These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Optimal compliant-surface jumping: a multi-segment model of springboard standing jumps.
    Author: Cheng KB, Hubbard M.
    Journal: J Biomech; 2005 Sep; 38(9):1822-9. PubMed ID: 16023469.
    Abstract:
    A multi-segment model is used to investigate optimal compliant-surface jumping strategies and is applied to springboard standing jumps. The human model has four segments representing the feet, shanks, thighs, and trunk-head-arms. A rigid bar with a rotational spring on one end and a point mass on the other end (the tip) models the springboard. Board tip mass, length, and stiffness are functions of the fulcrum setting. Body segments and board tip are connected by frictionless hinge joints and are driven by joint torque actuators at the ankle, knee, and hip. One constant (maximum isometric torque) and three variable functions (of instantaneous joint angle, angular velocity, and activation level) determine each joint torque. Movement from a nearly straight motionless initial posture to jump takeoff is simulated. The objective is to find joint torque activation patterns during board contact so that jump height can be maximized. Minimum and maximum joint angles, rates of change of normalized activation levels, and contact duration are constrained. Optimal springboard jumping simulations can reasonably predict jumper vertical velocity and jump height. Qualitatively similar joint torque activation patterns are found over different fulcrum settings. Different from rigid-surface jumping where maximal activation is maintained until takeoff, joint activation decreases near takeoff in compliant-surface jumping. The fulcrum-height relations in experimental data were predicted by the models. However, lack of practice at non-preferred fulcrum settings might have caused less jump height than the models' prediction. Larger fulcrum numbers are beneficial for taller/heavier jumpers because they need more time to extend joints.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]