09PEC028 ANDVACED METHODS OF ANALYSIS IN BIOMECHANICS

A synchronized quasi-static analysis of a drop jump and a squat

jump

Author: A763319

Word Count: 1478

1
A synchronized quasi-static analysis of a drop jump and a squat
jump
Toni S. Evitts
Loughborough University, Biomechanics Laboratory. Department of Sport, Exercise and Health Studies. Loughborough University,
Loughborough, Leicestershire, LE11 3TU, ENGLAND.

ABSTRACT

Quai-static analysis uses kinematic and kinetic data to estimate joint moments during the execution of sporting
movements. Joint moments are approximated by considering static loads, but ignoring inertial loads. Static
loads, gravitational and external loads, are calculated using ground reaction force and position data from
digitisation. Inertial loads, angular acceleration, angular velocity, centre of mass and weight of segments are
not considered. The assumption that the body is static and that inertial load exert negligible effects results in
inaccurate values. Other sources of error, systematic error and random error, further amplify inaccuracy of
calculated joint moments. Sources of error include, recording kinematic data, digitisation error, joint centre
approximation, and multi-planar movement. Application of the estimated joint moments in interpreting real-life
movements is limited as; effects of other joints are not considered, sporting movements often involve
movement in more than one plane, no differentiation between bilateral limbs or individual muscle can be made,
and co-contraction and friction are not accounted for. There are many sources of error when estimating joint
moments using quasi-static analysis and therefore care should be taken to firstly reduce systematic error and
secondly in this interpretation of data due to the shortcomings of the model of human movement employed.

Key words: quasi-static analysis, moment, static load, inertial load.

1. Introduction accordance with the policy statement of

THE MEASUREMENT or estimation of human joint
forces and moments is a topic of interest in the
study of human movement. Joint forces and
moments are generated by the muscles and
passive soft tissues around the joint to control
body segmental movement. During movement,
joint forces and moments are not only used to
counter the gravitational and external loads (static
loads) due to interaction between the body and the
environment, but also to counter the inertial loads
of the body segments, which are related to the
segmental angular acceleration and segmental
CoM (Wu and Ladin, 1996). The effects of velocity,
acceleration of segments are ignored in quasi-
static analysis; segment weight can also be
omitted.
The static load during can be calculated by
measuring the ground reaction forces, and
moments from force data and position data of
joints from digitisation.
The joint forces and moments can be approximated
by static load, assuming that the inertial load is
negligible. This approximation simplifies the
inverse dynamics process. The errors in joint load
calculation caused by eliminating the inertial load
have been evaluated (Bresler and Frankel, 1950;
Cappozzo et al., 1980; Wells, 1981). The purpose
of this paper is to evaluate the quasi-static analysis
of a drop jump and a squat jump, methods used to
find jump height of a Drop Jump (DJ) and Counter-
movement jump (CMJ) using kinetic data are also
considered. Assumptions underling the methods,
and limitations will be discussed.
2. Methods
A maximal vertical DJ was performed by one male
subject and a maximal vertical CMJ by another. All
participants gave their informed consent in
Loughborough University. Seven reflective markers
were placed on the right side of the body, on the
glenohumeral-joint (shoulder), humeroulnar-joint
(elbow), radiocarpal-joint (wrist), greater-
trochanter (hip), lateral femoral-condyle (knee),
lateral-malleolus (ankle), and fifth-metatarsal (toe).
Ground reaction forces and moments of force were
collected with a Kistler piezoelectric force plate,
sampled at 1000 Hz and recorded using Bioware
software. A video-recorder (50 Hz) and digitising
software (SiliconCoach) was used to collect and
process kinematic data. The camera was set up
perpendicular to the sagittal plane of motion to
capture the movement. Timing lights were used to
synchronise video and force data (20 light emitting
diodes illuminated subsequently at 0.001-sec
intervals, at some point after video recorded had
commenced; the following equation was used to
synchronize data: Time zero in force data
Joint centres were digitised using the reflective
markers as well as the vertex of the cranium.
3. Analysis
The human body was modelled as planar, rigid-
body system comprising of seven segments linked
by frictionless, hinge joints (Fig.1). Quasi-static
analysis of the joint position data and force data
was used to find joint moments. The co-ordinates
of each joint position was corrected to give its
position relative to the centre of the force plate
(joint coordinates (xj,yj) – centre of force plate
coordinates (xc,yc). Reference points in the plane
of movement were used to scale from pixels to real
life distance in metres. Quasi-static analysis of

2
these positions was used to find the reaction
moment and hence joint moment at each joint. Jump height cm

Counter
movement Drop-jump
jump

FT 38.2 44.3

DI 36.0 3010

I-M 36.4 165

SI 36.4 327

Table 1 - Jump heights (change in CoM height) for counter

movement- and drop-jump calculated using four methods:
Figure 1 – model of human body and axis of data
flight time (FT), double integration (DI), impulse-
collection
momentum (I-M) and single integration (SI).
Fy and Fz data for the two jumps was used along
with digitised data to estimate joint moments.
During the ground contact phase of the jumps the Quasi-static analysis of the CMJ and DJ are
moments at the joints were estimated by ignoring summarised in Fig.2 and Fig.3 respectively.
the inertial contributions, and the weights of the Negative values denote clockwise and positive,
segments. The moment was computed by taking anticlockwise, angular motion.
the product of the magnitude of the ground
reaction force vector (Fz) and the perpendicular
distance between the joints position (d) and the
ground reaction force vector originating from the
centre of pressure (Ay).
Position of joint centres from digitised data were
corrected relative to the centre of the force plate
and calibrated to give real life values in cm.
Force data was synchronized with video data using
LED timing lights. Reaction moments were
calculated by

where Ay is position of centre of pressure in

relation to centre of force plate in the sagital plane,
px is joint position in the sagittal plane, Fz is vertical
force data(transverse plane), Fy is force data in the
sagittal plane, and py is joint position in the
Figure 2 – Joint moments and total support moment during
transverse direction.
a counter movement-jump.
Joint moment is the reaction moment multiplied by
minus one. Joint moments were calculated for
ankle, knee and hip and the sum of the modulus of
these values for each joint was used to find total
support moment, i.e.

Where Am, Km and Hm are values of joint moment

for the ankle, knee and hip respectively.

Kinetic data was used to analyse each trial using 4

methods; 1 method using double numerical
integration (DI), 2 methods based on vertical
takeoff velocity as calculated from the force
platform (SI & I-M), and 1 method based on time of
flight (FT). An overview of these methods is
presented in Appendix 1.
Figure 3 - Joint moments and total support moment during
4. Results a drop-jump.

Jump heights calculated using the four The maximum moment at each joint and in each
aforementioned methods for the Counter jump is detailed in Table 2 and total moments are
movement- and drop-jump are detailed in Table 1. presented in table 3.

3
 algorithms). However, the accuracy in which total
Max Joint moment Nm joint loads can be approximated by static loads
only needs to be considered (Callis, 1997). One
Counter source of error may be that; although the body
segments have small masses and moments of
movement Drop-jump
inertia, the large accelerations they experience
jump during some sports movements result in inertial
forces and moments that are similar to, or greater
Ankle 552.7 633.6 than, the static loads, hence discounting these will
give inaccurate results.
Knee -615.5 -279.7 It may be appropriate to ignore the inertial load if
there is only interest in determining the order of
Hip 753.6 -350.0 magnitude of joint forces and moments under
certain conditions. However, the inertial loads,
Support especially the inertial forces, contribute greatly in
1572.0 1011.3
moment the non-dominant directions (i.e. in the coronal
plane). Furthermore, the inertial force is more
Table 2 - Maximum joint moment at each joint during a important at the proximal joint than at the distal
counter movement- and the drop-jump. joint (Ladin and Wu, 1996).
However one advantage of using quasi-static
analysis is that by only considering static loads,
Total moment (Absolute) Nm computation of derivatives from inherently noisy
displacement data is avoided, eliminating influence
Counter of error in derivative values (Lanshammer, 1982)
movement Drop-jump on moments.
The resultant force vector is assumed to act in the
jump
same direction on all segments; effects of other
joints are not considered. As each joint is
12383.6 7856.0 calculated in isolation the results are essentially
Ankle
(12404.2) (7876.9) approximations. Also, if the axis of motion is not
parallel to the camera then error will occur.
-7740.4 2290.7 Movement in the plane perpendicular to the
Knee
(8255.3) (3501.8) camera shot is not quantified, hence 3D analysis
may be required to analyse actions with significant
8088.5 3374.6 movement in such plane. Factors such as co-
Hip contraction of antagonistic muscle groups and
(10051.1) (6606.7)
friction are not considered, as joints assumed
Support freely rotational pin joints.
(30710.6) (17985.5) A source of error in the method used here is that
moment
joint centres are not accurately depicted by the
reflective markers, and their position may be
Table 3 - Total support and absolute total moment at each
distorted for example by muscle deformation
joint and total absolute support moment during a counter
movement- and a drop-jump. during contraction. This is an example of
systematic error. Other sources of systematic
error that should be considered include; error in
digitising, and the natural vibration frequency,
sample frequency (≥1000Hz necessary), cut-off
5. Discussion frequency (≥580Hz is acceptable), Street at al.
(2001), and calibration error of force plate. Care
Quasi-static analysis relies on a number of should be taken to minimise effects of systematic
assumptions in order to function. One assumption error. Also force data is not corrected hence
is that ground reaction force dominates movement introducing further error.
determination; the degree to which this is true As opposite limbs are assumed contributing equally
determines a proportion of the error introduced. and simultaneously, it is not possible to examine
Another assumption is that the body is in a static the contribution of individual limbs.
position; this is seldom true in sporting Contact time of the drop jump is shorter than the
movements, such as the jumps analysed here. The drop jump. Can not establish which individual
implications of these assumptions are discussed muscles are acting at each joint or what proportion
below. of the total torque they are producing.
The quasi-static analysis approach does not take
into account internal forces and therefore only
reflects the gravitational and external reactions 6. References
between the body and the environment. This may
introduce error in the results especially if fast [1] WU, G., LADIN, Z., 1996. Limitations of quasi-static
movements are analysed; the effect of the estimation of human joint loading during locomotion.
inertia/forces and moments becomes more Medical and Biological Engineering and Computing, 34:
important as the speed of locomotion increases. 472-476.
Eliminating these forces also may not be [2] BRESLER B., FRANKEL J. P., 1950. The forces and
appropriate for analysis of proximal joints, i.e. hip; moments in the leg during level walking. Transactions of
and where the shear components of the force and the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 72: 27-36.
moment are of interest. (Ladin and Wu, 1996)
Quasi-static analysis may be beneficial is practical
[3] CAPPOZZO, A., LEO T., and CORTESl, S. S., 1980. A
polycentric knee-ankle mechanism for above knee
application due to its simplicity (no complicated
prostheses. Journal of Biomechanics, 13, (3): 231-239.
kinematic transducers, inverse dynamics

4
[4] WELLS, R. P., 1981. The projection of the ground
reaction force as a predictor of internal joint moments.
Bull. Prosth. Res, 18, (1): 15-19.
[5] CHALLIS, J.H., 1997. Producing physiologically realistic
individual muscle force estimations by imposing
constraints when using optimization techniques. Medical
Engineering & Physics, 19 (3):253-261.
[6] LANSHAMMER, H., 1982. On precision limits for
derivatives numerically calculated from noisy data',
Journal of Biomechanics, 15, (6): 459-470.
[7] STREET, G., MCMILLAN, S., BOARD, W.,
RASMUSSEN, M., HENEGHAM, M.J., 2001. Sources of
error in determining countermovement jump height with
impulse method. Journal of Applied Biomechanics, 17:43-
54.
[8] ARAGÓN-VARGAS, L. F., 1997. Kinesiological factors
in vertical jump performance: Differences among
individuals. Journal of Applied Biomechanics, 13, 24–44.
[9] DOWLING, J. J., & VAMOS, L. 1993. Identification of
kinetic and temporal factors related to vertical jump
performance. Journal of Applied Biomechanics, 9, 95–110.

5
APPENDIX 1 – JUMP HEIGHT ESTIMATION METHODS
TF method used constant acceleration equation
where t = time of flight from force data, u =
velocity at takeoff calculated by using v=u+at
(v=0).
Force data was used in two different ways to find
velocity at take-off (Vto). Firstly Vto was obtained
using the impulse-momentum (I-M) method from
instantaneous vertical velocity-time curve; which
was in turn calculated integrating propulsive force
(Fzp), Fz minus corrected body weight, with respect
to time (impulse) and normalizing by body mass
according to:
where tto-n is some time just before takeoff and t0 is
the beginning of data collection when the subject is
standing on the force plate, then
where Fzp is propulsive force, obtained from
subtracting body weight from the vertical ground
reaction force; t0 is the beginning of data collection,
and tto is the instant of takeoff. Change in CoM
vertical position can be found by
The single integration (SI) method Instantaneous
velocity at time of takeoff (IVto), taken from the
instantaneous vertical velocity versus time curve,
was also be used to calculate change in vertical
CoM position:
DI method used corrected force data to calculate
acceleration, then numerical integration using the
trapezium rule to find velocity, then displacement.
Firstly force data was corrected so total impulse ≈
0. Correction factor was calculated by total impulse
divided by total time of force recording (T), and
subtracted from Fzp; this process was reiterated
until total impulse was negligible.
Acceleration was calculated from this corrected
force data.
6
Integration of acceleration data using the
trapezium method gives velocity
Where an is instant acceleration at a given time
interval and an+1 is instant acceleration at the
subsequent time interval, t is the time interval
between data points, and Vn-1 is the previous
Velocity value calculated, i.e. using an-1 and an.
Displacement is calculated by again integrating
this data using the trapezium rule
The maximum value of S produced give the
greatest change of vertical CoM displacement from
starting position; hence jump height from take off
is
Where Smax is maximum displacement and Sto is
displacement at time of take-off.
As it is not possible to obtain a correction factor
using the drop-jump data an alternative method
was used to calculate jump height. Jump impulse
was calculated by integration of the force versus
time curve between time of take-off and touch-
down, minus the weight impulse:
Where tc is contact time, tto is time at take-off, and
ttd is time at touch-down. Take-off velocity is
calculated by
where Vtd is the velocity of the CoM just before
touchdown. Change in CoM position is therefore
FT, SI and I-M do not take into consideration the
displacement of the CoM prior to takeoff; therefore
may not be appropriate to compare jump
performance between individuals. Although,
previous researchers have found that the major
contribution to vertical jump height differences
among participants comes from VTO, whereas the
relative takeoff height is very similar from one
participant to another (Aragón-Vargas, 1997). DJ
may be the most useful method as it can take into
consideration displacement of CoM prior to take
off, i.e. total CoM displacement relative to the
starting standing position.
From Table 1 it can be seen that all four methods
give reliable results for CMJ although FT gives a
slightly higher value than the other three. This can
be explained as follows; the calculation of jump
height using the FT method has been criticized in
the literature because some of the assumptions
involved are not correct (Dowling & Vamos, 1993).
One clear limitation is that this method assumes
that the time to peak height of CoM is equal to one-
half of the time in the air, which is only true if the
participant takes off and lands with the body in the
same position. In reality body position at landing
can be crouched.2, hence time down would be
longer than time up. This results in an
overestimation of the distance from takeoff to
peak.
Data from the DJ gives somewhat more
inconsistent results. FT is the only realistic value
obtained. Limitations of the other four methods
mean they are not suitable for calculating jump
height of DJs. Problems arise as it is not possible to
correct the force data or to take into account
corrected body mass as it is when considering CMJ
data. This results in error in force data being
magnified by integration, producing nonsense
displacement values. I-M method can not be
performed as it is in CMJ analysis as take-off
impulse can not be calculated. Although the
adapted method is theoretically correct the
uncorrected force data, and lack of consideration
for the effect of weight results in a meaningless
outcome.