69th International Astronautical Congress (IAC), Bremen, Germany, 1-5 October 2018.

Copyright ©2018 by the International Astronautical Federation (IAF). All rights reserved.

IAC-18. D4.1.4x45486

From 2001: A Space Odyssey to Tomorrow’s Reality:

Evolving Artificial Gravity through Strategic Development

Emily E. Petersen*a
a
Department of Aeronautics & Astronautics, Purdue University, 610 Purdue Mall West Lafayette, IN 47907,
peterse8@purdue.edu
* Corresponding Author

Abstract

IAC-18-D4.1.4 Page 1 of 7
 69th International Astronautical Congress (IAC), Bremen, Germany, 1-5 October 2018.
Copyright ©2018 by the International Astronautical Federation (IAF). All rights reserved.

If mankind is ever to set foot on Mars and beyond, a more sustainable countermeasure against the harmful effects
of weightlessness must first be developed. While the current crew exercise and pharmaceutical regiment may suffice
at the present time, weightlessness-induced physiological system damage such as vision degradation, bone
demineralization, and muscular atrophy will most certainly deter the progress of manned space exploration. Artificial
gravity offers a promising solution; however, a variety of challenges has slowed its advancement. Cost, design and
launch complexity, and a limited understanding of the fundamental science have led many to dismiss the concept of
artificial gravity as a science fiction dream as opposed to a plausible reality. Due to the mounting urgency for a
sustainable, safe solution for long-term space exposure, the astronautics community must rise to the challenge of
rethinking the “impossible.” This paper discusses a variety of artificial gravity concepts and dissects priorities for
future development. Tangible progress will require strong partnerships between industry, academia, and government,
and supporting technologies and scientific advancements offer a wealth of shorter-term objectives. Artificial gravity
milestones can be paired with Earth-bound consumer needs and research inquiries, and these “lily pads” offer a
lower risk path toward high-impact innovation. Ultimately, artificial gravity offers a thrilling vision for the future of
space exploration, and the efforts of today can bring this vision into focus.

Keywords: artificial gravity, astronautics, space exploration, business development, strategy

IAC-18-D4.1.4 Page 2 of 7
 69th International Astronautical Congress (IAC), Bremen, Germany, 1-5 October 2018.
Copyright ©2018 by the International Astronautical Federation (IAF). All rights reserved.
Acronyms/Abbreviations
International Space Station (ISS).
1. Introduction
As mankind advances toward increasingly more
ambitious plans for long-duration manned space
exploration, a number of challenges must be overcome.
Despite the current exercise and pharmaceutical
regiment followed dutifully by International Space
Station (ISS) crew members, weightlessness imposes
significant physiological risks including bone loss,
muscle deterioration, vision degradation and renal stone
formation [1]. Ultimately, a safer, more sustainable
solution must be developed to ensure the safety and
success of future manned missions.
In the nearly 50 years of human space exploration,
no single countermeasure against the harmful effects of
weightlessness has been developed. While artificial
gravity has long existed as a concept, recent advances in
conceptual design, material development and health
sciences has offered this idea as one possible solution.
While unable to protect crew members against other
risks such as radiation, artificial gravity could
effectively eliminate all known physiological
repercussions of long-term exposure to weightlessness.
In 2017, Dr. Giles Clement of NASA Johnson Space
Center published a roadmap for artificial gravity
research in which he called for a full program to
investigate requirements and constraints for rotation of
humans in space [2]. Fundamental research is still
required to determine the feasibility and parameters of
how artificial gravity may be implemented in the future.
While this roadmap means to facilitate partnerships
within the astronautics community, there exist a
multitude of opportunities to capitalize on
collaborations with other industries in order to more
quickly and sustainably realize the research goals
established in the roadmap.
Oftentimes, these advanced, “science fiction” ideas
inspire rallies for a moonshot approach; these are
ambitious, exploratory paths toward a singular
technological breakthrough. While this approach can
have powerful results, it almost exclusively requires
early and sustained political and financial support.
Alternatively, a more incremental development path
can yield a wider range of meaningful results across a
broader spectrum of applications, and in doing so, can
garner more consistent, sustained investment. Artificial
gravity shows great promise for this approach of
incremental development with partnerships in
healthcare and academia among others, offering a
possible path forward for its development and
application by the astronautics community.
IAC-18-D4.1.4
2. Motivation
Despite the current pharmaceutical and exercise
regimen followed by ISS crew members, there exists
significant motivation to pursue solutions like artificial
gravity.
2.1 Crew Health & Safety
Weightlessness inflicts several serious effects on the
human body that must be fully understood before an
effective and safe design for artificial gravity can be
developed. Decrease in pressure such as during lift-off
influences a variety of significant bodily functions
including estimation of spatial orientation and
movement coordination. Orthostatic intolerance, muscle
atrophy, sensorimotor performance, bone
demineralization, immune deficiencies, back pain and
renal stone formation are just some of the adverse
effects of prolonged weightlessness [3].
Recently, vision degradation has also been
discovered as an effect of weightlessness-induced fluid
shifts into the upper body. Intracranial pressure built up
inside the skull affects brain tissue and cerebrospinal
fluid causing change in eye structure and heightened
cerebral spinal fluid pressure. With the first case of
intracranial pressure only being discovered in 2008,
concerns have grown as to what other physiological
risks are yet unknown [4].
2.2 Manned Mars Exploration and Beyond
Because of the human health risks posed by
exposure to deep space, serious consideration has been
given to the duration of the intended Mars exploration
mission and future deep space exploration. Unless an
effective countermeasure to weightlessness and
radiation exposure can be developed, minimizing the
Mars trip duration will be critical. A sustainable solution
must be developed for deep space exploration to be
manned in future missions intended to journey beyond
the red planet.
Two general mission types have been proposed for
manned Mars exploration, and it is important to
recognize the critical role artificial gravity could play in
each [5]. A short-stay mission would last between 560 to
850 days with a mere 30 to 60 of those days spent on
the Martian surface. A long-stay mission would allow
the crew to explore the surface for as long as 550 days
with transit journeys being less than 200 days.
In either mission trajectory, the crew would be
subjected to a zero-gravity environment for the duration
of the journey. The incentive exists, therefore, to pursue
the short-stay mission using existing propulsive
technology and a series of heavy lift launches [5]. Of
great concern, however is the short period of time
allowed for Martian exploration. Considering the
primary objective of the mission is to put the crew in as
direct contact with the field as possible for as long as
Page 3 of 7
 69th International Astronautical Congress (IAC), Bremen, Germany, 1-5 October 2018.
Copyright ©2018 by the International Astronautical Federation (IAF). All rights reserved.
possible, a 30 to 60 day stay with 1 to 2 weeks of
Martian gravity acclimation severely limits the duration
and detail of ground operations. A long-stay mission,
while preferable for the significantly greater amount of
time spent on Mars, would put the crew at greater risk
[6].
3. Artificial Gravity Fundamentals
Though largely theoretical in the context of full-
scale application by the astronautics community,
artificial gravity has existed as a concept since 1883.
The Russian visionary Konstantin Tsiolkovsky
introduced the idea of a spinning spacecraft that would
create gravity for crew running along the internal walls
in his manuscript Free Space [7].
3.1 Fundamental Designs
Three fundamental artificial gravity concepts form
the foundation for rotating vehicle designs. These three
are: the short rigid dumbbell with counter masses, the
rigid rotating truss, and the dual mass tether; each
permit increased complexity built upon physically and
mathematically sound designs.
The flywheel design minimizes volume and mass
without sacrificing the large radius required to minimize
centripetal acceleration. A torus is a slightly more
involved variation of this design.
In the rigid truss design, the rotating dumbbell
replaces the spokes with a simple truss design.
Concerns over the necessary isolated components of a
spacecraft, however, add complexity to the design. The
simplicity of the design, however, provides a
framework upon which to develop more complex
subsystems necessary for vehicle functionality.
Finally, a tethered vehicle operates by spinning two
counter masses connected by a long cable about a
central axis. The ability to maximize the radius of
rotation without substantial increases to the overall
vehicle mass and cost to orbit makes this concept
particularly interesting to the research community. The
design permits varying artificial gravity through
varying tether length and rotational velocity. The
straightness of the tether is maintained by tensile forces
created from centripetal force created from rotational
velocity. A viable design could be something as simple
as a crew compartment attached to a counterweight
compartment by a long cable that is initially coiled in a
spindle. Attitude thrusters on the compartments could
start the ship spinning while the cable uncoiled to its
desired length. The centripetal force would keep the
cable straight as it lengthened.
3.2 Comfort Charts
The human element of artificial gravity is still little
understood in the way Earth’s gravity is understood.
Essentially no precedent exists for architects designing
IAC-18-D4.1.4
artificial gravity experimentation, and while
mathematical parameters serve as loose theoretical
boundaries, there is no substitute for the actual human
experience. Comfort charts, graphs delineating zones
in which conditions are the least disruptive to the
typical human habitat, have been researched since the
early 1960’s with the rise of government-funded space
station planning [8].
Few researchers have published work regarding
comfort charts, and what data exists has proven to be
less than fully congruent with other published work.
Nonetheless, a few parameters appear to be agreed
upon. A maximum centripetal acceleration is
recommended at 6rpm, and the minimum centripetal
acceleration falls between 0.1g and 0.3g [8]. No
maximum radius of rotation appears to be agreed upon.
While the charts are still limited to visualization of
mathematical relationships between parameters as
opposed to artificial gravity itself, it serves as a
stepping stone for further research.
4. Moonshot Strategy Consideration
Oftentimes, these science-fiction-like concepts
inspire rallies for a moonshot approach. A moonshot
describes an ambitious, exploratory developmental path
that leads to breakthrough technology. Organizers of
moonshot approaches rarely have expectations for near-
term profitability or return. There are three key
components that must be present for success [9]. First,
the moonshot inspires, not purely from a financial gain
standpoint but for individuals to go above and beyond in
pursuit of a greater vision. Second, it is credible. A
successful moonshot follows a detailed assessment of
technological trends and the present market climate.
Finally, it is imaginative. Moonshot technology is not
purely an iterative improvement on an existent
technology, but it imagines the future of a given
industry and society.
While this future-back approach to strategy is a
critical driver in creating the technologies of the future,
the moonshot approach can have significant
disadvantages. Too much change too quickly can
challenge both visionaries and investors alike.
Moonshot approaches almost exclusively require
sustained political and financial support, and this
support is often drawn from a single or few sources
within a given industry. Furthermore, moonshots often
draw significant resources in time, money and resources
from a company’s normal operations [10].
The term “moonshot” comes from one of America’s
boldest moments when we landed men on the moon less
than 12 years after the Soviet Union launched Sputnik
into the vast unknown of space. While this feat was
remarkable and indeed blazed a new trail for space
technology, it would be false to believe this success
stood alone. In fact, it was built on a strong foundation
Page 4 of 7
 69th International Astronautical Congress (IAC), Bremen, Germany, 1-5 October 2018.
Copyright ©2018 by the International Astronautical Federation (IAF). All rights reserved.
of basic research. Rocketry was a known science based
on ballistic missile programs that had been initially
developed in the 1940s, and the physics of orbital flight
were built on 17th century Newtonian physics [11].
The development of artificial gravity is not yet
suited for a moonshot-driven approach, largely due to
the lack of fundamental research regarding human
performance. Because of the high-cost nature of
astronautics and space exploration as a whole, funding
directed solely toward the end-goal without due
diligence to the basic science would be misplaced.
Despite the excitement that a moonshot approach
inspires, artificial gravity technology is not yet ripe for
this model’s high-risk, high-cost nature.
5. Lily Pad Strategy Consideration
An alternative strategy that values an incremental
approach to technology development is the lily pad
model. At the opposite end of the risk-reward spectrum
from the moonshot approach lies low-risk, low-cost
incremental innovation in proven areas. The lily pad
approach, developed by a team at Purdue University led
by Dr. Joseph Sinfield, challenges the assumption that
increased cost correlates with greater reward [12]. When
return is reframed as a positive impact and not solely a
financial benefit, investments can be placed in a lower
risk, high-return sphere. High-impact innovations can be
achieved in this manner if the method by which they are
achieved are pursued through proactive, capability-
building investments and advancements.
Enabling innovations, coined “lily pads” in Dr.
Sinfield’s 2016 article in the MIT Sloan Review, have
the ability to deliver significant impact across multiple
contexts by placing the focus not only on users of
technology but on how impact unfolds. Conceptual
advancements and fundamental technical discoveries
represent the first stage of the lily pad model, even
though they may have little impact on the intended end-
goal technology. Emerging capabilities are developed
and introduced in market areas that are prime for
adoption, and progress in one area builds investment
and support that can create a path forward for a
subsequent capability. Capabilities are linked to user
needs in their respective application spaces with the
goal to satisfy the user who is ready to adopt now to
build that foundation of political and financial support
on the way to the larger goal.
Enabling innovations carry a common set of
qualities that guide investments in innovation. First,
these innovations offer multiple paths from its
fundamental principles to its greater impact. Second,
they have relevance in many application spaces to solve
a variety of problems for a variety of end-users. They
have the potential to challenge preconceived
worldviews and introduce a new outlook for the future.
Enabling technologies have headroom, areas of
IAC-18-D4.1.4
significant improvement or expansion into new
contexts. Finally, they can be packaged into diverse
solution forms to drive a predictable cascade of
innovations and impact.
Due to the complexity and cost of developing
artificial gravity, an incremental strategy that generates
sustainable resources and funding is well-suited to
pursue such high-impact innovation. Risk is reduced by
sharing it across multiple application spaces with users
who are primed for adoption now instead of far in the
future in an unclear marketspace. New application
spaces can be defined broadly while the technology is
still in early stages of fundamental research, and
partnerships can be developed with a range of industries
in anticipation of budding lily pad technologies.
In order to implement a lily pad approach to
artificial gravity development, the astronautics
community must be prepared to actively shape the
ecosystem. The factors influencing the ecosystem
include economic, sociological, systemic, and technical,
and cultural norms and policies may need to be
challenged to create an environment in which
innovation can blossom.
Artificial gravity is already being implemented on
smaller scales in unrelated industries, demonstrating
great potential for a range of enabling technologies and
partnerships. Research exists for direct, centrifugally-
induced fabrication of alginate beads at polymer-tube
micronozzles. By spinning the mounted tubes, they can
be aligned and even allow for alginate solutions with
viscosities up to 50,000 times that of water [13].
Integrated circuits have also been improved by artificial
gravity as voids have been shown to be effectively
removed by heating and rotation [14]. Centrifugation on
gasless system combustion has also been shown to
influence chemical conversion and could possibly aid in
solving practical problems such as production of
coatings and gradient materials [15]. A partnership
could also be established with the private healthcare
sector and academia. Research is ongoing as to the
effects of daily artificial gravity on the human in the
context of preventing bed rest-induced cardiovascular
conditioning, and dynamic cyclic loading has been
shown to induce bone formation in aging patients [16].
6. Conclusion
In reflecting upon the 50 years since Stanley
Kubrick’s iconic film 2001: A Space Odyssey, it is
difficult to not be excited in looking ahead to the next
50 years. Artificial gravity has long existed as a concept
and has since permeated mainstream pop culture
through science fiction film and fiction. The future of
safe, sustainable space exploration relies on the success
of technologies such as artificial gravity in light of the
great challenges such as the harmful physiological
effects of weightlessness. While pursuit of artificial
Page 5 of 7
 69th International Astronautical Congress (IAC), Bremen, Germany, 1-5 October 2018.
Copyright ©2018 by the International Astronautical Federation (IAF). All rights reserved.
gravity by means of a moonshot approach is thrilling –
indeed the very term moonshot inspires visions of one
of America’s finest moments – a strategy that combines
bold vision with incremental development is best-suited.
By pursuing continuous improvement in diverse, ripe
markets and application spaces, an accelerated low-risk
future-back growth strategy for artificial gravity can be
implemented through enabling innovations.
Acknowledgements
The author would like to extend her gratitude to Dr.
Jeff Greenblatt for his continued support and
encouragement. She would also like to thank her
friends, family, and mentors for their guidance and
confidence.
References
[1] W.H. Paloski, (January 1, 2004). Sensory-Motor
Adaptation to Space Flight: Human Balance Control
and Artificial Gravity.
[2] G. Clement. International roadmap for artificial
gravity research, NPJ, Microgravity. 29 (2017).
[3] W.H. Paloski, (January 1, 2004). Sensory-Motor
Adaptation to Space Flight: Human Balance Control
and Artificial Gravity.
[4] M. Shepanek, (May 18, 2015). Preparing for Long
Duration Space Missions [PowerPoint slides].
[5] B.G. Drake, K.D. Watts, (March 2014). Human
Exploration of Mars Design Reference Architecture 5.0
(Addendum #2).
[6] E.E. Petersen, G.A. Hrinda. Investigation of
Tethered Artificial Gravity Concepts for Manned Mars
Exploration, IAC-16.B3.7.9x35630, 67th International
Astronautical Congress, Guadalajara, Mexico, 2016,
October.
[7] Clément G., Bukley A., Paloski W. (2007) History of
Artificial Gravity. In: Clément G., Bukley A. (eds)
Artificial Gravity. The Space Technology Library, vol
20. Springer, New York, NY.
IAC-18-D4.1.4
[8] T. W. Hall, (2006). Artificial Gravity,
Visualization, Empathy and Design. Space 2006.
[9] Anthony, Scott D., and Mark Johnson. “What a
Good Moonshot Is Really For.” Harvard Business
Review, 7 Aug. 2014, hbr.org/2013/05/what-a-good-
moonshot-is-really-2?autocomplete=true.
[10] Thomson, Rebecca. “5 Reasons Why Continuous
Innovation Beats 'Moonshots'.” Innovation Enterprise, 1
Sept. 2016,
channels.theinnovationenterprise.com/articles/5-
reasons-why-continuous-innovation-beats-
moonshots.In-text Citation
[11] Casadevall, Arturo, and Ferric C. Fang. “Moonshot
Science-Risks and Benefits.” MBio, American Society
for Microbiology, 7 Sept. 2016,
mbio.asm.org/content/7/4/e01381-16.full.In-text
Citation
[12] Sinfield, Joseph V., and Freddy Solis. Finding a
Lower-Risk Path to High-Impact Innovations. MIT
Sloan Management Review, 13 June 2016,
sloanreview.mit.edu/article/finding-a-lower-risk-path-
to-high-impact-innovations/.In-text Citation
[13] Stefan Haeberle, Lars Naegele, Robert Burger,
Felix von Stetten, Roland Zengerle & Jens Ducrée
(2008) Alginate bead fabrication and encapsulation of
living cells under centrifugally induced artificial gravity
conditions, Journal of Microencapsulation, 25:4, 267-
274, DOI: 10.1080/02652040801954333.
[14] Linliu, K. (1997). U.S. Patent No. US5866478A.
Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
[15] Yukhvid V.I., Sanin V.N., Merzhanov A.G. (2001)
The Influence Of High Artificial Gravity on SHS
Processes. In: Regel L.L., Wilcox W.R. (eds) Processing
by Centrifugation. Springer, Boston, MA.
[16] Stenger, M.B., Evans, J.M., Knapp, C.F. et al. Eur J
Appl Physiol (2012) 112: 605.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00421-011-2005-1
Page 6 of 7
 69th International Astronautical Congress (IAC), Bremen, Germany, 1-5 October 2018.
Copyright ©2018 by the International Astronautical Federation (IAF). All rights reserved.

IAC-18-D4.1.4 Page 7 of 7