Kinetics versus Kinematics for Analyzing Locomotor Coordination

D. Gordon E. Robertson, Ph.D.

School of Human Kinetics, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, CANADA

Kinematic Analysis
‡ linear position, velocity and acceleration of markers ‡ linear position, velocity and acceleration of body segments ‡ angular position, velocity and acceleration of body segments ‡ total body or limb kinematics

Advantages of Kinematics ‡ easy to obtain with automated motion analysis systems ‡ accuracy is easy to determine ‡ requires little operator expertise ‡ immediate feedback possible .

Disadvantages of Kinematics ‡ only describes motion ‡ not indicative of causes ‡ difficult to discriminate important variables from idiosyncratic variables .

Kinetic Analysis ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ forces and moments of force work. energy and power impulse and momentum inverse dynamics derives forces and moments from kinematics and body segment parameters .

coordination) ‡ can be used to simulate motion and describe resulting kinematics ‡ can be validated against external force measurements .e.Advantages of Kinetics ‡ defines which structures cause the motion (i..

ligament. or bone forces) ..Disadvantages of Kinetics ‡ may require synchronization of several data acquisition systems (e.g. videography with force plates) ‡ special training to interpret ‡ more expensive and less developed software ‡ invasive for direct internal measurements (muscle.

simultaneously .Inverse Dynamics is Partial Solution to Invasive Measurements ‡ noninvasive with videography ‡ kinematics are determined ‡ direct measurements of external forces are often necessary (i.e. force platforms) ‡ can be applied at several joints..

Limitations of Inverse Dynamics ‡ results apply to conceptual structures not true anatomical structures ‡ cannot partition results into contributions by individual anatomical structures ‡ no direct means of validating ‡ modeling permits partitioning of forces and moments .

06 s) ‡ analysis of hip and knee only (ankle forces not significant during swing) .Sprint Analysis Example ‡ swing phase of one leg ‡ world-class male sprinter ‡ 50 m into 100 m competitive race (t=10.

3 0. Flexing -20. Flexor 0. Toe-off 0. Extending 300.Hip angular velocity.1 0. 0.2 Touch-down 0.0 0. Eccentric -2000.4 Time (s) . moment of force and power during sprinting ‡ initial burst of power to create swing ‡ latter burst to drive leg down 20. 0. -4000. Extensor -300. Concentric 2000.

Hip Moment ‡ causes rapid hip and knee flexion immediately after toe-off ‡ causes hip and knee to extend in preparation for touch-down .

3 0.2 0. Flexor 2000. -300. -20.Knee angular velocity. Flexing 300.1 0. Concentric 0. -2000. moment of force and power during sprinting ‡ initial burst of power to stop flexion ‡ small burst for extension ‡ final burst to stop extension 20. Extensor 0. Toe-off 0. Eccentric -4000.4 Time (s) .0 Touch-down 0. Extending 0.

Knee Moment ‡ not used to cause flexion or extension during swing ‡ stops knee flexion before midswing ‡ prevents hyper-extension (locking) prior to touch-down .

0 CFS 0.3 Time (s) . Extensor Concentric 1000. -1000. -20. moment of force and power during kicking ‡ initial burst of power to create swing ‡ negative work to create whipaction of leg and foot 20. 0. Flexor Trial: SL2CF 0. Eccentric -2000.2 0. -200. Extending 200.1 Hit Off 0. 0.Hip angular velocity. Flexing 0.

3 Time (s) . Flexor Concentric 1000. Extensor Trial: SL2CF 0. Extending 0. Eccentric -2000. moment of force and power during kicking ‡ initial power to stop flexion.0 CFS 0. 0. -20.Knee angular velocity. -200. 0. bumper effect ‡ negative power prior to contact to prevent hyperextension 20.1 Hit Off 0.2 0. -1000. Flexing 200.

75 m/s IFS=ipsilateral foot-strike ITO=ipsilateral toe-off CFS=contralateral foot-strike CTO=contralateral toe-off .Normal Walking Example ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ athletic male subject laboratory setting speed was 1.

moment of force and power during walking ‡ large burst of power by plantar flexors for pushoff ‡ dorsiflexors allow gentle landing and flexion during swing 10. -500. 250. Dorsiflexing 0. Plantar flexor Concentric 0.2 0. Trial: WN02DRMP Dorsiflexor 0.4 CFS ITO 0. Eccentric -750. -250.6 0.Ankle angular velocity. Plantar flexing 100. IFS CTO 0.0 Time (s) . -10. -100.8 IFS 1.0 0.

0 0. Flexor Concentric 0. Extending 0.8 Time (s) . -10. Extensor 0. Flexing 100. -250.0 0.6 IFS 1. Eccentric -750.4 0. IFS CTO 0.2 CFS ITO 0. moment of force and power during walking ‡ initial burst of power to cushion landing ‡ positive work to extend knee ‡ negative work by extensors to control flexion at push-off 10. -500. Trial: WN02DRMP -100. 250.Knee angular velocity.

Extending 100.2 CFS ITO 0. Flexor 0.8 Time (s) . IFS CTO 0. Flexing 0. Extensor Concentric 0. moment of force and power during walking ‡ some cushioning at landing ‡ large amount of negative work by flexors ‡ positive work by flexors to swing leg 10.6 IFS 1.0 0. -10. -500. Trial: WN02DRMP -100. -250.Hip angular velocity. 250.0 0.4 0. Eccentric -750.

.Questions? Answers? Thank you.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful