A Three-Dimensional Multibody Model of the Human Ankle-Foot Complex

Abstract

In this work, a three-dimensional foot and leg model is proposed, which combines six rigid bodies and five kinematic pairs to produce an articulated system of four segments (toes, mid-forefoot, rearfoot and leg) with thirteen independent degrees-of-freedom. The model is described using a multibody dynamics formulation with natural coordinates and estimated anthropometric parameters. A massless link is used to model the anatomical offset between the talocrural and talocalcaneal joints, avoiding the inclusion of a specific rigid body to model the talus bone. The reliability of the model was tested through its application to the study of the kinematic and dynamic patterns of the human gait. A male subject was analyzed and his data compared with literature, enabling to attest the consistency and realism of the proposed model.

Extended foot-ankle musculoskeletal models for application in movement analysis

“…Nevertheless, the presented results are consistent with the available literature for the joint moments at the ankle, subtalar, midtarsal, and metatarsophalangeal joints (Scott & Winter 1993;Bruening et al 2012;Malaquias et al 2015).…”

Multibody modelling of the foot for the biomechanical analysis of the ankle joint during running: A narrative review

“…Despite being deemed as state of the art for experimental acquisitions of foot motion, the protocols described can be tailored depending on the purpose of the model. For instance, in 2015, Malaquias et al 49 adapted the MFM model to better understand the patterns of the midtarsal joint. To this end, a 6-segment foot model – toes; medial and lateral mid-forefoot; rearfoot; tibia; and fibula – with 7 degrees of freedom (DOF) was created to evaluate kinematic patterns of the human gait.…”

“…The protocol considered 17 markers and differed from the MFM protocol by having 2 markers on the lateral and medial apex of the head of the tibia and fibula, 1 marker on the super-medial aspect of the talus, 1 marker on the posterior-lateral "corner" of the heel, 1 marker on the top head of the 2 nd phalange and a front shank cluster composed of 4 markers. 34,49 The placement of the markers is summarised in Figure 7. The angular displacements estimated by Malaquias et al 49 were similar to those presented by Kidder et al 34 The results presented in this work are relevant for the study of the variations in the longitudinal foot arch during gait.…”

“…34,49 The placement of the markers is summarised in Figure 7. The angular displacements estimated by Malaquias et al 49 were similar to those presented by Kidder et al 34 The results presented in this work are relevant for the study of the variations in the longitudinal foot arch during gait.…”

“…Nevertheless, all three models were able to accurately estimate joint moments and the ground reaction force (GRF) root mean square differences were less than 1% body weight for all shear forces. 64 Using the protocol described in the kinematic analyses section, Malaquias et al 49 attempted to characterise the behaviour of the longitudinal arch of the foot. For this, the gait pattern of a single subject with no gait disorders was acquired.…”