Biomechanical Differences Associated with Two Different Load Carriage Systems and their Relationship to Economy

• Authors: Ray Lloyd , Carlton Cooke
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

Purpose. To explore relationships between load carriage economy and the kinematics and kinetics of load carriage using both a backpack (BP) and a double pack (DP). Basic procedures. Nine participants walked on a treadmill at gradients of between 27% downhill and 20% uphill, and over a force plate on level ground, at a speed of 3 km.h-1. Expired air was collected throughout the treadmill experiment and all experiments were filmed for subsequent biomechanical analysis. The relative economy of load carriage was expressed in terms of the Extra Load Index (ELI). Main findings. There was a tendency for the double pack system to be associated with better economy than the BP. The double pack system provoked significantly less forward lean than the backpack and the horizontal displacement of the CoM was also smaller for the double pack system and both of these factors were strongly related to economy. There was, however, a greater range of motion of the trunk in the DP condition and this was also associated with improved economy. Conclusions. The results suggest that the DP was associated with smaller perturbations in gait than the BP and that this represents an advantage in terms of economy. In particular freedom of movement of the trunk in the sagittal plane may be an important consideration in the efficiency of load carriage systems.

Keywords

EN

load carriage; economy; kinematics; kinetics

• Publisher: De Gruyter Open
• Journal: Human Movement
• Year: 2011
• Volume: 12
• Issue: 1
• Pages: 65-74

Dates

published

1 - 3 - 2011

online

14 - 3 - 2011

Contributors

author

Ray Lloyd

• School of Social and Health Sciences, University of Abertay Dundee, Dundee, UK

author

Carlton Cooke

• Carnegie Research Institute, Leeds Metropolitan University, Leeds, UK

References

• Abe D., Yanagawa K., Niihata S., Effect of load carriage, load position, and walking speed on energy cost of walking. Appl Ergon, 2004, 35 (4), 329-335. DOI: 10.1016/j.apergo.2004.03.008.[Crossref]
• Bastien G. J., Willems P. A., Schepens B., Heglund N. C., Effect of load and speed on the energetic cost of human walking. Eur J Appl Physiol, 2005 (1-2), 94, 76-83. DOI: 10.1007/s00421-004-1286-z.[Crossref]
• Coombes J., Kingswell C., Biomechanical and physiological comparison of conventional webbing and the M83 assault vest. Appl Ergon, 2005, 36, 49-53. DOI: 10.1016/j.apergo.2004.09.004.[Crossref]
• Attwells R. L., Birrell S. A., Hooper R. H., Mansfield N. J., Influence of carrying heavy loads on soldiers' posture, movements and gait. Ergonomics, 2006, 49 (14), 1527-1537. DOI: 10.1080/00140130600757237.[PubMed][Crossref]
• Birrell S., Haslam R., The effect of load distribution within military load carriage systems on the kinetics of human gait. Appl Ergon, 2010, 41, 585-590. DOI: 10.1016/j.apergo.2009.12.004.[Crossref][PubMed]
• Hsiang S. M., Chang Ch., The effect of gait speed and load carrying on the reliability of ground reaction forces. Safety Science, 2002, 40, 639-657. DOI: 10.1016/S0925-7535(01)00064-9.[Crossref]
• Motmans R., Tomlow S., Vissers D., Trunk muscle activity in different modes of carrying schoolbags. Ergonomics, 2006, 49 (2), 127-138. DOI: 10.1080/00140130500435066.[PubMed][Crossref]
• Hong Y., Li J-X., Fong D., Effect of prolonged walking with backpack loads on trunk muscle activity and fatigue in children. J Electro Kines, 2008, 18, 990-996. DOI: 10.1016/j.jelekin.2007.06.013.[Crossref]
• Mackie H. W., Legg S. J., Postural and subjective responses to realistic schoolbag carriage. Ergonomics, 2008, 51 (2), 217-231. DOI: 10.1080/00140130701565588.[PubMed][Crossref]
• Lloyd R., Parr B., Davies S., Cooke C., Subjective perceptions of load carriage on the head and back in Xhosa women. Appl Ergon, 2010, 41, 522-529. DOI: 10.1016/j.apergo.2009.11.001.[Crossref]
• Lloyd R., Cooke C. B., The oxygen consumption associated with unloaded walking and load carriage using two different backpack designs. Eur J App Physiol, 2000, 81 (6), 486-492. DOI: 10.1007/s004210050072.[Crossref]
• Datta S. R., Ramanathan N. L., Ergonomic comparison of seven modes of carrying loads on the horizontal plane. Ergonomics, 1971, 14 (2), 269-278. DOI: 10.1080/00140137108931244.[Crossref][PubMed]
• Legg S. J., Mahanty A., Comparison of five modes of carrying a load close to the trunk. Ergonomics, 1985, 28, 1653-1660. DOI: 10.1080/00140138508963301.[PubMed][Crossref]
• Kinoshita H., Effects of different loads and carrying systems on selected biomechanical parameters describing walking gait. Ergonomics, 1985, 28, 1347-1362. DOI: 10.1080/00140138508963251.[PubMed][Crossref]
• Kinoshita H., Bates B., Effects of two load carrying systems on ground reaction forces during walking. In: Matsui H., Kobayashi K. (eds.) Biomechanics VIII A&B: Proceedings of the 8th International Congress of Biomechanics, Nagoya 1981. Human Kinetics Publishers, Champaign, 574-581.
• Lloyd R., Cooke C. B., Kinetic changes associated with load carriage using two rucksack designs. Ergonomics, 2000, 43 (9), 1331-1341. DOI: 10.1080/001401300421770.[PubMed][Crossref]
• Quesada P.M, Mengelkoch L. J., Hale R. C., Simon S. R., Biomechanical and metabolic effects of varying backpack loading on simulated marching. Ergonomics, 2000, 43 (3), 293-309. DOI: 10.1080/001401300184413.[PubMed][Crossref]
• Malville N. J., Burns W. C., Lim H. A., Basnyat R., Commercial porters of Eastern Nepal: health status, physical work capacity and energy expenditure. Am J Hum Biol, 2001, 13, 44-56. DOI: 10.1002/1520-6300(200101/02).[Crossref][PubMed]
• Obusek J. P., Harman E. A., Frykman P. N., Palmer C. J., Bills R. K., The relationship of backpack center of mass location to the metabolic cost of load carriage. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 1997, 29, S205.[Crossref]
• Schiffman J., Chelidze D., Aadams A., Seagala B., Hasselquist L., Nonlinear analysis of gait kinematics to track changes in oxygen consumption in prolonged load carriage walking: A pilot study. J Biomech, 2009, 42, 2196-2199. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2009.06.011.[Crossref][PubMed]
• Lloyd R., Parr B., Davies S., Cooke C., A comparison of the physiological consequences of head-loading and back-loading for African and European women. Eur J Appl Physiol, 2010, DOI: 10.1007/s00421-010-1395-9.[Crossref][PubMed]
• Lloyd R., Parr B., Davies S., Cooke C., No ‘Free Ride’ for African women: a comparison of head-loading versus back-loading amongst Xhosa women. S Afr J Sci, 2010, 106 (3-4), 1-5. DOI: 10.4102/sajs.v106i3/4.153.[Crossref]
• Taylor C. R., Heglund N. C., McMahon T. A., Looney T. R., Energetic cost of generating muscular force during running. J Exp Biol, 1980, 86, 9-18.
• Chow D., Kwok M., Au-Yang A., Holmes A., Cheng J., Yao F., Wong M., The effect of backpack load on the gait of normal adolescent girls. Ergonomics, 2005, 48, 642-656. DOI: 10.1080/00140130500070921.[Crossref]
• Harman E., Frykman P., Pandorf C., Tharion W., Mello R., Obusek J., Kirk J., Physiological, biomechanical and maximal performance comparisons of soldiers carrying loads using U. S. marine corps Modular Lightweight Load-carrying Equipment (MOLLE), and U. S. army Modular Load System (MLS). U. S. Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine, Natick 1999, T99-4.
• Dempster W., Space requirements for the seated operator. WADC Technical Report 64-102. Wright Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton 1955.
• Martin P. E., Morgan D. W., Biomechanical considerations for economical walking and running. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 1992, 24, 467-474.[PubMed]
• Thorstensson A., Effects of moderate external loading on the aerobic demand of submaximal running in men and 10 year-old boys. Eur J Appl Physiol, 1986, 55, 569-574. DOI: 10.1007/BF00423198.[Crossref]
• Cooke C. B., McDonagh M. J. N., Nevill A. M., Davies C. T. M., Effects of load on oxygen intake in trained boys and men during treadmill running. J Appl Physiol, 1991, 71, 1237-1244.[PubMed]
• Ling W., Houston V., Tsai Y.-S., Chui K., Kirk J., Women's load carriage performance using modular lightweight load carrying equipment. Mil Med, 2004, 169 (11), 914-919.
• Wood W., Orloff H., Comparison of two backpack designs using biomechanical and metabolic aspects of load carriage. In: Menzel H.-J., Chagas M. H. (eds.) Proceedings of the XXVth International Symposium on Biomechanics in Sports, Ouro Preto, Brazil, 2007, 517-520.
• Singh T., Koh M., Lower limb dynamics change for children while walking with backpack loads to modulate shock transmission to the head. J Biomech, 2009, 42, 736-742. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2009.01.035.[Crossref][PubMed]
• LaFiandra M., Lynch S., Frykman P., Harman E., Ramos H., Mello R., A comparison of two commercial off the shelf backpacks to the Modular Lightweight Load-carrying Equipment (MOLLE) in biomechanics, metabolic cost and performance. U. S. Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine, Natick 2003, T03-15.
• Cavanagh P. R., Williams K. R., The effect of stride length variation on oxygen uptake during distance running. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 1982, 14, 30-35.[PubMed][Crossref]
• Harman E., Han K.-H., Frykman P., Load Speed interaction effects on the biomechanics of backpack load carriage. In: Soldier Mobility: Innovations in Load Carriage System Design and Evaluation, NATO Research and Technology Organisation, RTO meeting proceedings 562001. RTO Human Factors and Medicine Panel (HFM) Specialists' Meeting, Kingston, Canada, p5-1/5-16, 27-29 Jun 2000.
• Polcyn A., Bensel K., Harman A., Obusek P., Pandorf C., Frykman P. et al., Effects of weight carried by soldiers: combined analysis of four studies on maximal performance, physiology and biomechanics. U. S. Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine, Natick 2002, TR02-010.
• Li J. X., Hong Y., Robinson P. D., The effect of load carriage on movement kinematics and respiratory parameters in children during walking. Eur J Appl Physiol, 2003, 90, 35-43. DOI: 10.1007/s00421-003-0848-9.[Crossref][PubMed]
• Hong Y., Cheung C.-K., Gait and posture responses to backpack load during level walking in children. Gait Posture, 2003, 17, 28-33. DOI: 10.1016/S0966-6362(02)00050-4.[Crossref][PubMed]
• Singh T., Koh M., Effects of backpack load position on spatiotemporal parameters and trunk forward lean. Gait Posture, 2009, 29, 49-53. DOI: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2008.06.006.[Crossref][PubMed]
• Riley P., Paolini G., Della Croce U., Paylo K., Kerrigan D., A kinematic and kinetic comparison of overground and treadmill walking in healthy subjects. Gait Posture, 2007, 26, 17-24. DOI: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2006.07.003.[PubMed][Crossref]
• Lee S., Hidler J., Biomechanics of overground vs. treadmill walking in healthy individuals. J Appl Physiol, 2008, 104, 747-755. DOI: 10.1152/japplphysiol.01380.2006.[PubMed][Crossref]
• Parvataneni K., Ploeg L., Olney S. J., Brouwer B., Kinematic, kinetic and metabolic parameters of treadmill versus overground walking in healthy older adults. Clin Biomech, 2009, 24, 95-100. DOI: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2008.07.002.[Crossref]
• Anderson A. M., Meador K. A., McClure L. R., Makrozahopoulos D., Brooks D. J., Mirka G. A., A biomechanical analysis of anterior load carriage. Ergonomics, 2007, 50 (12), 2104-2117. DOI: 10.1080/00140130701450195.[Crossref][PubMed]
• Goh J.-H., Thambyah A., Bose K., Effects of varying backpack loads on peak forces in the lumbosacral spine during walking. Clin Biomech, 1998, 13, S26-S31. DOI: 10.1016/S0268-0033(97)00071-5.[Crossref]
• Pai Y.-C., Patton J., Center of mass velocity-position predictions for balance control. J Biomech, 1997, 30, 347-354. DOI: 10.1016/S0021-9290(96)00165-0.[PubMed][Crossref]
• Hof A. L., Gazendam M. G. J., Sinke W. E., The condition for dynamic stability. J Biomech, 2005, 38, 1-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2004.03.025.[Crossref][PubMed]
• Harman E., Han K.-H., Frykman P., Pandorf C., The effects of backpack weight on the biomechanics of load carriage. U. S. Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine, Natick 2000, T00-17.
• Harman E., LaFiandra M., Pandorf C., Frykman P., Effect of walking grade and backpack weight on sagittal trunk inclination during load carriage. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 2002, 34, S280.[Crossref]
• Harman E., Han K.-H., Frykman P., Pandorf C., The effects of walking speed on backpack load carriage. U. S. Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine, Natick 2000, T00-20.
• Carlsöö S., Influence of frontal and dorsal loads on muscle activity on the weight distribution in the feet. Acta Orthop Scand, 1964, 34, 299-309.[Crossref]
• Bobet J., Norman R. W., Effects of load placement on back muscle activity in load carriage. Eur J Appl Physiol, 1984, 53, 71-75. DOI: 10.1007/BF00964693.[Crossref]
• Gordon M. J., Goslin B. R., Graham T., Hoare J., Comparison between load carriage and grade walking on a treadmill. Ergonomics, 1983, 26, 289-298.[PubMed][Crossref]
• Al-Khabbaz Y. S. S. M., Shimada T., Hasegawa M., The effect of backpack heaviness on trunk-lower extremity muscle activities and trunk posture. Gait Posture, 2008, 28, 297-302. DOI: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2008.01.002.[Crossref]
• Heglund N. C., Taylor C. R., Speed, stride frequency, and energy cost per stride: how do they change with body size and gait. J Exp Biol, 1988, 138, 301-318.

Identifiers

DOI

10.2478/v10038-011-0006-x