Liew, Bernard XW and Rügamer, David and Birn-Jeffery, Aleksandra V (2024) Neuromechanical stabilisation of the centre of mass during running. Gait and Posture, 108. pp. 189-194. DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2023.12.005
Liew, Bernard XW and Rügamer, David and Birn-Jeffery, Aleksandra V (2024) Neuromechanical stabilisation of the centre of mass during running. Gait and Posture, 108. pp. 189-194. DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2023.12.005
Liew, Bernard XW and Rügamer, David and Birn-Jeffery, Aleksandra V (2024) Neuromechanical stabilisation of the centre of mass during running. Gait and Posture, 108. pp. 189-194. DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2023.12.005
Abstract
Background: Stabilisation of the centre of mass (COM) trajectory is thought to be important during running. There is emerging evidence of the importance of leg length and angle regulation during running, which could contribute to stability in the COM trajectory The present study aimed to understand if leg length and angle stabilises the vertical and anterior-posterior (AP) COM displacements, and if the stability alters with running speeds. Methods: Data for this study came from an open-source treadmill running dataset (n = 28). Leg length (m) was calculated by taking the resultant distance of the two-dimensional sagittal plane leg vector (from pelvis segment to centre of pressure). Leg angle was defined by the angle subtended between the leg vector and the horizontal surface. Leg length and angle were scaled to a standard deviation of one. Uncontrolled manifold analysis (UCM) was used to provide an index of motor abundance (IMA) in the stabilisation of the vertical and AP COM displacement. Results: IMAAP and IMAvertical were largely destabilising and always stabilising, respectively. As speed increased, the peak destabilising effect on IMAAP increased from −0.66(0.18) at 2.5 m/s to −1.12(0.18) at 4.5 m/s, and the peak stabilising effect on IMAvertical increased from 0.69 (0.19) at 2.5 m/s to 1.18 (0.18) at 4.5 m/s. Conclusion: Two simple parameters from a simple spring-mass model, leg length and angle, can explain the control behind running. The variability in leg length and angle helped stabilise the vertical COM, whilst maintaining constant running speed may rely more on inter-limb variation to adjust the horizontal COM accelerations.
Item Type: | Article |
---|---|
Uncontrolled Keywords: | Running biomechanics; Uncontrolled Manifold Analysis; Motor control; Kinematics |
Divisions: | Faculty of Science and Health Faculty of Science and Health > Sport, Rehabilitation and Exercise Sciences, School of |
SWORD Depositor: | Unnamed user with email elements@essex.ac.uk |
Depositing User: | Unnamed user with email elements@essex.ac.uk |
Date Deposited: | 03 Jan 2024 13:09 |
Last Modified: | 30 Oct 2024 16:38 |
URI: | http://repository.essex.ac.uk/id/eprint/37405 |
Available files
Filename: Liew et al 2024 neuromech stability CoM running.pdf
Licence: Creative Commons: Attribution 4.0