Development of a Regression Model for the Treadmill Ground Reaction Force Components

Crossmark: check for updates

Authors

  • Fahad AlGheshyan Department of Industrial Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Miami, McArthur Building, Room 267, FL 33146, USA
  • Moataz Eltoukhy Department of Kinesiology and Sport Sciences, School of Education & Human Development, University of Miami, 1507 Levante Avenue, Max Orovitz Building, Room 132, Coral Gables, FL 33146, USA
  • Arzu-Thomas Onar St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, 262 Danny Thomas Pl, Memphis, TN 38105, USA
  • Shihab Asfour Department of Industrial Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Miami, McArthur Building, Room 267, FL 33146, USA

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17140/SEMOJ-1-106

Keywords:

Biomechanics, Regression analysis

Abstract

Treadmills allow for collecting multiple steps in a small area, and continuous testing for a long period of time with multiple speeds. These factors prove to be useful for biomechanics research laboratories that are usually equipped with floor embedded platforms. Acquiring instrumented treadmills with a built in force plate(s) – may not be financially feasible for many general purpose biomechanics laboratories; additionally instrumented treadmills only measures the vertical component of ground reaction force. The purpose of this study was to examine the components of Ground Reaction Force (GRF) in treadmill walking which were measured by placing a treadmill over floor-mounted force plates and to develop a set of regression equations to be used in associating treadmill’s GRF components with GRF components obtained during overground walking. The GRF measured during the treadmill walk was compared to GRF measured in overground walking. A total of twelve male subjects participated in this study. The analysis of the data did not reveal statistical differences in the anterior-posterior component of the GRF (APGRFP1 and APGRFP2) and in the early-stance and mid-stance peaks of the vertical GRF (VGRFP1 and VGRFP2) between treadmill and overground walking. Statistical differences between treadmill and overground walking were found during late stance for vertical ground reaction force (VGRFP3) and medial lateral ground reaction force (MLGRFP2) (p<0.05). During push-off- occurring in late-stance-vertical ground reaction force peaks (VGRFP3) were less in treadmill walking than in overground walking by 5-6% (p<0.05). The Medial-lateral ground reaction forces peaks (MLGRFP2) were also less in treadmill walking than in overground walking by 1-2% (p<0.05). In addition, five regression equations were
developed for treadmill’s GRF.

References

Belli A, Bui P, Bergera A, Geyssanta A, Lacourb JR. A tread-mill ergometer for three-dimensional ground reaction forces measurement during walking. J Biomech. 2001; 34(1): 105-112. doi: 10.1016/S0021-9290(00)00125-1

Li L, Hamill J. Characteristics of the vertical ground reac-tion force component prior to gait transition. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2002; 73(3): 229-237. doi: 10.1080/02701367.2002.10609016 Available at: Motion Lab Systems (www.motion-labs.com)

Dierick F, Penta M, Renaut D, Detrembleur C. A force mea-suring treadmill in clinical gait analysis. Gait Posture. 2004; 20(3): 299-303. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2003.11.001

Lake M, Robinson M. Biomechanics of Walking in Differ-ent Shoes: A Comparison Between Overground and Treadmill Testing Protocols. The International Society of Biomechanics Technical Group on Footwear Biomechanics. 7th Symposium on Footwear Biomechanics, Cleveland, Ohio USA. 2005.

Riley PO, Paolini G, Croce UG, Paylo KW, Kerrigan DC. A kinematic and kinetic comparison of overground and treadmill walking in healthy subjects. Gait Posture. 2007; 26(1): 17-24. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2006.07.003

Goldberg EJ, Kautz SA, Neptune RR. Can treadmill walk-ing be used to assess propulsion generation? J Biomech. 2008; 41(8): 1805-1808. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2008.03.009

Riley PO, Dicharry J, Franz J, et al. A kinematics and ki-netic comparison of overground and treadmill running. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2008; 40(6): 1093-1100. doi: 10.1249/ MSS.0b013e3181677530

Sohn RH, Hwang SH, Kim YH. Comparison of Motion Analysis and Energy Expenditures between Treadmill and Over-ground Walking. 13th International Conference on Biomedical Engineering IFMBE Proceedings. 2009. doi: 10.1007/978-3- 540-92841-6_479

Fellin RE, Manal K, Davis IS. Comparison of lower extrem-ity kinematic curves during overground and treadmill running. J Appl Biomech. 2010; 26(4): 407-414.

Nilsson J, Thorstensson A. Ground reaction forces at dif-ferent speeds of human walking and running. Acta Physiol Scand. 1989; 136(2): 217-227. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-1716.1989. tb08655.x

White SC, Yack HJ, Tucker CA, Lin HY. Comparison of vertical ground reaction forces during overground and treadmill walking. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1998; 30(10): 1537-1542.

Kram R, Griffin TM, Donelan JM, Chang YH. Force tread-mill for measuring vertical and horizontal ground reaction forc-es. J Appl Physiol. 1998; 85(2): 764-769.

Stolze H, Kuhtz-Buschbeck JP, Mondwurf C, et al. Gait analysis during treadmill and overground locomotion in chil-dren and adults. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1997; 105(6): 490-497. doi: 10.1016/S0924-980X(97)00055-6

Alton F, Baldey L, Caplan S, Morrissey MC. A kinematic comparison of overground and treadmill walking. Clin Biomech. Bristol, Avon. 1998; 13(6): 434-440. doi: 10.1016/S0268-0033- (98)00012-6

Murray MP, Spurr GB, Sepic SB, Gardner GM, Mollinger LA. Treadmill vs. floor walking: kinematics, electromyogram, and heart rate. J Appl Physiol. 1985; 59(1): 87-91.

Dingwell JB, Cusumano JP, Cavanagh PR, Sternad D. Lo-cal dynamic stability versus kinematic variability of continu-ous overground and treadmill walking. J Biomech Eng. 2001; 123(1): 27-32. doi: 10.1115/1.1336798

Owings TM, Grabiner MD. Step width variability, but not step length variability or step time variability, discriminates gait of healthy young and older adults during treadmill locomotion. J Biomech. 2004; 37(6): 935-938. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. jbiomech.2003.11.012

van Ingen Schenau GJ. Some fundamental aspects of the bio-mechanics of overground versus treadmill locomotion. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1980; 12(4): 257-261.

Savelberg HH, Vorstenbosch MA, Kamman EH, van de Wei-jer JGW, Schambardt HC. Intra-stride belt-speed variation af-fects treadmill locomotion. Gait Posture. 1998; 7(1): 26-34. doi:

Rodano R, Squadrone R. A Procedure for Quantitative Kine-matic Analysis in Running on Treadmill. 18 International Sym-posium on Biomechanics in Sports. Hong Kong, China. 2000.

Downloads

Published

2015-04-14

How to Cite

Fahad AlGheshyan, Moataz Eltoukhy, Arzu-Thomas Onar, & Shihab Asfour. (2015). Development of a Regression Model for the Treadmill Ground Reaction Force Components. Sports and Exercise Medicine , 1(2), 35–41. https://doi.org/10.17140/SEMOJ-1-106

Issue

Vol. 1 No. 2 (2015): Volume 1 Issue 2 2015

Section

Articles

License

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

All content published in Sports and Exercise Medicine (SEM) is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This license allows anyone to copy, distribute, transmit, and adapt the work — including for commercial purposes — provided appropriate credit is given to the original author(s) and source.