Engineering topics

Nicole C Strock

Publications and source records attributed to Nicole C Strock.

5 records

NASA NTRS2026

Performance Optimization for Lunar Extravehicular Activity Readiness (POLAR) Study: Methods Paper

To better understand which aspects of physical fitness may be most related to performance during Lunar surface operations and thereby help to inform the current NASA fitness standards, much can be learned from fields encompassing the “tactical athlete.” Other physically demanding professions such as law enforcement, military, or rescue professionals often require candidates to meet occupationally-relevant fitness standards. The determination of such standards is a multistep process, including both objective and subjective measures, to determine tasks essential to occupational performance and identify the minimal fitness profile needed to meet physical demands of the job. Notably, fitness is only one component which may contribute to the demands of astronaut selection, flight assignment, and occupational performance. Utilizing a framework to systematically determine which domains of fitness most contribute to relevant job tasks can aid in the refinement of current NASA-STD-3001 fitness standards. Therefore, NASA’s Exercise Physiology & Countermeasures Laboratory conducted the Performance Optimization for Lunar Extravehicular Activity Readiness (POLAR) study to identify and examine a comprehensive list of fitness tests (including NASA-STD-3001 assessments: 1-Repetition Maximum [1-RM] bench press and deadlift) and determine preliminary relationships between identified fitness parameters and novel Artemis-relevant tasks to help inform future investigations for the continued development of aerobic and muscular fitness standards for surface EVAs. This was accomplished through 1) a review of the literature relating fitness assessments to simulated or real EVA performance to identify fitness tests that are most correlated with simulated EVA task performance; 2) a task analysis following a modified framework for physical employment standards development to down select mission critical tasks; and 3) development and pilot testing of a novel, portable Artemis-relevant EVA task circuit to relate to a battery of fitness assessments. The current report describes the methodology used to complete the task analysis, EVA task circuit development, and the pilot study.

Nicole C Strock↗

NASA NTRS2023

Female Astronauts Exhibit Greater Reductions in Aerobic Peak Power Following Long-Duration Space Flight than Males

BACKGROUND: Long-duration exposure to microgravity during space flight causes cardiovascular deconditioning, ultimately reducing aerobic fitness. While sex-based differences play an integral role in health on Earth, there is a paucity of data to inform space flight-induced health and performance implications for female astronauts, which may be critical to ensure health, safety, and mission success. Therefore, this retrospective investigation characterized aerobic capacity in female and male astronauts to inform whether sex differences exist from pre to postflight. METHODS: A NASA historical database (n=47 crew; 11 female, 36 male) of International Space Station (ISS) crewmembers was used to characterize sex differences in aerobic capacity changes from pre to postflight to update the NASA Aerobic and Muscle Risk Evidence Report. Aerobic capacity (VO2pk; ml/kg/min) and peak power (W) were assessed using a graded cycling exercise protocol that included a 3-min warmup at 50 W, with stepwise increases in resistance (25 W/min) until volitional fatigue. Group differences in baseline demographics and the percent change in aerobic capacity from preflight (~90 days before launch) to postflight (~3 days after return) were compared using independent t-tests. Significance was set at P<0.05 (Mean ±SD). RESULTS: At preflight, females were younger (44.5±6.6 vs 48.6±5.6 yrs; p=0.041), weighed less (68.8±10.0 vs 81.0±8.8 kg; p< 0.001), with lower VO2pk (32.8±5.9 vs 37.8±6.0 ml/kg/min; p=0.021) and aerobic peak power (229±42 vs 299±52 W; p< 0.001) than males, but had similar heart rate at VO2pk (176.0±7.3 vs 173.0±10.8 beats/min; p=0.406). ISS flight durations (F: 205.0±58.3 vs M: 176.0±40.5 days; p=0.061) and reductions in VO2pk from pre to postflight were comparable between sexes (F: -11.8±10.7%; M: -8.8%±7.9%; p=0.32). However, females had a greater reduction in aerobic peak power than males (−13.3%±8.9% vs −4.9%±8.8%; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate that some indicators of fitness (i.e., aerobic peak power) are more impacted in female astronauts compared to males after long-duration space flight missions. Future investigations with larger sample sizes are necessary to identify the physiological basis of sex-based differences and develop effective countermeasure approaches for both sexes.

Nicole C Strock↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Teal Cycle Ergometer Vibration Isolation and Stabilization System Human-in-the-Loop Ground Evaluation for Long-Duration Spaceflight

Purpose: To counter the deleterious effects of weightlessness on the cardiopulmonary system, astronauts living on the International Space Station exercise on a variety of countermeasure equipment including the Cycle Ergometer Vibration Isolation and Stabilization System (CEVIS). Operational since 2001, the onboard CEVIS will be replaced by a new model, known as Teal CEVIS (TC). As a part of ground evaluation, TC hardware underwent human-in-the-loop (HITL) testing to verify the TC hardware produces workloads that elicit physiologic responses comparable to a laboratory cycle ergometer (LAB). Methods: Seven subjects (5 M/2 F) performed submaximal cycle ergometer testing with indirect calorimetry measures on TC and LAB on separate test days. Testing consisted of graded 30 watt increases in workload until subjects reached 85% of age-predicted max heart rate (HR). Exercise outcomes included rate of oxygen uptake (VO2; liters/min), rate of energy expenditure (REE; kcal/min), and HR (beats/min). Linear mixed models (LMM) were fitted to compare VO2, REE, and HR responses between devices across power outputs with fixed effects for power (P) and device (D) and with random effects for subject. LMM effect coefficients (β), std errors (SE), pseudo-partial R2 of effects (pR2), and model likelihood ratio statistics (χ2, Pr(> chisq); α<.05) are provided. Results: LMM main effects for P and D were observed for VO2 (βp=.0107, SE = .0002, pR2=0.97; βd = -0.075, SE = 0.019, pR2=0.14; χ2(1)= 13.57, p<.001), such that VO2 was higher across stages on TC. Main effects of P and D were observed for REE (βp= .0586, SE = 0.001, pR2= 0.97; βd = -0.33208, SE = 0.099, pR2= 0.056; χ2(1)=10.481, p < .01), such that REE was higher across power outputs on TC. A P x D interaction was observed for HR, along with main effects for P and D (βp x d =-0.048, SE = 0.02, pR2=0.048; βp= 0.42, SE = 0.016, pR2=0.87; χ2(1) = 5.398, p = 0.02), such that higher workloads elicited a greater difference in HR between devices. Conclusions: HITL results show, TC elicits greater physiologic responses across power outputs compared to LAB. However, pR2 for device effects show small differences between devices. Therefore, TC can be expected to provide appropriate physiological stimulus across workloads and be considered a reliable tool to mitigate the effects of weightlessness.

Cycle Ergometer Vibration and Isolation System↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Determining the Importance of In-Flight Treadmill Running Capabilities for Maintaining Astronaut Health and Performance

BACKGROUND: Physical deconditioning induced via spaceflight is most effectively attenuated through in-flight exercise training. Throughout its evolution, NASA has implemented advancements to in-flight exercise countermeasures, culminating in the triad of devices currently used aboard the International Space Station (ISS): a treadmill (T2), cycle ergometer (CEVIS), and resistance exercise device (ARED). Despite high-quality exercise devices and prescriptions, many crewmembers experience reductions in both aerobic capacity (VO2peak pre-post mean change: -10%) and strength (knee isokinetic pre-post mean change: -15%). As NASA moves towards exploration missions, which will impose greater size, power, and time constraints on exercise systems in addition to physically demanding surface extravehicular activities (EVAs), providing robust capabilities to protect crew health and performance should be prioritized. OVERVIEW: Future missions to the Lunar and Martian surfaces will include EVAs requiring ambulation and greater physical exertion than those in Apollo missions. While the exercise device concepts planned for exploration missions include resistive and aerobic capabilities, they do not allow for ambulation. Specifically, the countermeasure planned for Artemis Lunar transit is a flywheel device, which provides both exercise modalities through a single resistive cable. While more robust than the flywheel, the devices planned for the Lunar orbital space station, and subsequent Mars habitats, will provide distinct aerobic and resistance modalities capable of achieving high intensities. However, these modalities do not include a treadmill. Recent research suggests that greater in-flight running intensity and volume attenuate decrements in aerobic capacity and strength; however, this has not been experimentally confirmed. The Exploration Exercise Treadmill Requirements study is currently underway, aiming to determine the effects of exercising without a treadmill on aerobic capacity, strength, bone density, and sensorimotor function during long-duration spaceflight. DISCUSSION: Providing running capabilities on future exploration missions may help to maintain astronaut physical ability, reduce injury, and promote health. Studies quantifying the effects of using exploration exercise devices are in progress, which will help provide critical recommendations on whether a treadmill is a necessary component of the in-flight training regime. This presentation will discuss the capabilities of exploration exercise devices and the potential implications of not having running capabilities during long-duration spaceflight.

Alyssa N Varanoske↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Increased Treadmill Running and Lower-Body Resistance Training Intensity May Attenuate Aerobic Capacity Loss During Spaceflight

BACKGROUND: In-flight exercise training is the primary countermeasure to mitigate spaceflight-induced decrements in strength and aerobic capacity. Despite high-quality exercise capabilities and prescriptions aboard the International Space Station (ISS), most astronauts experience strength and aerobic capacity loss; however, significant individual variability exists. Recent findings suggest that greater in-flight running (i.e., distance per session) and lower-body resistance exercise intensity (i.e., load relative to body weight) help preserve strength. Whether similar variables contribute to the preservation of aerobic capacity during spaceflight is unknown. METHODS: A NASA database of exercise performance metrics was used to identify long-duration (≥ 90 days) ISS crew who completed pre- and post-flight aerobic capacity testing (VO2peak, cycle ergometry, n = 44). “Responders” (R) were classified as those that maintained or improved VO2peak (n = 13; 1.4 ± 3.3%), and “non-responders” (NR) were those with the most severe decrements (n = 13; -20.0 ± 3.4%) from pre- to post-flight. In-flight exercise records (cycling, treadmill, resistance exercise) were aggregated across flight weeks. Independent t-tests or Mann-Whitney U tests were used to compare training variables (i.e., frequency, time, intensity, volume) between R and NR. RESULTS: Consistent with the variables contributing to strength protection, in-flight running distance (R: 5.0 ± 0.7; NR: 4.2 ± 1.0 km/session, p = 0.020) and lower-body resistance exercise intensity (R: 110.9 ± 27.3; NR: 91.7 ± 16.5% body weight, p = 0.040) were greater in R than NR. Active running time was also greater in R than NR (R: 101.1 ± 20.4; NR: 82.3 ± 23.5 min/wk; p = 0.039). However, no group differences in cycling frequency, intensity, or time, as well as upper body or core resistance exercise intensity, volume, or frequency were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Although physiologically distinct stimuli, the exercise training variables contributing to the preservation of both strength and aerobic capacity during microgravity exposure appear to be consistent. Increased running time and distance, but not cycling, combined with higher-intensity lower-body resistance exercise, may help mitigate losses in both aerobic capacity and strength during long-duration spaceflight.

Alyssa N Varanoske↗