Mathematical models for predicting G-duration tolerances.

Mathematical models that predict fatigue-based G-duration tolerances for relaxed and straining subjects are developed and validated using published data. These models are based on regression analysis calculations using published G-duration tolerance data of relaxed subjects exposed to 3-5 G and subjects exposed to 6-9 G using an anti-G suit and performing the anti-G straining maneuver. These G-duration models are derived from published G-level tolerance models based on intravascular hydrostatic pressures and physiologic responses to maximum voluntary contractions (MVC%). Included in the validation of these models are the baroreceptor and muscle contraction cardiovascular reflexes that support arterial BP. A basic energy pool that supports a G-duration of 140 s for G exposures > 5 G is theorized. Because of the long duration of sustained G exposures in these models, the physiologic dynamics involved in predicting straining G-duration tolerances, are identified and validated using different time periods, i.e., Phases I and II. These models, based on sustained G exposures to a constant G level are also applicable to exposures of variable G levels known as simulated aerial combat maneuver (SACM) G-profile tolerances. G-duration tolerances > 9 G are predicted using these models for subjects using reclined-seat backs and positive pressure breathing.

Mathematical models for predicting G-level tolerances.

The mathematical models developed in this article predict the following human G-level tolerances: 1) rapid onset relaxed (ROR); 2) gradual onset relaxed (GOR); and, 3) straining-rapid onset. Included in the model are specific functions of: 1) anti-G suit; 2) positive pressure breathing (PBG); 3) baroreceptor reflex; 4) handgrip reflex; 5) anti-G straining maneuver (AGSM) increasing intrathoracic pressures (Pi); 6) leg elevation; and, 7) reclining seatback angles < or = 55 degrees. These functions are based on sound physiologic principles. Also discussed in the development of this model, but not included in the models, were: 1) isometric muscle contraction reflex; 2) Qigong (Q-G) maneuver; and, 3) straining GOR tolerances. The straining GOR tolerance profile was calculated to be a measure of G-duration tolerance and not G-level tolerance. A maximum P of 125 mm Hg from the AGSM was used in these models that could be augmented with PBG to 185 mm Hg. G-level tolerance predictions using this model were validated with published data.

Can centrifugation at increased G be used to predict results of 0G?

Can physiologic research on the effects of weightlessness be conducted using a centrifuge providing an increased G environment? The answer to this question, if affirmative can have extraordinary implications regarding physiologic research in space that now begs the answer to the more general and basic question, what is the 'best environment' to differentiate the biological effects of mass from weight? In considering the best environment, there are several important factors in support of conducting human and animal physiologic 'gravitational' research on centrifuges here on Earth. Increased G research using a centrifuge can be conducted for a small fraction of the cost of research in space. It can be made available to more scientists as the number of centrifuges for this type of research increases. There are far less-detailed and therefore much easier preparation requirements for animal and human studies on a centrifuge compared with space research.

Straining GOR tolerance determinations are a measure of G-duration not G-level tolerance.

Straining gradual G onset rate (GOR) tolerances are considered by physiologists as a measure of G-level tolerance. Using recently developed G-level and G-duration mathematical models, it was found that straining GOR tolerances may well be a measure of tolerance to G-duration. G-duration tolerance was determined to be limited with the onset of fatigue and not cardiovascular insufficiency. G-level tolerances that were predicted using a mathematical model were higher than determined using straining GOR tolerance measurements of subjects on a centrifuge. Also the G-duration tolerance mathematical model showed that those centrifuge subjects had not expended all of their "energy reserve" during their sustained G exposure most probably because of the onset of fatigue. Even if they were able to use all of their potential energy reserve, their G-duration tolerance would not have allowed them to reach the maximum G-level predicted with the G-level tolerance model. It is therefore concluded that the straining GOR tolerance profile, with G onset rates of 0.1G/s, is not a measure of G-level tolerance, as has been assumed, but is a measure of G-duration tolerance. These findings have significant safety implications world-wide since this straining GOR profile is commonly used as a G-level tolerance fighter-pilot-selection determination; i.e. pilot selection standards for G-level tolerance are not a measure of G-level tolerance. In testing equipment design changes, the proper G tolerance profiles must be used to correctly measure its impact on G tolerance.

Mathematical models for predicting straining G-level tolerances in reclined subjects.

Mathematical models that predict straining G-level tolerances of subjects reclined > 55 degrees are described. Straining G-level tolerances are defined as those G-levels of exposures that require the use of the anti-G straining maneuver (AGSM). A subject reclined > 55 degrees has a reduced inspiratory volume that limits the maximum intrathoracic pressure that can be developed that is the basis for the AGSM. Therefore the inability to perform a maximum AGSM reduces the maximum G-level that can be tolerated. G-level tolerances of subjects at seat-back angles between 75 degrees and 55 degrees are modeled. The use of positive pressure breathing (PBG) to increase G-level tolerance is considered. Maximum G-level tolerances are dependent upon anti-G suit pressures (psi) used and are predicted as follows: 55 degrees = 11.7 and 12.7 G with 7 and 10 psi; 65 dergrees = 12.1 and 12.8 G with 6 and 9 psi; and 75 degrees = 13.4 and 14.2 G with 5 and 8 psi anti-G suit pressure.

Taking gravity into space.

NASA: The use of a personal centrifuge as a countermeasure to weightlessness during space flight is presented. The authors argue that it is more effective than exercise techniques now used. Recent research in intermittent gravity exposure is reviewed and future opportunities and requirements for research are examined.^ieng

Increased chronic acceleration exposure enhances work capacity.

Adult male chickens adapted to 1.75 or 2.5 G from long term centrifugation, were maximally exercised on an animal treadmill at 1 g (Earth's gravity) and compared with the exercise capacities of control chickens raised at 1 g. The increased-G birds had statistically significantly greater exercise capacities than the controls during the first 3 weeks of the study after the initial exercise exposure. Thereafter however for the following two months of the study, there was no difference in either group's exercise capacities. This early increased work capacity was attributed to the increased-G birds improved ability to maximize their muscular strength with neurological adaptation. The increased-G birds lost body mass at a 31% greater rate during exercise than the controls although this difference was not statistically significant. This increased body mass loss was considered to have resulted from increased use of glycogen during exercise.

The role of anaerobic power in human tolerance to simulated aerial combat maneuvers.

The relationships of anaerobic power, blood lactate levels, and selected anthropometric measurements to +Gz tolerance were examined in 10 adult males. Upper and lower body anaerobic indices were determined by Wingate anaerobic tests (WT). Acceleration tolerance was measured as duration time for a simulated aerial combat maneuver (SACM) centrifuge profile with alternating 4.5 and 7 +Gz 15-s plateaus until exhaustion. Group mean (+/- SD) for SACM duration was 250 +/- 97 s. Peak blood lactate concentration was 4.9 +/- 1.5 mmol/L and overall rating of perceived exertion was 7.4 +/- 2.1 using the Borg Category-Ratio Scale. Group mean for WT lower body 30-s mean power (MP, index of anaerobic performance) was 620 +/- 128 W; peak power (PP, highest 5-s power output) was 851 +/- 169 W. Upper body MP and PP were 380 +/- 68 W and 497 +/- 81 W, respectively. SACM duration time was positively correlated (p < 0.05) with lower body MP and PP, upper body PP, various body circumferences, weight, fat-free body weight, and height; but did not correlate with WT power outputs relative to body weight, or with other SACM variables. Results suggest that anaerobic power is an important physiologic component in SACM tolerance.

The role of artificial gravity in the exploration of space.

Terrestrial animals including the human require regular periodic gravitational (g) stimulation to maintain normal physiologic functions on earth or in space. Identical g stimulations can be produced in space with inertial forces (G) using a centrifuge. These stimulations may be made more efficient in preventing physiologic deconditioning by increasing G levels above 1 G. The effective operational use of the centrifuge in space to prevent physiologic deconditioning from microgravity exposures will require ground-based studies using weightless simulation such as bedrest or dry immersion with laboratories that have human-use centrifuges. The use of periodic, increased-G exposures in space may offer a practical inexpensive solution in preventing physiologic deconditioning.

Preinflation before acceleration on tolerance to simulated Space Shuttle reentry G profiles in dehydrated subjects.

This study was conducted to determine if preinflation of a standard five-bladder anti-g suit 10 minutes before exposure to a centrifuge simulation of a Space Shuttle reentry would provide significantly better protection against orthostasis than the standard symptomatic inflation regimen. This study differed significantly from prior studies: The rate of g onset was slower, peak g was lower, duration of exposure was longer, and the subjects were dehydrated to mimic conditions observed in astronauts immediately postflight. Preinflation demonstrated physiological advantages as determined by arterial blood pressure and heart rate changes in seven healthy male, experienced centrifuge subjects.

Artificial gravity in space flight.

Clearly, physiologic adaptation to terrestrial life for all animals is assured only by frequent encounters with gravity. Indeed, upon exposure to weightlessness in space flight, losses of physiologic functions quickly begin. Some physiologic parameters change more rapidly than others, but the deconditioning process starts rapidly. The rates of functional losses for all affected parameters are interesting in that they appear to approach a limit; i.e., losses of these functions may not continue until indefinitely. The regulation of this functional asymptotic response to space is not known, but probably based on functional requirements of the body to life itself and perhaps genetic expression. The latter controlling mechanism (DNA) functions only on aquatic (weightless) animals on Earth--land animals must stimulate these physiologic functions as they relate to gravity on a regular frequent basis. This loss of regulation upon entering the weightless environment is fascinating since land-based animals including the humans have evolved from millions (perhaps billions) of years of terrestrially adapted ancestors. One would expect some DNA involvement in the regulation of its physiology, but it appears to be absent. Therefore, if the functional debilitation of space is to be denied, we must begin to understand the adaptation process of the sole basis for the control of our physiologic processes on land; i.e., how gravity regulates our biologic functions. To learn about this regulatory mechanism, some inquiry into how aquatic animals first adapted to living on land might be helpful.

Animals, alternatives, and humans: solving problems through research in the U.S. Air Force.

The Armstrong Laboratory and its predecessors have conducted responsible animal research in support of USAF operations for nearly three decades. The use of animal models, is essential in research that requires a complex living system, but would be too hazardous to humans. The Laboratory also has aggressively pursued alternatives to the use of animals and improved methods in conducting animal research. Thus far, fewer animals are used currently in some areas of research. Since the human is the focus for Armstrong Laboratory research, human test subjects are used as frequently as possible. As improved noninvasive physiologic monitoring methods become available, humans will be used more extensively.

A report of orthodontic undergraduate education in two dental schools: Toronto, Canada and Liverpool, England.

The undergraduate orthodontic courses at Toronto and Liverpool are compared. Each course comprises more than 250 hours of teaching and within that, more than 100 hours involve clinical tuition. Both courses contain laboratory modules for the teaching of removable and fixed appliance technique. Undergraduates treat their own patients with both simple and complex appliances, within their clinical training period which extends over at least 2 years. Liverpool undergraduates treat more patients per student than their counterparts in Toronto (P < 0.05). During the third year of study, the clinical experience of the Liverpool students (P < 0.001) is made up of a greater proportion of patients treated with removable appliances. In both centres, senior students treat patients with a greater preponderance of fixed appliance techniques and two-arch treatments.

Effect of pyridostigmine bromide on acceleration tolerance and performance.

Pyridostigmine Bromide (PB) is used as a pre-exposure antidote for the prevention of potentially lethal effects of certain chemical warfare nerve agents by reversibly inhibiting acetylcholinesterase (AChE). This study was designed to determine whether PB has any deleterious effects on acceleration tolerance (+Gz) or performance. Double-blind placebo trials were conducted to evaluate the effects of PB (90 mg) per day on +Gz tolerances and performance. Three types of exposures were used: 1) gradual onset rate (GOR) exposures of 0.1 G/s; 2) a series of rapid onset rate (ROR) exposures of 6.0 G/s; and 3) a simulated aerial combat maneuver (SACM) of 4.5 to 9.0 +Gz. Performance tasks included the Unified Tri-Service Cognitive Performance Assessment Battery (UTC-PAB). The subjects were not able to correlate their symptoms with PB, placebo, or the acceleration exposure itself. Plasma PB individual levels ranged between 6 and 31 ng/ml and AChE levels of inhibition had a range of 12 to 45%. There were no significant effects on +Gz tolerance or performance related to PB. Based on the results of this study, PB does not significantly alter +Gz tolerance or performance. Therefore, we do not expect aircrew taking prophylactic doses of PB to be adversely affected during aerial combat operations.

Guidelines for a research and development (R&D) program for high sustained G.

This article is a contribution to the workshop on "Operational Requirements in the Prevention of G-Induced Loss of Consciousness (G-LOC) in High Performance Aircraft"; it focuses on the "operational" side of the requirements to prevent G-LOC. There are two types of requirements for prevention of G-LOC; a) pre-G-LOC detection devices that monitor physiologic changes of the pilot before G-LOC occurs, and b) the more generic personal G protection systems that increase G tolerance. Recently there have been major advances in G-protection research and development (R&D) systems (soon to become operational) that significantly improve G-level and G-duration tolerances. We do not know the extent of the impact of these new systems on G-LOC, but it could be substantial. These near-term operational anti-G systems are: 1. Positive pressure breathing (PPB) systems assisted by chest counterpressure that are activated by an increase in G levels; i.e., the higher G level, the greater the pressures applied to the aircrew member (Morgan et al., 1992). This PPB system is known as PBG. PBG has been flight tested with the standard operational anti-G suit. This test program known as Combat Edge significantly reduces pilot fatigue and extends G-duration tolerance. In limited operational testing of F-16 and F-15 aircraft, PBG has received substantial pilot acceptance. 2. An improved anti-G suit that provides uniform pressure of the lower body that includes the operational anti-G suit abdominal bladder. This new anti-G suit concept increases both G-level and G-duration tolerances (Krutz et al., 1990; Morgan et al., 1992). Flight tested as the Advanced Tactical Anti-G Suit (ATAGS), it is comfortable and preferred by pilots over the standard operational anti-G suit. 3. The combination of Combat Edge and ATAGS, the most advanced anti-G system in the final stages of development (Morgan et al., 1992). This anti-G equipment has been tested in the laboratory on the centrifuge. Experimental subjects are able to tolerate 8 to 9G "relaxed" or with a minimal anti-G straining maneuver (AGSM) (Morgan, 1992). Accleration scientists believe that once these systems become operational on high performance aircraft that the incidence of G-LOC will be significantly reduced, particularly G-LOC associated with fatigue.

Physiologic validation of a short-arm centrifuge for space application.

A short-arm centrifuge (SAC) of 5-6 ft (1.5-1.8 m) radius may be useful in space to measure tolerances to acceleration (G) and to stimulate the cardiovascular system, thereby reducing cardiovascular decompensation that occurs in weightlessness. Relaxed rapid (1G/s onset rate, ROR) and gradual (0.1 G/s onset rate, GOR) G tolerances were measured on seven men using a 5-ft (1.5 m) radius centrifuge and compared with their G tolerances obtained on the 20-ft (6.1 m) radius human-use centrifuge at the Armstrong Laboratory, Brooks AFB, TX. Since the subjects were required to flex their legs to assume a squatting position on the SAC, a similar position was used on the 20 ft (6.1 m) centrifuge called feet up (FU), and compared with normal-seated +Gz tolerances (controls). The subjects tolerated the SAC exposures without any problems. ROR and GOR tolerances were as follows: control, 3.6 G and 4.2 G; FU, 4.5 G and 5.6 G; and SAC, 4.6 G and 6.4 G. We concluded that a 5-ft radius centrifuge can be used to measure G tolerances. The increases in the SAC GOR tolerances over ROR tolerances indicate that the baroreceptors were stimulated by the G, and the SAC exposure would be useful in preventing cardiovascular decompensation in microgravity.