Influence of leg stiffness and its effect on myodynamic jumping performance.

The purposes of this study are: a) to examine the possibility of influencing the leg stiffness through instructions given to the subjects and b) to determine the effect of the leg stiffness on the mechanical power and take-off velocity during the drop jumps. A total of 15 athletes performed a series of drop jumps from heights of 20, 40 and 60 cm. The instructions given to the subjects were a) "jump as high as you can" and b) "jump high a little faster than your previous jump". The jumps were performed at each height until the athlete could not achieve a shorter ground contact time. The ground reaction forces were measured using a "Kistler" force plate (1000 Hz). The athletes body positions were recorded using a high speed (250 Hz) video camera. EMG was used to measure muscle activity in five leg muscles. The data was divided into 5 groups where group 1 was made up of the longest ground contact times of each athlete and group 5 the shortest. The leg and ankle stiffness values were higher when the contact times were shorter. This means that by influencing contact time through verbal instructions it is possible to control leg stiffness. Maximum center of mass take-off velocity the can be achieved with different levels of leg stiffness. The mechanical power acting on the human body during the positive phase of the drop jumps had the highest values in group 3. This means that there is an optimum stiffness value for the lower extremities to maximize mechanical power.     

Muscle work is biased toward energy generation over dissipation in non-level running

This study tested the hypothesis that skeletal muscles generate more mechanical energy in gait tasks that raise the center of mass compared to the mechanical energy they dissipate in gait tasks that lower the center of mass despite equivalent changes in total mechanical energy. Thirteen adults ran on a 10° decline and incline surface at a constant average velocity. Three-dimensional (3D) joint powers were calculated from ground force and 3D kinematic data using inverse dynamics. Joint work was calculated from the power curves and assumed to be due to skeletal muscle–tendon actuators. External work was calculated from the kinematics of the pelvis through the gait cycle. Incline vs. decline running was characterized with smaller ground forces that operated over longer lever arms causing larger joint torques and work from these torques. Total lower extremity joint work was 28% greater in incline vs. decline running (1.32 vs. −1.03 J/kg m, p<0.001). Total lower extremity joint work comprised 86% and 71% of the total external work in incline (1.53 J/kg m) and decline running (−1.45 J/kg m), which themselves were not significantly different (p<0.180). We conjectured that the larger ground forces in decline vs. incline running caused larger accelerations of all body tissues and initiated a greater energy-dissipating response in these tissues compared to their response in incline running. The runners actively lowered themselves less during decline stance and descended farther as projectiles than they lifted themselves during incline stance and ascended as projectiles. These data indicated that despite larger ground forces in decline running, the reduced displacement during downhill stance phases limited the work done by muscle contraction in decline compared to incline running.     

Effects of Forefoot Shoe on Knee and Ankle Loading during Running in Male Recreational Runners

Objectives: Although overuse running injury risks for the ankle and knee are high, the effect of different shoe designs on Achilles tendon force (ATF) and Patellofemoral joint contact force (PTF) loading rates are unclear. Therefore, the primary objective of this study was to compare the ATF at the ankle and the PTF and Patellofemoral joint stress force (PP) at the knee using different running shoe designs (forefoot shoes vs. normal shoes). Methods: Fourteen healthy recreational male runners were recruited to run over a force plate under two shoe conditions (forefoot shoes vs. normal shoes). Sagittal plane ankle and knee kinematics and ground reaction forces were simultaneously recorded. Ankle joint mechanics (ankle joint angle, velocity, moment and power) and the ATF were calculated. Knee joint mechanics (knee joint angle velocity, moment and power) and the PTF and PP were also calculated. Results: No significant differences were observed in the PTF, ankle plantarflexion angle, ankle dorsiflexion power, peak vertical active force, contact time and PTF between the two shoe conditions. Compared to wearing normal shoes, wearing the forefoot shoes demonstrated that the ankle dorsiflexion angle, knee flexion velocity, ankle dorsiflexion moment extension, knee extension moment, knee extension power, knee flexion power and the peak patellofemoral contact stress were significantly reduced. However, the ankle dorsiflexion velocity, ankle plantarflexion velocity, ankle plantarflexion moment and Achilles tendons force increased significantly. Conclusions: These findings suggest that wearing forefoot shoes significantly decreases the patellofemoral joint stress by reducing the moment of knee extension, however the shoes increased the ankle plantarflexion moment and ATF force. The forefoot shoes effectively reduced the load on the patellofemoral joint during the stance phase of running. However, it is not recommended for new and novice runners and patients with Achilles tendon injuries to wear forefoot shoes.     

The effect of speed on leg stiffness and joint kinetics in human running

The goals of this study were to examine the following hypotheses: (a) there is a difference between the theoretically calculated (McMahon and Cheng, 1990. Journal of Biomechanics 23, 65-78) and the kinematically measured length changes of the spring-mass model and (b) the leg spring stiffness, the ankle spring stiffness and the knee spring stiffness are influenced by running speed. Thirteen athletes took part in this study. Force was measured using a "Kistler" force plate (1000 Hz). Kinematic data were recorded using two high-speed (120 Hz) video cameras. Each athlete completed trials running at five different velocities (approx. 2.5, 3.5, 4.5, 5.5 and 6.5 m/s). Running velocity influences the leg spring stiffness, the effective vertical spring stiffness and the spring stiffness at the knee joint. The spring stiffness at the ankle joint showed no statistical difference (p < 0.05) for the five velocities. The theoretically calculated length change of the spring-mass model significantly (p < 0.05) overestimated the actual length change. For running velocities up to 6.5 m/s the leg spring stiffness is influenced mostly by changes in stiffness at the knee joint.     

Mechanical energy states during running

Changes in total mechanical work and its partitioning into different energy states (kinetic, potential and rotational) during a step cycle of running were investigated on six well trained athletes who ran at the test speeds of 40, 60, 80, and 100% (9.3 +/- 0.3 m/s) of maximum. Cinematographic techniques were utilized to calculate the mechanical energy states as described by Norman et al. (1976), using a 13 segment mechanical model of a runner as the basis for the computations. The data showed that both the kinetic and rotational energy increased parabolically but the potential energy decreased linearly with increases in running velocity. The calculated power of the positive work phase increased quadratically with running speed. During the phase when the runner was in contact with the ground, the applied calculations gave similar increases for the positive and negative works, and the power ratio (Wneg/Wpos) stayed the same at all measured speeds. Therefore, it is likely that the method used to calculate the various mechanical energy states did not reflect accurately enough the physiological energy costs at higher running speeds. It may, however, be quite acceptable for estimating the mechanical energy states during walking and slow running, in which case the role of negative work is less and consequently the storage and utilization of elastic energy is small.     

Muscle mechanical advantage of human walking and running: implications for energy cost.

Muscular forces generated during locomotion depend on an animal's speed, gait, and size and underlie the energy demand to power locomotion. Changes in limb posture affect muscle forces by altering the mechanical advantage of the ground reaction force (R) and therefore the effective mechanical advantage (EMA = r/R, where r is the muscle mechanical advantage) for muscle force production. We used inverse dynamics based on force plate and kinematic recordings of humans as they walked and ran at steady speeds to examine how changes in muscle EMA affect muscle force-generating requirements at these gaits. We found a 68% decrease in knee extensor EMA when humans changed gait from a walk to a run compared with an 18% increase in hip extensor EMA and a 23% increase in ankle extensor EMA. Whereas the knee joint was extended (154-176 degrees) during much of the support phase of walking, its flexed position (134-164 degrees) during running resulted in a 5.2-fold increase in quadriceps impulse (time-integrated force during stance) needed to support body weight on the ground. This increase was associated with a 4.9-fold increase in the ground reaction force moment about the knee. In contrast, extensor impulse decreased 37% (P < 0.05) at the hip and did not change at the ankle when subjects switched from a walk to a run. We conclude that the decrease in limb mechanical advantage (mean limb extensor EMA) and increase in knee extensor impulse during running likely contribute to the higher metabolic cost of transport in running than in walking. The low mechanical advantage in running humans may also explain previous observations of a greater metabolic cost of transport for running humans compared with trotting and galloping quadrupeds of similar size.     

A telemetry-based velocometer to measure wheelchair velocity

The purpose of this paper is to present a telemetry-based velocometer that has the ability to measure wheelchair velocity. Five studies are described which provide measurements of the validity, dynamic response, reliability and resistance of the velocometer. Validity: a linear relationship was found when velocity calculated from the velocometer was plotted against three test velocities. The average root mean square deviation (ARMSD) was used to compare velocity calculated from the velocometer with velocity calculated by manual digitising at 200Hz. The ARMSD calculated for each test speed from three trials were 0.06+/-0.01, 0.27+/-0.05 and 0.48+/-0.16 ms(-1) at 1, 5 and 9 ms(-1), respectively. Dynamic response: expressed as a percentage of the average mean trial velocity, the ARMSD for the five acceleration and five deceleration trials were 6.5+/-1.8% and 6.9+/-1.2%, respectively. Reliability was assessed from a comparison between mean trial velocity calculated from velocometer output and the speed of the motor used to spin the wheels. Expressed as a percentage of the mean trial velocity, the mean+/-SD of the differences were 0.00+/-0.17%, for the ten disc wheel trials and 0.00+/-0.41%, for the ten spoke wheel trials. Velocometer resistance calculated as a factor of the mechanical resistance of the wheelchair rear wheel spinning in air were -0.50 and -0.91 N, for the disc and spoke wheel, respectively. Velocometer resistance calculated as a factor of the total mechanical resistance of the wheelchair-wheelchair user system were -1.37 and -1.82 N, for the disc and spoke wheel, respectively.     

Effect of rocker shoes and running speed on lower limb mechanics and soft tissue vibrations

Previous studies have shown a possible effect of running speed and the sole material of footwear on lower-limb mechanics and soft tissue vibrations, while little information has been offered concerning the influence of the shape of the footwear’s sole. The purpose of this study is to assess the effect of running speed and rocker shoes on muscular activity, ground reaction force, and soft tissue vibrations. Twenty participants performed heel-toe running with two shoes, differentiated only by their sole shape (i.e. rocker and non-rocker), at four running speeds. Ground reaction force and electromyograms of the gastrocnemius medialis and vastus lateralis were measured, and soft tissue accelerations of the same muscles were recorded with tri-axial accelerometers. A continuous wavelet transform was applied to the accelerometer’s signals to analyse them in the time-frequency domain. The rocker of the shoes did not change the muscular activations, ground reaction force, nor power of soft tissue vibrations. In opposite, increased running speed led to an augmentation of all of the measured parameters. Interestingly, running speed augmentation led to a greater increase in high frequencies component of soft tissue vibrations (25–50 Hz, 242%) than lower ones (8–25 Hz, 111%). Consequently, we indicated a 10% increase in the relative part of the high frequencies of the total power. In conclusion, although rocker shoes have shown an effect on lower-limb kinetics in some studies, no influence on soft tissue vibration is denoted. By contrast, soft tissue vibrations may be modulated by changing running speed.     

Relationship between countermovement jump performance and multijoint isometric and dynamic tests of strength

The purpose of this investigation was to determine the relationship between countermovement vertical jump (CMJ) performance and various methods used to assess isometric and dynamic multijoint strength. Twelve NCAA Division I-AA male football and track and field athletes (age, 19.83 +/- 1.40 years; height, 179.10 +/- 4.56 cm; mass, 90.08 +/- 14.81 kg; percentage of body fat, 11.85 +/- 5.47%) participated in 2 testing sessions. The first session involved 1 repetition maximum (1RM) (kg) testing in the squat and power clean. During the second session, peak force (N), relative peak force (N x kg(-1)), peak power (W), relative peak power (W x kg(-1)), peak velocity (m x s(-1)), and jump height (meters) in a CMJ, and peak force and rate of force development (RFD) (N x s(-1)) in a maximal isometric squat (ISO squat) and maximal isometric mid-thigh pull (ISO mid-thigh) were assessed. Significant correlations (P < or = 0.05) were found when comparing relative 1RMs (1RM/body mass), in both the squat and power clean, to relative CMJ peak power, CMJ peak velocity, and CMJ height. No significant correlations existed between the 4 measures of absolute strength, which did not account for body mass (squat 1RM, power clean 1RM, ISO squat peak force, and ISO mid-thigh peak force) when compared to CMJ peak velocity and CMJ height. In conclusion, multijoint dynamic tests of strength (squat 1RM and power clean 1RM), expressed relative to body mass, are most closely correlated with CMJ performance. These results suggest that increasing maximal strength relative to body mass can improve performance in explosive lower body movements. The squat and power clean, used in a concurrent strength and power training program, are recommended for optimizing lower body power.     

A simple method for measuring stiffness during running

The spring-mass model, representing a runner as a point mass supported by a single linear leg spring, has been a widely used concept in studies on running and bouncing mechanics. However, the measurement of leg and vertical stiffness has previously required force platforms and high-speed kinematic measurement systems that are costly and difficult to handle in field conditions. We propose a new "sine-wave" method for measuring stiffness during running. Based on the modeling of the force-time curve by a sine function,this method allows leg and vertical stiffness to be estimated from just a few simple mechanical parameters: body mass, forward velocity, leg length, flight time, and contact time. We compared this method to force-platform-derived stiffness measurements for treadmill dynamometer and overground running conditions, at velocities ranging from 3.33 m.s-1 to maximal running velocity in both recreational and highly trained runners. Stiffness values calculated with the proposed method ranged from 0.67 % to 6.93 % less than the force platform method, and thus were judged to be acceptable. Furthermore, significant linear regressions (p < 0.01) close to the identity line were obtained between force platform and sine-wave model values of stiffness. Given the limits inherent in the use of the spring-mass model, it was concluded that this sine-wave method allows leg and stiffness estimates in running on the basis of a few mechanical parameters, and could be useful in further field measurements.     

Force platforms as ergometers.

Walking and running on the level involves external mechanical work, even when speed averaged over a complete stride remains constant. This work must be performed by the muscles to accelerate and/or raise the center of mass of the body during parts of the stride, replacing energy which is lost as the body slows and/or falls during other parts of the stride. External work can be measured with fair approximation by means of a force plate, which records the horizontal and vertical components of the resultant force applied by the body to the ground over a complete stride. The horizontal force and the vertical force minus the body weight are integrated electronically to determine the instantaneous velocity in each plane. These velocities are squared and multiplied by one-half the mass to yield the instantaneous kinetic energy. The change in potential energy is calculated by integrating vertical velocity as a function of time to yield vertical displacement and multiplying this by body weight. The total mechanical energy as a function of time is obtained by adding the instantaneous kinetic and potential energies. The positive external mechanical work is obtained by adding the increments in total mechanical energy over an integral number of strides.     

Agreement between spatiotemporal parameters from a photoelectric system with different filter settings and high-speed video analysis during running on a treadmill at comfortable velocity

The aim of this study was to determine the level of agreement between spatiotemporal gait characteristics from a photoelectric system with different filter settings and high-speed video analysis during running on a treadmill at comfortable velocity. Forty-nine runners performed a running protocol on a treadmill at comfortable velocity. Two systems were used to determine spatiotemporal parameters (i.e. contact time [CT], flight time [FT], step frequency [SF] and step length [SL]) during running: OptoGait system and high-speed video analysis at 1000 Hz. The collected data was re-filtered in the OptoGait software by using nine different settings (i.e. 0_0, 1_1, 2_2, 3_3, 3_4, 4_4, 4_5, 5_4 and 5_5), and compared to those obtained through video analysis. The Pearson correlation analysis revealed very large correlations (r > 0.9, p < 0.001) in CT, FT, SF and SL between both systems, regardless of the OptoGait’s filter settings. The ICC reported an almost perfect association (ICC > 0.9) for both SL and SF regardless of the filter setting. However, large variations between filter settings according to the data from video analysis were reported in CT and FT (0_0, 1_1 and 2_2 filter settings obtained an association ICC > 0.9, whereas other filters obtained lower ICCs). Bland-Altman plots revealed small bias and error and no presence of heteroscedasticity of error for 1_1 setting. In conclusion, the filter setting for the OptoGait system should be considered to minimize the bias and error of spatiotemporal parameters measurement. For running on a treadmill, the 1_1 filter setting is recommended if gait parameters are to be compared to a high-speed video analysis (1000 Hz).     

Differentiation of ankle sprain motion and common sporting motion by ankle inversion velocity

This study investigated the ankle inversion and inversion velocity between various common motions in sports and simulated sprain motion, in order to provide a threshold for ankle sprain risk identification. The experiment was composed of two parts: Firstly, ten male subjects wore a pair of sport shoes and performed ten trials of running, cutting, jump-landing and stepping-down motions. Secondly, five subjects performed five trials of simulated sprain motion by a supination sprain simulator. The motions were analyzed by an eight-camera motion capture system at 120 Hz. A force plate was employed to record the vertical ground reaction force and locate the foot strike time for common sporting motions. Ankle inversion and inversion velocity were calculated by a standard lower extremity biomechanics calculation procedure. Profiles of vertical ground reaction force, ankle inversion angle and ankle inversion velocity were obtained. Results suggested that the ankle was kept in an everted position during the stance. The maximum ankle inversion velocity ranged from 22.5 to 85.1°/s and 114.0 to 202.5°/s for the four tested motions and simulated sprain motion respectively. Together with the ankle inversion velocity reported in the injury case (623°/s), a threshold of ankle inversion velocity of 300°/s was suggested for the identification of ankle sprain. The information obtained in this study can serve as a basis for the development of an active protection apparatus for reducing ankle sprain injury.     

Peak power, ground reaction forces, and velocity during the squat exercise performed at different loads

This study examined the changes in peak power, ground reaction force and velocity with different loads during the performance of the parallel squat movement. Twelve experienced male lifters (26.83 +/- 4.67 years of age) performed the standard parallel squat, using loads equal to 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, and 90% of 1 repetition maximum (1RM). Each subject performed all parallel squats with as much explosiveness as possible using his own technique. Peak power (PP), peak ground reaction force (PGRF), peak barbell velocity (PV), force at the time of PP (FPP), and velocity at the time of PP (VPP) were determined from force, velocity, and power curves calculated using barbell velocity and ground reaction force data. No significant differences were detected among loads for PP; however, the greatest PP values were associated with loads of 40 and 50% of 1RM. Higher loads produced greater PGRF and FPP values than lower loads (p < 0.05) in all cases except between loads equal to 60-50, 50-40, and 40-30% of 1RM for PGRF, and between loads equal to 70-60 and 60-50% of 1RM for FPP. Higher loads produced lower PV and VPP values than lower loads (p < 0.05) in all cases except between the 20-30, 70-80, and 80-90% of 1RM conditions. These results may be helpful in determining loads when prescribing need-specific training protocols targeting different areas of the load-velocity continuum.     

A simple method for measuring force, velocity and power output during squat jump

Our aim was to clarify the relationship between power output and the different mechanical parameters influencing it during squat jumps, and to further use this relationship in a new computation method to evaluate power output in field conditions. Based on fundamental laws of mechanics, computations were developed to express force, velocity and power generated during one squat jump. This computation method was validated on eleven physically active men performing two maximal squat jumps. During each trial, mean force, velocity and power were calculated during push-off from both force plate measurements and the proposed computations. Differences between the two methods were not significant and lower than 3% for force, velocity and power. The validity of the computation method was also highlighted by Bland and Altman analyses and linear regressions close to the identity line (P<0.001). The low coefficients of variation between two trials demonstrated the acceptable reliability of the proposed method. The proposed computations confirmed, from a biomechanical analysis, the positive relationship between power output, body mass and jump height, hitherto only shown by means of regression-based equations. Further, these computations pointed out that power also depends on push-off vertical distance. The accuracy and reliability of the proposed theoretical computations were in line with those observed when using laboratory ergometers such as force plates. Consequently, the proposed method, solely based on three simple parameters (body mass, jump height and push-off distance), allows to accurately evaluate force, velocity and power developed by lower limbs extensor muscles during squat jumps in field conditions.     

Biomechanical comparison of unilateral and bilateral power snatch lifts

Biomechanical characteristics of the one-handed dumbbell power snatch (DBPS) were examined to determine whether significant differences existed between unilateral and bilateral weightlifting movements. Kinetic and kinematic movement data were recorded from 10 male weightlifters (mean +/- SD: age: 30.2 +/- 10.2 years; height: 174.2 +/- 4.4 cm; body mass: 81.5 +/- 14.6 kg) during one-handed dumbbell (DB) and traditional barbell (BBPS) power snatch performance with loads of approximately 80% of respective lift one repetition maximums (1RM) with the use of 2 synchronized Kistler force plates and high-speed 3-dimensional video. Results highlighted asymmetry in the ground reaction force and kinematic profile of the DBPS, which deviated from the observed patterns of the bilateral movement. This study found that the nonlifting side (the side corresponding with the hand that did not hold the DB) tended to generate a greater pull phase peak vertical ground reaction forces significantly faster (p = 0.001) than the lifting side (the side corresponding with the hand that held the DB) during the DBPS. In addition, the DBPS nonlifting side catch phase loading rate was approximately double that of the lifting side loading rate (p < 0.05). These results quantify symmetrical deviations in the movement patterns of the unilateral power snatch movement both during the concentric muscular contraction of load vertical displacement, and the loading implications of unilateral landing. This asymmetry supports the contention that unilateral variations of weightlifting movements may provide a different training stimulus to athletes.     

Relations between force-velocity characteristics of the knee-hip extension movement and vertical jump performance

Relations between force-velocity characteristics of the multijoint movement of the lower limbs and vertical jump performance were investigated. A total of 67 untrained subjects (age: 19.54 +/- 2.38 years; height: 166.88 +/- 8.53 cm; body mass: 59.14 +/- 10.82 kg, mean +/- SD) performed isometric and isotonic knee-hip extension movements on a servo-controlled dynamometer, and the force-velocity relations were determined. Also, vertical jump (VJ) performance was measured with a jump gauge. The force-velocity relation was described with a linear function so that the maximum isometric force (Fmax) and the maximum unloaded velocity (Vmax) for the knee-hip extension movement were estimated by extrapolation. Maximum isometric force coincided with maximum isometric force, F(0) (F(0)/Fmax = 1.03 +/- 0.24). Maximum isometric force, Vmax, and maximum power output (Pmax) were positively correlated with VJ (r = 0.48, 0.68, and 0.76, respectively; p < 0.001). However, when Fmax, Vmax, and Pmax were normalized with body mass (BM), leg length (LL), and BM, respectively, no correlation was seen between Fmax/BM and VJ (r = 0.24, p > 0.05), and significant correlations were seen between Vmax/LL and VJ (r = 0.56, p < 0.001) and between Pmax/BM and VJ (r = 0.65, p < 0.001). On the other hand, Fmax and Vmax (r = 0.12, p > 0.05) and Fmax/BM and Vmax/LL (r = 0.05, p > 0.05) were not significantly correlated, indicating that Fmax and Vmax were independent variables. The present estimates of Fmax, Vmax, and Pmax can be useful for evaluating the actual performance of multijoint movement of the lower limbs. It is suggested that, although in untrained individuals the speed of movement might be a more important determinant of jump performance, jump performance ability has a potential to improve with increases in strength of the lower limb.     

A proposed method for determining peak power in the jump squat exercise

In recent years a great deal of research has been published using peak power (PP) in the jump squat (JS) exercise as a measure of athletic performance. However, no standardized method for the determination of PP exists at this time to accurately evaluate this variable. Our proposed method (PM) for determining PP (PPPM) in the JS uses the product of vertical ground reaction forces and velocity of the center of mass of both the subject and the external resistance of a loaded Olympic bar. Fifteen male subjects with a mean age of 27 +/- 3 years, weight of 78 +/- 17 kg, and height of 175 +/- 10 cm participated in this study. PP was measured in the JS at five different testing loads (30%, 35%, 40%, 45%, and 50% body weight) based on methods commonly discussed in the literature to compare PP results of previous methods to those obtained using the PM. Paired t-tests at different load levels were used for statistical analysis with an overall alpha = 0.05. The average PP among five testing loads, measured by the PM, was 3782 +/- 906 W. PP derived from the product of force and velocity of the bar alone was 72% lower than PPPM at 1057 +/- 243 W (P < 0.0001). The PP estimated by the product of bar velocity and vertical ground reaction forces of the bar plus the subject was 8% higher than PPPM at 4100 +/- 844 W (P = 0.0001). Our results indicate that using the methods traditionally reported in the literature may cause an overestimation of PP during athletic performance. Using the PM in future research will facilitate test validity and enable the generalization of results outside the scope of specific research projects.     

Effects of velocity and weight support on ground reaction forces and metabolic power during running

The biomechanical and metabolic demands of human running are distinctly affected by velocity and body weight. As runners increase velocity, ground reaction forces (GRF) increase, which may increase the risk of an overuse injury, and more metabolic power is required to produce greater rates of muscular force generation. Running with weight support attenuates GRFs, but demands less metabolic power than normal weight running. We used a recently developed device (G-trainer) that uses positive air pressure around the lower body to support body weight during treadmill running. Our scientific goal was to quantify the separate and combined effects of running velocity and weight support on GRFs and metabolic power. After obtaining this basic data set, we identified velocity and weight support combinations that resulted in different peak GRFs, yet demanded the same metabolic power. Ideal combinations of velocity and weight could potentially reduce biomechanical risks by attenuating peak GRFs while maintaining aerobic and neuromuscular benefits. Indeed, we found many combinations that decreased peak vertical GRFs yet demanded the same metabolic power as running slower at normal weight. This approach of manipulating velocity and weight during running may prove effective as a training and/or rehabilitation strategy.     

Normalization of ground reaction forces

The appropriateness of normalizing data, as one method to reduce the effects of a covariate on a dependent variable, should be evaluated. Using ratio, 0.67-nonlinear, and fitted normalizations, the aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between ground reaction force variables and body mass (BM). Ground reaction forces were recorded for 40 female subjects running at 3.7 +/- 0.18 m x s(-1) (mass = 58 +/- 6 kg). The explained variance for mass to forces (peak-impact-vertical = 70%; propulsive-vertical = 27%; braking = 40%) was reduced to <0.1% for mass to ratio normalized forces (i.e., forces/BM1) with statistically significantly different power exponents (p < 0.05). The smaller covariate effect of mass on loading rate variables of 2-16% was better removed through fitted normalization (e.g., vertical-instantaneous-loading rate/ BM(0.69+/-0.93); +/-95% CI) with nonlinear power exponents ranging from 0.51 to 1.13. Generally, these were similar to 0.67 as predicted through dimensionality theory, but, owing to the large confidence intervals, these power exponents were not statistically significantly different from absolute or ratio normalized data (p > 0.05). Further work is warranted to identify the appropriate method to normalize loading rates either to mass or to another covariate. Ratio normalization of forces to mass, as predicted through Newtonian mechanics, is recommended for comparing subjects of different masses.