Design and testing of a high-speed treadmill to measure ground reaction forces at the limit of human gait

Bundle, Matthew W.; Powell, Michael Ora; Ryan, Laurence J.

doi:10.1016/j.medengphy.2015.04.009

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As the body mass increased, the difference in the horizontal GRF between the ideal and non-ideal treadmill conditions Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology frontiersin.org increased. On the non-ideal treadmill, the horizontal GRF appeared to be affected by a phase shift with the extent of the delay depending on the gait phase, which is consistent with the results of a previous study using force plates (Bundle et al, 2015).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Physical factors that differentiate body kinematics between treadmill and overground walking

Jung

Koo

2022

Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Treadmills are widely used in rehabilitation and gait analysis. However, previous studies have reported differences in terms of kinematics and kinetics between treadmill and overground walking due to physical and psychological factors. The aim of this study was to analyze gait differences due to only the physical factors of treadmill walking. Walking motions of a male participant were captured at 0.63, 1.05, 1.33, and 3.91 m/s. A gait controller of a virtual subject (63 kg) was trained for ground walking at each walking speed via a reinforcement learning method. Additionally, the gait controllers of virtual subjects with different body masses of 47, 79, and 94 kg were trained for ground walking at 1.05 m/s. The gait controllers and virtual subjects were tested for treadmill walking, and their lower-limb joint kinematics were compared with those for ground walking. Treadmill conditions of maximum allowable belt force and feedback control frequency of belt speed were set between 100 and 500 N and between 10 and 50 Hz, respectively. The lower-limb kinematics were identical between the two conditions regardless of the body mass and walking speed when the belt could provide a constant speed regardless of external perturbation in the ideal treadmill. However, kinematic differences were observed when simulation was performed on a non-ideal treadmill with a relatively low belt force and control frequency of belt speed. The root-mean-square differences of the hip, knee, and ankle flexion angles between treadmill and overground running at 3.91 m/s increased by 3.76°, 3.73°, and 4.91°, respectively, when the maximum belt force and control frequency decreased from infinity to 100 N and 10 Hz, respectively. At a maximum belt force exceeding 400 N or a control frequency exceeding 25 Hz, the root-mean-square difference of the joint kinematics was less than 3° for all body masses and walking speeds. Virtual subjects walking on non-ideal treadmills showed different joint kinematics from ground walking. The study identified physical factors that differentiate treadmill walking from overground walking, and suggested the belt forces and control frequencies of a treadmill to achieve the desired limit of kinematic differences.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Physical factors that differentiate body kinematics between treadmill and overground walking

Jung

Koo

2022

Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Biomechanical differences are likely larger when accelerating [100,101] and when running at higher speeds (i.e., sprinting) on regular MT's [17,21] and may also be impacted by the use of shoes [41] and fatigue status [57,58] and the findings of this review can therefore not be generalized to these conditions. Indeed, special MTs have been developed for sprinting that may reduce biomechanical differences [102][103][104]. Third, most meta-analyses were affected by high levels of heterogeneity.…”

Section: Limitations and Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is Motorized Treadmill Running Biomechanically Comparable to Overground Running? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cross-Over Studies

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Treadmills are often used in research, clinical practice, and training. Biomechanical investigations comparing treadmill and overground running report inconsistent findings. Objective This study aimed at comparing biomechanical outcomes between motorized treadmill and overground running. Methods Four databases were searched until June 2019. Crossover design studies comparing lower limb biomechanics during non-inclined, non-cushioned, quasi-constant-velocity motorized treadmill running with overground running in healthy humans (18-65 years) and written in English were included. Meta-analyses and meta-regressions were performed where possible. Results 33 studies (n = 494 participants) were included. Most outcomes did not differ between running conditions. However, during treadmill running, sagittal foot-ground angle at footstrike (mean difference (MD) − 9.8° [95% confidence interval: − 13.1 to − 6.6]; low GRADE evidence), knee flexion range of motion from footstrike to peak during stance (MD 6.3° [4.5 to 8.2]; low), vertical displacement center of mass/pelvis (MD − 1.5 cm [− 2.7 to − 0.8]; low), and peak propulsive force (MD − 0.04 body weights [− 0.06 to − 0.02]; very low) were lower, while contact time (MD 5.0 ms [0.5 to 9.5]; low), knee flexion at footstrike (MD − 2.3° [− 3.6 to − 1.1]; low), and ankle sagittal plane internal joint moment (MD − 0.4 Nm/kg [− 0.7 to − 0.2]; low) were longer/higher, when pooled across overground surfaces. Conflicting findings were reported for amplitude of muscle activity. Conclusions Spatiotemporal, kinematic, kinetic, muscle activity, and muscle-tendon outcome measures are largely comparable between motorized treadmill and overground running. Considerations should, however, particularly be given to sagittal plane kinematic differences at footstrike when extrapolating treadmill running biomechanics to overground running. Protocol registration CRD42018083906 (PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews).

show abstract

“…Over time, the original calibration of treadmills may need to be revised, necessitating attention to the load cells. The common way to calibrate an instrumented treadmill is to use known dead weights to compare the output signals [2][3][4] . However, this method only allows for vertical load calibration.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Calibration of instrumented treadmills using an instrumented pole; a modified version to use relatively smaller forces

Hosseini-Yazdi

2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The instrumented treadmills’ quality of the generated Ground Reaction Forces (GRF) may degrade over time, as the original calibration matrix may not accurately represent the exerted forces. A cost-effective alternative to manufacturer recalibration is to use an instrumented pole for calibration. Collins et al. presented a simple method to collect multiple data points by exerting forces in various directions. The sensor on the instrumented pole provides instantaneous force magnitudes, while motion capture records the pole’s instantaneous directions. They recommended a relatively large force magnitude (1000N), requiring at least two individuals. Using an optimization method, the new calibration may be estimate by relating the exerted forces (pole) to the treadmill signals. Here, we attempted to simplify the process further, allowing a single individual to perform force exertion with additional force exertion direction. Thus, the calibrating forces were reduced to one-third of the prior recommendation. This maintained the structural integrity of the pole and helped avoid inducing bending moments that could affect calibration results. The cross-validation score for test data (prediction score) was at least 0.92. Additionally, comparing GRFs in posterior/anterior and vertical directions with a benchmark treadmill for even walking revealed an average cross-correlation of 0.97.

show abstract

Design and testing of a high-speed treadmill to measure ground reaction forces at the limit of human gait

Cited by 7 publications

References 27 publications

Physical factors that differentiate body kinematics between treadmill and overground walking

Physical factors that differentiate body kinematics between treadmill and overground walking

Is Motorized Treadmill Running Biomechanically Comparable to Overground Running? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cross-Over Studies

Calibration of instrumented treadmills using an instrumented pole; a modified version to use relatively smaller forces

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About