Engineering topics

Shupert, C. L.

Publications and source records attributed to Shupert, C. L..

5 records

NASA NTRS1999

Ankle and hip postural strategies defined by joint torques

Previous studies have identified two discrete strategies for the control of posture in the sagittal plane based on EMG activations, body kinematics, and ground reaction forces. The ankle strategy was characterized by body sway resembling a single-segment-inverted pendulum and was elicited on flat support surfaces. In contrast, the hip strategy was characterized by body sway resembling a double-segment inverted pendulum divided at the hip and was elicited on short or compliant support surfaces. However, biomechanical optimization models have suggested that hip strategy should be observed in response to fast translations on a flat surface also, provided the feet are constrained to remain in contact with the floor and the knee is constrained to remain straight. The purpose of this study was to examine the experimental evidence for hip strategy in postural responses to backward translations of a flat support surface and to determine whether analyses of joint torques would provide evidence for two separate postural strategies. Normal subjects standing on a flat support surface were translated backward with a range of velocities from fast (55 cm/s) to slow (5 cm/s). EMG activations and joint kinematics showed pattern changes consistent with previous experimental descriptions of mixed hip and ankle strategy with increasing platform velocity. Joint torque analyses revealed the addition of a hip flexor torque to the ankle plantarflexor torque during fast translations. This finding indicates the addition of hip strategy to ankle strategy to produce a continuum of postural responses. Hip torque without accompanying ankle torque (pure hip strategy) was not observed. Although postural control strategies have previously been defined by how the body moves, we conclude that joint torques, which indicate how body movements are produced, are useful in defining postural control strategies. These results also illustrate how the biomechanics of the body can transform discrete control patterns into a continuum of postural corrections.

Non-NASA Center↗

NASA NTRS1999

The timing of galvanic vestibular stimulation affects responses to platform translation

We compared the effects of galvanic vestibular stimulation applied at 0, 0.5, 1.5 and 2.5 s prior to a backward platform translation on postural responses. The effect of the galvanic stimulation was largest on the final equilibrium position of the center of pressure (CoP). The largest effects occurred for the 0.5 and 0-s pre-period, when the dynamic CoP pressure changes in response to both the galvanic stimulus and the platform translation coincided. The shift in the final equilibrium position was also larger than the sum of the shifts for the galvanic stimulus and the platform translation alone for the 0.5 and 0-s pre-periods. The initial rate of change of the CoP response to the platform translation was not significantly affected in any condition. Changes in the peak CoP position could be accounted for by local interaction of CoP velocity changes induced by the galvanic and translation responses alone, but the changes in final equilibrium position could only be accounted for by a change in global body orientation. These findings suggest that the contribution of vestibulospinal information is greatest during the dynamic phase of the postural response, and that the vestibular system contributes most to the later components of the postural response, particularly to the final equilibrium position. These findings suggest that a nonlinear interaction between the vestibular signal induced by the galvanic current and the sensory stimuli produced by the platform translation occurs when the two stimuli are presented within 1 s, during the dynamic phase of the postural response to the galvanic stimulus. When presented at greater separations in time, the stimuli appear to be treated as independent events, such that no interaction occurs. Copyright 1999 Elsevier Science B.V.

Non-NASA Center↗

NASA NTRS1998

Role of vestibular information in initiation of rapid postural responses

Patients with bilateral vestibular loss have difficulty maintaining balance without stepping when standing in tandem, on compliant surfaces, across narrow beams, or on one foot, especially with eyes closed. Normal individuals (with no sensory impairment) maintain balance in these tasks by employing quick, active hip rotation (a "hip strategy"). The absence of a hip strategy in vestibular patients responding to translations of a short support surface has previously been taken as evidence that the use of hip strategy requires an intact vestibular system. However, many tasks requiring hip strategy alter one or a combination of important system characteristics, such as initial state of the body (tandem stance), dynamics (compliant surfaces), or biomechanical limits of stability (narrow beams). Therefore, the balance deficit in these tasks may result from a failure to account for these support surface alterations when planning and executing sensorimotor responses. In this study, we tested the hypothesis that vestibular information is critical to trigger a hip strategy even on an unaltered support surface, which imposes no changes on the system characteristics. We recorded the postural responses of vestibular patients and control subjects with eyes closed to rearward support surface translations of varying velocity, in erect stance on a firm, flat surface. Subjects were instructed to maintain balance without stepping, if possible. Faster translation velocities (25 cm/s or more) produced a consistent pattern of early hip torque (first 400 ms) in control subjects (i.e., a hip strategy). Most of the patients with bilateral vestibular loss responded to the same translation velocities with similar torques. Contrary to our hypothesis, we conclude that vestibular function is not necessary to trigger a hip strategy. We postulate, therefore, that the balance deficit previously observed in vestibular patients during postural tasks that elicit a hip strategy may have been due to the sensorimotor consequences of the system alterations imposed by the postural tasks used in those studies. Preliminary results from two younger patients who lost vestibular function as infants indicate that age, duration of vestibular loss, and/or the timing of the loss may also be factors that can influence the use of hip strategy as a rapid postural response.

NASA Discipline Neuroscience↗

NASA NTRS1996

Effects of vestibular loss on head stabilization in response to head and body perturbations

Control of head position during postural responses is important to facilitate both the interpretation of vestibular signals and the stabilization of gaze. In these experiments, we compared head stabilization for two different postural tasks: 1) in response to perturbations at the head, and 2) in response to perturbations induced at the support surface, which perturb both body and head position. To determine whether normal vestibular function is necessary for head stabilization in these two tasks, responses to forward and backward mechanical perturbations of the head and body were compared for 13 normal subjects and 4 patients with profound bilateral vestibular loss (two with vestibular loss in adulthood and two in infancy). Normal subjects showed little neck muscle activity for body perturbations, but large, early activations in both neck extensors and flexors for head perturbations. In contrast, vestibular patients showed excessive neck muscle activation for body perturbations and reduced or absent neck muscle activity for head perturbations. Patients with vestibular loss in adulthood also showed increased head acceleration in response to both head and body perturbations, but patients with vestibular loss in infancy showed more normal head accelerations. For body perturbations, the differences in head acceleration between patients and normals were greater for later head acceleration peaks, indicating poor head control during the execution of the postural response. Trunk angle changes were also higher in the patients for forward body perturbations, indicating that poorer control of trunk position could have contributed to their poorer head stabilization. These results indicate that the vestibular system plays an important role in head and trunk stabilization for both head and body perturbations. However, the more normal head accelerations of the patients with infant vestibular loss also indicate that other mechanisms, possibly involving neck reflexes, can at least partially substitute for the vestibular system to provide head and trunk stabilization.

NASA Discipline Neuroscience↗

NASA NTRS1984

The Two Modes of Visual Processing: Implications for Spatial Orientation

The roles of the focal and ambient visual systems in spatial orientation are discussed. The two modes are defined and compared. The contribution of each system is illustrated through examples such as spatial disorientation/motion sickness, vehicle guidance/night driving, visual narrowing under stress/cortical brain damage, and aircraft instrumentation. Emphasis is placed on the need for testing procedures for the ambient system.

Leibowitz, H. W.↗