Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU)”

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.

161 records · Page 9
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1972

Redundancy management of multiple inertial systems for Space Shuttle.

Failure detection and isolation techniques are developed for application to off-the-shelf type four-gimbaled inertial measurement units such as the KT-70 or Carousel IV. By using simulated boost and entry shuttle trajectories with specific gimbaled IMU models, failure detection thresholds are developed based upon red-line life dependent requirements and warning thresholds are given within the red-line thresholds based upon expected worst case IMU performance. Using these trajectories, established trajectory thresholds, and multiple IMU models, various failure detection and isolation techniques are evaluated for application in both powered and unpowered flight phases. The adequacy of off-the-shelf systems for both attitude and velocity detection methods is evaluated and recommendations for shuttle application are made.

Dove, D. W.↗
NASA NTRS2002

Tightly Coupled Inertial Navigation System/Global Positioning System (TCMIG)

Many NASA applications planned for execution later this decade are seeking high performance, miniaturized, low power Inertial Management Units (IMU). Much research has gone into Micro-Electro-Mechanical System (MEMS) over the past decade as a solution to these needs. While MEMS devices have proven to provide high accuracy acceleration measurements, they have not yet proven to have the accuracy required by many NASA missions in rotational measurements. Therefore, a new solution has been formulated integrating the best of all IMU technologies to address these mid-term needs in the form of a Tightly Coupled Micro Inertial Navigation System (INS)/Global Positioning System (GPS) (TCMIG). The TCMIG consists of an INS and a GPS tightly coupled by a Kalman filter executing on an embedded Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA) processor. The INS consists of a highly integrated Interferometric Fiber Optic Gyroscope (IFOG) and a MEMS accelerometer. The IFOG utilizes a tightly wound fiber coil to reduce volume and the high level of integration and advanced optical components to reduce power. The MEMS accelerometer utilizes a newly developed deep etch process to increase the proof mass and yield a highly accurate accelerometer. The GPS receiver consists of a low power miniaturized version of the Blackjack receiver. Such an IMU configuration is ideal to meet the mid-term needs of the NASA Science Enterprises and the new launch vehicles being developed for the Space Launch Initiative (SLI).

Watson, Michael D.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Toward an IMU-Based Space Suit Motion Capture System

Spacesuits are complex engineering systems that sustain human health and enable performance outside Earth-like environments. These systems must support human mobility and physical workload demands while minimizing injury risk during extravehicular activity (EVA). Future EVA operations on the Lunar surface are expected to be more frequent and require higher physical workloads than previously during the ISS, Shuttle, and Apollo programs. To characterize the workloads and ergonomics needs a suit must support, the kinematics of the space suit must be measured during operationally-relevant tasks in ground analog environments. Kinematics capture of the suit is challenging for traditional optical motion capture (OMC) approaches due to marker occlusion, harsh lighting or environmental conditions, and tests with suit surrogates in outdoor field environments. To this end, engineers at NASA are developing the Augmented Suit Inverse Kinematics (ASIK) system, a complete motion capture method and inverse kinematics solver which relies solely on a network of wireless inertial measurement units (IMUs) attached to the major kinematic segments of the spacesuit. The ASIK modeling language allows for the simple inclusion of probabilistic priors such as suit size and shape or IMU poses. The ASIK system was tested in a 7-subject pilot study. Each subject donned NASA’s new prototype exploration spacesuit in the Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS) facility at Johnson Space Center in Houston, TX. The suits were outfitted with 12 IMUs to estimate lower body and trunk kinematics. The suits were also outfitted with a set of reflective OMC markers, and traditional OMC data was collected and processed. Characterization of the ASIK-derived suit joint angles’ accuracy against an optical motion capture datum will be presented. Discussion of these results, as well as discussion of system calibration and nuances of mathematical observability, will be included.

IMU↗
NASA NTRS2012

Sampling and Control Circuit Board for an Inertial Measurement Unit

Spacesuit navigation is one component of NASA s efforts to return humans to the Moon. Studies performed at the NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC) considered various navigation technologies and filtering approaches to enable navigation on the lunar surface. As part of this effort, microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) inertial measurement units (IMUs) were studied to determine if they could supplement a radiometric infrastructure. MEMS IMUs were included in the Lunar Extra-Vehicular Activity Crewmember Location Determination System (LECLDS) testbed during NASA s annual Desert Research and Technology Studies (D-RATS) event in 2009 and 2010. The testbed included one IMU in 2009 and three IMUs in 2010, along with a custom circuit board interfacing between the navigation processor and each IMU. The board was revised for the 2010 test, and this paper documents the design details of this latest revision of the interface circuit board and firmware.

Chelmins, David↗
NASA NTRS2021

LiDAR-Inertial Based Navigation and Mapping for Precision Landing

Future lander missions will travel to ambitious, scientifically interesting locations near rough and dangerous terrain. They will need to operate with limited prior information about the terrain, and under varying lighting conditions. Landing safely and precisely in the face of these challenges is difficult for existing vision-based landing systems, which require detailed orbital reconnaissance, a priori hazard maps, and impose time-of-day restrictions on landing to ensure similar lighting conditions in orbital and descent imagery. Advanced 3D imaging LiDAR systems currently under development, and originally intended for single-scan hazard detection, have the potential to be operated continuously from altitudes of up to 5 km. Used together with existing inertial measurement units (IMUs), these sensors open a path-to-flight for a full navigation and mapping system, which could replace or augment a traditional landing sensor suite. A landing system based around these sensors can perform accurate altimetry, map-relative localization (MRL), LiDAR-inertial odometry, and map refinement in an illumination-insensitive manner, over unknown or partially known terrain. This paper outlines preliminary work on a LiDAR-inertial landing system that: estimates the spacecraft trajectory during entry, descent, and landing (EDL); and maps the topography of the terrain below, for future use in hazard detection and avoidance. An incremental, factor graph based, smoothing approach is used to solve for the maximum a posteriori trajectory of spacecraft states. Integrated IMU measurements and features tracked in adjacent range and intensity images are used to estimate motion (LiDAR-inertial odometry). LiDAR scans are binned into motion-corrected digital elevation models (DEMs), which are matched to an existing orbital topographic map to provide absolute position information (MRL). The estimated trajectory is then used to project the LiDAR scans into the map frame, creating a variable-resolution quadtree topographic map suitable for hazard detection and avoidance. Existing topographic maps from throughout the solar system (i.e., Earth, the Moon, Mars, Ceres, Vesta, Europa, Enceladus, and Eros) are upsampled for use in EDL simulations. The Mars 2020 Lander Vision System Simulator (LVSS) is extended to simulate LiDAR-inertial data for realistic EDL trajectories. Results of the algorithm operating on the simulated data are presented. Estimated spacecraft trajectory and refined map are compared to ground truth to assess estimation accuracy.

Katake, Anup↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Toward an IMU-based Space Suit Motion Capture System

Spacesuits are complex engineering systems that sustain human health and enable performance outside of Earth-like environments. These systems must support human mobility and physical workload demands while minimizing injury risk during extravehicular activity (EVA). Future EVA on the lunar surface during the Artemis program is expected to be more frequent and require higher physical workloads than previous EVAs during the ISS, Shuttle, or Apollo programs. Hence it is important to optimize future as well as current spacesuits to be efficient and comfortable for the success of space and planetary missions. To enable this, an efficient method is needed to test these spacesuits on the ground.When testing spacesuits in ground environments, it is often necessary to understand the kinematics of the suit to validate the design against relevant requirements or characterize the physical workload necessary to operate the suit. This is a challenging task for traditional optical motion capture (OMC) approaches: suit-mounted OMC markers are easily occluded by the subject or environment and may become detached during testing. Controlling lighting and reflectivity of objects in the motion capture volume is also difficult. Fixed-position OMC cameras also constrain testing to a small and contrived laboratory environment, disallowing kinematics capture in field environments.One promising alternative is the use of suit-mounted inertial measurement units (IMUs). These sensors are small, unobtrusive, and portable, but come at the cost of increased sensor noise and complexity of the software and mathematics to analyze the collected data. To this end, engineers at NASA are developing the Augmented Suit Inverse Kinematics (ASIK) system, a complete motion capture methodand inverse kinematics solver which relies solely on a network of wireless IMUs attached to the major kinematic segments of the spacesuit. The ASIK modeling language allows for the simple inclusion of probabilistic priors such as suit size and shape or IMU positions and rotations. Furthermore, to increase accuracy and reduce operational overhead to use this motion capture approach, the developed inverse kinematics solver exploits so-called self-calibratingalgorithmic techniques, which reduce the need for precise alignment of the sensors on the segments or scripted functional calibration procedures. The ASIK system was tested in a 7-subject pilot study. Each subject donned NASA’s new prototype exploration spacesuit in the Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS) facility at the NASA Johnson Space Center. The subjects were outfitted with a set of 14 APDM (Portland, OR, USA) Opal IMUs, 12 of which were used in the ASIK model to estimate lower body and trunk kinematics. The subjects were also outfitted with a set of reflective OMC markers and traditional OMC data was collected and processed. Presented results will include characterization of ASIK-derived suit joint angles accuracy against an optical motion capture datum. Discussion of these results, as well as discussion of system calibration and nuances of mathematical observability, will be included.If successful, IMU-based motion capture will enable testing and validation of spacesuits more frequently, with less overhead, in more extreme environments. Future work will apply these techniques to common spacesuit testing tasks, such as gait, mobility, and balance assessment, physical workload characterization, and ergonomics evaluations.

Timothy Mcgrath↗
NASA NTRS1991

Final STS-35 Columbia descent BET products and results for LaRC OEX investigations

Final STS-35 'Columbia' descent Best Estimate Trajectory (BET) products have been developed for Langley Research Center (LaRC) Orbiter Experiments (OEX) investigations. Included are the reconstructed inertial trajectory profile; the Extended BET, which combines the inertial data and, in this instance, the National Weather Service atmospheric information obtained via Johnson Space Center; and the Aerodynamic BET. The inertial BET utilized Inertial Measurement Unit 1 (IMU1) dynamic measurements for deterministic propagation during the ENTREE estimation process. The final estimate was based on the considerable ground based C-band tracking coverage available as well as Tracking Data and Relay Satellite System (TDRSS) Doppler data, a unique use of the latter for endo-atmospheric flight determinations. The actual estimate required simultaneous solutions for the spacecraft position and velocity, spacecraft attitude, and six IMU parameters - three gyro biases and three accelerometer scale factor correction terms. The anchor epoch for this analysis was 19,200 Greenwich Mean Time (GMT) seconds which corresponds to an initial Shuttle altitude of approximately 513 kft. The atmospheric data incorporated were evaluated based on Shuttle derived considerations as well as comparisons with other models. The AEROBET was developed based on the Extended BET, the measured spacecraft configuration information, final mass properties, and the final Orbiter preoperation databook. The latter was updated based on aerodynamic consensus incrementals derived by the latest published FAD. The rectified predictions were compared versus the flight computed values and the resultant differences were correlated versus ensemble results for twenty-two previous STS entry flights.

Oakes, Kevin F.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Backup Alignment Devices on Shuttle: Heads-Up Display or Crew Optical Alignment Sight

NASA s Space Shuttle was built to withstand multiple failures while still keeping the crew and vehicle safe. Although the design of the Space Shuttle had a great deal of redundancy built into each system, there were often additional ways to keep systems in the best configuration if a failure were to occur. One such method was to use select pieces of hardware in a way for which they were not primarily intended. The primary function of the Heads-Up Display (HUD) was to provide the crew with a display of flight critical information during the entry phase. The primary function of the Crew Optical Alignment Sight (COAS) was to provide the crew an optical alignment capability for rendezvous and docking phases. An alignment device was required to keep the Inertial Measurement Units (IMUs) well aligned for a safe Entry; nominally this alignment device would be the two on-board Star Trackers. However, in the event of a Star Tracker failure, the HUD or COAS could also be used as a backup alignment device, but only if the device had been calibrated beforehand. Once the HUD or COAS was calibrated and verified then it was considered an adequate backup to the Star Trackers for entry IMU alignment. There were procedures in place and the astronauts were trained on how to accurately calibrate the HUD or COAS and how to use them as an alignment device. The calibration procedure for the HUD and COAS had been performed on many Shuttle missions. Many of the first calibrations performed were for data gathering purposes to determine which device was more accurate as a backup alignment device, HUD or COAS. Once this was determined, the following missions would frequently calibrate the HUD in order to be one step closer to having the device ready in case it was needed as a backup alignment device.

Chavez, Melissa A.↗
NASA NTRS2001

Enabling technology for NASA's Europa Orbiter mission

The authors will describe the drivers for the subsystem requirements in the Europa Orbiter mission, in particular the mission criticality of the IMU and the predicted natural space radiation environments that require enabling technologies to be identified. Descriptions of the Europa IMU and the HRG technology are given with emphasis on the inherent radiation hardness in the HRG principle of operation and sensor construction, as well as the steps taken to further harden the sensor electronics.

inertial measurement unit inertial reference unit ↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

IMUFDIR Tuning In Response To Structural Deformation Of The Orion Capsule

During system level Thermal Vacuum (TVAC) testing it was discovered that the pressure differential of the crew cabin in a vacuum would deflect the capsule slightly, causing significant misalignment of Orion’s three Inertial Measurement Units (IMUs). This phenomenon has been likened to a balloon expanding. When this misalignment was modeled in simulation as a function of atmospheric pressure, it was determined that the rate of deflection on reentry was significant enough to cause a mis-compare of the angular rates measured by the IMUs. This mis-comparison of the rates caused Orion’s Fault Detection Isolation and Recovery (FDIR) algorithm to falsely fail one of the IMUs. This manuscript will discuss how the IMUFDIR algorithm was detuned to be insensitive to these ballooning effects, while still meeting FDIR requirements to capture real faults in an IMU. All testing to validate this detuning was performed in a Six Degree of Freedom (6 DOF) Monte Carlo Simulation Environment.

Nicholas Rahaim↗
NASA NTRS1983

Reliability analysis and fault-tolerant system development for a redundant strapdown inertial measurement unit

A methodology is developed and applied for quantitatively analyzing the reliability of a dual, fail-operational redundant strapdown inertial measurement unit (RSDIMU). A Markov evaluation model is defined in terms of the operational states of the RSDIMU to predict system reliability. A 27 state model is defined based upon a candidate redundancy management system which can detect and isolate a spectrum of failure magnitudes. The results of parametric studies are presented which show the effect on reliability of the gyro failure rate, both the gyro and accelerometer failure rates together, false alarms, probability of failure detection, probability of failure isolation, and probability of damage effects and mission time. A technique is developed and evaluated for generating dynamic thresholds for detecting and isolating failures of the dual, separated IMU. Special emphasis is given to the detection of multiple, nonconcurrent failures. Digital simulation time histories are presented which show the thresholds obtained and their effectiveness in detecting and isolating sensor failures.

Motyka, P.↗
NASA NTRS1973

Failure detection and isolation methods for redundant gimballed inertial measurement units.

Skewed alignment of two redundant conventional inertial measuring units permits nonambiguous detection and isolation of hard and soft failures in real time by an airborne computer. Accelerometer outputs and gimbal readouts are monitored periodically, and attitude rate and velocity error vectors are computed from these data. Magnitudes of these vectors provide failure detection, and projection of these error vectors onto the coordinate axes of the two clusters permits isolation. A detailed Monte Carlo simulation of one version of the mechanization as applied to Space Shuttle boost trajectories demonstrates effectiveness down to very low levels of inertial instrument performance failures. The results indicate that worst case overall navigation performance occurs when accelerometer failures are of the order of 20 sigma and gyro failures are about 100 sigma for conventional state-of-the-art IMU instruments.

Solov, E. G.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Kinematic Sensors Evaluation for Spaceflight Exercise Data Collections

INTRODUCTION: On the International Space Station (ISS), exercise feedback from astronauts is very important to diagnose and mitigate any form-related injuries and ensure efficacious exercise prescriptions and systems. Going forward, exploration exercise efforts seek to gain further quantitative data of human and system performance. Currently, methods of collecting in-flight exercise data on the ISS are limited to marker-based motion capture (MoCap) where astronauts must wear reflective markers over their clothes and specialized cameras are used. The main objective of this work was to investigate the following alternative tracking options: markerless video-based MoCap and inertial measurement units (IMUs). These were compared against traditional marker-based MoCap to evaluate kinematic accuracy and inform feasible methods for future exercise data collections on the ISS, especially in support of future Vibration Isolation and Stabilization (VIS) system development. METHODS: Three test subjects performed a variety of flight-like resistance and aerobic exercises using the Miniature Exercise Device (MED-2), Concept-2 rowing ergometer, barbell mockup, bench (e.g., for bench press, hip thruster, and cycling), and a custom structure for dips. These were intended also to represent exercises which could be performed on the multi-modality European Enhanced Exploration Exercise Device (E4D) [1]. The marker-based MoCap data, collected through a 16-camera OptiTrack MoCap system, was regarded as the gold standard to compare the data against. Passive markers were affixed to each subject according to a modified full body Plug-in Gait marker set [2] with 46 total markers. The markerless MoCap data was collected using two GoPro Hero7 cameras and one GoPro Hero11 camera. For the IMU data, a full body set of 17 Xsens DOTs were placed on the subject: 10 upper body and 7 lower body IMUs. Biomechanical modeling and evaluation was conducted through OpenSim [3] (MoCap), OpenSense [4] (IMU), OpenCap [5] (markerless), ENABLE [6] (markerless), and other modeling software. Secondary objectives included comparing the volume of equipment, reducing mass and crew set-up time. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: While there were issues with initial processing for the IMUs and markerless MoCap, the results aided in the understanding of each sensor, developing end-to-end processes, and identifying future needs. Some observed concerns with the markerless MoCap approaches included being cognizant of a cluttered background, number of people in field of view, camera number and placement. Some challenges with the IMUs included possible sliding, early deactivation possibly due to exercise pose, and large quantity sensor synchronization. Overall, the markerless MoCap option may be the preferred method of data collection and processing as it provides a solution for certain IMU shortcomings and may be least in equipment volume, upmass, and crew setup time. CONCLUSIONS: While this work was mainly focused on ISS data collection, these sensor data along with continued evaluation and development efforts will help to establish best methods for exercise data collection on Gateway, for other Artemis missions, and beyond. Details on the latest end-to-end processing of the data and results will be presented, along with lessons learned and recommended sensor selection and methods.

S. Faragalla↗
NASA NTRS2024

Kinematic Sensors Evaluation for Spaceflight Exercise Data Collections

INTRODUCTION: On the International Space Station (ISS), exercise feedback from astronauts is very important to diagnose and mitigate any form-related injuries and ensure efficacious exercise prescriptions and systems. Going forward, exploration exercise efforts seek to gain further quantitative data of human and system performance. Currently, methods of collecting in-flight exercise data on the ISS are limited to marker-based motion capture (MoCap) where astronauts must wear reflective markers over their clothes and specialized cameras are used. The main objective of this work was to investigate the following alternative tracking options: markerless video-based MoCap and inertial measurement units (IMUs). These were compared against traditional marker-based MoCap to evaluate kinematic accuracy and inform feasible methods for future exercise data collections on the ISS, especially in support of future Vibration Isolation and Stabilization (VIS) system development. METHODS: Three test subjects performed a variety of flight-like resistance and aerobic exercises using the Miniature Exercise Device (MED-2), Concept-2 rowing ergometer, barbell mockup, bench (e.g., for bench press, hip thruster, and cycling), and a custom structure for dips. These were intended also to represent exercises which could be performed on the multi-modality European Enhanced Exploration Exercise Device (E4D) [1]. The marker-based MoCap data, collected through a 16-camera OptiTrack MoCap system, was regarded as the gold standard to compare the data against. Passive markers were affixed to each subject according to a modified full body Plug-in Gait marker set [2] with 46 total markers. The markerless MoCap data was collected using two GoPro Hero7 cameras and one GoPro Hero11 camera. For the IMU data, a full body set of 17 Xsens DOTs were placed on the subject: 10 upper body and 7 lower body IMUs. Biomechanical modeling and evaluation was conducted through OpenSim [3] (MoCap), OpenSense [4] (IMU), OpenCap [5] (markerless), ENABLE [6] (markerless), and other modeling software. Secondary objectives included comparing the volume of equipment, reducing mass and crew set-up time. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: While there were issues with initial processing for the IMUs and markerless MoCap, the results aided in the understanding of each sensor, developing end-to-end processes, and identifying future needs. Some observed concerns with the markerless MoCap approaches included being cognizant of a cluttered background, number of people in field of view, camera number and placement. Some challenges with the IMUs included possible sliding, early deactivation possibly due to exercise pose, and large quantity sensor synchronization. Overall, the markerless MoCap option may be the preferred method of data collection and processing as it provides a solution for certain IMU shortcomings and may be least in equipment volume, upmass, and crew setup time. CONCLUSIONS: While this work was mainly focused on ISS data collection, these sensor data along with continued evaluation and development efforts will help to establish best methods for exercise data collection on Gateway, for other Artemis missions, and beyond. Details on the latest end-to-end processing of the data and results will be presented, along with lessons learned and recommended sensor selection and methods.

S Faragalla↗
NASA NTRS2020

Vibration-based health characterization of multiple IMUs in UAV applications

Inertial measurement units (IMUs) are vital in UAV navigation for vehicle attitude and position estimation, especially in the frequently-occurring case of temporary loss of GPS capabilities. Degradation in these units could yield inaccurate position estimates, resulting in incorrect input for vehicle control systems. A wide variety of these units exist to meet the needs of UAV operators, general aviation, and military vehicles. In recent decades, lightweight and inexpensive MEMS sensors have grown in popularity with respect to UAVs. Studies into the failure modes of MEMS devices suggest that vibration is one of the leading causes of MEMS degradation. MEMS sensors are generally encased in their own hermetic packaging, as their small size and sensitivity cause them to be particularly vulnerable to air damping and particulate contamination when exposed. Exposure to excessive vibration can cause cracking in this packaging as well as damage to connecting electronics, with recorded results that cause sensors to act outside of their specifications, potentially providing unreliable input to controllers. A prior study from the Politecnico di Torino looked into the degradation of MEMS IMUs, specifically the AXIS-AIS402, for aerospace and vibrating environments. In the study, the authors found that after exposing MEMS IMUs to simulated vibrations from working conditions of aerospace applications, the sensors showed increased noise and increased bias instability. At NASA Ames, several widely-used MEMS IMUs were selected for a new IMU degradation study, comparing accelerometer performance before and after exposure to similar levels of vibration simulating aerospace conditions. The IMUs were selected from the Pixhawk autopilot systems, hobby sUAS, or prior experimental studies at NASA. Additionally, the industrial grade VectorNav-100 IMU was selected as a ground truth reference point to which the performance of the test sensors can be compared. In the study, each sensor is exposed to functional levels of UAV vibration as replicated on a single-frequency vibratory table in the NASA Ames SHARP Laboratory, and each accelerometer is characterized for bias, drift, and noise characteristics both before and after vibratory exposure. The focus of this study is to monitor the health of the IMU sensors and determine if sensor degradation can be detected from output error and frequency spectrum analysis, rather than from microscopic examination of the sensors. In this case, sensor degradation and faulty data can be more easily detectable by non-experts hoping to use these sensors as an important piece of an integrated package. In addition, specific sensor degradation modes potentially leading to in-flight hazards could be identified, such as accelerated levels of drift and altered temperature response. The overall goal of this work is to increase levels of safety for future users of these sensors and to provide a clear analysis of sensor limitations currently lacking in most sensor specification documentation.

IMUs↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Instrumented Walking and Turning Test to Evaluate Suited Gait Dynamics and Performance in Extravehicular Activity Training Environments

Background and aims: Walking will be required for many exploration tasks on the Moon during the Artemis program. Walking in a straight line on the confined floorspace of a testing area, and repetitive treadmill walking that requires no change in direction may not adequately reflect the balance and coordination required during ambulation. Also, performance of turning maneuvers may be affected differently in different extravehicular activity (EVA) training facilities that simulate partial gravity. For example, the Neutral Buoyancy Lab (NBL) simulates lunar gravity by adding weight to underwater subjects to alter buoyancy and achieve the equivalent ground reaction force of 1/6 of Earth’s gravity (1/6G), whereas the Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS) uses a computer controlled overhead suspension system programmed to continuously offload a percentage of a subject’s weight to simulate 1/6G. The degree to which dynamic movements such as turning are comparable across these EVA training facilities has not yet been evaluated. The instrumented gait test helps NASA scientists and engineers evaluate gait dynamics and performance in suited conditions, and this test demonstrates the unique characteristics and limitations of EVA training facilities. We developed an instrumented walking and turning test using inertial measurement units (IMUs) and conducted the test at NASA’s EVA training facilities. Results were used to compare suited walking and turning characteristics in the ARGOS and the NBL. Methods: Subjects donned the Mark III space suit during offloading with the ARGOS spreader bar gimbal and donned the Z2.5 space suit while underwater in the NBL with weights and floatation added to achieve realistic suit center of gravity. The test team securely attached three Opal (APDM, OR, USA) wireless IMUs on the space suit for each test run: one on the middle of the hard upper torso, and one on the left and on the right ankle bearings. During the NBL tests, the IMUs were encased in a waterproof housing (GoPro) with foam added to create a tighter fit. At both testing facilities, 6.3 m x 1.0 m (LxW) walking lines were marked, and a cone for turning or walking around was located at the end of the walking path with another line on the other side of the cone to indicate the stopping point after walking around the cone. Under simulated 1/6G, subjects began by standing at the marked line with their arms folded across the chest, they then walked at a preferred speed along the straight walking path until they reached the end, turned 180 degrees around the cone, and finally stopped at the marked stopping point. All IMU data recorded during testing were automatically saved to the internal memory. Then, raw IMU signals were processed using custom MATLAB (Mathworks, MA, USA) code to compare gait parameters during both the walking and the turning components of the task. These parameters included time (s), speed (m/s for walking and rad/s for turning), step number (n) and walk:turn time ratio (% time spent straight walking versus turning). Results: Less time, faster gait, fewer steps, and higher walk:turn ratio during both walking and turning components were exhibited during tests performed at the ARGOS versus those performed at the NBL. During the NBL tests, the slower walking speed continued at the same rate throughout a U-shape turn. During the ARGOS tests, the subjects performed shorter and tighter turns at 4 times the speed of the NBL turns because they walked 30% faster and the vertical offloading system gave them more support. Conclusion: Our data show that the differences in walking and turning parameters during the NBL tests may be due to the high viscosity in the water environment where the motion of the lower limbs was slow and did not reach full flexion and extension. These tests improve the current knowledge of testing environments in preparation for EVAs on the lunar surface.

Kyoung Jae Kim↗