Literature DB >> 19648412

Redirection of center-of-mass velocity during the step-to-step transition of human walking.

Peter G Adamczyk1, Arthur D Kuo.   

Abstract

Simple dynamic walking models based on the inverted pendulum predict that the human body's center of mass (COM) moves along an arc during each step, with substantial work performed to redirect the COM velocity in the step-to-step transition between arcs. But humans do not keep the stance leg perfectly straight and need not redirect their COM velocity precisely as predicted. We therefore tested a pendulum-based model against a wide range of human walking data. We examined COM velocity and work data from normal human subjects (N=10) walking at 24 combinations of speed (0.75 to 2.0 m s(-1)) and step length. These were compared against model predictions for the angular redirection of COM velocity and the work performed on the COM during redirection. We found that the COM is redirected through angular changes increasing approximately linearly with step length (R(2)=0.68), with COM work increasing with the squared product of walking speed and step length (R(2)=0.82), roughly in accordance with a simple dynamic walking model. This model cannot, however, predict the duration of COM redirection, which we quantified with two empirical measures, one based on angular COM redirection and the other on work. Both indicate that the step-to-step transition begins before and ends after double support and lasts about twice as long - approximately 20-27% of a stride. Although a rigid leg model can predict trends in COM velocity and work, the non-rigid human leg performs the step-to-step transition over a duration considerably exceeding that of double support.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19648412      PMCID: PMC2726857          DOI: 10.1242/jeb.027581

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Biol        ISSN: 0022-0949            Impact factor:   3.312


  22 in total

1.  A simple model of bipedal walking predicts the preferred speed-step length relationship.

Authors:  A D Kuo
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 2.097

2.  Energetics of actively powered locomotion using the simplest walking model.

Authors:  Arthur D Kuo
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 2.097

3.  Force platforms as ergometers.

Authors:  G A Cavagna
Journal:  J Appl Physiol       Date:  1975-07       Impact factor: 3.531

4.  Mechanical work and efficiency in level walking and running.

Authors:  G A Cavagna; M Kaneko
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  1977-06       Impact factor: 5.182

5.  Mechanical work in terrestrial locomotion: two basic mechanisms for minimizing energy expenditure.

Authors:  G A Cavagna; N C Heglund; C R Taylor
Journal:  Am J Physiol       Date:  1977-11

6.  Simultaneous positive and negative external mechanical work in human walking.

Authors:  J Maxwell Donelan; Rodger Kram; Arthur D Kuo
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 2.712

7.  Pace length effects in human walking: "groucho" gaits revisited.

Authors:  John E A Bertram; Paul D'Antonio; Jaime Pardo; David V Lee
Journal:  J Mot Behav       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 1.328

8.  The spring-mass model for running and hopping.

Authors:  R Blickhan
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  1989       Impact factor: 2.712

Review 9.  Energy-saving mechanisms in walking and running.

Authors:  R M Alexander
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  1991-10       Impact factor: 3.312

10.  Mechanical work for step-to-step transitions is a major determinant of the metabolic cost of human walking.

Authors:  J Maxwell Donelan; Rodger Kram; Arthur D Kuo
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 3.312

View more
  38 in total

1.  Stance and swing phase costs in human walking.

Authors:  Brian R Umberger
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2010-03-31       Impact factor: 4.118

2.  Mechanical and energetic consequences of reduced ankle plantar-flexion in human walking.

Authors:  Tzu-wei P Huang; Kenneth A Shorter; Peter G Adamczyk; Arthur D Kuo
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2015-09-18       Impact factor: 3.312

3.  A collisional perspective on quadrupedal gait dynamics.

Authors:  David V Lee; John E A Bertram; Jennifer T Anttonen; Ivo G Ros; Sarah L Harris; Andrew A Biewener
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2011-04-06       Impact factor: 4.118

4.  The critical phase for visual control of human walking over complex terrain.

Authors:  Jonathan Samir Matthis; Sean L Barton; Brett R Fajen
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2017-07-24       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  The correlation between metabolic and individual leg mechanical power during walking at different slopes and velocities.

Authors:  Jana R Jeffers; Arick G Auyang; Alena M Grabowski
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2015-04-22       Impact factor: 2.712

6.  Differential activation of lumbar and sacral motor pools during walking at different speeds and slopes.

Authors:  A H Dewolf; Y P Ivanenko; K E Zelik; F Lacquaniti; P A Willems
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2019-07-10       Impact factor: 2.714

7.  Sensitivity of biomechanical outcomes to independent variations of hindfoot and forefoot stiffness in foot prostheses.

Authors:  Peter Gabriel Adamczyk; Michelle Roland; Michael E Hahn
Journal:  Hum Mov Sci       Date:  2017-05-09       Impact factor: 2.161

8.  Changes in mechanical work during neural adaptation to asymmetric locomotion.

Authors:  Brian P Selgrade; Montakan Thajchayapong; Gloria E Lee; Megan E Toney; Young-Hui Chang
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2017-06-08       Impact factor: 3.312

Review 9.  A unified perspective on ankle push-off in human walking.

Authors:  Karl E Zelik; Peter G Adamczyk
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2016-12-01       Impact factor: 3.312

10.  Mechanical and energetic consequences of rolling foot shape in human walking.

Authors:  Peter G Adamczyk; Arthur D Kuo
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2013-04-11       Impact factor: 3.312

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.