Sensorimotor Challenges
of
Orbital and Lunar Missions
Charles M. Oman, Ph.D.
Director, Man Vehicle Laboratory
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Sensorimotor Adaptation Research Team Leader
National Space Biomedical Research Institute
coman@mit.edu
UTMB/NASA-JSC Aerospace Medicine Grand Rounds
27 November, 2007
1
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Topics
• Disorientation and cognitive map
shifts in orbital flight
• Motion sickness
• Earth return: landing vertigo and
postlanding ataxia
• Lunar mission sensorimotor concerns
2
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Entering 0-G
• At 0-G onset, some
experience a 1-2 sec
somersaulting sensation,
particularly eyes closed or
after prolonged hyper-g.
Thereafter:
• Most people feel upright, with eyes open or closed.
• No sensation of “falling”.
– “Falling” is visually and cognitively mediated.
• Visual scene appears stationary during head movement
(i.e. no abnormal oscillopsia).
3
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Inversion Illusions
• 0-G inversion illusion. (Titov, 1962)
• Paradoxical sensation of being
continuously gravitationally upside
down, even when visually upright
in the cabin.
• Persists with eyes closed.
• Fluid shift, visceral elevation and
otolith unloading likely contribute.
• Temporarily reversible with
proprioceptive or visual cues.
• Uncommon after flight day 2
• < 25% of crew experience it.
4
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Visual Reorientation Illusion
• Surface nearest your feet seems
like a “floor”. Surfaces parallel to
body seem like “walls”.
• The orientation of your own body
– or that of a person you look at –
redefines “down”.
• Probability of illusion depends on
visual vertical cues, visual
attention and your familiarity with
the interior.
• Occurs spontaneously, but can be
cognitively initiated and reversed.
• Incidence is almost universal.
• Susceptibility persists for months.
(Oman et al, 1986; 2007)
5
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
EVA Height Vertigo
• Viewing Earth beneath your own
feet during EVA can trigger
sudden sense of height, fear of
falling, and enhanced awareness
of orbital motion.
• The natural compulsion to hang
on can sometimes be disabling.
• Turning away from Earth and
putting spacecraft “below”
instead of Earth can resolve
problem.
(Oman, 2003; 2007)
6
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
0-G Navigation Problems
• Local “visual” vertical in
each module is defined by
orientation of racks,
equipment, labeling, etc.
• “Cognitive map” of each
module is remembered in a
visually upright orientation –
probably due to our
terrestrial heritage.
• If module visual verticals are
incongruently oriented,
difficult mental rotations are
needed to interrelate them.
• Shuttle crews visiting Mir
sometimes got lost.
(Black arrow = local visual “up”)
(Oman, 2007)
7
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Visual Vertical Cues
Research suggests the
dominant cues are:
• “Frame cues”:
Symmetry and aspect
ratio of interior surfaces:
• “Polarity cues”:
Orientation of familiar
objects generically seen
“upright” – e.g. people.
• “Cognitive map cues”:
prior experience in the
room.
• Lighting & color less
effective.
(Howard, 1978; 2001; Oman et al 2003; 2007)
8
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Limbic Cognitive Map
• In animals, limbic cells
code place and direction
in a reference frame
defined by gravitational,
environmental visual
and motoric cues.
• Direction coded in a 2D
“horizontal” plane
• In 0-G, direction and
place cells responses
are initially labile - the
“horizontal” plane
sometimes aligns with
the surface of
locomotion
(Knierim, et al 2003, Taube, et al 2004, Oman 2007)
9
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
VRI = Cognitive Map Shift
Reorientation of the limbic
cognitive map of the local
environment causes VRIs
and makes
• surrounding surfaces inherit
new identities. (Here: the wall
becomes “a floor”.)
• perceived body orientation
suddenly change. (Here: right
shoulder down suddenly
becomes left shoulder down.)
Oman (2003; 2007)
• perceived direction sometimes change.
• objects not located where previously remembered.
10
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Do Map Shifts Occur on Earth ?
• On Earth we sometimes loose
our sense of direction in
subways or complex
buildings.
• On Earth, gravity anchors our
cognitive map, so cognitive
map rotations (“direction
vertigo”) normally occur only
in azimuth.
• We may be mistaken about direction, but the floors,
walls and ceilings never exchange identities the way
they do for astronauts experiencing VRIs.
(Jonsson, 2002; Oman 2007)
11
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
VRIs cause Motion Sickness
Perceived self orientation change is
not accompanied by normal
confirming semicircular canal or
gravireceptor cue.
Multiple VRIs can cause motion
sickness. A single VRI can trigger
vomiting in a person already sick.
Examples:
• Seeing an inverted
crewmember floating nearby.
• Viewing the Earth in an
unexpected direction.
12
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
What causes motion sickness ?
Vestibular
Eye
Body
Body
Dynamics
Efference copy
Brainstem
Cerebellar
Spinal Internal
Cortical
Brain
Models
Limbic +
Orientation
Sensory conflict
Areas
• (Reason,
Prolonged
sensory
conflict
1978;
Oman
1980)
causes sensory-motor learning
• To interpret sensory cues,
via internal model updating…
CNS
internal models
andemploys
motion sickness.
of previously learned sensory • motor
Only relationships.
vestibular conflicts cause
sickness- others act indirectly.
vestibular
organsconflict
= no
• No
Normally,
sensory
sickness.
signals
are brief and used to
identify the new, unexpected
• component
Emetic linkage
dynamics
and
of sensory
inflow
thresholds determine symptom
and
initiate
correctiveand
body
latency,
avalanching
movements.
persistence.
Emetic
System
“Emetic
Linkage”
Symptoms &
Signs
13
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Sensory-Motor Conflict Model
+
+
.
x
ne
B
u
+
x
∫ dt
S
+
+
• Observer model for
orientation
perception and
movement control
• Sensory conflict
• Emetic linkage
na
+
a
A
ˆ B,
ˆ S
ˆ
Re-identification of A,
Re-calculation of K, C
B̂
m
-
C
x̂
+
xd
∫ dt
ˆ.
x+
+
+
K
K
(60s +1)2
+
+
+
c
-
K
(600s+1)2 +
+
Â
Ŝ
(Oman, 1982, 1990)
cTT c
â
14
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Emetic dynamics..a hydraulic analogy
emetic agent:
released due to
sensory conflict
Everyday life:
no accumulation due to bowl
leak, so no nausea.
visible level
corresponds to
nausea intensity
During motion sickness:
larger emetic input causes
visible accumulation
Vomiting:
high accumulation triggers
siphon emptying, and cycle
begins again
15
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Microgravity Sensory Conflicts
• Otolith afferent pattern doesn’t
correspond to any static head
position on Earth.
• A sustained head tilt produces
no change in utricular otolith
outflow - as it normally does on
Earth.
• VRIs change perceived orientation without any matching
semicircular canal or otolith cue.
• Headward fluid shift and gravireceptor unweighting may
cause inversion illusion - reversing the direction of
expected otolith cues on head tilt.
16
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Space Adaptation Syndrome
SAS = Fluid Shift + SMS
Fluid Shift (entire crew)
• head fullness
• puffy face
• headache
• stomach elevation
• stuffy nose
• engorged face & neck veins
• impaired taste & smell
• increased diuresis
Space Motion Sickness (many crew)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
fatigue, drowsiness, yawning
apathy
headache
burping, flatulence
HPA stress hormone release
epigastric awareness & discomfort
anorexia, reduced gastric motility
nausea
distraction, multitasking difficulty
vomiting - often sudden
repeated vomiting: fluid, electrolyte,
glucose loss, ketosis, and “hitting
the wall”.
“Sopite Syndrome” is often the earliest - and sometimes the only –
symptom of motion sickness
(Graybiel and Knepton, 1976)
17
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Clinical Grading
approximate
incidence
1/3
None (0)
1/3
Mild (1)
Moderate (2)
1/3
+
Severe (3)
(Davis, et al 1988)
18
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
A Typical First Day in Space
For a person with higher nausea threshold, or who had taken drugs
This individual had prodromal nausea before vomiting 4x.
prophylactically, pattern might look more like this
(Oman, et al 1986)
19
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Space Motion Sickness Incidence
• 0% on Mercury/Gemini, 30% on Apollo/
Vostok/Soyuz/Salyut, 56% on Skylab
• 75% on Shuttle.
• Incidence is
– highest in larger spacecraft.
– highest on days 1-2, declining on days 3-5
– lower on second and subsequent space flights.
– unrelated to gender, or prior flying experience.
– so far, not reliably predicted by 1-G motion
sickness susceptibility tests.
• Some sickness goes unreported.
• “Earth Sickness” (part of “Landing Syndrome”) about
30% after 1-2 week missions, 90% after long
duration flights.
20
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
EVA
• 0-G vomiting is normally not dangerous
– little risk of aspiration if conscious.
• However: Shuttle EMU space suit was not
designed to withstand or contain a vomiting
episode.
• STS mission rule: No non-emergency EVAs till
flight day 4 unless EVA crew have been entirely
asymptomatic for 2 days.
21
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Shuttle/ISS EMU 0-G Vomiting Risk
1. Vomit reacts with
LiOH CO2 scrubber,
heat shuts down
primary vent circuit.
2. Vomit freezes
sonic nozzles,
shutting down
backup O2 supply
system.
3. Vomit is biologically
active, rendering suit
nonresuable
Heimlich (1980)
(Insuit vomiting episodes have happened. Lets be sure this
gets fixed for Constellation program.)
22
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Motion Sickness Drugs
• No “magic bullet” exists - yet.
• Inflight efficacy can only be clinically judged.
Controlled inflight effectiveness studies are
impractical
• Formulary includes:
– Oral Phen (25 mg) or Phen/Dex (25/ 2.5 or 5 mg)
– IM Phenergan injectable (25 or 50mg). Potentially
sedating so should be used before sleep, or add oral
Dex. Injection site pain.
– Phenergan suppository (25mg). For chronic vomiting.
– Oral Scop/Dex (0.4 or 0.6/ 2.5 or 5 mg). Rapidly
effective, shorter half life than Phen. Potential for
blurred vision and urinary retention, especially if
multiple doses. Infrequently used > STS-30.
23
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Sickness Management Training
•
Part of US Sailing’s “Safety-at-Sea” curriculum since 1992
– Practical do’s and don’ts. (“Knowledge is power”.)
•
We should teach new astronauts:
– how head movements and illusions cause motion sickness
– how to recognize and react to early symptoms
• Limit head & body movements. Allow for nausea lag.
• When anyone is sick, everyone should remain visually upright.
• Use foot and body restraints.
– how to choose and use drugs.
– to avoid repeated vomiting. Take a drug and sleep it off.
– the importance of fluid, electrolyte, glucose replacement.
– why logging symptoms and drug use is important for future crews
24
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Earth Landing Disorientation
Returning crews routinely
experience “Entry/Landing
Syndrome”, including:
• Head movement contingent
oscillopsia (visual surround
motion) and self motion
illusions (“tumbled gyros”)
• Illusions due to vehicle
angular and linear
accelerations.
• “One G feels like three”.
(Harm & Reschke, 1999)
25
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Postlanding Vertigo & Ataxia
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Large interindividual
differences, but almost all have
postural stability decrement.
Little loss of muscle strength,
but loss of extensor tone.
Reduction in “cone of stability”
while standing.
Walk with wide gait, turn corners
wide.
•
Vertical motion illusions
climbing/descending stairs.
Oscillopsia, reduced visual
acuity and head lock while
walking, running.
55% cannot walk 400m suited.
Some long duration Mir & ISS
crewmembers unable to stand
up or walk after landing. Most
need ~ 15 days to recover to
postflight performance. Some
mild symptoms last 3-5 months
26
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Tilt-Translation Illusion
• Entry and postlanding head tilt is perceived primarily as
linear translation, usually in the opposite direction to head
tilt. Some individuals perceive a temporal lag. Head roll
produces compensatory horizontal eye movement.
• Explained as Otolith Tilt-Translation Reintepretation
(“OTTR Illusion”)
(Parker, et al, 1985; Reschke & Parker, 1987; Young et al 1984)
27
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Tilt-Translation Illusion
• “A classic tilt-translation illusion was my dominant
vestibular effect upon return. When I tilted my head to
the right, I felt I was translating to the left through a
distance so large I thought I was in the next room. It
was equal in all 4 directions…
• “It was a persisting feeling while my head was tilted,
but subdued by vision and knowledge that ‘this can’t
be happening’. The onset was immediate and
intense with only very small tilt angle..”
(Richards et al, 2001)
28
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Gain Illusion
• Head pitch or roll produces a tumbling
sensation, or apparent motion of the visual
surround (oscillopsia) as if the “gain” of head
rotation sensation was increased, so the
head seems to move farther than it actually
does.
29
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Estimating “Down”
• To distinguish gravireceptor tilt
cues from translation cues, the
brain must also estimate the
direction and magnitude of gravity
using:
– Semicircular canal rotational
cues
– Visual cues (if reliable cues are
present)
– Knowledge of self-movement
commands
– Knowledge of what movements
are physically possible.
• Errors in estimating G result in
illusory accelerations or forces.
g
a
g
a
30
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Observer Models
1-G models account for eye movements and illusory tilt
and translation perception in darkness for many types of
passive tilt and translation in humans and monkeys.
Conflict signals (green) drive angular velocity and
“down” estimation.
31
(Merfeld 1995, 2003; Haslwanter 2000)
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Rotation Otolith Tilt-Translation Reinterpretation
(“ROTTR”) Hypothesis
Changes in rotation cue weighting
explain both:
A: Gain Illusion: Over-estimation of head
rotation based on angular (e.g.
semicircular canal) cues causes a
transient linear acceleration illusion in
the same direction
B: Tilt translation Illusion: Underestimation
of rotation results in a transient linear
acceleration illusion in the opposite
direction.
(Here: g is gravity, ĝ is perceived “down,”
and â is perceived linear acceleration.)
(Merfeld 2003)
32
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Effects of Visual Cues
• If the direction of “down” is
misperceived but visual or
proprioceptive cues indicate no
acceleration, the unaccounted for ĝ
component of gravity is perceived
as a “mysterious force”.
• Such illusory forces seem to push
f̂
people side ways in earth-quaked
houses, amusement park tilted
rooms, or outdoor “mystery spots”.
g
• Pilots attribute illusory forces to
“gusts”. (A form of unrecognized
Type 1 spatial disorientation).
33
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
STS-3 PIO
“Pilot Induced Oscillation”
• 1982, no HUD, the CDR’s first
Shuttle re/entry & landing.
• Shuttle had PIO detection filter
to reduce control authority.
• PIO remains controversial.
Postflight tests showed no
control system anomaly.
• Shuttle Training Aircraft
provides no experience with
Gain/Tilt-Translation illusions.
• Vehicle pitch could cause pilot
control response delays,
illusory forces, misperception
of attitude.
34
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Shuttle Landing Performance
• Shuttle has landed safely 120
times. About 10% had several
landing parameters beyond
“desired” range.
FTE
parameter
# > desired
#>
acceptable
Hdot mg TD
13
3
GS TD
10
2
Lat Pos TD
17
1
• Possible correlation with
postlanding neurovestibular
function tests (n=9, Clark &
McCluskey, 2001)
• STS touchdown velocities
have higher variance than
in Shuttle Training Aircraft.
35
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Lunar Landing Issues
•
•
•
•
•
Geographic disorientation
Landing zone visual assessment
Dust grayout
Touchdown terrain awareness
Human role in vehicle control
36
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Geographic Disorientation
•
•
•
A15 crew realized they weren’t
Apollo 15
heading for planned spot, and
didn’t know exactly where they
were relative to any familiar
landmarks. So they picked a
smooth area nearby and headed
for it. (Mindell, 2007)
“The problem was, when we
pitched over and began to look
out the window, there was
nothing there !”
“I was very surprised that the
general terrain was as smooth
and flat as it was..there were very
few craters that had any shadow
at all, and very little definition”.
(Dave Scott)
37
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Landing Zone Assessment
Apollo goal: touchdown on < 5
deg slope, < 2 ft. variations
Perceptual limitations:
• Cognitive map includes only
large landmarks.
• Fractal terrain, difficult to
remember/recognize.
• 0.5 m landmarks become
visible at ~ 4000 feet.
• Regolith reflectance is not
like Earth (non-Lambertian)
• Slope difficult to judge at
steep visual angles
• Shading elevation cues are
ambiguous.
• Light from behind/below can
make craters appear convex
Apollo 15
38
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Shape from Shading
• Which “crater” appears concave ?
• Shape is inferred from shading employing a “light from
above” assumption - even in orbital flight.
(Oman, 2003)
39
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Dust Grayout
• Grayout at < 50-100’ causes progressive loss of
horizon, altitude, position cues.
• “ I couldn’t tell what was underneath me; I knew it
was a generally good area and I was just going to
have to bite the bullet and land”, because I couldn’t
tell whether there was a crater down there or not”.
• “It turned out there were more craters there than we
realized, either because we didn’t look before the
dust started or because the dust obscured them”
Pete Conrad, Apollo 12
40
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Touchdown Terrain Awareness
•
•
Crew cannot see below
and behind. Must remain
aware of the terrain
beneath during descent.
Apollo 15 landing gear
overlapped edge of a small
crater. Descent engine bell
damaged by crater rim.
41
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Manual vs. Automatic
• Constellation Lunar Lander will have autonomous
landing capability - needed for uncrewed operations.
• NASA Spacecraft Human Rating Requirements
require capability for manual control of flight path and
attitude.
• Apollo 14-17 LEMs had autoland capability - though
it was never used. Why ?
John Young: “Because the place we were landing was
saturated in craters and the automatic system didn’t know
where the heck the craters were, and I could look out the
window and see them. Why trust the automation anyways?
You’re responsible for the landing. You know where you
want to land when you look out the window and why don’t
you make sure you land there?”
(Cummings, et al 2005)
42
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Semi-Autonomous Option
• One method now in
development:
• Lidar scans terrain at
7K’, automation
suggests landing spot
too far
for terrain
sensors
too far
for human
eye
too high
for window 7000’
view
4000’
• Crew visually
confirms site and
either:
– approves
– redesignates, or
– flies manually
too shallow
for terrain
sensors
Apollo
(Forest et al, 2007; Brady, et al 2007)
43
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
EVA Locomotion
• Astronauts usually loped
(skipping without support
foot exchange) on flat
terrain.
• In reduced g, loping,
skipping and running is
energetically more
efficient than walking.
Pressurized suit legs act
like springs, improving
energy recovery.
• High suit CG, rigid torso,
and lower ground reaction
forces make walking on
slopes more difficult.
(Farley & Mcmahon, 1992; Carr & Newman 2005, 2007)
44
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
EVA Balance
• Running is one legged
walking.
• Threshold for static tilt
perception in darkness likely
rises from .3 deg to 1-2 deg.
due to 1/6g.
• Crew likely more dependent
on vision for balance.
• Suit stiffness may constrain
normal ankle & hip strategies.
• Apollos: Falling on flat
• Helmet design (and suit lights)
terrain is safe.
determine field of view.
• Repeated falling is tiring • Apollo EVAs were all in
coats suit with dust.
daylight, and on relatively flat • Downhill sliding falls a
terrain.
concern.
45
DISORIENTATION MOTION SICKNESS EARTH RETURN
LUNAR MISSIONS
Questions ?
46
References
General References on Balance, Motion Sickness and 0-G Visual Orientation and Navigation
McCredie, S. (2007). Balance:in search of the lost sense, Little, Brown (Hachette).
Oman, C. M. (2007). Spatial Orientation and Navigation in Microgravity. Spatial Processing in Navigation, Imagery
and Perception. F. W. Mast and L. Janeke. Springer Verlag, New York: 208-248.
http://mvl.mit.edu/MVLpubs/Oman_Spatial_Orientation_and_Nav_in_Microgravity_2007.pdf
Oman, C. M. (2003). Human Visual Orientation in Weightlessness. Levels of Perception. L. Harris and M. Jenkin.
New York, NY, Springer Verlag: 375-398.
http://mvl.mit.edu/MVLpubs/Oman_York_Symposium_Vis_Orient_in_Weightlessness_2003.pdf
Oman, C. (2004) In Search of a Cure for Seasickness. US Sailing Safety at Sea Seminars Program,
http://mvl.mit.edu/MVLpubs/Oman_Safety_at_Sea_Seasickness_2004.pdf
Reason, J. T. (1978). "Motion sickness: some theoretical and practical considerations." Applied Ergonomics 9(3):
163-167.
Other References:
Brady, TM Schwartz, JL Tillier, CE (2007) System Architecture and Operational Concept for an Autonomous
Precision Lunar Landing System, 30th AAS Guidance and Control Conference, Breckenridge, CO, 2/2007-2/.
(CS Draper Lab Report no. P-4485)
Carr, C.E. , Newman, D.J. (2005) When is running more efficient than walking in a space suit ? SAE ICES 200501-2970. http://mvl.mit.edu/MVLpubs/Carr2005.pdf
Cummings, M. L., Wang, E., Smith, C. A., Marquez, J. J., Duppen, M., & Essama, S. (2005). Conceptual HumanSystem Interface Design for a Lunar Access Vehicle (HAL2005-04), MIT –HAL,
p.64 web.mit.edu/aeroastro/www/labs/halab/papers/HSI_interim_report_1.pdf
Davis, J. R., R. T. Jennings, B. G. Beck and J. P. Bagian (1993). "Treatment efficacy of intramuscular promethazine
for space motion sickness." Aviat Space Environ Med 64: 230-233.
Davis, J. R., J. M. Vanderploeg, P. A. Santy, R. T. Jennings and D. F. Stewart (1988). "Space motion sickness
during 24 flights of the Space Shuttle." Aviat. Space Environ. Med. 59: 1185-1189.
47
References
Farley, CT and McMahon, TA () Energetics of walking and running: insights from simulated reduced-gravity
experiments. J. Appl. Physiol. 73:2709-2712.
Forest, LJ, Kessler, LJ, Homer, ML. (2007) Design of a human-interactive autonomous flight manager (AFM) for
crewed lunar landing. AIAA Infotech, Rohnert Park,CA. Draper Report P-4503.
http://www.draper.com/papers/papers.html#forest
Graybiel, A. and J. Knepton (1976). "Sopite syndrome: a sometimes sole manifestation of motion sickness."
Aviat Space Environ Med 47(8): 873-882.
Graybiel, A. and J. Knepton (1976). "Sopite syndrome: a sometimes sole manifestation of motion sickness."
Aviat Space Environ Med 47(8): 873-882.
Harm DL, Reschke MF, and Parker DE, (1999) DSO 604 OI-1 Visual-Vestibular Integration Motion Perception
Reporting, Extended Duration Orbiter Medical Project Final Report 1989-1995, NASA SP-1999-534.
Haslwanter, T., R. Jaeger, S. Mayr and M. Fetter (2000). "Three-dimensional eye-movment responses to offvertical axis rotations in humans." Exp Brain Res 134: 96-106.
Howard, I. P. (1982). Human Visual Orientation. Chichester, Sussex, John Wiley.
Howard, I. P. and G. Hu (2001). "Visually Induced Reorientation Illusions." Perception 30: 583 - 600.
Jennings, R. T. (1998). "Managing Space Motion Sickness." Journal of Vestibular Research 8(1): 67-70.
Jonsson, E. (2002). Inner Navigation: Why we get lost and how we find our way. New York, Scribner.
Knierim, J. J., B. L. McNaughton and G. R. Poe (2000). "Three-dimensional spatial selectivity of hippocampal
neurons during space flight." Nature Neuroscience 3(3): 209-210.
Merfeld, D. M., L. R. Young, C. M. Oman and M. J. Shelhamer (1993). "A multidimensional model of the effect of
gravity on the spatial orientation of the monkey." J Vestib Res 3(2): 141-61.
Merfeld, D. M. and L. H. Zupan (2002). "Neural processing of gravitoinertial cues in humans. III. Modelling tilt
and translation responses." J. Neurophysiol. 87: 819-33.
Merfeld, D. M. (2003). "Rotation otolith tilt-translation reinterpretation (ROTTR) hypothesis: A new hypothesis to
explain neurovestibular spaceflight adaptation." Journal of Vestibular Research 13: 309-320.
Oman, C.M. (1982) "A heuristic mathematical model for the dynamics of sensory conflict and motion sickness"
,Acta Oto-laryngologica Suppl. 392
Oman, C.M. (1990) "Motion sickness: a synthesis and evaluation of the sensory conflict theory,” Canadian
Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology, 68:294-303.
48
References
Oman, C. M., B. K. Lichtenberg, K. E. Money and R. K. McCoy (1986). "MIT/Canadian vestibular experiments on
the Spacelab-1 mission: 4. Space motion sickness: symptoms, stimuli, and predictability." Experimental
Brain Research 64: 316-334.
Oman, C. M., I. Howard, T. Smith, A. Beall, A. Natapoff, J. Zacher and H. Jenkin (2003). The Role of Visual
Cues in Microgravity Spatial Orientation. The Neurolab Spacelab Mission:Neuroscience Research In
Space. J. Buckey and J. Homick. Houston, TX, NASA Johnson Space Center.
Mindell, D.A. (2007) Digital Apollo, Human, Machine and Spaceflight, Ch. 10 (in press)
Parker, D. E., M. F. Reschke, A. P. Arrott, J. L. Homick and B. K. Lichtenberg (1985). "Otolith tilt-translation
reinterpretation following prolonged weightlessness: implications for preflight training." Aviation, Space, and
Environmental Medicine 56: 601-606.
Reason, J. T. (1978). "Motion sickness: some theoretical and practical considerations." Applied Ergonomics 9(3):
163-167.
Reschke, M. F. and D. E. Parker (1987). "Effects of prolonged weightlessness on self-motion perception and eye
movements evoked by roll and pitch." Aviat. Space. Environ. Med. 58(9): A153-A157.
Reschke, M. F., J. J. Bloomberg, D. L. Harm, W. H. Paloski and D. E. Parker (1994). Neurophysiological
Aspects: Sensory and Sensory-Motor Function. Space Physiology and Medicine. A. E. Nicogossian, Lea
and Febiger.
Richards, J. T., J. B. Clark, C. M. Oman and T. H. Marshburn (2001). Neurovestibular Effects of Long-Duration
Spaceflight: A Summary of Mir Phase 1 Experiences: 1-33. NSBRI Report 2001.
Small, R. L., A. M. Fisher and J. W. Keller (2005). A Pilot Spatial Orientation Aiding System. AIAA 5th Aviation,
Technology, Integration, and Operations Conference (ATIO). Arlington, VA, AIAA.
Taube, J., R. Stackman, J. Calton and C. M. Oman (2004). "Rat head direction cell responses in zero-gravity
parabolic flight." J. Neurophysiol. 92: 2887-2997
Titov, G. and M. Caidin (1962). I am Eagle !, Bobs-Merrill.
Young, L. R., C. M. Oman, D. G. D. Watt, K. E. Money and B. K. Lichtenberg (1984). "Spatial orientation in
weightlessness and readaptation to Earth's gravity." Science 225: 205-208.
49
VRIs vs. Inversion Illusions
Character
VRI
0-G Inversion
Illusion
Perceived surface
identity
Depends on
orientation
Always veridical
Allocentric reference
frame
Spacecraft
External
gravitational frame
Perceived orientation Usually feet towards
“floor”, but can vary
Always
gravitationally
inverted
Role of visual cues
Required
Not essential
Duration
Seconds
Many minutes
Lability
Easily cognitively
reversed
Reversible with
haptic cues
Incidence
Almost universal
< 25% of crew
Prevalence
Can occur
throughout flight
Rare after second
day
Paradoxical
sensation
Momentary
Continuous
Oman, 2007
50