Literature DB >> 25814181

Tradeoffs between impact loading rate, vertical impulse and effective mass for walkers and heel strike runners wearing footwear of varying stiffness.

Brian J Addison1, Daniel E Lieberman2.   

Abstract

Humans experience repetitive impact forces beneath the heel during walking and heel strike running that cause impact peaks characterized by high rates and magnitudes of loading. Impact peaks are caused by the exchange of momentum between the ground and a portion of the body that comes to a full stop (the effective mass) during the period of the impact peak. A number of factors can influence this exchange of momentum, including footwear stiffness. This study presents and tests an impulse-momentum model of impact mechanics which predicts that effective mass and vertical impulse is greater in walkers and heel strike runners wearing less stiff footwear. The model also predicts a tradeoff between impact loading rate and effective mass, and between impact loading rate and vertical impulse among individuals wearing footwear of varying stiffness. We tested this model using 19 human subjects walking and running in minimal footwear and in two experimental footpads. Subjects walked and ran on an instrumented treadmill and 3D kinematic data were collected. As predicted, both vertical impulse (walking: F(2,54)=52.0, p=2.6E-13; running: F(2,54)=25.2, p=1.8E-8) and effective mass (walking: F(2,54)=12.1, p=4.6E-5; running: F(2,54)=15.5, p=4.7E-6) increase in less stiff footwear. In addition, there is a significant inverse relationship between impact loading rate and vertical impulse (walking: r=-0.88, p<0.0001; running: r=-0.78, p<0.0001) and between impact loading rate and effective mass (walking: r=-0.88, p<0.0001; running: r=-0.82, p<0.0001). The tradeoff relationships documented here raise questions about how and in what ways the stiffness of footwear heels influence injury risk during human walking and running.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Heel strike running; Impact; Walking

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25814181     DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2015.01.029

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomech        ISSN: 0021-9290            Impact factor:   2.712


  6 in total

1.  Effects of 12-week cadence retraining on impact peak, load rates and lower extremity biomechanics in running.

Authors:  Junqing Wang; Zhen Luo; Boyi Dai; Weijie Fu
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2020-08-24       Impact factor: 2.984

2.  The Role of Upper Body Biomechanics in Elite Racewalkers.

Authors:  Helen J Gravestock; Catherine B Tucker; Brian Hanley
Journal:  Front Sports Act Living       Date:  2021-07-09

3.  Heel impact forces during barefoot versus minimally shod walking among Tarahumara subsistence farmers and urban Americans.

Authors:  Ian J Wallace; Elizabeth Koch; Nicholas B Holowka; Daniel E Lieberman
Journal:  R Soc Open Sci       Date:  2018-03-14       Impact factor: 2.963

4.  Assessment of IAAF Racewalk Judges' Ability to Detect Legal and Non-legal Technique.

Authors:  Brian Hanley; Catherine B Tucker; Athanassios Bissas
Journal:  Front Sports Act Living       Date:  2019-08-08

5.  Anthroengineering: an independent interdisciplinary field.

Authors:  Michael A Berthaume; Patricia Ann Kramer
Journal:  Interface Focus       Date:  2021-08-13       Impact factor: 3.906

Review 6.  Running Injury Paradigms and Their Influence on Footwear Design Features and Runner Assessment Methods: A Focused Review to Advance Evidence-Based Practice for Running Medicine Clinicians.

Authors:  Cristine Agresta; Christina Giacomazzi; Mark Harrast; Jessica Zendler
Journal:  Front Sports Act Living       Date:  2022-03-09
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.