4.5 Article

A phenomenological model for estimating metabolic energy consumption in muscle contraction

Journal

JOURNAL OF BIOMECHANICS
Volume 37, Issue 1, Pages 81-88

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0021-9290(03)00239-2

Keywords

muscle modeling; metabolic energy; heat; movement simulation; isometric; isotonic

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A phenomenological model for muscle energy consumption was developed and used in conjunction with a simple Hill-type model for muscle contraction. The model was used to address two questions. First, can an empirical model of muscle energetics accurately represent the total energetic behavior of frog muscle in isometric, isotonic, and isokinetic contractions? And second, how does such a model perform in a large-scale, multiple-muscle model of human walking? Four simulations were conducted with frog sartorius muscle under full excitation: an isometric contraction, a set of isotonic contractions with the muscle shortening a constant distance under various applied loads, a set of isotonic contractions with the muscle shortening over various distances under a constant load, and an isokinetic contraction in lengthening. The model calculations were evaluated against results of similar thermal in vitro experiments performed on frog sartorius muscle. The energetics model was then incorporated into a large-scale, multiple-muscle model of the human body for the purpose of predicting energy consumption during normal walking. The total energy estimated by the model accurately reflected the observed experimental behavior of frog muscle for an isometric contraction. The model also accurately reproduced the experimental behavior of frog muscle heat production under isotonic shortening and isokinetic lengthening conditions. The estimated rate of metabolic energy consumption for walking was 29% higher than the value typically obtained from gait measurements. (C) 2003 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