4.5 Article

Characterization of the mechanical properties of backpacks and their influence on the energetics of walking

Journal

JOURNAL OF BIOMECHANICS
Volume 42, Issue 2, Pages 125-130

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2008.10.012

Keywords

Backpack; Stiffness; Energetics; Walking; Linear model

Funding

  1. Decathlon Research and Development Department

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The objectives of the experiment were (i) to characterize the mechanical properties of backpacks and (ii) to study the influence of a flexible backpack on the energetics and kinematics of walking. Twelve subjects walked at different speeds on a treadmill with each of two backpacks loaded with 25% bodyweight, with either a rigid or a flexible link between the body attachment and the suspended loads. A single degree of freedom linear model of the link between the pack and the trunk was used to calculate the stiffness and damping coefficient of the two backpacks. The oxygen consumption (VO2) and the vertical acceleration of both the backpack and trunk were measured. The vertical excursion of the pack given by the model was significantly correlated with that actually measured (R = 0.87, p < 0.001). At 3.7 and 4.5km h(-1) the flexible pack induced lower acceleration peaks (respectively - 22% and -8%: p < 0.05) and tended to reduce VO2 (p = 0.055 at 4.5 km h (1)) compared with the rigid one. At 5.2 and 6 km h (1) both the accelerative forces and VO2 increased with the flexible pack (p < 0.05) mainly because of the high vertical movement of the pack. It was concluded that a simple model can be used to predict the vertical excursion of the pack and that a flexible backpack can provide energetic benefits when its oscillations are nearly in phase with those of the trunk. However, any resonance effect can lead to a modified walking pattern and an increased metabolic cost. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available