Mechanical and energetic consequences of rolling foot shape in human walking

SUMMARY During human walking, the center of pressure under the foot progresses forward smoothly during each step, creating a wheel-like motion between the leg and the ground. This rolling motion might appear to aid walking economy, but the mechanisms that may lead to such a benefit are unclear, as the leg is not literally a wheel. We propose that there is indeed a benefit, but less from rolling than from smoother transitions between pendulum-like stance legs. The velocity of the body center of mass (COM) must be redirected in that transition, and a longer foot reduces the work required for the redirection. Here we develop a dynamic walking model that predicts different effects from altering foot length as opposed to foot radius, and test it by attaching rigid, arc-like foot bottoms to humans walking with fixed ankles. The model suggests that smooth rolling is relatively insensitive to arc radius, whereas work for the step-to-step transition decreases approximately quadratically with foot length. We measured the separate effects of arc-foot length and radius on COM velocity fluctuations, work performed by the legs and metabolic cost. Experimental data (N=8) show that foot length indeed has much greater effect on both the mechanical work of the step-to-step transition (23% variation, P=0.04) and the overall energetic cost of walking (6%, P=0.03) than foot radius (no significant effect, P>0.05). We found the minimum metabolic energy cost for an arc foot length of approximately 29% of leg length, roughly comparable to human foot length. Our results suggest that the foot's apparently wheel-like action derives less benefit from rolling per se than from reduced work to redirect the body COM.

[1]  J. B. Weir New methods for calculating metabolic rate with special reference to protein metabolism , 1949, The Journal of physiology.

[2]  L Howarth,et al.  Principles of Dynamics , 1964 .

[3]  V. Tucker The energetic cost of moving about. , 1975, American Scientist.

[4]  Animals , 1981, Restoration & Management Notes.

[5]  J. Brockway Derivation of formulae used to calculate energy expenditure in man. , 1987, Human nutrition. Clinical nutrition.

[6]  Tad McGeer,et al.  Passive Dynamic Walking , 1990, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[7]  M. Whittle Three-dimensional motion of the center of gravity of the body during walking , 1997 .

[8]  Philip E. Martin,et al.  EFFECT OF SYMMETRICAL AND ASYMMETRICAL LOWER EXTREMITY INERTIA CHANGES ON WALKING ECONOMY 495 , 1997 .

[9]  A. Kuo A simple model of bipedal walking predicts the preferred speed-step length relationship. , 2001, Journal of biomechanical engineering.

[10]  Arthur D Kuo,et al.  Energetics of actively powered locomotion using the simplest walking model. , 2002, Journal of biomechanical engineering.

[11]  J. Donelan,et al.  Mechanical work for step-to-step transitions is a major determinant of the metabolic cost of human walking. , 2002, The Journal of experimental biology.

[12]  Rodger Kram,et al.  Simultaneous positive and negative external mechanical work in human walking. , 2002, Journal of biomechanics.

[13]  Andrew H Hansen,et al.  Roll-over shapes of human locomotor systems: effects of walking speed. , 2004, Clinical biomechanics.

[14]  D. Childress,et al.  Effects of shoe heel height on biologic rollover characteristics during walking. , 2004, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[15]  S. Gard,et al.  The human ankle during walking: implications for design of biomimetic ankle prostheses. , 2004, Journal of biomechanics.

[16]  Philip E. Martin,et al.  Manipulations of leg mass and moment of inertia: effects on energy cost of walking. , 2005, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[17]  J. Donelan,et al.  Mechanics and energetics of swinging the human leg , 2005, Journal of Experimental Biology.

[18]  Andrew H Hansen,et al.  Effects of adding weight to the torso on roll-over characteristics of walking. , 2005, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[19]  Andy Ruina,et al.  Energetic Consequences of Walking Like an Inverted Pendulum: Step-to-Step Transitions , 2005, Exercise and sport sciences reviews.

[20]  A. Ruina,et al.  A collisional model of the energetic cost of support work qualitatively explains leg sequencing in walking and galloping, pseudo-elastic leg behavior in running and the walk-to-run transition. , 2005, Journal of theoretical biology.

[21]  D. Childress,et al.  The Effects of Prosthetic Foot Roll-Over Shape Arc Length on the Gait of Trans-Tibial Prosthesis Users , 2006, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[22]  S. Collins,et al.  The advantages of a rolling foot in human walking , 2006, Journal of Experimental Biology.

[23]  L. Chèze,et al.  Adjustments to McConville et al. and Young et al. body segment inertial parameters. , 2007, Journal of Biomechanics.

[24]  A. Hansen A Biomechanist???s Perspective on Partial Foot Prostheses , 2007 .

[25]  S. Collins,et al.  Ankle fixation need not increase the energetic cost of human walking. , 2008, Gait & posture.

[26]  Peter G Adamczyk,et al.  Redirection of center-of-mass velocity during the step-to-step transition of human walking , 2009, Journal of Experimental Biology.

[27]  Daniel P Ferris,et al.  It Pays to Have a Spring in Your Step , 2009, Exercise and sport sciences reviews.

[28]  Steven H Collins,et al.  A simple method for calibrating force plates and force treadmills using an instrumented pole. , 2009, Gait & posture.

[29]  Andrew H Hansen,et al.  Effective rocker shapes used by able-bodied persons for walking and fore-aft swaying: implications for design of ankle-foot prostheses. , 2010, Gait & posture.