Value chain · CLM-1374
In plain terms
A 1979 NASA paper let small, hand-picked crews live in faster-spinning habitats (3 turns a minute), but held large settlements of ordinary people to 1 turn a minute or less, to avoid motion sickness.
The claim as recorded
A habitat-design paper in NASA SP-428 (1979) sets the maximum rotation rate by population: 3 rpm for a selected crew of 100, 2 rpm for a habitat of 10,000, and no more than 1 rpm for a general population of a million. The paper sizes sphere, cylinder, torus and "crystal palace" shapes against these limits.
Scope and limits
Design criteria, not measured tolerance limits. SP-413 uses 1 rpm for its 10,000-person torus (CLM-1372), more conservative than this paper's 2 rpm for 10^4. The two are different design choices, not a contradiction.
What it assumes
Rotating-room adaptation results on Earth carry over to long stays in space.
Where it comes from
PDF p.48 (printed p.36): "most personnel adapt to rotation rates of 3 rpm"; the 3 rpm rate is chosen for the 100-person habitat; for the general-population habitat (10^6) rates above 1 rpm "should be avoided" (text layer reads "I rpm", OCR); "it is reasonable to consider 2 rpm as its rotation rate" (the 10^4 habitat). PDF p.52 (printed p.40), Table 3 "PARAMETRIC DESIGN CONDITIONS": maximum rotation 3, 2 and 1 rpm for populations 10^2, 10^4 and 10^6 (superscripts lost in the text layer).
Basis: design-criterion rotation rates in rpm, by habitat population
Related records
- Answers question
- QST-015 not published in this release
Cite this
energyaperture.com/c/clm-1374
CLM-1374, Energy Aperture, as of 1979.
Connected records
Other published records linked to this one. A list, not a judgement.