Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Motion Capture”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 55 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

TOWARD A METHOD FOR SCALING HUMAN BODY MODELS IN AN IMU-BASED WORKFLOW

BACKGROUND Scaled biomechanical models can more accurately inform crew health decisions when tailored to the wide range of astronaut sizes. One component to improve scaling of existing models to better represent each unique astronaut’s size is the individual length scaling of limbs. Traditionally, these lengths are determined by motion capture or manual measurement. A new method is herein proposed for length scaling which can be done by measuring linear and angular accelerations at a desired point during isolated motion around a point of rotation, then calculating the distance between the desired point and point of rotation. When an Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) device is placed at the distal point of a limb, the isolated motion is about that limb’s proximal joint. For example, to measure forearm length, an IMU is placed at the wrist, the point of rotation is at the elbow, and the isolated motion is forearm flexion and extension. These calculated lengths are then used to scale models to each unique astronaut’s size, thereby improving the applicability of the model. This method of scaling limb segments can be used for any limb that has an easily defined proximal joint for the limb to rotate around including hands, arms, legs, feet. Utilizing IMUs for data collection also provides the synergistic ability to record data without a dedicated space in a room with many cameras, therefore reducing the data collection footprint, or record data where optical motion capture is not possible, such as inside a spacesuit. METHODS AND RESULTS To test this method, upper body data collection was performed with 5 Xsens DOT IMUs on a single subject. IMUs consist of an accelerometer, a gyroscope, and a magnetometer which collect linear acceleration, angular velocity, and magnetic fluctuations, respectively. Before any ground-based laboratory collection, the magnetic fluctuations are used to correct the heading of the IMU in space relative to the Earth’s magnetic field. The direct measurement of angular velocity is integrated to calculate angular acceleration. Then the linear acceleration ( a ) and angular acceleration (α) are solved using r = at/α to calculate the radius, which in this case is the distance between the IMU and the point of rotation (i.e., segment length). The IMU must be placed at the most distal point of the limb being measured (i.e., ankle if measuring lower leg length) and the test plan must consist of an isolated motion about that limb’s proximal joint (i.e., knee flexion and extension if measuring lower leg length). The distances (radii) calculated at every time interval were filtered (bandpass filter keeping 5th-90th percentile data) to eliminate outliers and spurious data that occur when the isolated motion was stopped or nearly stopped. The remaining distances were averaged, resulting in the calculated limb length. Scaling factors were then computed by dividing the calculated limb length by the unscaled model’s length. These scale factors are plugged into the Scale Tool in OpenSim [1,2] to apply the scaling to the OpenSim Full Body Rajagopal Model [3,4]. Manual measurements of limb lengths were taken before data collection started and used for comparing against the calculated lengths. The Anthropometric Survey of US Army Personnel (ANSUR II) [5] was also used as a third source of reference for limb length measurements. The following measurements were retrieved from the subject before data collection: 34.5 cm from L1 to C7 (thorax), 25.7 cm from C7 Joint Center (JC) to head vertex (neck and head), 36.3 cm from shoulder JC to elbow JC (humerus), 29.5 cm from elbow JC to wrist JC (forearm), and 16.2 cm from clavicle to acromion (clavicle). Of those five, forearm and humerus lengths were calculated using this proposed method to obtain preliminary results. The forearm length after filtering and averaging was calculated to be 37.6 cm. This is a 28% overestimation from the measured forearm length (29.5 cm). The humerus length after filtering and averaging was calculated to be 47.8 cm. This is a 31% difference from the measured subject length (36.3 cm). Sources of error include imperfect isolated motion (method currently expects that motion should be perfectly circular in a 2D plane, include no rotation of the IMU, and be relatively smooth; a more secure IMU attachment method will help), unrefined filter techniques (removed highest and lowest values with 20% high and low pass filters and no smoothing filters), arbitrary removal of stopped or near stopped data (kept data for only a short range before and after the angular velocity peaking), and a more representative method for removing gravitational acceleration is needed (current method is to zero all accelerations against a baseline taken just before the isolated motion which does not account for the gravitational acceleration changed due to IMU rotation during movement). Addressing these error sources will improve the accuracy of the limb length calculation. Next steps include creating a method for whole-body scaling estimation using individual limb scale factors. Continued pursuit of these techniques is expected to enable acquiring anthropometric information using only IMUs in real-time.

E. K. Marecki↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Toward A Method for Scaling Human Body Models in an IMU-Based Workflow

- Scaled biomechanical models can more accurately inform crew health decisions when tailored to the wide range of astronaut sizes. One component to improve scaling of existing models to better represent each unique astronaut’s size is the individual length scaling of limbs. Traditionally, limb lengths are determined by motion capture or manual measurement. - A new method is herein proposed for length scaling which can be done by measuring linear and angular accelerations at a desired point during isolated motion around a point of rotation, then calculating the distance between the desired point and point of rotation. - When an Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) device is placed at the distal point of a limb, the isolated motion is about that limb’s proximal joint. This method of scaling limb segments can be used for any limb that has an easily defined proximal joint for the limb to rotate around including hands, arms, legs, feet. - Calculated limb lengths are then used to scale models to each unique astronaut’s size, thereby improving the applicability of the model. - This method was investigated as a possible away to obtain scaling information in data collections where IMUs are worn, but optical motion capture may not always be available, such as inside spacesuits or during crew exercise on the International Space Station.

E. K. Marecki↗
NASA NTRS2023

The Digital Astronaut Simulation

The Digital Astronaut Simulation provides a human biomechanics modeling, simulation, and analysis capability that is enabling spaceflight hardware design to incorporate the human dynamic input early in development cycles as well as characterize performance after prototypes are built. The enhanced toolset includes a modified multibody model, updated motion capture marker sets, and refined methods for scaling and inverse kinematics. These provide increased accuracy for applications in exercise and extravehicular tasks in reduced gravity, especially where upper extremity motion is involved. A core capability highlighted is the calculation of ground reaction forces, moments, and center of pressure based on motion capture. Verification and validation efforts include comparison with force platform measurements.

Human Spaceflight↗
NASA NTRS2020

Multibody Based Digital Astronaut Dynamics Simulation

BACKGROUND: This study provides the Software, Robotics, & Simulation Division at the NASA Johnson Space Center with a verification tool for multibody dynamics simulation requiring human motion. The motivation stems from current studies of several Vibration Isolation & Stabilization(VIS)system designs that attenuate the moments and forces which would be transmitted to a spacecraft during an exercise. A multibody dynamics model for a proposed VIS was available previously[1], therefore modeling of the VIS was not needed for this work. The interest here is in creating the multibody dynamics model of an astronaut in motion which may be utilized independently or while attached to a mechanism. An existing simulation [2] that utilizes OpenSim [3,4] and an in-house multibody dynamics package (MBDyn) [5] is used in order to verify the astronaut model. The main advantage this model will have over the existing simulation is that everything will be processed in one tool. METHODS AND RESULTS: Creating the simulation required; estimation of Body Segment Inertial Parameters (BSIP),a multibody model of the human-VIS system, joint acceleration profiles, and input files for MBDyn, which is used for this analysis. The scaling factors provided by Dumas et al. [6] are utilized in estimating the BSIP. Anthropometric data are used for estimating these parameters, the Anthropometric Survey of US Army Personnel (ANSUR II) [7] was the source. The astronaut model consists of 15 bodies, 14 joints and 32 degrees of freedom, with the dynamics topology generated using the center of mass locations and anthropometric data. MBDyn has an option for prescribed joint motion (PJM), which requires joint acceleration data as input. The joint angle data is first obtained from a motion capture system and then processed through code that has been created to generate approximate joint acceleration profiles. The topology tree for the astronaut model begins at the right foot up to the pelvis where there is one branch for going down the left leg and another for the torso. The torso branch leads to branches for the arms and a leaf body for the head/neck segment. For attachment to the VIS, the heel of the right foot is connected to the VIS platform through a fixed joint, resembling a foot restraint. The left foot does not attach to the platform in order to prevent a system with a closed loop. Topology and symmetry of the astronaut model were verified through kinematic analysis. Further verification of the forces and moments transmitted to the VIS were verified against the existing simulation. There was a satisfactory level of agreement when testing a simple motion, for example, rocking back and forth. Full exercise motions are to be tested soon. The main outcome has been a novel application of MBDyn for biomechanics modeling that is now available for dynamic simulations involving human motion. The estimation of BSIP was another useful result of this study, requiring only 15 inputs for generating mass properties of a theoretical astronaut model. Expansion on this work is possible by going through an alternative route in obtaining the joint motion data. Instead of high-tech and often expensive motion capture systems, an individual may watch videos with high focus and at a slow motion for each individual segment in order to determine the initial and final time and angle for that specific degree of freedom. Synthetic trajectories may also be created if there is no video reference available.

F N Matari↗
NASA NTRS2012

Comparative Ergonomic Evaluation of Spacesuit and Space Vehicle Design

With the advent of the latest human spaceflight objectives, a series of prototype architectures for a new launch and reentry spacesuit that would be suited to the new mission goals. Four prototype suits were evaluated to compare their performance and enable the selection of the preferred suit components and designs. A consolidated approach to testing was taken: concurrently collecting suit mobility data, seat-suit-vehicle interface clearances, and qualitative assessments of suit performance within the volume of a Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle mockup. It was necessary to maintain high fidelity in a mockup and use advanced motion-capture technologies in order to achieve the objectives of the study. These seemingly mutually exclusive goals were accommodated with the construction of an optically transparent and fully adjustable frame mockup. The construction of the mockup was such that it could be dimensionally validated rapidly with the motioncapture system. This paper describes the method used to create a space vehicle mockup compatible with use of an optical motion-capture system, the consolidated approach for evaluating spacesuits in action, and a way to use the complex data set resulting from a limited number of test subjects to generate hardware requirements for an entire population. Kinematics, hardware clearance, anthropometry (suited and unsuited), and subjective feedback data were recorded on 15 unsuited and 5 suited subjects. Unsuited subjects were selected chiefly based on their anthropometry in an attempt to find subjects who fell within predefined criteria for medium male, large male, and small female subjects. The suited subjects were selected as a subset of the unsuited medium male subjects and were tested in both unpressurized and pressurized conditions. The prototype spacesuits were each fabricated in a single size to accommodate an approximately average-sized male, so select findings from the suit testing were systematically extrapolated to the extremes of the population to anticipate likely problem areas. This extrapolation was achieved by first comparing suited subjects performance with their unsuited performance, and then applying the results to the entire range of the population. The use of a transparent space vehicle mockup enabled the collection of large amounts of data during human-in-the-loop testing. Mobility data revealed that most of the tested spacesuits had sufficient ranges of motion for the selected tasks to be performed successfully. A suited subject's inability to perform a task most often stemmed from a combination of poor field of view in a seated position, poor dexterity of the pressurized gloves, or from suit/vehicle interface issues. Seat ingress and egress testing showed that problems with anthropometric accommodation did not exclusively occur with the largest or smallest subjects, but also with specific combinations of measurements that led to narrower seat ingress/egress clearance.

England, Scott↗
NASA NTRS2012

Postures and Motions Library Development for Verification of Ground Crew Human Systems Integration Requirements

Spacecraft and launch vehicle ground processing activities require a variety of unique human activities. These activities are being documented in a Primitive motion capture library. The Library will be used by the human factors engineering in the future to infuse real to life human activities into the CAD models to verify ground systems human factors requirements. As the Primitive models are being developed for the library the project has selected several current human factors issues to be addressed for the SLS and Orion launch systems. This paper explains how the Motion Capture of unique ground systems activities are being used to verify the human factors analysis requirements for ground system used to process the STS and Orion vehicles, and how the primitive models will be applied to future spacecraft and launch vehicle processing.

Jackson, Mariea Dunn↗
NASA NTRS2013

Postures and Motions Library Development for Verification of Ground Crew Human Factors Requirements

Spacecraft and launch vehicle ground processing activities require a variety of unique human activities. These activities are being documented in a primitive motion capture library. The library will be used by human factors engineering analysts to infuse real to life human activities into the CAD models to verify ground systems human factors requirements. As the primitive models are being developed for the library, the project has selected several current human factors issues to be addressed for the Space Launch System (SLS) and Orion launch systems. This paper explains how the motion capture of unique ground systems activities is being used to verify the human factors engineering requirements for ground systems used to process the SLS and Orion vehicles, and how the primitive models will be applied to future spacecraft and launch vehicle processing.

Stambolian, Damon↗
NASA NTRS2017

A Tool for the Automated Collection of Space Utilization Data: Three Dimensional Space Utilization Monitor

Space Human Factors and Habitability (SHFH) Element within the Human Research Program (HRP) and the Behavioral Health and Performance (BHP) Element are conducting research regarding Net Habitable Volume (NHV), the internal volume within a spacecraft or habitat that is available to crew for required activities, as well as layout and accommodations within the volume. NASA needs methods to unobtrusively collect NHV data without impacting crew time. Data required includes metrics such as location and orientation of crew, volume used to complete tasks, internal translation paths, flow of work, and task completion times. In less constrained environments methods exist yet many are obtrusive and require significant post-processing. Examplesused in terrestrial settings include infrared (IR) retro-reflective marker based motion capture, GPS sensor tracking, inertial tracking, and multi-camera methods Due to constraints of space operations many such methods are infeasible. Inertial tracking systems typically rely upon a gravity vector to normalize sensor readings,and traditional IR systems are large and require extensive calibration. However, multiple technologies have not been applied to space operations for these purposes. Two of these include: 3D Radio Frequency Identification Real-Time Localization Systems (3D RFID-RTLS) Depth imaging systems which allow for 3D motion capture and volumetric scanning (such as those using IR-depth cameras like the Microsoft Kinect or Light Detection and Ranging / Light-Radar systems, referred to as LIDAR)

Vos, Gordon A.↗
NASA NTRS2018

Influence of Load Profile on Biomechanics of the Squat and Deadlift

Long duration space travel will expose astronauts to extended periods of reduced gravity. Since gravity is not present to assist loading, astronauts will use resistive and aerobic exercise regimes for the duration of the space flight to counteract the effect reduced gravity has on the body. Astronauts will exercise on a flywheel based device on the second Orion Exploration Mission (EM2). The effect that the flywheel load profile has on biomechanics is unknown when compared to free weights or a simulated free weight profile. The purpose of this evaluation is to compare the differences in lower body kinematics and kinetics between the flywheel and free weight profile. Test subjects were instrumented with reflective markers for motion capture data collection while exercising on the Device for Aerobic and Resistive Training (DART) prototype developed by TDA Research, Inc. of Wheat Ridge, CO. Exercises performed were either the squat while wearing a harness or deadlift while grasping a T-bar, both of which interfaced with the DART through a rope cable. The DART, a motorized device controlled via software, is capable of producing different load profiles. Profiles include simulated free weights with adjustable eccentric overload capability and flywheel. Test variables included the applied device load and the load profile, both set through the DART software interface. Motion capture data was collected with a 12 camera system (Smart-DX, BTS Bioengineering, Brooklyn, NY). Bilateral ground reaction force data were collected with force plates (P6000, BTS Bioengineering). DART cable force was recorded through an internal load cell. Data was collected from a total of four test subjects. The three repetition maximum was determined for each test subject for both squat and deadlift. High, medium and low loads were determined based on this maximum. The test subject performed five repetitions of each exercise at each load and each test trial was repeated twice. Cadence was controlled during exercising. Biomechanical data were used to drive the models utilizing the OpenSim software platform. Subject specific models were scaled to match the anthropometrics of the test subjects and used to estimate the peak joint angle, joint range of motion, the peak joint moment and the joint moment impulse of the lower extremity joints and the lumbar joint.These are preliminary results because the data analysis is ongoing. There was a lot of inter-subject variability, however, in general, there was a greater peak lumbar flexion angle for the flywheel squat exercise. There was a trend towards a greater range of motion at the hip for the squat exercise with free weight. There was also a greater hip extension, lumbar extension and ankle plantar flexion impulse moment during the squat exercise with free weight. During the deadlift exercise, the peak knee flexion angle and peak knee extension moment were greater when using the free weight profile. For deadlift, the hip extension, lumbar extension and ankle plantar flexion impulse moment tended to be greater with the free weight profile. Overall, the kinematic and kinetic outcomes for the flywheel profile were either statistically the same as free weight profile in many cases, significantly reduced in a few cases, and rarely higher.

Bioengineering↗
NASA NTRS2015

A Tool for the Automated Collection of Space Utilization Data: Three Dimensional Space Utilization Monitor

Space Human Factors and Habitability (SHFH) Element within the Human Research Program (HRP), in collaboration with the Behavioral Health and Performance (BHP) Element, is conducting research regarding Net Habitable Volume (NHV), the internal volume within a spacecraft or habitat that is available to crew for required activities, as well as layout and accommodations within that volume. NASA is looking for innovative methods to unobtrusively collect NHV data without impacting crew time. Data required includes metrics such as location and orientation of crew, volume used to complete tasks, internal translation paths, flow of work, and task completion times. In less constrained environments methods for collecting such data exist yet many are obtrusive and require significant post‐processing. Example technologies used in terrestrial settings include infrared (IR) retro‐reflective marker based motion capture, GPS sensor tracking, inertial tracking, and multiple camera filmography. However due to constraints of space operations many such methods are infeasible, such as inertial tracking systems which typically rely upon a gravity vector to normalize sensor readings, and traditional IR systems which are large and require extensive calibration. However multiple technologies have not yet been applied to space operations for these explicit purposes. Two of these include 3‐Dimensional Radio Frequency Identification Real‐Time Localization Systems (3D RFID‐RTLS) and depth imaging systems which allow for 3D motion capture and volumetric scanning (such as those using IR‐depth cameras like the Microsoft Kinect or Light Detection and Ranging / Light‐Radar systems, referred to as LIDAR).

Vos, Gordon A.↗
NASA NTRS2016

The Virtual Tablet: Virtual Reality as a Control System

In the field of human-computer interaction, Augmented Reality (AR) and Virtual Reality (VR) have been rapidly growing areas of interest and concerted development effort thanks to both private and public research. At NASA, a number of groups have explored the possibilities afforded by AR and VR technology, among which is the IT Advanced Concepts Lab (ITACL). Within ITACL, the AVR (Augmented/Virtual Reality) Lab focuses on VR technology specifically for its use in command and control. Previous work in the AVR lab includes the Natural User Interface (NUI) project and the Virtual Control Panel (VCP) project, which created virtual three-dimensional interfaces that users could interact with while wearing a VR headset thanks to body- and hand-tracking technology. The Virtual Tablet (VT) project attempts to improve on these previous efforts by incorporating a physical surrogate which is mirrored in the virtual environment, mitigating issues with difficulty of visually determining the interface location and lack of tactile feedback discovered in the development of previous efforts. The physical surrogate takes the form of a handheld sheet of acrylic glass with several infrared-range reflective markers and a sensor package attached. Using the sensor package to track orientation and a motion-capture system to track the marker positions, a model of the surrogate is placed in the virtual environment at a position which corresponds with the real-world location relative to the user's VR Head Mounted Display (HMD). A set of control mechanisms is then projected onto the surface of the surrogate such that to the user, immersed in VR, the control interface appears to be attached to the object they are holding. The VT project was taken from an early stage where the sensor package, motion-capture system, and physical surrogate had been constructed or tested individually but not yet combined or incorporated into the virtual environment. My contribution was to combine the pieces of hardware, write software to incorporate each piece of position or orientation data into a coherent description of the object's location in space, place the virtual analogue accordingly, and project the control interface onto it, resulting in a functioning object which has both a physical and a virtual presence. Additionally, the virtual environment was enhanced with two live video feeds from cameras mounted on the robotic device being used as an example target of the virtual interface. The working VT allows users to naturally interact with a control interface with little to no training and without the issues found in previous efforts.

virtual control interface↗
NASA NTRS2020

Cross-Cutting Computational Modeling Project: Exploration Medical Station Analysis

Astronauts will be away from Earth-based medical care for long periods during future exploration missions. Thus, it will be necessary for the astronauts to perform various medical tasks to monitor and maintain their health in the microgravity environment of space. Performance of these tasks will be constrained due to the limited volume available to perform the task, the absence of gravity and the limited resources and capabilities available in the medical work area. It is therefore necessary to evaluate exploration medical workstation designs for how well the designs will support crew performance of medical tasks. This evaluation featured two trained medical caregivers (99th percentile male, 26th percentile female) performing emergent care procedures (alone and in tandem) on a medical manikin. The procedures came from the The procedures came from the International Space Station Medical Checklist, and they are designed for spaceflight. The objectives of the evaluation included determining the operational volume required to perform the tasks, examining the effect of constraining the operational volume with partitions, determining candidate locations for foot restraints and equipment placements and determining the effect of single vs. dual caregiver on the operational volume.A marker-based motion capture system collected the motion data, which enabled computation of operational volumes and foot placement maps using custom Python code. Additional data collected included heart rate, time to perform the procedures, and feedback from the caregivers in the form of the NASA Task Load Index (TLX), the US Government System Usability Survey, and an open-ended questionnaire.

Christopher A Gallo↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Spacesuit Reach Capability and Work Volume Assessment

Work volumes and reach envelopes define the locations where work objects or interfaces can be placed around a person to reduce ergonomic risk. Spacesuits, however, show unique reach patterns, due to the stiffness and mechanical constraints from pressurization. This study measured the reach motion patterns and capabilities from subjects wearing a pressurized spacesuit using a 3D motion capture system. The subjects performed arm and hand motions, focusing on extreme lateral and vertical positions. These motions defined the maximum ranges. They also performed on-suit reaches to measure where they could or couldn’t reach on the suit surface to determine where critical controls and devices could be placed on the suit. A parametric model of the reach volume was statistically built using the collected hand position data. The observed shape and size of the work volume substantially vary by persons, depending on anthropometry and strength capability. It was also indicated that the traditional metrics (e.g., simple spherical or cylindrical representations) estimated from “unsuited” persons or computer simulations may not accurately capture such variations. The results of this study can help to design and optimize space hardware and task activities, to protect crewmembers from overexertion or injuries.

Han Kim↗
NASA NTRS2011

A Comparison of Methods for Assessing Space Suit Joint Ranges of Motion

Through the Advanced Exploration Systems Program, NASA is attempting to use the vast collection of space suit mobility data from 50 years worth of space suit testing to build predictive analysis tools to aid in early architecture decisions for future missions and exploration programs. However, the design engineers must first understand if and how data generated by different methodologies can be compared directly and used in an essentially interchangeable manner. To address this question, the isolated joint range of motion data from two different test series were compared. Both data sets were generated from participants wearing the Mark III Space Suit Technology Demonstrator (MK-III), Waist Entry I-suit (WEI), and minimal clothing. Additionally the two tests shared a common test subject that allowed for within subject comparisons of the methods that greatly reduced the number of variables in play. The tests varied in their methodologies: the Space Suit Comparative Technologies Evaluation used 2D photogrammetry to analyze isolated ranges of motion while the Constellation space suit benchmarking and requirements development used 3D motion capture to evaluate both isolated and functional joint ranges of motion. The isolated data from both test series were compared graphically, as percent differences, and by simple statistical analysis. The results indicated that while the methods generate results that are statistically the same (significance level p= 0.01), the differences are significant enough in the practical sense to make direct comparisons ill advised. The concluding recommendations propose direction for how to bridge the data gaps and address future mobility data collection to allow for backward compatibility.

Aitchison, Lindsay↗
NASA NTRS2012

A Comparison of Methods for Assessing Space Suit Joint Ranges of Motion

Through the Advanced Exploration Systems (AES) Program, NASA is attempting to use the vast collection of space suit mobility data from 50 years worth of space suit testing to build predictive analysis tools to aid in early architecture decisions for future missions and exploration programs. However, the design engineers must first understand if and how data generated by different methodologies can be compared directly and used in an essentially interchangeable manner. To address this question, the isolated joint range of motion data from two different test series were compared. Both data sets were generated from participants wearing the Mark III Space Suit Technology Demonstrator (MK-III), Waist Entry I-suit (WEI), and minimal clothing. Additionally the two tests shared a common test subject that allowed for within subject comparisons of the methods that greatly reduced the number of variables in play. The tests varied in their methodologies: the Space Suit Comparative Technologies Evaluation used 2-D photogrammetry to analyze isolated ranges of motion while the Constellation space suit benchmarking and requirements development used 3-D motion capture to evaluate both isolated and functional joint ranges of motion. The isolated data from both test series were compared graphically, as percent differences, and by simple statistical analysis. The results indicated that while the methods generate results that are statistically the same (significance level p= 0.01), the differences are significant enough in the practical sense to make direct comparisons ill advised. The concluding recommendations propose direction for how to bridge the data gaps and address future mobility data collection to allow for backward compatibility.

Aitchison, Lindsay T.↗
NASA NTRS2009

A Method for and Issues Associated with the Determination of Space Suit Joint Requirements

In the design of a new space suit it is necessary to have requirements that define what mobility space suit joints should be capable of achieving in both a system and at the component level. NASA elected to divide mobility into its constituent parts-range of motion (ROM) and torque- in an effort to develop clean design requirements that limit subject performance bias and are easily verified. Unfortunately, the measurement of mobility can be difficult to obtain. Current technologies, such as the Vicon motion capture system, allow for the relatively easy benchmarking of range of motion (ROM) for a wide array of space suit systems. The ROM evaluations require subjects in the suit to accurately evaluate the ranges humans can achieve in the suit. However, when it comes to torque, there are significant challenges for both benchmarking current performance and writing requirements for future suits. This is reflected in the fact that torque definitions have been applied to very few types of space suits and with limited success in defining all the joints accurately. This paper discussed the advantages and disadvantages to historical joint torque evaluation methods, describes more recent efforts directed at benchmarking joint torques of prototype space suits, and provides an outline for how NASA intends to address joint torque in design requirements for the Constellation Space Suit System (CSSS).

Matty, Jennifer E.↗
NASA NTRS2019

Assessment of Upper Body Posture and Shape with Garment-Embedded Flexible Strain Sensors

Spacesuits are critical to performing spacewalks or EVA, however can increase injury risks due to - Spacesuit Fit Concerns: Astronauts come from a diverse population; Improper suit fit will result in persistent contact and mechanical pressure on the body. - Altered Biomechanics: Mechanical constraints and pressurization can make it difficult due to - Reduced range of motion, Reduced strength capability. To improve suit design and mitigate injuries, kinematic and geometric measurements are required during EVA evaluations - Human motions inside a spacesuit may not coincide with the suit motions: Spacesuit configurations do not exactly match with human anatomical joints; Gaps/paddings inside the suit induce lags between human motion and suit motion - Conventional motion capture or 3-D scanning techniques are difficult to use to measure internal motion: Optical occlusions; Volume restrictions; Ferrous magnetic interference.

Vu, Linh↗
NASA NTRS2011

Kinematics and Kinetics of Squat and Deadlift Exercises with Varying Stance Widths

The primary motion of squat and deadlift exercise involves flexion and extension of the hips, knees, and ankles, but each exercise can be performed with variations in stance width. These variations may result in differing kinematics and ground reaction forces (GRF), which may in turn affect joint loading. PURPOSE: The purpose of this investigation was to compare ankle, knee, and hip kinematics and kinetics of normal squat (NS), wide-stance squat (WS), normal deadlift (ND), and sumo deadlift (SD). We hypothesized that hip joint kinematics and work at each joint would differ between exercise variations. METHODS: Six subjects (3 m/3 f; 70.0 plus or minus 13.7 kg; 168 plus or minus 9.9 cm) performed each lift in normal gravity on the ground-based version of the Advanced Resistive Exercise Device (ARED) used on the International Space Station. The ARED provided resistance with a combination vacuum tube/flywheel mechanism designed to replicate the gravitational and inertial forces of free weights. Subjects completed each lift with their 10-repetition maximum load. Kinematic data were collected at 250 Hz by a 12-camera motion-capture system (Smart-D, BTS Bioengineering, Milan, Italy), and GRF data were collected at 1000 Hz with independent force platforms for each leg (Model 9261, Kistler Instruments AG, Winterhur, Switzerland). All data were captured simultaneously on a single workstation. The right leg of a single lift for each motion was analyzed. Modeling software (OpenSim 2.2.0, Simbios, Palo Alto, CA) determined joint kinematics and net positive and negative work at each lower extremity joint. Total work was found as the sum of work across all joints and was normalized by system mass. Effect sizes and their 95% confidence intervals were computed between conditions. RESULTS: Peak GRF were similar for each lift. There were no differences between conditions in hip flexion range of motion (ROM). For hip adduction ROM, there were no differences between the NS, WS, and SD. However, hip adduction ROM was greater during the NS and SD than during the ND. Hip rotation ROM was greater during the WS than during the NS and SD, and was greater during the SD than during the ND. For knee and ankle flexion ROM, the ND, WS, and SD were not different, but ROM was greater during the NS than the ND and greater during the WS than the SD. Total eccentric work was greater during the WS than the SD. Otherwise, there were no differences in eccentric or concentric work between conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Although squat and deadlift exercises consist of similar motions, there are kinematic differences between them that depend on stance width. Total eccentric and concentric work are similar for different lifts, but differing kinematics may require activation of different musculature for each variation. With respect to each condition, in the ND the ROM of each joint tended to be less, and the WS tended to trade knee motion for hip motion. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: Knowledge of differences in kinematics and kinetics between different squat and deadlift variations is important for coaches and rehabilitation personnel to understand when prescribing exercise. Our results suggest that each variation of the squat and deadlift should be considered a separate exercise that may induce different long-term training effects.

DeWitt, John K.↗