Biomechanics of overground versus treadmill running

Nelson, Richard C.; Dillman, Charles J.; Lagassé, Pierre P.; Bickett, Phillip

doi:10.1249/00005768-197200440-00029

Cited by 100 publications

(63 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The duration of these high velocities is brief, however, falling within the period of blinks observed in this study and reported for other monkey (Macaca) species (Baker et al, 2002;Porter et al, 1993). Other studies comparing treadmill and overground locomotion in humans and quadrupeds also reveal differences, though less dramatic, in angular and linear displacements (Alton et al, 1998;Barrey et al, 1993;Nigg et al, 1995;Stolz et al, 1997;Vogt et al, 2002), as well as in temporal characteristics (e.g., Alton et al, 1998;Barrey et al, 1993;Buchner et al, 1994;Nelson et al, 1972;Stolze et al, 1997;Wetzel and Stuart, 1976;Wetzel et al, 1975) and generated forces (White et al, 1998).…”

Section: Comparison Of Head and Trunk Rotations During Treadmillsupporting

confidence: 82%

Stabilization and mobility of the head and trunk in vervet monkeys(Cercopithecus aethiops) during treadmill walks and gallops

Dunbar

2004

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The brain requires internal or external reference frames to determine body orientation in space. These frames may change, however, to meet changing conditions. During quadrupedal overground locomotion by monkeys, the head rotates on a stabilized trunk during walking, but the trunk rotates on a stabilized head during galloping. Do the same movement patterns occur during in-place locomotion? Head and trunk pitch rotations were measured, and yaw and roll rotations estimated from cine films of three adult vervet monkeys (Cercopithecus aethiops L. 1758) walking and galloping quadrupedally on a treadmill. Head and trunk rotational patterns during treadmill walks were comparable to the patterns found during overground walks. The rotational velocities of these segments during both treadmill walks and gallops were also comparable to the velocities found during natural locomotion. By contrast, whereas head and trunk rotational patterns during treadmill gallops did occur that were comparable to the patterns practiced during overground gallops, a significantly different pattern involving large and simultaneous head and trunk rotations was more commonly observed. Simultaneous head and trunk rotations may be possible during treadmill gallops because the fixed visual surround is providing an adequate spatial reference frame. Alternatively, or in addition to this visual information, a re-weighting in other sensory modalities may be occurring. Specifically, the vestibular inputs used during overground locomotion to reference gravity or a gravity-derived vector may become less important than proprioceptive inputs that are using the treadmill belt surface as a reference. Regardless, the spatial reference frame being used, blinks that occur at specific times during the largest head yaw rotations may be necessary to avoid the initiation of unwanted and potentially destabilizing lateral sway brought on by sudden increases in optic flow velocity.

show abstract

Section: Comparison Of Head and Trunk Rotations During Treadmillsupporting

confidence: 82%

Stabilization and mobility of the head and trunk in vervet monkeys(Cercopithecus aethiops) during treadmill walks and gallops

Dunbar

2004

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The comparison of treadmill and overground running can be somewhat problematic, as joint angle kinematics may differ slightly, even though the cause of these discrepancies is not completely understood (Nelson et al, 1972;Nigg et al, 1995). Nonetheless, as long as the speed of the treadmill belt is constant, and dynamics and kinematics are not measured during belt acceleration, there exists no fundamental mechanical difference between treadmill and overground running (Van Ingen Schenau, 1980).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does a crouched leg posture enhance running stability and robustness?

Blum

Birn-Jeffery

Daley

et al. 2011

Journal of Theoretical Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Humans and birds both walk and run bipedally on compliant legs. However, differences in leg architecture may result in species-specific leg control strategies as indicated by the observed gait patterns. In this work, control strategies for stable running are derived based on a conceptual model and compared with experimental data on running humans and pheasants (Phasianus colchicus). From a model perspective, running with compliant legs can be represented by the planar spring mass model and stabilized by applying swing leg control. Here, linear adaptations of the swing leg parameters, leg angle, leg length and leg stiffness, are assumed. Experimentally observed kinematic control parameters (leg rotation and leg length change) of human and avian running are compared, and interpreted within the context of this model, with specific focus on stability and robustness characteristics. The results suggest differences in stability characteristics and applied control strategies of human and avian running, which may relate to differences in leg posture (straight leg posture in humans, and crouched leg posture in birds). It has been suggested that crouched leg postures may improve stability. However, as the system of control strategies is overdetermined, our model findings suggest that a crouched leg posture does not necessarily enhance running stability. The model also predicts different leg stiffness adaptation rates for human and avian running, and suggests that a crouched avian leg * Corresponding author. Tel: +49-3641-945729, Fax: +49-3641-945732Email address: Yvonne.Blum@uni-jena.de (Yvonne Blum) April 30, 2011 posture, which is capable of both leg shortening and lengthening, allows for stable running without adjusting leg stiffness. In contrast, in straight-legged human running, the preparation of the ground contact seems to be more critical, requiring leg stiffness adjustment to remain stable. Finally, analysis of a simple robustness measure, the normalized maximum drop, suggests that the crouched leg posture may provide greater robustness to changes in terrain height. Preprint submitted to the Journal of Theoretical BiologyKeywords: Spring mass model (SLIP), Leg parameter adaptation, Human and avian locomotion List of symbols, terms and definitions Nomenclature

show abstract

“…Finally, the results of the present study are based on novel experimental data recorded for overground running. Although treadmills enable gait experiments to be performed more easily in a laboratory setting, biomechanical differences between treadmill and overground running have been identified under certain circumstances (Elliott and Blanksby, 1976;Frishberg, 1983;Nelson et al, 1972;Nigg et al, 1995;Riley et al, 2008). Also, it is not known whether kinetic differences exist between treadmill and overground running at faster speeds of locomotion.…”

Section: Muscular Strategy Shift In Human Runningmentioning

confidence: 99%