew to
potential spikes in radiation exposure [65]. Complementing shielding and monitoring, the I-
HUB also emphasizes the importance of medical monitoring and countermeasures. Regular
health checks and radiation-specific countermeasures are critical in mitigating potential
health effects on the crew [66]. Additionally, the I-HUB maintains an emergency protocol to
manage sudden surges in radiation exposure, including designated safe areas within the
habitat where the crew can seek shelter, particularly vital during solar particle events or other
unexpected radiation spikes [67].
Radiation protection within the I-HUB employs a comprehensive, multifaceted approach
encompassing effective shielding, continuous monitoring, proactive medical measures, and
emergency protocols. Such measures collectively underscore the commitment to safeguarding
crew safety against one of space's most significant threats. Protecting against radiation further
highlights the importance of robust structural design.
3.4.4. Structures
The I-HUB’s structural design centers on ensuring durability, integrity, and adaptability to
the hostile space environment. Its structural elements, encompassing interior configurations,
SMS and TRA, are designed meticulously, integrating lightweight, durable, and radiation-
resistant materials for an optimal balance between mass efficiency and structural performance
[68]. These material characteristics resist cosmic radiation and facilitate the habitat's ability to
withstand pressure differentials between its interior and the external space vacuum.
Student No. 202254301
35
Structural modularity constitutes a fundamental design aspect, responding to the logistical
challenges and costs tied to space transportation [69]. This modular approach allows
structures amenable to easy assembly, repair, reconfiguration, or expansion. The SMS,
designed as interconnected yet autonomous units, and the TRA, built for efficient operations
and routine upgrades, embody this principle of functional adaptability.
The I-HUB employs advanced shielding technologies and design strategies, including multi-
layered shielding and active shielding, to combat the potential damages from space debris and
micrometeoroids [70, 71]. Although small, these high-velocity particles can inflict significant
damage; therefore, incorporating such shielding methods is integral to the I-HUB's resilience.
Moreover, pressure integrity is maintained across the I-HUB's structures, a vital requirement
in the space environment. All structural components, from the robust exterior walls to the
seals and hatches connecting various modules, are designed to withstand the pressure
differential, preventing potentially hazardous decompression events. The I-HUB's design
principles also consider load-bearing capacity, durability, and resistance to space
environments. They manifest in each element, from the TRA to the SMS, the interior
configurations, and even the minutest components. Future growth and adaptability are also
anticipated, with modular and expandable structures that can evolve to accommodate
technological advances and evolving mission requirements. The I-HUB's structural design
presents a fundamental understanding of space habitation structural challenges, ensuring its
inhabitants' robustness, adaptability, and safety through the thoughtful selection of materials,
design principles, and protective measures.
3.4.5. Induced Gravity
Induced or artificial gravity presents a potential solution to health risks associated with
prolonged space habitation. In the design of the I-HUB, the concept of induced gravity is
intricately integrated within each structural component—the SMS, FPS, and EPS. This design
consideration enhances habitation comfort and efficiency while mitigating physiological
issues that may arise from extended exposure to microgravity [72].
The strategy to generate induced gravity within the I-HUB predominantly depends on
rotational dynamics. The habitat structure undergoes controlled rotation, creating a
centrifugal force that simulates gravity's sensation. As a result, both inhabitants and
equipment remain grounded to the 'floor' [73]. By implementing this rotational solution,
health issues such as bone density and muscle mass loss can be mitigated, often linked to
long-term space habitation. However, applying rotation to induce gravity introduces the
Coriolis effect; a phenomenon experienced within a rotating frame of reference that can lead
to perceptual deflection of moving objects. This effect may induce discomfort and
disorientation among the hub’s inhabitants [74]. To alleviate the Coriolis effect, the I-HUB's
design incorporates optimal rotation rates and corridor orientation, minimizing disruptive
forces.
The I-HUB also comprises carefully planned transition zones, accommodating the
fluctuations in gravity levels throughout the habitat. These transition zones enable inhabitants
to acclimate when moving between areas of differing gravity. Furthermore, equipment,
fixtures, and fittings are designed to function effectively in the varying gravity conditions
within the I-HUB [75].
Student No. 202254301
36
Nevertheless, they are not without challenges despite the promising potential of induced
gravity systems. These include design constraints, energy requirements, and possible
physiological impacts on the crew. Balancing the optimal rotation rates for gravity simulation
and minimizing Coriolis effects requires meticulous engineering and design. Induced gravity
is a strategic adaptation of physics principles to confront the unique challenges posed by
space habitation. This ingenious concept is a testament to the creativity ingrained in the I-
HUB's design.
3.5. Systems and Infrastructures
This section explores the innovative essence of the I-HUB, emphasizing the key systems that
infuse vitality into the hub. It discusses the complexities of power and thermal regulation that
ensure the continuous functioning of the hub, the crucial communication systems that
maintain the I-HUB's connection to Earth, and the pioneering waste management and
recycling models that protect sustainability within this closed-loop environment.
3.5.1. Power and Thermal Systems
Establishing the I-HUB in the challenging void of space demands meticulous engineering,
especially when ensuring its sustained power and thermal regulation. Each SMS in the
foundation phase structure is equipped with advanced power and thermal systems. These
systems are tailored for unique operation and synchronized functionality with other modules,
underscoring the versatility of the I-HUB's design.
At the heart of the I-HUB's power architecture is the hybrid power generation system. This
design synergizes the continuous prowess of CSP with the unparalleled energy density of
fusion reactors. CSP diligently capture the relentless energy from the sun, while fusion
reactors promise a sustainable, clean, and enduring energy backup. Together, they ensure the
I-HUB remains powered under diverse cosmic conditions.
Figure 19: Deployed photovoltaic cells for CSP generation system.
With the cyclical nature of solar energy and possible downtimes in fusion reactors, a robust
energy storage mechanism is non-negotiable. The I-HUB is strengthened with state-of-the-art
Student No. 202254301
37
high-capacity batteries. These are further supported by flywheel energy systems, ensuring
power continuity even during events like solar eclipses [76]. Moreso, the I-HUB adopts a
hierarchical power distribution system. While each SMS maintains autonomy with its
independent grid, seamless interoperability with the FPS's central grid ensures efficient
energy allocation. In designing this, paramount considerations were redundancy, emergency
response, and overall energy efficiency. The vast structural expanse of the I-HUB introduces
challenges in power routing and load balancing. Additionally, extra-terrestrial threats like
micrometeoroid impacts and radiation pose risks to the power infrastructure. These
necessitate robust monitoring, timely upgrades, and redundant backup systems to safeguard
the hub's power integrity.
The expanse of space presents extreme thermal variances. To navigate these, the I-HUB
ingeniously blends passive and active cooling strategies. Passive methods, leveraging
specialized insulation materials, play a pivotal role in maintaining internal temperate stasis
without external interventions [77]. The I-HUB is equipped with thermal radiators for
scenarios demanding active intervention. These are pivotal in dissipating excessive heat,
ensuring a habitable internal environment irrespective of external thermal fluxes.
Figure 20: SMS deployed thermal radiator.
Interstellar environment is not without its thermal challenges. Factors like micrometeoroid-
induced damages or radiation can adversely affect the thermal infrastructure. Balancing heat
rejection during cold spikes while ensuring energy conservation epitomizes the delicate
engineering equilibrium the I-HUB achieves. The prowess of I-HUB's power and thermal
systems embodies the union of cutting-edge technology with visionary space engineering,
setting the stage for the equally intricate communication and waste management systems
explored in subsequent sections.
3.5.2. Communication Systems
In space, communication becomes an essential tether, bridging the I-HUB to Earth and other
celestial assets. The intricacies of the I-HUB's design ensure that every component, from each
Student No. 202254301
38
SMS to the FPS incorporates cutting-edge communication systems to provide clarity,
reliability, and, most importantly, redundancy.
The backbone of I-HUB's communication infrastructure is a carefully crafted blend of high-
frequency communication antennas, transceivers, and dynamic networking protocols. These
technologies cultivate seamless data transmission and real-time voice communication [78].
Strategic placement of these antennas ensures unwavering signal strength and coverage,
irrespective of I-HUB's orientation in space. These antennas are designed to operate across
multiple frequency bands, strengthened by transceivers that deliver clean signal modulation
and demodulation. The I-HUB leverages satellite relay systems to augment its direct
communication capabilities, ensuring uninterrupted communication even when a direct line
of sight to Earth is unavailable [79].
Acknowledging the inherent vulnerabilities of space communication, the I-HUB has
prioritized redundancy as a precaution and an essential survival strategy. From auxiliary
antennas to reserve transceivers, backup systems are seamlessly integrated, ensuring
unbroken communication despite primary system anomalies. Handling the vast amount of
data generated and received by the I-HUB is a significant challenge. Robust data handling
protocols adeptly manage hefty data packets, efficiently segmenting them for transmission
and subsequent reassembly upon reception. While latency is an intrinsic aspect of deep-space
communication, I-HUB's state-of-the-art protocols significantly minimize these delays,
fostering timely information and voice exchanges.
However, space communication is rife with challenges. There are many hurdles, from signal
degradation over immense distances to cosmic interferences. Undeterred, the I-HUB employs
potent error correction algorithms, fortifying data integrity. Given the sensitive nature of
certain transmissions, advanced encryption techniques have been deployed, shielding data
against potential security breaches. The I-HUB and its Earth-based mission control bond is
strengthened through specialized interfaces and software systems. This cohesive integration
streamlines real-time communication and empowers terrestrial teams to monitor, evaluate,
and, steer the hub's operations.
The I-HUB's communication system embodies the fusion of advanced engineering and the
imperative of human connection, even in the vast void of space. The intricate balance of
technology and protocol ensures that the I-HUB remains a beacon of connectivity irrespective
of distance. It sets the groundwork for its equally efficient waste management and recycling
systems, detailed in the ensuing section.
3.5.3. Waste Management and Recycling Systems
Sustainable waste management in a confined space environment, like the I-HUB, presents
unique challenges that demand innovative solutions. Anchoring these solutions are the
systems integrated within modules, where inhabitants predominantly reside. The Delta
Module, recognized for its potent life support systems and greenhouse functionalities, further
fortifies the waste management and recycling framework. Each SMS hosts unique waste
management procedures while collectively operating symbiotically to ensure a sustainable
and healthy habitat [80].
A streamlined waste collection system forms the I-HUB's waste management foundation.
This system is designed to efficiently manage waste disposal by categorizing waste into
organic, inorganic, and hazardous types. This categorization ensures proper separation,
containment, and storage, with dedicated repositories and mechanisms for each waste type.
Student No. 202254301
39
Closed-loop life support systems embody the pinnacle of recycling technology in the I-HUB.
They play a pivotal role in recycling waste into usable resources, particularly by converting
CO2 and wastewater into life-sustaining oxygen and drinkable water [81]. Additionally,
specialized recycling units are deployed to process and repurpose waste materials. These
units reduce the dependency on resupply missions and mitigate the environmental footprint.
In conjunction with water recycling and purification systems, these technologies ensure a
consistent and sustainable water supply, drastically diminishing the need for external
resupply from Earth.
Figure 21: Fundamental relationships in a regenerative life support system [82].
The I-HUB's design philosophy also emphasizes waste reduction at its core. Long-lasting
materials have been prioritized, and equipment that can be easily repaired over those
necessitating frequent replacements are chosen. This philosophy inherently minimizes waste
generation, leading to efficient resource utilization. Managing waste in the constrained
environment of space presents its set of challenges. Waste storage mainly necessitates
ingenious solutions to address concerns like odor control, containment, and preventing
detrimental impacts on the habitat's air quality. Innovative containment strategies and
advanced filtration systems ensure that waste storage does not compromise the habitat's
environmental quality.
For the residual waste that cannot be recycled, the I-HUB has instituted methods such as
chemical processing for its safe disposal. These methods are meticulously designed to
prevent any harm to the habitat or its surrounding space environment. Specialized disposal
units, coupled with protocols that ensure the waste's neutralization, ensure that non-recyclable
waste does not become a persistent threat. By leveraging advanced technologies and
sustainable practices, the I-HUB ensures its self-sufficiency, minimizing its ecological
footprint and maximizing its operational longevity in space.
Student No. 202254301
40
4.0 SUSTAINABILITY, BUDGET, AND RISK ASSESSMENT
4.1. Sustainability and Self-Sufficiency
The cruciality and survivability of prolonged human mission in space relies on the
foundational pillars of sustainability and self-sufficiency. Far from Earth's abundant
resources, a habitat's longevity is intertwined with its ability to efficiently generate, utilize,
and recycle resources. This section delves into the sophisticated mechanisms and designs the
I-HUB employs to foster these two critical aspects.
Three domains emerge as focal points:
a) Ingenious systems for resource generation and recycling
b) Emphasis on energy efficiency paired with renewable energy sources.
c) Paramountcy of sustainable food and water production
Together, these domains paint a holistic picture of the I-HUB's commitment to a sustainable
future in the interstellar realm.
4.1.1. Resource Generation and Recycling
The distance separating the I-HUB from Earth elevate the importance of resource generation
and recycling to a paramount status. Any dependency on earthly supplies would be
logistically challenging and jeopardize the core of the hub's self-sufficiency requirement.
Hence, resource sustainability in the I-HUB is crafted on the dual principles of longevity and
reusability. Materials chosen for the I-HUB's construction and daily operations are
meticulously selected, considering their lifespan, ability to withstand space conditions, and
eventual recyclability [83].
Reflecting on the waste management and recycling systems detailed in the preceding chapter,
these systems are not standalone entities but are intimately linked with resource generation.
Organic and inorganic waste materials are not perceived as mere 'waste' but as potential
resources, ushering in a paradigm shift in waste management. These materials undergo
advanced processing, ensuring their transformation into usable forms. For instance, organic
waste becomes a source of nutrient-rich compost, which is pivotal for the hub's food
production systems [84].
The I-HUB ardently endorses the idea of a closed-loop system reminiscent of Earth's
ecosystems. In this system, each element, be it waste or resource, flows in a cycle of use,
reuse, and recycling, mirroring nature's perpetual wheel of life and regeneration. A
particularly innovative facet of this approach is the integration of state-of-the-art
technologies, such as 3D printing. Materials once deemed unusable find new purpose and
form [85].
4.1.2. Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
Energy acts not merely as a facilitator but as an essential lifeline, driving habitats, enabling
scientific research, and sustaining human existence. For an expansive venture like the I-HUB,
far removed from Earth's proximity, depending solely on transported energy is impractical
and unsustainable. The I-HUB embodies a paradigm of self-sufficiency anchored firmly in
energy efficiency and harnessing renewable energy sources.
Student No. 202254301
41
Central to this energy strategy is the ever-radiant Sun. CSP stands as a linchpin in the I-
HUB's energy architecture, as touched upon in the preceding chapter. Beyond Earth's
atmosphere, where terrestrial constraints are non-existent, the Sun's rays are unfiltered and
incredibly powerful. The I-HUB's CSP systems tap into this undiluted solar bounty, focusing
sunlight through mirrors or lenses to produce heat. This heat is subsequently transformed into
electricity. Within space's vacuum, such a method reaps unparalleled efficiencies,
establishing itself as a foundational energy source for the hub [86].
While CSP ensures immediate renewable energy, fusion reactors, often heralded as the 'Holy
Grail' of power generation, supplements the I-HUB unwavering, potent, and pristine power
source. The fusion of light atomic nuclei, predominantly hydrogen, liberates enormous
amounts of energy, mirroring the cosmic reactions that power our Sun. With benign by-
products and colossal energy output, fusion reactors emerge as the foremost choice for long-
term, sustainable interstellar residence [87].
Nevertheless, even the vastness of space has its energy-generation downtimes. During such
phases, advanced energy storage mechanisms are indispensable. High-capacity batteries,
renowned for their longevity and brisk charging faculties, take the helm. Supplementing these
are flywheel systems: ingeniously designed mechanical marvels that conserve rotational
energy and swiftly release it when summoned. Furthermore, the I-HUB's infrastructure
integrates state-of-the-art energy optimization techniques. Cutting-edge power management
algorithms operate judiciously, channelling energy where it is paramount, thereby ensuring
an uninterrupted lifeline to critical systems while upholding the highest efficiency standards
[88].
"Efficiency" in the I-HUB is not merely a term but a guiding principle intricately woven into
its design blueprint. Measures to prevent energy dissipation manifest in various forms: from
meticulously engineered insulation systems curtailing heat escape to adopting top-tier energy-
efficient appliances. Additionally, adaptive systems, possessing the intelligence to allocate
energy grounded on real-time requirements, resonate with the hub's allegiance to
sustainability. The I-HUB's energy ethos revolves around two cardinal pillars: capitalizing on
the abundant renewable energy reservoirs that space proffers and an unwavering commitment
to optimization and conservation. This synergy of advanced technological prowess and
deliberate design strategy casts a beacon, projecting toward sustainable space habitats.
4.1.3. Food and Water Production
The sustainability of prolonged human life is intimately tethered to a reliable and self-
contained food and water production system. Considering the enormity of the distances
separating the I-HUB from Earth, the notion of depending on terrestrial resupplies becomes
wholly unfeasible. It is, therefore, of the utmost importance that an ecosystem capable of
fulfilling the essential sustenance needs of the I-HUB's inhabitants is cultivated.
Growing food in the weightless space environment poses its unique challenges. However,
pioneering techniques such as hydroponics and aeroponics exhibit incredible potential as
adapted by the I-HUB. Hydroponics enables plant cultivation without soil, substituting it with
nutrient-enriched water. In contrast, aeroponics employs air or mist to deliver plant nutrients.
These innovative approaches, inherently more water-efficient than conventional terrestrial
farming, offer the added advantage of adaptability to a broad spectrum of crops. Moreover,
Student No. 202254301
42
the non-reliance on soil eliminates the risk of soil-borne diseases, thereby enhancing potential
yield.
While plant-based foodstuffs can form a considerable portion of the nutritional intake,
proteins remain a vital dietary component. Alternative protein sources, hence, are of
significant interest. For instance, algae, cultivated in compact bioreactors, presents a
promising source of essential amino acids and vitamins [89]. Furthermore, the advances in
cellular agriculture forecast the prospect of lab-grown meat, offering a more spatially-
efficient and sustainable protein source devoid of the logistical challenges associated with
livestock rearing. Water, the bedrock of life, calls for meticulous management within space
habitats. The I-HUB employs sophisticated closed-loop water recycling systems in alignment
with the waste management systems described earlier. These innovative systems adeptly
process and purify wastewater, including human waste, and convert it into potable water.
Despite challenges such as removing contaminants and eliminating harmful microorganisms,
these continuously evolving technologies have proven their robustness in securing a
continuous, safe water supply for the I-HUB's crew.
However, nourishment must extend beyond mere calorie provision. To ensure the long-term
health and productivity of the I-HUB's inhabitants, their dietary intake must be balanced and
nutritionally complete. This requirement necessitates incorporating systems or technologies
to monitor the food's nutritional content and guide cultivation strategies to guarantee a
diverse diet. For instance, AI-driven nutrient monitoring systems can analyze and
preemptively predict the crew's nutritional needs, enabling them to adapt food production
cycles accordingly. The strategic employment of innovative food and water production
technologies underscores a commitment to ensuring sustainable, healthy living even in the
most challenging environments. These lessons extracted from the frontlines of such
pioneering endeavors hold promise for space colonization and addressing sustainability
challenges back here on Earth.
Given these advancements in the utilization and production of resources, it is essential to note
that there are, of course, constraints. The succeeding section delves into these limitations. A
comprehensive understanding of the mass and power budgets is pivotal for the long-term
success of the I-HUB, guiding its development and expansion and underpinning all
operational and strategic decisions.
4.2. Budget and Resource Allocation
The delicate equilibrium between functionality and efficiency is a cornerstone of
comprehensive space infrastructure, and the Intergalactic Hub (I-HUB) stands as a testament
to this principle. Central to this equilibrium is the meticulous act of budgeting, focusing on
mass and power. Grounded in theoretical constructs, which are informed by historic space
missions, empirical data, and engineering estimations, the parameters of the I-HUB are
defined with accuracy. These budgetary decisions dictate the hub's operational revolution and
reinforce its commitment to safety and the sustenance of extended space habitation.
Commencing with an analysis of the mass budget, paving the way for a deeper examination
of the power budget.
Student No. 202254301
43
4.2.1. Mass Budget
The mass budget is a structured distribution framework that outlines the permissible weight
for each component and subsystem within a space entity [90]. Given the immense
complexities of space voyages, a minor misalignment with the mass budget can trigger
significant repercussions in propulsion efficiency, energy demands, and overarching mission
integrity. Formulating an accurate mass budget is paramount to ensure the I-HUB's viability
as a robust, secure, and long-term cosmic habitat.
The detailed mass budget summary, accessible in the table below, provides an integrative
perspective of the I-HUB's mass composition. The figures, inspired by NASA's MIG
Baseline Configuration [91], encapsulate average estimations for each core subsystem,
balancing the complexity between operational necessities and spatial limitations.
Table 9: Mass budget summary.
Student No. 202254301
44
Grounded in its foundational design constraints and limits clarified further in (refer to Table
10), the I-HUB's weight stipulations are derived from its innate launch weight capabilities
and the subsequent weight it can uphold during its operational phase. The intricacies of space
missions demand a balance between maximizing functionalities and retaining a sustainable
mass footprint, mass is distributed across the hub's diversified segments in line with this.
From living quarters to state-of-the-art research labs and food storage to advanced energy
units, every facet receives a weighted allocation echoing its operational significance.
Design Constraints
Parameter
Value
Unit
Maximum Crew Size per Module
4
Destination
Earth-Moon L2
orbit
Pressurized Volume
310
Cubic meter
Systems Volume
150
Cubic meter
Stowage Volume
90
Cubic meter
Habitable Volume
120
Cubic meter
Operating Presure
101.3
kPa
Oxygen Fraction
21.00
%
Life Support Closure -Water
Closed
Life Support Closure - Air
Closed
Module Length
11.5
m
Module Width
6.5
m
Power Generation
26.7
kW
Energy Storage
5.96
kW
Solar Array Area - Deployable
250
Sqr meter
Solar Array Area - Attached
80
Sqr meter
Thermal Radiator Area
150
Sqr meter
TRL Margin
20
%
Additional Modules per Expansion
5
Table 10: I-HUB design constraint.
Pursuing efficiency, the I-HUB incorporates standout measures. Deploying cutting-edge
lightweight materials, innovating with multipurpose equipment, and leveraging efficient
storage systems are a few hallmarks of this journey. Against the backdrop, a continuous
monitoring regime coupled with on-the-fly adjustments underpins the I-HUB's mode of
operation, ensuring adherence to the mass constraints. This dynamism encompasses strategies
Student No. 202254301
45
such as phasing out redundant equipment, creatively repurposing materials, and instituting
aggressive recycling paradigms.
With its inherent uncertainties, vacuum space necessitates a reserved safety buffer within the
mass budget. This precautionary margin serves as a safety net, prepared to address
unexpected adversities, ensuring the I-HUB remains structurally and functionally resilient
even under constraints. Navigating the nuanced balance of space missions often hinges on
calculated trade-offs. For the I-HUB, this translates to a sophisticated symmetry between
heightening functionalities and containing the aggregate mass, sculpting an optimized and
harmonious space entity. With the mass budget laid out, examining another pivotal dimension
of the I-HUB's operational blueprint – the power budget, which discourse the energy
dynamics central to the hub's functionality.
4.2.2. Power Budget
The power budget, a systematic energy distribution blueprint, crystallizes the energy
requirements for each subsystem and component within the I-HUB. The assiduous
formulation and governance of this power budget underpins the unyielding operability of the
I-HUB. Maintaining a consistent energy conduit to pivotal systems is not just paramount; it is
instrumental in ensuring that the I-HUB stands as a model of efficiency and functionality in
outer space [92].
The I-HUB's power budget is more than just a compilation of numbers; it is a nuanced energy
matrix, accentuating demands from diverse subsystems. This is exemplified in the power
budget summary in the table below. An in-depth analysis of the I-HUB's power system, as
outlined in (Appendices B & C), yielded an optimized power generation of approximately
37.7 kW. The table elucidates the average and peak power prerequisites for each primary
subsystem, with a cumulative operational power pegged at 26.7 kW and a surge peak at 41.7
kW.
Table 11: The I-HUB subsystems power budget summary.
Student No. 202254301
46
Navigating the labyrinth of components and functionalities, power allocation within the I-
HUB emerges as a complex exercise in equilibrium. Hierarchies of necessity dictate these
allocations: life-support systems unequivocally command the apex position, while
subsystems like the environmental monitoring and control systems (EMCS) are contingent on
situational availability. Pushing the frontier of energy optimization, the I-HUB incorporates
an impressive variety of technologies and strategies. From energy-conserving appliances to
perceptive power management systems and steadfast energy storage methodologies to real-
time adaptability [93].
At the core of the hub’s operational strategy is relentless power consumption monitoring.
Pioneering systems stand sentinel, recalibrating power distribution synchrony with real-time
exigencies and bracing for exigent circumstances that demand swift power reallocations. A
consecrated safety margin is woven into the power budget by mirroring the rigor associated
with space missions. This safeguards against unpredictable energy surges and satisfies the
spectre of systemic blackouts or failures. Outer space's intrinsic challenges, magnified by its
harsh environment, raise an intricate quandary of ensuring reliable and sustainable power.
4.3. Risk and Concern Assessment
The meticulous planning and design of the I-HUB demands a thorough assessment of
potential risks and concerns. Evolving through the nuances of space exploration and
habitation, it becomes evident that anticipating and preparing for challenges is paramount.
This ensures the safety and functionality of the I-HUB and its longevity as a vital hub for
humanity. Central to this preparatory paradigm is the clear demarcation and exploration of
two pivotal aspects: the technical concerns associated with the operationality, and
sustainability of the hub and the holistic strategies poised to manage and mitigate these risks.
4.3.1. Technical Concern
The altercations of early space habitats with radiation, or the adversities faced by long-
duration missions due to failed waste management systems, accentuate the imperative of
preemptive planning. For instance, the ISS grappled with issues like calcium build-up in
water recycling systems and mechanical wear in life-support systems, highlighting the
challenges of maintaining complex systems in space [94].
Within the framework of the I-HUB, 'technical concerns' articulate the potential challenges,
anomalies, or failures poised to affect the hub's subsystems. These could result from the
design's inherent features, the subsystems' intricate interactions, or external cosmic
influences. Dissecting the multi-layered concerns associated with I-HUB, it is imperative to
understand that while the hub is conceived with cutting-edge technology, the relentless
progression of technology and the inevitability of obsolescence pose latent challenges. The
potential divergence between current technological standards and future advancements can
introduce system inefficiencies or compatibility challenges, making adaptability and
upgradability crucial [95].
Outlined below is a comprehensive list of technical concerns, accentuated by their
prospective implications for I-HUB:
Student No. 202254301
47
i. Structural Integrity: Beyond serving as the I-HUB's backbone, the structure faces
the formidable task of withstanding the rigors of space. Factors like micrometeoroid
collisions could compromise its integrity. Similarly, particle and electromagnetic
cosmic radiation can gradually degrade material properties. This degradation could
escalate the risk of structural failures, putting the facility and its inhabitants at peril.
ii. System Complexity: A system's complexity invariably shadows its susceptibility. As
systems grow intricate, the potential nodes of malfunction multiply. Diagnosis and
redressal become labyrinthine due to the woven tapestry of subsystem
interdependence. This accentuates the importance of thorough testing, validation, and
continuous monitoring.
iii. Subsystem Interoperability: Integrating disparate subsystems is comparable to
staging a balanced symphony. A single strident task, say a misbehaving sensor, or a
sync lapse, can upset the concord, leading to cascading operational anomalies. The
gravity of such issues magnifies when the intricacies of performing on-the-spot
repairs in space vacuum are pondered.
iv. Radiation Shielding: Cosmic radiation, comprised of energetic particles and high-
frequency photons, poses a dual threat. For the crew, long-term exposure can lead to
radiation sickness, cancer, or even acute radiation syndrome in high doses.
Simultaneously, radiation can also degrade electronic systems, causing malfunctions
or shortening their lifespan.
v. Life Support Systems Reliability: Life support systems must function without fail.
They maintain the air composition, temperature, humidity, and pressure, and any
disturbances could pose immediate health risks or, in worst-case scenarios, be fatal. A
robust system requires redundancy, comprehensive monitoring, and rapid response
measures.
vi. Power and Energy Management: Serving as I-HUB's vital pulse, an outage or any
inefficiency could potentially halt operations. The repercussions, from basic amenities
to life-ensuring systems, would ripple across the board, casting a pall over I-HUB's
very continuance.
vii. Communication and Data Management: Any communication or data flow
disruption could isolate I-HUB and disrupt operations. Furthermore, data management
challenges could result in data loss or corruption, undermining scientific efforts and
operational control.
Far from conceptual principles, technical concerns are tangible challenges demanding pre-
emptive actions. The unified functioning of the myriad systems embedded within I-HUB
calls for unparalleled precision and proactive measures. Focusing on the strategies designed
to mitigate and manage these technical concerns is essential to fortifying I-HUB against
unpredictable cosmic variables.
4.3.2. Risk Management Strategies
Every aspect of a mission demands stringent oversight, not least of which is the management
of risks. At its core, 'Risk Management' in the context of I-HUB refers to the systematic
approach of identifying, assessing, and prioritizing potential vulnerabilities, followed by
coordinated efforts to minimize, monitor, and control their impact, should they materialize.
Given the severity of the repercussions of any misstep in outer space, this facet assumes
paramount importance.
Student No. 202254301
48
Identifying potential risks is the bedrock upon which mitigation strategies are constructed.
Methodologies employed span from detailed simulations replicating the space environment,
allowing for an in-depth analysis of how each system would respond under different
conditions, to a study of historical data that sheds light on past missions. Expert
consultations, bringing in decades of experience and domain-specific knowledge, refine the
understanding of potential challenges and craft a roadmap to navigate them. The table
Presented below is a detailed exposition of mitigation strategies for each identified technical
concern:
Technical
Concerns
Risk Management strategies
Structural
Integrity
*Engineering robustness into the I-HUB material ensures resilience against
common space threats like micrometeoroid impacts.
*Innovative materials, known for their durability and resistance to cosmic
radiation, could be incorporated to counter material degradation.
*Regular structural integrity checks, using internal and external sensors,
facilitate early detection and repair of wear and tear.
System
Complexity
*Modular designs are adopted, allowing individual subsystems to be updated
or replaced without affecting the overarching system.
*Developing a robust fault detection, isolation, and recovery system (FDIR)
ensures prompt identification of anomalies and their immediate redressal.
*Augmenting traditional methods with AI-driven diagnostic tools provides
real-time monitoring and predictive maintenance.
Subsystem
Interoperability
*Standardization of interfaces and communication protocols ensures seamless
integration and minimizes miscommunications between subsystems.
*Regular system-wide tests and drills, simulating different scenarios, help
detect and rectify interoperability issues.
*Integrating a centralized health monitoring setup further streamlines
interactions and offer a holistic view of the hub's operations.
Radiation
Shielding
*Incorporation of materials with high hydrogen content attenuates cosmic
radiation effectively.
*Layered shielding with a blend of traditional and novel materials minimizes
radiation penetration.
*Magnetic or electrostatic shields could be researched as potential adjuncts,
repelling charged particles away from the I-HUB.
Life Support
Systems
Reliability
*Multiple redundancies ensure backup systems immediately take over in case
of a primary system failure.
*Continuous monitoring and automated alerts ensure swift responses to any
deviation from predefined safety parameters.
*Routine crew training in life support system maintenance and emergency
protocols bolsters on-site troubleshooting capabilities.
Student No. 202254301
49
Power and
Energy
Management
*Hybrid power sources, combining solar arrays with fusion reactors, ensure
continuous power supply even during periods of low solar exposure.
*Battery technologies with rapid charging capabilities and longevity can be
incorporated for backup purposes.
*Automated energy distribution networks optimize power usage across
various I-HUB operations, ensuring that essential systems are always
prioritized.
Communication
and Data
Management
*Deploying multiple communication arrays and ensuring their spatial
distribution around I-HUB mitigates the risk of total communication blackout.
*Incorporating error-checking and correction algorithms in data transmission
protocols minimizes data corruption.
*Utilizing distributed data storage solutions safeguards against data loss and
facilitates redundancy, ensuring critical data remains intact and retrievable.
Table 12: Risk management strategies for identified technical concerns.
Risk management, by its very nature, is an ongoing and iterative endeavour. Through
rigorously conceived and adeptly implemented strategies, I-HUB is girded to withstand the
diverse challenges that the cosmos presents, ensuring the design's objectives and the safety of
its inhabitants are uncompromised.
Student No. 202254301
50
5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORKS
5.1. Key Findings
The Intergalactic Hub (I-HUB) represents a colossal leap in space engineering, presenting
complex technological solutions with the vast of space to pave the way for future deep-space
explorations and habitats. Synthesizing the research discussed in the preceding chapters, this
section clarifies the findings imperative to conceptualizing, designing, and sustaining the I-
HUB.
For extended habitation in space, optimizing and, where possible, recycling resources is
imperative. Foremost in this domain is the concept of closed loop recycling systems,
especially concerning water and breathable air. The absence of such integrated systems
threatens the sustainability of the habitat, potentially precipitating rapid resource depletion
and cultivating an inhospitable environment. The absence of redundancy in life support
infrastructure also emerges as a perilous gap. In the vast space where immediate external
intervention is unfeasible, lacking backup systems escalates vulnerabilities. Furthermore, the
mental and physiological toll of prolonged confinement and exposure to an artificially
maintained environment is non-trivial. Without spaces conducive to recreation and social
interactions, there is an augmented risk of exacerbating psychological challenges, which
could jeopardize the overall well-being of the I-HUB inhabitants.
Reliable power generation, mainly through renewable sources, remains at the crux of the I-
HUB's operational challenges. As the hub traverses’ deep space, instances of prolonged
eclipse or diminished solar accessibility could critically strain its energy reserves. The
significance of these challenges is further amplified when considering the necessity for
efficient energy management and distribution. Without a robust power distribution
framework, essential systems risk energy deprivation, potentially culminating in holistic
operational disruptions.
Dissimilar to the protective shield Earth provides, the I-HUB stands vulnerable to cosmic
radiation. The urgency for dynamic radiation shielding becomes paramount, without which
both the crew and the intricate systems of the hub are at heightened risk. Moreover, the
insidious nature of prolonged radiation exposure can manifest in debilitating health
consequences. Thus, the necessity for vigilant monitoring and prompt intervention is
accentuated. Balancing the integration of radiation shielding without compromising the
structural integrity or inducing prohibitive weight remains a nuanced challenge.
The dynamic nature of crewed spaceflight missions necessitates an adaptive approach to
habitat design. Without a modular and agile framework, the I-HUB could quickly spiral into
obsolescence or face crippling operational constraints. Prolonged exposure to microgravity
presents its unique set of physiological challenges, including but not limited to degenerative
bone and muscle health. Incorporating design innovations to mitigate these effects becomes
vital. Furthermore, while the Telescopic Robotic Arm (TRA) presents a cutting-edge
addition, its Technology Readiness Level (TRL) warrants scrutiny. The success and
efficiency of the TRA could dictate pivotal design and operational aspects of the I-HUB.
Student No. 202254301
51
5.2. Recommendation for Overcoming Identified Challenges
While significant, the complexities highlighted in the previous section can be navigated
through systematic and innovative strategies. From the knowledge gained in this research and
technological innovations, this section offers specific recommendations to navigate and
address the challenges in the conceptualization and operation of the I-HUB. An advanced
hybrid regenerative life support system characterizes the I-HUB's design. Employing
Forward Osmosis technologies facilitates robust water recycling via refined filtration and
purification processes. To enhance air quality and guarantee extended system longevity, the
design integrates top-tier CO2 scrubbers and oxygen generators. Decentralizing these systems
into a network of smaller, interconnected modules notably boosts system robustness,
circumventing the risks associated with singular failure points. The inhabitant's mental and
emotional well-being is prioritized by adopting a human-centric approach to habitat design.
The infusion of VR and AR technologies allows residents to delve into simulated natural
terrains, serving as a psychological sanctuary from the spatial confines and fostering
emotional equilibrium.
The power infrastructure of the I-HUB synergizes the strengths of Concentrated Solar Power
(CSP) and fusion technologies. Complemented with state-of-the-art energy storage solutions,
this hybrid system promises consistent energy delivery, even during periods of solar
obscurity. Leveraging AI-driven power management tools, the hub can proactively gauge
energy needs, fine-tune energy allocation and ensure uninterrupted power supply to critical
sectors.
Radiation protection stands paramount for the operational fidelity of the I-HUB. This is
achieved through an intricate array of sensors that monitor radiation metrics. Augmenting this
setup with AI models, adept at forecasting radiation anomalies, ensures prompt defensive
actions. Simulating Earth's protective magnetosphere by initiating artificial magnetic fields
around the I-HUB offers an additional layer of radiation defense. Including cutting-edge
materials such as hydrogenated boron nitride nanotubes (BNNTs) in its architectural
blueprint amplifies this radiation shield without a consequential weight penalty.
Furthermore, the I-HUB utilizes the principle of modularity in its foundational design. This
perspective not only streamlines the integration of emerging technologies but also sidesteps
the need for exhaustive system revamps. A cornerstone for preserving human health in this
space endeavor is the induction of centrifugal living quarters. These modules serve against
the physiological repercussions of enduring microgravity by mimicking Earth-like
gravitational dynamics. While these recommendations provide a robust roadmap for the
present, they also underscore the inexhaustible realm of possibilities and challenges ahead,
leading to potential domains for future research.
5.3. Potential Area for Future Research
Considering the comprehensive investigation of The Intergalactic Hub (I-HUB) and its
relevance in the bid to explore the boundless cosmos, it becomes pertinent to spotlight
potential avenues that necessitate further probing and elucidation. These areas of exploration
are not mere gaps; they are, in fact, prospective pillars that can redefine the narrative of space
exploration and sustainable habitat design. As such, delving into these domains can lead to
ground-breaking innovations, conforming humans with the intricacies of outer space.
Student No. 202254301
52
i. Advanced Life Support Systems for Space Infrastructure: Ensuring sustained
human existence in space hinges on the uninterrupted provision of vital life resources.
Although effective in short-term space missions, current life support systems face
substantial challenges when considering the complexities of deep-space habitation.
The quest for heightened efficiency and unparalleled reliability demands synergies
across multiple disciplines. Engaging with bioengineering, environmental science,
and nanotechnology can fast-track the creation of advanced closed-loop systems,
replicating Earth's self-sustaining ecological processes.
ii. Food Production and Sustainability Practise in Space: Producing food in space
transcends mere nutritional needs. It carries profound psychological implications,
instilling a sense of autonomy, continuity, and connection to familiar terrestrial
practices. Drawing from botany, aeroponics, aquaculture, and behavioural psychology
can catalyse innovations that address food requirements and fortify the psychological
well-being of space inhabitants.
iii. Space Habitat Structural Design: The structural conception of I-HUB extends
beyond mere resistance to external adversities. It encompasses adaptability,
resonating with the evolving technological landscapes and human-centered
requirements of space exploration. Interdisciplinary engagements with materials
science, astrophysics, and sociology can provide transformative insights, leading to
habitat designs that balance human aspirations with the stringent demands of outer
space.
The paramountcy of interdisciplinary collaboration becomes evident in extrapolating these
potential research areas. The approach to understanding and thriving within it must mirror
this diversity—the reality of sustainable deep-space habitats closer to fruition by bridging
these identified knowledge gaps. This will propel the space habitat design and exploration
field and carve a path for humanity to become actual habitants of the cosmos.
Student No. 202254301
53
6.0 REFERENCES
[1] H. Benaroya, L. Bernold, K.M. Chua, Engineering, design and construction of lunar bases, J. Aerosp. Eng.
15 (2002) 33–45.
[2] T. Filburn, R. Malla, J. Smith, K. Brown, A. Clark, J. Genovese, An investigation into life support systems
for a lunar habitat, in: 41st International Conference on Environmental Systems, 2011, p. 5040.
[3] P.E. Hintze, S. Quintana, Building a lunar or martian launch pad with in situ materials: recent laboratory and
field studies, J. Aerosp. Eng. 26 (2013)
[4] R. Goyal, T. Bryant, M. Majji, R.E. Skelton, A. Longman, Design, and control of growth adaptable artificial
gravity space habitat, in: AIAA SPACE and Astronautics Forum and Exposition, 2017, p. 5141.
[5] R.D. Launius, Space stations: base camps to the stars, in: Proceedings of the Thirty-Eighth History Symposia
of the International Academy of Astronautics, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, 2004, Univelt, Inc., 2011.
[6] M. Chen, R. Goyal, M. Majji, and R. E. Skelton, "Review of space habitat designs for long term space
explorations," Progress in Aerospace Sciences, vol. 122, p. 100692, 2021.
[7] S. Curley, I. Stambaugh, M. Swickrath, M. Anderson, and H. Rotter, "Deep space habitat ECLSS design
concept," 42nd International Conference on Environmental Systems, p. 3417, July 2012.
[8] M. Chen, R. Goyal, M. Majji, and R. E. Skelton, "Design and analysis of a growable artificial gravity space
habitat," Aerospace Science and Technology, vol. 106, p. 106147, 2020.
[9] B. G. Drake, S. J. Hoffman, and D. W. Beaty, "Human exploration of Mars, design reference architecture
5.0," 2010 IEEE Aerospace Conference, pp. 1-24, 2010.
[10] D. Kasaboski and H. Hill, "Galactic Cosmic Radiation Risk in Human Space Missions," in Proceedings of
the 65th International Astronautical Congress, Toronto, Canada, 2014. International Astronautical Federation.
[11] M. F. Piszczor, S. W. Benson, D. A. Scheiman, D. B. Snyder, H. J. Fincannon, S. R. Oleson, and G. A.
Landis, "Advanced solar cell and array technology for NASA deep space missions," in 2008 33rd IEEE
Photovoltaic Specialists Conference, pp. 1-5, May 2008.
[12] A. F. I. Bin Ahmad Fakhri, "Alternative design of a space station for human habitability," Bachelor's thesis,
Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, 2021.
[13] V. Buchli, "Extraterrestrial methods: Towards an ethnography of the ISS," in Lineages and Advancements
in Material Culture Studies, pp. 17-32, Routledge, 2020.
[14] P. Kessler, T. Prater, T. Nickens, and D. Harris, "Artemis Deep Space Habitation: Enabling a Sustained
Human Presence on the Moon and Beyond," in 2022 IEEE Aerospace Conference (AERO), pp. 01-12, March
2022.
[15] M. Smith et al., "The Artemis Program: An Overview of NASA's Activities to Return Humans to the
Moon," 2020 IEEE Aerospace Conference, Big Sky, MT, USA, 2020, pp. 1-10, doi:
10.1109/AERO47225.2020.9172323.
[16] K. Hurlbert, B. Bagdigian, C. Carroll, A. Jeevarajan, M. Kliss, and B. Singh, Human health, life support
and habitation systems. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA): Washington, DC, USA, 2012.
[17] J. Perry, R. Carrasquillo, and D. Harris, "Atmosphere revitalization technology development for crewed
space exploration," in 44th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, p. 140, 2006.
Student No. 202254301
54
[18] L. W. Townsend, "Implications of the space radiation environment for human exploration in deep space,"
Radiation Protection Dosimetry, vol. 115, no. 1-4, pp. 44-50, 2005.
[19] National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, "Space radiation and astronaut health:
managing and communicating cancer risks," 2021.
[20] "ISS ECLSS," Wikipedia. [Online]. Available: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISS_ECLSS. Accessed: June
23, 2023].
[21] G. R. Clément, R. D. Boyle, K. A. George, G. A. Nelson, M. F. Reschke, T. J. Williams, and W. H.
Paloski, "Challenges to the central nervous system during human spaceflight missions to Mars," Journal of
Neurophysiology, vol. 123, no. 5, pp. 2037-2063, 2020.
[22] G. Clément and A. Bukley, Eds., Artificial Gravity, vol. 20. Springer Science & Business Media, 2007.
[23] R. M. Wheeler, "Agriculture for space: People and places paving the way," Open Agriculture, vol. 2, no. 1,
pp. 14-32, 2017.
[24] P. Falke, L. Hash, J. Marsh, J. White, D. Climek, and K. Kwiat, "The Deep Space Network-a technology
case study and what improvements to the Deep Space Network are needed to support crewed missions to
Mars?" Doctoral dissertation.
[25] A. Rai, J. A. Robinson, J. Tate-Brown, N. Buckley, M. Zell, K. Tasaki, G. Karabadzhak, I. V. Sorokin, and
S. Pignataro, "Expanded benefits for humanity from the International Space Station," Acta Astronautica, vol.
126, pp. 463-474, 2016.
[26] J. McFatter, K. Keiser, and T. W. Rupp, "NASA Docking System Block 1: NASA's new direct electric
docking system supporting ISS and future human space exploration," in Aerospace Mechanisms Symposium,
no. JSC-E-DAA-TN51081, May 2018.
[27] R. J. McLaughlin and W. H. Warr, "The Common Berthing Mechanism (CBM) for international space
station," in Society of Automotive Engineers, pp. 2001-01, 2001.
[28] N. Melenbrink, C. Teeple, and J. Werfel, "A Robot Factors Approach to Designing Modular Hardware," in
2022 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), pp. 3528-3535, October
2022.
[29] N. Wells, "Bigelow Expandable Activity Module (BEAM) ISS Year-Three: Technology Demonstration,
Utilization, and Potential Future Applications," no. JSC-E-DAA-TN71575, 2019.
[30] A. L. E. X. Ellery, "Extraterrestrial 3D printing & in-situ resource utilization to sidestep launch costs,"
in www.bis-space.com, vol. 70, pp. 337-343, 2017.
[31] NASA, "3D Printing In Zero-G Technology Demonstration," NASA, [Online].
Available: https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/research/experiments/1115.html. [Accessed: June 23,
2023].
[32] P. Gonzalez Marquez and A. Rajkumar, "Biomimicry Based Design for Advanced Thermal Control System
in Orion Spacecraft," in 49th International Conference on Environmental Systems, July 2019.
[33] G. Misra, "Architecture and life support systems for a rotating space habitat," in 38th COSPAR Scientific
Assembly, vol. 38, p. 2, 2010.
[34] S. Häuplik-Meusburger, S. L. Bishop, and J. A. Wise, "Habitability and the Golden Rule of Space
Architecture."
[35] E. P. M. L. M. de Cote, A. M. Flores Herrera, E. Giorgi, and T. Cattaneo, "Augmented Reality (AR) and
Virtual Reality (VR) as Tools to Empower Vulnerable Communities: Opportunities and Challenges for
Designers," in Design for Vulnerable Communities, pp. 307-321, 2022.
Student No. 202254301
55
[36] S. Jefferies, T. Collins, A. D. Cianciolo, and T. Polsgrove, "Impacts of launch vehicle fairing size on
human exploration architectures," in 2017 IEEE Aerospace Conference, pp. 1-16, March 2017.
[37] J. Greenberg, "Selecting a launch vehicle for GEO missions," in 16th International Communications
Satellite Systems Conference, p. 111
[38] Larson, W.J. and Pranke, L.K., 1999. Human spaceflight: mission analysis and design.
[39] E. Crawley, B. Cameron, and D. Selva, "System architecture: strategy and product development for
complex systems," Prentice Hall Press, 2015.
[40] E. Seedhouse and E. Seedhouse, "Technological feasibility," in Mars One: The Ultimate Reality TV
Show?, pp. 111-136, 2017.
[41] SpaceX, "Starship," 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.spacex.com/vehicles/starship/. Accessed: June
23, 2023].
[42] C. Williams, S. Borowski, L. Dudzinski, and A. Juhasz, "A spherical torus nuclear fusion reactor space
propulsion vehicle concept for fast interplanetary piloted and robotic missions," in 35th Joint Propulsion
Conference and Exhibit, p. 2704, 1999.
[43] N. Wells, "Bigelow Expandable Activity Module (BEAM) ISS Year-Three: Technology Demonstration,
Utilization, and Potential Future Applications," no. JSC-E-DAA-TN71575, 2019.
[44] M. M. Cohen, "Space habitat design integration issues," SAE Technical Paper, p. 981800, 1998.
[45] D. Arney, R. Sutherland, J. Mulvaney, D. Steinkoenig, C. Stockdale, and M. Farley, "On-orbit Servicing,
Assembly, and Manufacturing (OSAM) State of Play," 2021.
[46] S. Patane, K. Abromitis, G. Acosta Quiros, P. Shestople, D. Kieler, and M. P. Snyder, "On-orbit Servicing,
Assembly, and Manufacturing (OSAM) Enhancing Climate Research," in ASCEND 2021, p. 4189, 2021.
[47] M. Wickler, "A mission planning concept and mission planning system for future manned space missions,"
in NASA. Goddard Space Flight Center, Third International Symposium on Space Mission Operations and
Ground Data Systems, Part 1, November 1994.
[48] Visual Capitalist, "The Cost of Space Flight," in Visual Capitalist, [Online].
Available: https://www.visualcapitalist.com/the-cost-of-space-flight/. [Accessed: 28 June 2023].
[49] R. W. Farquhar, E. A. Belbruno, D. W. Dunham, Y. Guo, and J. McAdams, "Utilization of Libration Points
and Halo Orbits for Human Space Exploration in the Sun-Earth-Moon System and Beyond," in IAF abstracts,
34th COSPAR Scientific Assembly, p. 725, 2002.
[50] D. Webber, "Space tourism: Its history, future and importance," Acta Astronautica, vol. 92, no. 2, pp. 138-
143, 2013.
[51] L. Sihver and S. M. J. Mortazavi, "Radiation risks and countermeasures for humans on deep space
missions," in 2019 IEEE Aerospace Conference, pp. 1-10, March 2019.
[52] F. A. Cucinotta, W. Schimmerling, J. W. Wilson, L. E. Peterson, G. D. Badhwar, P. B. Saganti, and J. F.
Dicello, "Space radiation cancer risks and uncertainties for Mars missions," Radiation research, vol. 156, no. 5,
pp. 682-688, 2001.
[53] J. C. Liou and N. L. Johnson, "Risks in space from orbiting debris," Science, vol. 311, no. 5759, pp. 340-
341, 2006.
[54] Y. Lu, Q. Shao, H. Yue, and F. Yang, "A review of the space environment effects on spacecraft in different
orbits," IEEE Access, vol. 7, pp. 93473-93488, 2019.
Student No. 202254301
56
[55] N. Kanas and D. Manzey, "Space psychology and psychiatry," vol. 16, Dordrecht, Springer, 2008.
[56] R. C. Dempsey, Ed., "The International Space Station: Operating an outpost in the new frontier,"
Government Printing Office, 2017.
[57] S. Häuplik-Meusburger and S. Bishop, "Space Habitats and Habitability," Springer International
Publishing, 2021.
[58] D. J. Barta and D. L. Henninger, "Regenerative life support systems—Why do we need them?," Advances
in Space Research, vol. 14, no. 11, pp. 403-410, 1994.
[59] C. H. E. N. Yunpeng, P. A. N. G. Liping, Y. I. N. Yongli, L. I. Guoxiang, and W. A. N. G. Jun,
"Emergency strategy operation optimization for atmosphere environment control system in space station,"
Beijing Hangkong Hangtian Daxue Xuebao, vol. 43, no. 9, pp. 1924-1930, 2017.
[60] N. M. Samsonov, L. S. Bobe, L. I. Gavrilov, V. M. Novikov, N. S. Farafonov, J. I. Grigoriev, E. N. Zaitsev,
S. J. Romanov, A. I. Grogoriev, and J. E. Sinjak, "Long-duration space mission regenerative life support," Acta
Astronautica, vol. 47, no. 2-9, pp. 129-138, 2000.
[61] M. Whitmore, J. Boyer, and K. Holubec, "NASA-STD-3001, space flight human-system standard and the
human integration design handbook," in Industrial and Systems Engineering Research Conference, No. JSC-
CN-25695, May 2012.
[62] G. D. Badhwar and P. M. O'Neill, "Galactic cosmic radiation model and its applications," Advances in
Space Research, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 7-17, 1996.
[63] M. Naito, H. Kitamura, M. Koike, H. Kusano, T. Kusumoto, Y. Uchihori, T. Endo, Y. Hagiwara, N.
Kiyono, H. Kodama, and S. Matsuo, "Applicability of composite materials for space radiation shielding of
spacecraft," Life Sciences in Space Research, vol. 31, pp. 71-79, 2021.
[64] D. Kasaboski and H. Hill, "Galactic Cosmic Radiation Risk in Human Space Missions," in 65th
International Astronautical Congress, Toronto, Canada: International Astronautical Federation, 2014.
[65] T. Shelfer, E. Semones, S. Johnson, N. Zapp, M. Weyland, F. Riman, J. Flanders, M. Golightly, and G.
Smith, "Active radiation monitoring on the International Space Station," SAE Technical Paper, No. 2002-01-
2456, 2002.
[66] C. M. Werneth, T. C. Slaba, J. L. Huff, Z. S. Patel, and L. C. Simonsen, "Medical Countermeasure
Requirements to Meet NASA’s Space Radiation Permissible Exposure Limits for a Mars Mission Scenario,"
Health Physics, vol. 123, no. 2, pp. 116-127, 2022.
[67] R. L. Summers, S. L. Johnston, T. H. Marshburn, and D. R. Williams, "Emergencies in space," Annals of
Emergency Medicine, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 177-184, 2005.
[68] B. Piascik, J. Vickers, D. Lowry, S. Scotti, J. Stewart, and A. Calomino, "Materials, structures, mechanical
systems, and manufacturing roadmap," NASA TA, pp. 12-2, 2012.
[69] D. Westley, J. Grau, L. Jordan, and S. McDermott, "Modular spacecraft standards: supporting low-cost,
responsive space," in Space 2004 Conference and Exhibit, p. 6098, September 2004.
[70] P. Desiati and E. D'Onghia, "CREW HaT: A Magnetic Shielding System for Space Habitats," arXiv
preprint arXiv:2209.13624, 2022.
[71] G. Stansbery, "NASA's Orbital Debris Program Office. Briefing to the NASA Advisory Council," 2016.
[72] G.R. Clément, A.P. Bukley, and W.H. Paloski, "Artificial gravity as a countermeasure for mitigating
physiological deconditioning during long-duration space missions," Frontiers in systems neuroscience, vol. 9, p.
92, 2015.
Student No. 202254301
57
[73] C.R. Keckler and P.R. Kurzhals, "Spin dynamics of manned space stations," NASA Technical Report
NASA-TR-R-155, 1963.
[74] L. Young, K. Yajima, and W. Paloski, "Artificial gravity research to enable human space exploration,"
Paris: International Academy of Astronautics, pp. 1
[75] S.L. Rajulu, G.K. Klute, and N.R. Moore, "A study to explore locomotion patterns in partial gravity
environments," SAE Technical Paper 921157, 1992.
[76] W. E. Simon and D. L. Nored, "Manned spacecraft electrical power systems," Proceedings of the IEEE,
vol. 75, no. 3, pp. 277-307, 1987.
[77] S. Tachikawa, H. Nagano, A. Ohnishi, and Y. Nagasaka, "Advanced Passive Thermal Control Materials
and Devices for Spacecraft: A Review," International Journal of Thermophysics, vol. 43, no. 6, p. 91, 2022.
[78] J. Mukherjee and B. Ramamurthy, "Communication technologies and architectures for space network and
interplanetary internet," IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 881-897, 2012.
[79] W. A. Imbriale and L. Boccia, Space Antenna Handbook, 2012.
[80] T. Wydeven and M. A. Golub, "Waste streams in a crewed space habitat," Waste Management & Research,
vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 91-101, 1991.
[81] V. I. Bilaro, Jr., "The Physical/Chemical Closed-Loop Life Support Research Project," in Space Programs
and Technologies Conference, September 1990, p. 3729.
[82] P. Anker, "A Life Support System for Astronauts Living in Space," in The Ecological Colonization of
Space. Apr. 2005. Available: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/A-Life-Support-System-for-Astronauts-
Living-in-Space_fig1_249293173 [Accessed: Aug. 10, 2023].
[83] R. C. Hill and P. A. Bowen, "Sustainable construction: principles and a framework for attainment,"
Construction Management & Economics, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 223-239, 1997.
[84] R. K. Sinha, S. Herat, G. Bharambe, S. Patil, P. Bapat, K. Chauhan, and D. Valani, "Human waste-a
potential resource: Converting trash into treasure by embracing the five r's philosophy for safe and sustainable
waste management," Environ. Res. J, vol. 3, p. 143, 2009.
[85] J. Y. Wong, "3D printing applications for space missions," Aerospace Medicine and Human Performance,
vol. 87, no. 6, pp. 580-582, 2016.
[86] S. Dixit, "Solar technologies and their implementations: A review," Materials Today: Proceedings, vol. 28,
pp. 2137-2148, 2020.
[87] M. Rodriguez, "FIREFLY--Fusion-Powered Interstellar Rendezvous and Exploratory Flying LaboratorY,"
2011.
[88] S. Ahmad, U. K. Jhuma, H. Mubarak, S. Mekhilef, and H. Mokhlis, "Real Time Power Management for
AC Microgrid Prioritizing Renewable Energy Sources, Battery Storage and Critical Load," in 2022 IEEE IAS
Global Conference on Emerging Technologies (GlobConET), May 2022, pp. 981-986.
[89] Y. Torres-Tiji, F. J. Fields, and S. P. Mayfield, "Microalgae as a future food source," Biotechnology
Advances, vol. 41, p. 107536, 2020.
[90] P. Fortescue, G. Swinerd, and J. Stark, Eds., Spacecraft Systems Engineering. John Wiley & Sons, 2011.
[91] D. Smitherman and A. Schnell, "Gateway lunar habitat modules as the basis for a modular mars transit
habitat," in 2020 IEEE Aerospace Conference, March 2020, pp. 1-12.
Student No. 202254301
58
[92] B. H. Cho, "MODELING AND ANALYSIS OF SPACECRAFT POWER SYSTEMS (SOLAR, SHUNT,
SWITCHING, STABILITY)," M.S. thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 1985.
[93] S. Ginter, G. Gisler, J. Hanks, D. Havenhill, W. Robinson, and L. Spina, "Spacecraft energy storage
systems," IEEE Aerospace and Electronic Systems Magazine, vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 27-32, 1998.
[94] E. Coleshill, L. Oshinowo, R. Rembala, B. Bina, D. Rey, and S. Sindelar, "Dextre: Improving maintenance
operations on the international space station," Acta Astronautica, vol. 64, no. 9-10, pp. 869-874, 2009.
[95] G. F. Dubos and J. H. Saleh, "Risk of spacecraft on-orbit obsolescence: Novel framework, stochastic
modeling, and implications," Acta Astronautica, vol. 67, no. 1-2, pp. 155-172, 2010.
Student No. 202254301
59
7.0 APPENDICES
Student No. 202254301
60
APPENDIX A
Figure 22: The I-HUB's functional analysis and allocation tree.
Student No. 202254301
61
APPENDIX B
Table 13: Power Analysis.
APPENDIX C
Table 14: Power Analysis continuation.