The agreement between reaction-board measurements and kinematic estimation of adult male human whole body centre of mass location during running.

The segmental method for estimating the centre of mass (COM) location of the human body has been widely used since 1889. How closely this method agrees with direct measurements of the location and movement of COM during activity however, remains unclear. To test this, a novel reaction-board utilizing life sized projections of human subjects is designed for measuring COM location. Agreement between the segmental method and the more direct reaction-board measurement method is then assessed. Our data demonstrate that the reaction-board system has a physical maximum error of 1.28 cm and 1.95 cm for locating COM along the vertical (board length) and horizontal (board width) axes respectively, and show that the reaction-board and segmental methods agree to within limits of 6.0 cm for the location of COM and to within 5.6 cm for the movement of COM between two points, in recumbent individuals. Applied to running, the segmental method agrees to within limits of 4.8 cm for oscillation of COM and 5.3 cm for stride median COM height. The segmental method agrees with a more direct technique of known accuracy, the reaction-board method, most closely when measuring averaged oscillation over repeated strides, where it displays a measurement error range of 5.1 cm to 0.1 cm in runners.

[1]  D. Altman,et al.  STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT , 1986, The Lancet.

[2]  B. Bates.  Scientific Basis of Human Movement , 1977 .

[3]  C. Dillman.  Kinematic Analyses of Running , 1975, Exercise and sport sciences reviews.

[4]  J. Dapena,et al.  Linear kinematics of the men's 110-m and women's 100-m hurdles races. , 1991, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[5]  T. Shimba.  An estimation of center of gravity from force platform data. , 1984, Journal of biomechanics.

[6]  R. Lovett,et al.  A METHOD OF DETERMINING THE POSITION OF THE CENTRE OF GRAVITY IN ITS RELATION TO CERTAIN BONY LANDMARKS IN THE ERECT POSITION , 1909 .

[7]  Giovanni Alfonso Borelli,et al.  De motu animalium , 1967 .

[8]  A Belli,et al.  Mechanical energy assessment with different methods during running. , 1993, International journal of sports medicine.

[9]  B. Benda,et al.  Biomechanical relationship between center of gravity and center of pressure during standing , 1994 .

[10]  P. Cavanagh,et al.  A BIOMECHANICAL COMPARISON OF ELITE AND GOOD DISTANCE RUNNERS , 1977, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[11]  G. Cavagna,et al.  MECHANICAL WORK IN RUNNING. , 1964, Journal of applied physiology.

[12]  W. H. Groves.  Mechanical Analysis of Diving , 1950 .

[13]  F. G. Evans,et al.  Anatomical Data for Analyzing Human Motion , 1983 .

[14]  D. Kerrigan,et al.  The vertical displacement of the center of mass during walking: a comparison of four measurement methods. , 1998, Journal of biomechanical engineering.

[15]  Joseph Hamill,et al.  Biomechanical Basis of Human Movement , 1995 .

[16]  Wilhelm Braune,et al.  On the Centre of Gravity of the Human Body , 1985, Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

[17]  K. R. Williams,et al.  Relationship between distance running mechanics, running economy, and performance. , 1987, Journal of applied physiology.

[18]  W. O. Fenn.  WORK AGAINST GRAVITY AND WORK DUE TO VELOCITY CHANGES IN RUNNING , 1930 .

[19]  W. O. Fenn.  FRICTIONAL AND KINETIC FACTORS IN THE WORK OF SPRINT RUNNING , 1930 .

[20]  M. Haugland,et al.  Artifact-free sensory nerve signals obtained from cuff electrodes during functional electrical stimulation of nearby muscles , 1994 .

[21]  G S Krahenbuhl,et al.  Variability in running economy and mechanics among trained male runners. , 1991, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.