Metabolic Costs Of Generating Force

Metabolic Overview of Biomechanical Motor Metabolism Despite the significant differences in morphology and operating mechanisms, bipedal and quadruped walking of the same size act with approximately the same amount of metabolic energy. It has been shown that metabolic energy usage in quadruped channels and biped hoppers can only be predicted by the weights indicated by foot contact and by the time available to generate force. We tested whether the relationship between this motion mechanism and energy theory applies to the bipedal movement as well.

Objective: To study the influence of surface and insole on the metabolic cost of running. When running, the muscles of the feet create the power to relieve the impact with the ground. External damping (surface or shoe) reduces the muscular strength needed for cushioning, thereby lowering the cost of metabolism. Our main assumption is that the cost of metabolism in runs that do not exercise will be reduced by running cushions. In addition, we assume that the running metabolic cost of lightweight cushioned shoes is almost the same as when running on a hard ground due to cushioning properties and mass offset of shoes.

In this study we tested the metabolic cost of the buffer hypothesis. This suggests that running involves "buffering" the cost of physical shock tolerance. Specifically, while controlling pedaling technology, barefoot / minimum sports experience and footwear, we quantified the sole effect of shoe cushion on running metabolic cost. In support of our initial hypothesis, we found that the average metabolic cost of exercise was significantly reduced when the subject was running a 10 mm foam cushion surface compared to a normal hard treadmill surface . The metabolic cost of running without shoes, which supports our second hypothesis on the surface of a normal hard treadmill, is not much different from that of lightweight cushion running shoes. To further clarify, our initial hypothesis states that the metabolic cost of sports without shoes will decrease in terms of cushioning.

There is no further average reduction of metabolic costs. We doubt that everyone may have optimum buffer thickness to minimize their metabolic energy requirements. This optimality may depend on a number of factors, including buffer stiffness (hardness tester), weight and weight of the foot hitting. In summary, we found that medium thickness foam cushion usually lowers the running cost of metabolism. In addition, there is no difference in the metabolic cost of running between shoes without shoes and shoes. This is probably because the adverse effects of the insole offset the good effect of the cushion.