Mechanics of dog walking compared with a passive, stiff-limbed, 4-bar linkage model, and their collisional implications.
Here, we present a simple stiff-limbed passive model of quadrupedal walking, compare mechanics predicted from the model with those observed from forceplate measurements of walking dogs and consider the implications of deviation from model predictions, especially with reference to collision mechanics. The model is based on the geometry of a 4-bar linkage consisting of a stiff hindleg, back, foreleg and the ground between the hind and front feet. It uses empirical morphological and kinematic inputs to determine the fluctuations in potential and kinetic energy, vertical and horizontal forces and energy losses associated with inelastic collisions at each foot placement. Using forceplate measurements to calculate centre of mass motions of walking dogs, we find that (1) dogs may, but are not required to, spend periods of double support (one hind- and one forefoot) agreeing with the passive model; (2) legs are somewhat compliant, and mechanical energy fluctuates during triple support, with mechanical energy being lost directly after hindfoot placement and replaced following forefoot placement. Footfall timings and timing of mechanical energy fluctuations are consistent with strategies to reduce collisional forces, analogous to the suggested role of ankle extension as an efficient powering mechanism in human walking.
Usherwood
James R
JR
The Royal Veterinary College, North Mymms, Hatfield, Herts, UK. jusherwood@rvc.ac.uk
Williams
Sarah B
SB
Wilson
Alan M
AM
D000818:Animals; D001696:Biomechanical Phenomena; D004285:Dogs / Q000033:anatomy & histology / Q000502:physiology*; D005684:Gait; D007700:Kinetics; D008954:Models, Biological; D016138:Walking / Q000502:physiology*