Advertisement

Biological Cybernetics

, Volume 69, Issue 3, pp 195–204 | Cite as

The contribution of muscle properties in the control of explosive movements

  • Arthur J. van Soest
  • Maarten F. Bobbert
Article

Abstract

Explosive movements such as throwing, kicking, and jumping are characterized by high velocity and short movement time. Due to the fact that latencies of neural feedback loops are long in comparison to movement times, correction of deviations cannot be achieved on the basis of neural feedback. In other words, the control signals must be largely preprogrammed. Furthermore, in many explosive movements the skeletal system is mechanically analogous to an inverted pendulum; in such a system, disturbances tend to be amplified as time proceeds. It is difficult to understand how an inverted-pendulum-like system can be controlled on the basis of some form of open loop control (albeit during a finite period of time only). To investigate if actuator properties, specifically the force-length-velocity relationship of muscle, reduce the control problem associated with explosive movement tasks such as human vertical jumping, a direct dynamics modeling and simulation approach was adopted. In order to identify the role of muscle properties, two types of open loop control signals were applied: STIM(t), representing the stimulation of muscles, and MOM(t), representing net joint moments. In case of STIM control, muscle properties influence the joint moments exerted on the skeleton; in case of MOM control, these moments are directly prescribed. By applying perturbations and comparing the deviations from a reference movement for both types of control, the reduction of the effect of disturbances due to muscle properties was calculated. It was found that the system is very sensitive to perturbations in case of MOM control; the sensitivity to perturbations is markedly less in case of STIM control. It was concluded that muscle properties constitute a peripheral feedback system that has the advantage of zero time delay. This feedback system reduces the effect of perturbations during human vertical jumping to such a degree that when perturbations are not too large, the task may be performed successfully without any adaptation of the muscle stimulation pattern.

Keywords

Movement Time Feedback System Inverted Pendulum Joint Moment Open Loop Control 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bizzi E, Hogan N, Mussa-Ivaldi FA, Giszter S (1992) Does the nervous system use equilibrium point control to guide single and multiple joint movements? Behav Brain Sci 15:603–614Google Scholar
  2. Bobbert MF, Huijing PA, Ingen Schenau GJ van (1986a) A model of the human triceps surae muscle-tendon complex applied to jumping. J Biomech 19:887–898Google Scholar
  3. Bobbert MF, Huijing PA, Ingen Schenau GJ van (1986b) An estimation of power output and work done by the human triceps surae muscle-tendon complex in jumping. J Biomech 19:899–906Google Scholar
  4. Bootsma RJ, Wieringen PCW van (1990) Timing an attacking forehand drive in table tennis. J Exp Psychol [Hum Percept] 16:21–29Google Scholar
  5. Bullock D, Grossberg W (1991) Adaptive neural networks for control of movement trajectories invariant under speed and force rescaling. Hum Movement Sci 10:3–53Google Scholar
  6. Ebashi S, Endo M (1968) Calcium ion and muscle contraction. Prog Biophys Mol Biol 18:125–183Google Scholar
  7. Ettema GJC, Huijing PA (1989) Properties of tendinous structures and series elastic components of EDL muscle tendon complex of the rat. J Biomech 22:1209–1215Google Scholar
  8. Feldman AG (1986) Once more on the equilibrium point hypothesis (lambda model) for motor control. J Motor Behavior 18:17–54Google Scholar
  9. Gordon AM, Huxley AF, Julian FJ (1966) The variation of isometric tension with sarcomere length in vertebrate muscle fibres. J Physiol (Lond) 184:170–192Google Scholar
  10. Gottlieb GL, Agarwal GC (1979) Response to sudden torques about ankle in man: myotatic reflex. J Neurophysiol 42:91–106Google Scholar
  11. Grieve DW, Pheasant S, Cavanagh PR (1978) Prediction of gastrocnemius length from knee and ankle joint posture. In: Asmussen E, Jorgensen K (eds) Biomechanics VI-A. University Park Press, Baltimore, pp 405–412Google Scholar
  12. Grillner S (1981) Control of locomotion in bipeds, tetrapods and fish. In: Brooks VB (ed) Handbook of physiology, sect 1, The nervous system, vol 2, Motor control. Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore, pp1179–1236Google Scholar
  13. Hatze H (1981) Myocybernetic control models of skeletal muscle. University of South Africa, PretoriaGoogle Scholar
  14. Hill AV (1938) The heat of shortening and the dynamic constants of muscle. Proc Royal Soc 126B:136–195Google Scholar
  15. Hogan N, Bizzi E, Mussa-Ivaldi FA, Flash T (1987) Controlling multi-joint motor behavior. Exerc Sport Sci Rev 15:153–190Google Scholar
  16. Katz B (1939) The relation between force and speed in muscular contraction. J Physiol (Lond) 96:45–64Google Scholar
  17. McMahon TA (1984) Muscles, reflexes and locomotion. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, pp 148–161Google Scholar
  18. Petrofsky JS, Phillips CA (1980) The influence of temperature, initial length and electrical activity on the force-velocity relationship of the medial gastrocnemius muscle of the cat. J Biomech 14:297–306Google Scholar
  19. Reiss M, Taylor JG (1991) Storing temporal sequences. Neural Networks 4:773–787Google Scholar
  20. Schmidt RA (1982) Motor control and learning: a behavioral emphasis. Human Kinetics, Champaign, ILGoogle Scholar
  21. Shampine LF, Gordon MK (1975) Computer solution of ordinary differential equations. The initial value problem. Freeman, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  22. Soest AJ van, Schwab AL, Bobbert MF, Ingen Schenau GJ van (1992) SPACAR: a software subroutine package for simulation of the behavior of biomechanical systems. J Biomech 25:1219–1226Google Scholar
  23. Soest AJ van, Schwab AL, Bobbert MF, Ingen Schenau GJ van (1993a) The influence of the biarticularity of the gastrocnemius muscle on vertical jumping achievement. J Biomech 26:1–8Google Scholar
  24. Stern JT (1974) Computer modelling of gross muscle dynamics. J Biomech 7:411–428Google Scholar
  25. Taga G, Yamaguchi Y, Shimizu H (1991) Self-organized control of bipedal locomotion by neural oscillators in unpredictable environment. Biol Cybern 65:147–159Google Scholar
  26. Visser JJ, Hoogkamer JE, Bobbert MF, Huijing PA (1990) Length and moment arm of human leg muscles as a function of knee and hip joint angles. Eur J Appl Physiol 61:453–460Google Scholar
  27. Vos EJ, Mullender MG, Ingen Schenau GJ van (1990) Electromechanical delay in vastus lateralis muscle during isometric contractions. Eur J Appl Physiol 60:467–471Google Scholar
  28. Wadman WJ, Denier van der Gon JJ, Geuze RH, Mol CR (1979) Control of fast goal-directed arm movements. J Hum Movement Stud 5:3–7Google Scholar
  29. Werff K van der (1977) Kinematic and dynamic analysis of mechanisms, finite element approach. Ph. D. thesis, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  30. Winters JM (1990) Hill-based muscle models: a systems engineering perspective. In: Winters JM, Woo SL-Y (eds) Multiple muscle systems. Biomechanics and movement organization. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 69–93Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Arthur J. van Soest
    • 1
  • Maarten F. Bobbert
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Human Movement SciencesVrije UniversiteitAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations