Results for “Cycle Ergometer Vibration and Isolation System”

NASA NTRS1991

Design of a vibration isolation system for a cycle ergometer to be used onboard the Space Shuttle

Low frequency vibrations generated during exercise using the cycle ergometer onboard the Space Shuttle are disrupting sensitive microgravity experiments. The design team is asked by NASA/USRA to generate alternatives for the design of a vibration isolation system for the cycle ergometer. It is the design team's objective to present alternative designs and a problem solution for a vibration isolation system for an exercise cycle ergometer to be used onboard the Space Shuttle. In the development of alternative designs, the design team emphasizes passive systems as opposed to active control systems. This decision is made because the team feels that passive systems are less complex than active control systems, external energy sources are not required, and mass is reduced due to the lack of machinery such as servomotors or compressors typical of active control systems. Eleven alternative designs are developed by the design team. From these alternatives, three active control systems are included to compare the benefits of active and passive systems. Also included in the alternatives is an isolation system designed by an independent engineer that was acquired late in the project. The eight alternatives using passive isolation systems are narrowed down by selection criteria to four considered to be the most promising by the design team. A feasibility analysis is performed on these four passive isolation systems. Based on the feasibility analysis, a final design solution is chosen and further developed. From the development of the design, the design team has concluded that passive systems are not effective at isolating vibrations for the low frequencies considered for this project. Recommendations are made for guidelines of passive isolation design and application of such systems.

Pearson, Lillian↗

NASA NTRS2017

Practical Applications of Cables and Ropes in the ISS Countermeasures System

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) uses exercise countermeasures on the International Space Station (ISS) to maintain crew health and combat the negative effects of long-duration spaceflight on the human body. Most ISS exercise countermeasures system (CMS) equipment rely heavily on the use of textile and wire ropes to transmit resistive loads and provide stability in a microgravity environment. For a variety of reasons, including challenges in simulating microgravity environments for testing and limits on time available for life cycle testing, the textiles and wire ropes have contributed significantly to on-orbit planned and unplanned maintenance time. As a result, continued ground testing and on-orbit experience since the first expedition on the ISS in 2000 provide valuable data and lessons learned in materials selection, applications, and design techniques to increase service life of these ropes. This paper will present a review of the development and failure history of textile and wire ropes for four exercise countermeasure systems-the Treadmill with Vibration Isolation and Stabilization (TVIS) System, Cycle Ergometer with Vibration Isolation and Stabilization (CEVIS) System, Interim Resistive Exercise Device (IRED), and the Advanced Resistive Exercise Device (ARED)-to identify lessons learned in order to improve future systems. These lessons learned, paired with thorough testing on the ground, offer a forward path towards reduced maintenance time and up-mass for future space missions.

Svetlik, Randall G.↗

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 NTRS2016

Decompression Sickness During Simulated Low Pressure Exposure is Increased with Mild Ambulation Exercise

Musculoskeletal activity accelerates inert gas elimination during oxygen breathing prior to decompression (prebreathe), but may also promote bubble formation (nucleation) and increase the risk of decompression sickness (DCS). The timing, pattern and intensity of musculoskeletal activity are likely critical to the net effect. The NASA Prebreathe Reduction Program (PRP) combined oxygen prebreathe and exercise preceding a 4.3 psia exposure in non-ambulatory subjects (a microgravity analog) to produce two protocols now used by astronauts preparing for extravehicular activity - one employing cycling and non-cycling exercise (CEVIS: 'cycle ergometer vibration isolation system') and one relying on non-cycling exercise only (ISLE: 'in-suit light exercise'). Current efforts investigate whether light exercise normal to 1 G environments increases the risk of DCS over microgravity simulation.

Pollock, N. W.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Ambulation During Periods of Supersaturation Increase Decompression Stress in Spacewalk Simulations

Musculoskeletal activity accelerates inert gas elimination during oxygen breathing prior to decompression (prebreathe), but may also promote bubble formation (nucleation) and increase the risk of decompression sickness (DCS). The timing, pattern and intensity of musculoskeletal activity and the level of tissue supersaturation are likely critical to the net effect. Understanding the relationships is important to evaluate exercise prebreathe protocols and quantify decompression risk in gravity and microgravity environments. The NASA Prebreathe Reduction Program (PRP) combined oxygen prebreathe and exercise preceding a low pressure (4.3 psia; altitude equivalent of 30,300 ft [9,235 m]) simulation exposure of non-ambulatory subjects (a microgravity analog) to produce two protocols now used by astronauts preparing for extravehicular activity. One protocol included both upright cycling and non-cycling exercise (CEVIS: 'cycle ergometer vibration isolation system') and one protocol relied on non-cycling exercise only (ISLE: 'in-suit light exercise'). CEVIS trial data serve as control data for the current study to investigate the influence of ambulation exercise in 1G environments on bubble formation and the subsequent risk of DCS.

Pollock, N. W.↗

NASA NTRS2017

Designing for Reliability and Robustness

Long duration spaceflight has a negative effect on the human body, and exercise countermeasures are used on-board the International Space Station (ISS) to minimize bone and muscle loss, combatting these effects. Given the importance of these hardware systems to the health of the crew, this equipment must continue to be readily available. Designing spaceflight exercise hardware to meet high reliability and availability standards has proven to be challenging throughout the time the crewmembers have been living on ISS beginning in 2000. Furthermore, restoring operational capability after a failure is clearly time-critical, but can be problematic given the challenges of troubleshooting the problem from 220 miles away. Several best-practices have been leveraged in seeking to maximize availability of these exercise systems, including designing for robustness, implementing diagnostic instrumentation, relying on user feedback, and providing ample maintenance and sparing. These factors have enhanced the reliability of hardware systems, and therefore have contributed to keeping the crewmembers healthy upon return to Earth. This paper will review the failure history for three spaceflight exercise countermeasure systems identifying lessons learned that can help improve future systems. Specifically, the Treadmill with Vibration Isolation and Stabilization System (TVIS), Cycle Ergometer with Vibration Isolation and Stabilization System (CEVIS), and the Advanced Resistive Exercise Device (ARED) will be reviewed, analyzed, and conclusions identified so as to provide guidance for improving future exercise hardware designs. These lessons learned, paired with thorough testing, offer a path towards reduced system down-time.

Svetlik, Randall G.↗

NASA NTRS2014

Musculoskeletal-induced Nucleation in Altitude Decompression Sickness

Musculoskeletal activity has the potential to both improve and compromise decompression safety. Exercise enhances inert gas elimination during oxygen breathing prior to decompression (prebreathe), but it may also promote bubble nuclei formation (nucleation), which can lead to gas phase separation and bubble growth and increase the risk of decompression sickness (DCS). The timing, pattern and intensity of musculoskeletal activity and the level of tissue supersaturation may be critical to the net effect. There are limited data available to evaluate cost-benefit relationships. Understanding the relationship is important to improve our understanding of the underlying mechanisms of nucleation in exercise prebreathe protocols and to quantify risk in gravity and microgravity environments. Data gathered during NASA's Prebreathe Reduction Program (PRP) studies combined oxygen prebreathe and exercise followed by low pressure (4.3 psi; altitude equivalent of 30,300 ft [9,235 m]) microgravity simulation to produce two protocols used by astronauts preparing for extravehicular activity. Both the Phase II/CEVIS (cycle ergometer vibration isolation system) and ISLE (in-suit light exercise) trials eliminated ambulation to more closely simulate the microgravity environment. The CEVIS results (35 male, 10 female) serve as control data for this NASA/Duke study to investigate the influence of ambulation exercise on bubble formation and the subsequent risk of DCS.

Pollock, N. W.↗

NASA NTRS2014

Ambulation Increases Decompression Sickness in Spacewalk Simulations

Musculoskeletal activity has the potential to both improve and compromise decompression safety. Exercise enhances inert gas elimination during oxygen breathing prior to decompression (prebreathe), but it may also promote bubble nuclei formation (nucleation), which can lead to gas phase separation and bubble growth and increase the risk of decompression sickness (DCS). The timing, pattern and intensity of musculoskeletal activity and the level of tissue supersaturation may be critical to the net effect. Understanding the relationships is important to evaluate exercise prebreathe protocols and quantify decompression risk in gravity and microgravity environments. Data gathered during NASA's Prebreathe Reduction Program (PRP) studies combined oxygen prebreathe and exercise followed by low pressure (4.3 psi; altitude equivalent of 30,300 ft [9,235 m]) microgravity simulation to produce two protocols used by astronauts preparing for extravehicular activity. Both the Phase II/CEVIS (cycle ergometer vibration isolation system) and ISLE (in-suit light exercise) trials eliminated ambulation to more closely simulate the microgravity environment. The CEVIS results (35 male, 10 female) serve as control data for this NASA/Duke study to investigate the influence of ambulation exercise on bubble formation and the subsequent risk of DCS. METHODS Four experiments will replicate the CEVIS exercise-enhanced oxygen prebreathe protocol, each with a different exception. The first of these is currently underway. Experiment 1 - Subjects complete controlled ambulation (walking in place with fixed cadence and step height) during both preflight and at 4.3 psi instead of remaining nonambulatory throughout. Experiment 2 - Subjects remain non-ambulatory during the preflight period and ambulatory at 4.3 psi. Experiment 3 - Subjects ambulate during the preflight period and remain non-ambulatory at 4.3 psi. Experiment 4 - The order of heavy and light exercise employed in the CEVIS protocol is reversed, with the light exercise occurring first (subjects remain non-ambulatory throughout). Decompression stress is assessed with non-invasive ultrasound during each of 14 epochs of a 4 hour simulated spacewalk at 4.3 psi; aural Doppler is used to monitor bubbles (Spencer grade 0-IV scale) passing through the pulmonary artery, and two-dimensional echocardiographic imaging is used to look for left ventricular gas emboli (LVGE; the presence of which is a test termination criterion). Venous blood is collected at baseline and twice following repressurization to determine if the decompression stress is correlated with microparticles (cell fragments) accumulation. The plan is to test 25-50 subjects in each experiment. Fisher Exact Tests (one-tailed) are used to compare test and control groups. Trials are suspended when the DCS or grade IV VGE observations reach 70% confidence of DCS risk >15% and grade IV VGE risk >20%. RESULTS Experiment 1 was concluded with 20 complete trials (15 male, 5 female) since the statistical outcome would not change with five additional trials. The observed DCS was significantly greater in Experiment 1 than in CEVIS trials (4/20 [20%] vs. 0/45 [0%], respectively, p=0.007), as was the frequency of peak grade IV VGE (6/21 [29%; including one additional subject that presented grade IV VGE but whose trial was ended before completion when LVGE were observed] vs. 3/45 [7%], respectively, p=0.024). Experiment 3 trials are now underway, with 11 trials completed (10 male, 1 female). Preliminary results indicate no difference in observed DCS between Experiment 3 and CEVIS trials (1/11 [9%] vs. 0/45 [0%], respectively, p=0.196), or between Experiment 3 and Experiment 1 trials (p=0.405). The frequency of peak grade IV VGE in Experiment 3 (2/11 [18%]) did not differ from CEVIS or Experiment 1 trials (p=0.251 and p=0.425, respectively). Microparticle patterns are widely variable and still under analysis. DISCUSSION The results of the Experiment 1 trials support the thesis that decompression stress is increased by ambulation exercise, given the higher incidence of DCS and grade IV VGE when compared to the non-ambulatory PRP CEVIS trials. Experiment 3 trials are incomplete, but suggest that the effect of ambulation during ground level preflight oxygen breathing alone, when subjects are undersaturated with inert gas, may not differ in risk from ambulation at both preflight and spacesuit pressures, the latter when subjects are supersaturated with inert gas. Further trials are needed to confirm the relative effects of ambulation in undersaturated vs. supersaturated states and to determine whether light exercise facilitates the removal of heavy exercise-induced nucleation (Experiment 4).

Pollock, N. W.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Developing Methods for Exercise System Kinematic Tracking

BACKGROUND How to quantify the load and forces produced by exercise equipment and their Vibration Isolation and Stabilization (VIS) platforms in-flight is an active area of investigation. Kinematic tracking paired with system modeling can provide insights as well as verification and validation of simulations used for system design and development. Traditional motion capture methods can require significant cost in equipment procurement and crew-time, but newer lessons learned can be leveraged [1]. The VIS systems of current and future exercise hardware on the International Space Station (ISS) such as the Cycle Ergometer with Vibration Isolation System (CEVIS) and the European Enhanced Exploration Exercise Device (E4D) are not currently outfitted with IMUs or similar measurement devices. Video-based methods would enable use of multi-purpose, crew-familiar flight equipment. An initial exploration of video-based solutions was performed utilizing 2-camera video from crew cycling on Teal-CEVIS on the ISS. METHODS AND RESULTS Our group has scoped a variety of video-based object tracking methods. To date, we have primarily investigated computer vision toolkits such as open CV. Techniques explored include key-point detection, background subtraction, region-of interest tracking, color-based tracking, tag masking and tracking, and corner detection. Although object-tracking and 6D pose estimation is a rich field, space applications are a unique problem that are challenging for existing software and toolkits. The majority of the existing object-tracking applications involve vehicles/pedestrians and household objects with simple backgrounds. We have identified the following features which pose particular challenges for on-station exercise equipment tracking: 1. Busy and visually cluttered background 2. Low-textured tracking object with relatively small motions 3. Occlusions and motion by human subject and loose, floating objects 4. Limited number of video cameras with no fixed global references 5. Limited ability to add tags, markers, or visual references to the tracking object 6. Lack of training data for Machine Learning (ML) algorithms CONCLUSION We will summarize the efficacy of techniques tested for a ground mock-trial and the on-station exercise trial. It is likely that human-in-loop feedback or a conglomerate of methods is required. ML-based methods, like those implemented for human body tracking [2], may still be a viable option, but more training data and validation is needed.

L Nilsson↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Developing Methods for Exercise System Kinematics Tracking

BACKGROUND How to quantify the load and forces produced by exercise equipment and their Vibration Isolation and Stabilization (VIS) platforms in-flight is an active area of investigation. Kinematic tracking paired with system modeling can provide insights as well as verification and validation of simulations used for system design and development. Traditional motion capture methods can require significant cost in equipment procurement and crew-time, but newer lessons learned can be leveraged [1]. The VIS systems of current and future exercise hardware on the International Space Station (ISS) such as the Cycle Ergometer with Vibration Isolation System (CEVIS) and the European Enhanced Exploration Exercise Device (E4D) are not currently outfitted with IMUs or similar measurement devices. Video-based methods would enable use of multi-purpose, crew-familiar flight equipment. An initial exploration of video-based solutions was performed utilizing 2-camera video from crew cycling on Teal-CEVIS on the ISS. METHODS AND RESULTS Our group has scoped a variety of video-based object tracking methods. To date, we have primarily investigated computer vision toolkits such as openCV. Techniques explored include key-point detection, background subtraction, region-of interest tracking, color-based tracking, tag masking and tracking, and corner detection. Although object-tracking and 6D pose estimation is a rich field, space applications are a unique problem that are challenging for existing software and toolkits. The majority of the existing object-tracking applications involve vehicles/pedestrians and household objects with simple backgrounds. We have identified the following features which pose particular challenges for on-station exercise equipment tracking: Busy and visually cluttered background Low-textured tracking object with relatively small motions Occlusions and motion by human subject and loose, floating objects Limited number of video cameras with no fixed global references Limited ability to add tags, markers, or visual references to the tracking object Lack of training data for Machine Learning (ML) algorithms CONCLUSION We will summarize the efficacy of techniques tested for a ground mock-trial and the on-station exercise trial. It is likely that human-in-loop feedback or a conglomerate of methods is required. ML-based methods, like those implemented for human body tracking [2], may still be a viable option, but more training data and validation is needed.

L B Nilsson↗

NASA NTRS2007

Comparison of the US and Russian Cycle Ergometers

The purpose of this study was to compare the U.S. and Russian cycle ergometers focusing on the mechanical differences of the devices and the physiological differences observed while using the devices. Methods: First, the mechanical loads provided by the U.S. Cycle Ergometer with Vibration Isolation System (CEVIS) and the Russian Veloergometer were measured using a calibration dynamometer. Results were compared and conversion equations were modeled to determine the actual load provided by each device. Second, ten male subjects (32.9 +/- 6.5 yrs, 180.6 +/- 4.4 cm; 81.9 +/- 6.9 kg) experienced with both cycling and exercise testing completed a standardized submaximal exercise test protocol on CEVIS and Veloergometer. The exercise protocol involved 8 sub-maximal workloads each lasting 3 minutes for a total of 24 minutes per session, or until the end of the stage when the subject reached 85% of peak oxygen consumption or age-predicted maximum heart rate (220 - age). The workload started at 50 Watts (W), increased to 100 W, and then increased 25 W every 3 minutes until reaching a peak workload of 250 W. Physiological variables were then compared at each workload by repeated measures ANOVA or paired t-tests (p<0.05). Results: While both CEVIS and Veloergometer produced significantly lower workloads than the displayed workload, CEVIS produced even lower loads than Veloergometer (p<0.05) at each indicated workload. Despite this fact, the only physiological variables that showed a significant difference between the ergometers were VE (125 - 250W), VO2 (175 and 250 W), and VCO2 (175 W). All other physiological data were not statistically different between CEVIS and Veloergometer. Conclusion: Although workloads were different between ergometers, relatively few physiological differences were observed. Therefore, CEVIS workloads of 87.5 - 262.5 W can be rounded to the nearest 25 W increment and performed on the Veloergometer.

Norcross, Jason↗

NASA NTRS2015

Human Research Program Advanced Exercise Concepts (AEC) Overview

Exercise countermeasures provide benefits that are crucial for successful human spaceflight, to mitigate the spaceflight physiological deconditioning which occurs during exposure to microgravity. The NASA Human Research Program (HRP) within the Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate (HEOMD) is managing next generation Advanced Exercise Concepts (AEC) requirements development and candidate technology maturation to Technology Readiness Level (TRL) 7 (ground prototyping and flight demonstration) for all exploration mission profiles from Multi Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) Exploration Missions (up to 21 day duration) to Mars Transit (up to 1000 day duration) missions. These validated and optimized exercise countermeasures systems will be provided to the ISS Program and MPCV Program for subsequent flight development and operations. The International Space Station (ISS) currently has three major pieces of operational exercise countermeasures hardware: the Advanced Resistive Exercise Device (ARED), the second-generation (T2) treadmill, and the cycle ergometer with vibration isolation system (CEVIS). This suite of exercise countermeasures hardware serves as a benchmark and is a vast improvement over previous generations of countermeasures hardware, providing both aerobic and resistive exercise for the crew. However, vehicle and resource constraints for future exploration missions beyond low Earth orbit will require that the exercise countermeasures hardware mass, volume, and power be minimized, while preserving the current ISS capabilities or even enhancing these exercise capabilities directed at mission specific physiological functional performance and medical standards requirements. Further, mission-specific considerations such as preservation of sensorimotor function, autonomous and adaptable operation, integration with medical data systems, rehabilitation, and in-flight monitoring and feedback are being developed for integration with the exercise countermeasures systems. Numerous technologies have been considered and evaluated against HRP-approved functional device requirements for these extreme mission profiles, and include wearable sensors, exoskeletons, flywheel, pneumatic, and closed-loop microprocessor controlled motor driven systems. Each technology has unique advantages and disadvantages. The Advanced Exercise Concepts project oversees development of candidate next generation exercise countermeasures hardware, performs trade studies of current and state of the art exercise technologies, manages and supports candidate systems physiological evaluations with human test subjects on the ground, in flight analogs and flight. The near term goal is evaluation of candidate systems in flight, culminating in an integrated candidate next generation exercise countermeasures suite on the ISS which coalesces research findings from HRP disciplines in the areas of exercise performance for muscle, bone, cardiovascular, sensorimotor, behavioral health, and nutrition for optimal benefit to the crew.

Countermeasures↗

NASA NTRS2006

Stationary Apparatus Would Apply Forces of Walking to Feet

A proposed apparatus would apply controlled cyclic forces to both feet for the purpose of preventing the loss of bone density in a human subject whose bones are not subjected daily to the mechanical loads of normal activity in normal Earth gravitation. The apparatus was conceived for use by astronauts on long missions in outer space; it could also be used by bedridden patients on Earth, including patients too weak to generate the necessary forces by their own efforts. The apparatus (see figure) would be a modified version of a bicycle-like exercise machine, called the cycle ergometer with vibration isolation system (CEVIS), now aboard the International Space Station. Attached to each CEVIS pedal would be a computer-controlled stress/ vibration exciter connected to the heel portion of a special-purpose pedal. The user would wear custom shoes that would amount to standard bicycle shoes equipped with cleats for secure attachment of the balls of the feet to the special- purpose pedals. If possible, prior to use of the apparatus, the human subject would wear a portable network of recording accelerometers, while walking, jogging, and running. The information thus gathered would be fed to the computer, wherein it would be used to make the exciters apply forces and vibrations closely approximating the forces and vibrations experienced by that individual during normal exercise. It is anticipated that like the forces applied to bones during natural exercise, these artificial forces would stimulate the production of osteoblasts (bone-forming cells), as needed to prevent or retard loss of bone mass. In addition to helping to prevent deterioration of bones, the apparatus could be used in treating a person already suffering from osteoporosis. For this purpose, the magnitude of the applied forces could be reduced, if necessary, to a level at which weak hip and leg bones would still be stimulated to produce osteoblasts without exposing them to the full stresses of walking and thereby risking fracture.

Hauss, Jessica↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Effects of Replacing Treadmill Running with Alternative Exercise Countermeasures During Long-Duration Spaceflight

Introduction: Current exercise countermeasures on the International Space Station (ISS), including treadmill running, cycle ergometry, and resistive exercise, are used to protect crewmember health and performance during long-duration spaceflight. However, exploration vehicles for Artemis and beyond will have volume and power restrictions, requiring exercise hardware to have a smaller footprint and use fewer resources. Thus, recent efforts have focused on developing exercise devices that provide both aerobic and resistive training on one platform without including a treadmill, such as the European Enhanced Exploration Exercise Device (E4D). It is critical to validate the efficacy of exploration-focused exercise modalities to preserve muscle strength, aerobic fitness, bone density, and sensorimotor performance. Thus, the aim of this study is to determine the physiological effects of spaceflight that occur with nominal ISS exercise prescriptions compared to exploration-forward exercise modalities to determine if a treadmill is required to maintain current levels of protection during long-duration missions. Methods: Crewmembers will be assigned to one of three groups: 1) Control Group (n ≥ 40) who will partake in nominal exercise on the ISS, including running on the treadmill with vibration isolation system 2 (T2), ergometry on the cycle ergometer with vibration isolation and stabilization device (CEVIS), and strength training on the advanced resistive exercise device (ARED); 2) Active Group 1, who will partake in CEVIS and ARED exercise only (n = 8); and 3) Active Group 2, who will partake in aerobic and resistive exercise on the E4D only (n = 8). For Active Group 1, nominal aerobic exercise on T2 will be replaced with corresponding exercise on CEVIS. For Active Group 2, a dedicated exercise prescription will be designed to maximize the capabilities of the E4D to include resistive exercise, cycle ergometry, rowing, and rope pulling. Crewmembers in both active groups will not be permitted to perform treadmill exercise. Health and performance markers including bone mineral density (dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry [DXA]), body composition (DXA), cardiovascular fitness (cycle VO2peak), muscle strength and endurance (isometric/isokinetic testing, power endurance testing), sensorimotor performance (sit-to-stand, obstacle course), postural control (computerized dynamic posturography), and blood and urine biochemical markers of bone metabolism will be assessed before, during, and following spaceflight. Results: Data collection for this study is currently in progress. Conclusions: This study will assess the efficacy of exploration exercise modalities, including the effects of removing the treadmill exercise capability or of exclusively using the E4D, compared to nominal ISS exercise across an entire mission on bone, muscle, aerobic, and sensorimotor health and performance. Findings from this study will help provide a recommendation on whether these exploration exercise modalities can sufficiently protect against physiological deconditioning during spaceflight or whether a treadmill may be required to maintain current levels of protection during future exploration class spaceflight missions.

A.N. Varanoske↗

NASA NTRS2013

Benefits, Consequences, and Uncertainties of Conventional (Exercise) Countermeasure Approaches

This presentation will review the pros, cons, and uncertainties of using exercise countermeasures in hypothetical long duration exploration missions. The use of artificial gravity and exercise will be briefly discussed. One benefit to continued use of exercise is related to our extensive experience with spaceflight exercise hardware and programming. Exercise has been a part of each space mission dating back to the 1960's when simple isometric and bungee exercises were performed in the Gemini capsule. Over the next 50 years, exercise hardware improved cumulating in today's ISS suite of exercise equipment: Cycle Ergometer with Vibration Isolation and Stabilization System (CEVIS), Treadmill (T2) and Advanced Resistive Exercise Device (ARED). Today's exercise equipment is the most robust ever to be flown in space and allows the variety and intensity of exercise that might reasonably be expected to maintain muscle mass and function, bone density and cardiovascular fitness. A second benefit is related to the large body of research literature on exercise training. There is a considerable body of supporting research literature including >40,000 peer reviewed research articles on exercise training in humans. A third benefit of exercise is its effectiveness. With the addition of T2 and ARED to our ISS exercise suite, crew member outcomes on standard medical tests have improved. Additionally exercise has other positive side effects such as stress relief, possible improvement of immune function, improved sleep, etc. Exercise is not without its consequences. The major cons to performance of in‐flight exercise are the time and equipment required. Currently crew are scheduled 2.5 hrs/day for exercise and there is considerable cost to develop, fly and maintain exercise hardware. While no major injuries have been reported on ISS, there is always some risk of injury with any form of exercise There are several uncertainties going forward; these relate mostly to the development of small compact robust effective exercise devices for the next generation of space vehicles. It is becoming increasingly apparent that high intensity exercise is required for maintenance of fitness and functional capability and so future hardware will need to be developed, tested and implemented that allow for a wide variety of exercise, at high intensity while likely involving low mass, volume and power. There are many unanswered issues related to the minimum number and type of exercise devices required for exploration, optimizing exercise prescriptions for these devices, whether a treadmill is absolutely required, and even whether any single countermeasure can adequately protect muscle, bone, cardiovascular and sensorimotor function.

Ploutz-Snyder, Lori↗

NASA NTRS1992

The 1991-1992 project summaries

The Department of Mechanical Engineering at The University of Texas at Austin participated in seven cooperative design projects this year. Six of the projects were associated with the Johnson Space Center and include the design of a thermal control system for an inflatable lunar habitat module, a vibration isolation system for a space shuttle cycle ergometer, a radiator shading device for a lunar outpost, a reusable astronaut safety tether, a resistive exercise device for use on the space shuttle, and a fleet of autonomous regolith throwing devices for radiation shielding of lunar habitats. The seventh project is associated with the Jet Propulsion Lab and involves the design of a shock absorbing wheel for a small six-wheeled Martian rover vehicle.

Nichols, Steven P.↗

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↗