Gait and Posture 6 (1997) 171-176

The influence of walking speed on mechanical joint power during gait

I.H. Chen ‘, K.N. Kuo b+*. T.P. Andriacchi b

~’Department of Orthopedics, Tzu-Chi Buddhist General Hospital, Hua-Lien, Taiwan
” Deparrrnenr of’ Orthopt2dic Surgery, Rush-Presbyterian-St. Luke S Medical Center. 1653 W. Congress Purkn*+,, C%itqgo. !l. Ml6 12. 1IS.4

Received 6 September 1995: received in revised form 21 November 1996: accepted 17 February IYJ”

Abstract

To study how walking speeds influence joint power and determine normal mechanical power output by the muscles about the
hip, knee and ankle joints, we investigated ten healthy children in our gait laboratory. We found that walking speed does influence
the mechanical work at the hip, knee and ankle. The work generated at the knee had the greatest increase with speed. The work
at the hip was also sensitive to speed changes but to a lesser degree. Surprisingly, the joint power at the ankle remained constant
despite increasing speed. This also supports the theory that the role of the calf muscle in propulsion is related to walking speed.
CC1997 Elsevier Science B.V.

Kepwd.s: Gait analysis; Joint work; Power: Walking speed

1. Introduction speeds may vary. This is particularly true in gait studies

The analysis of the mechanical power generated by
the muscles about the joints of the lower extremity
during gait has been applied to the study of normal and
pathological gait [l-3]. Mechanical joint power, the
product of joint angular velocity and moment, can
provide important information that cannot be derived
from other gait measures. Mechanical power has been
used extensively for the evaluation of patients with
cerebral palsy where muscle function is of particular
interest [ l--5].
In spite of the relatively frequent use of mechanical
joint power calculations in various gait studies, the
influence of walking speed on this parameter has not
been well defined. Previous gait studies [6-81 have
identified that temporal parameters, kinematic parame-
ters and kinetic parameters are influenced by walking
speed. Thus, it is difficult to compare the calculations
of joint powers among various studies where walking
~ _-..--
* Correspondingauthor. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery,1725
W. Harrison St., Suite 1063, Chicago. IL 60612. Tel.: + 1 312
2434244; t:dx: f 1 3 12 942 15 16.
0966-6362!97’%17.W (C 1997 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
PI1 S09hh-6?67( 97)00009-x
of subjects with reduced walking speeds due to pathol-
ogy. Thus, an understanding of the manner in which
joint power changes with walking speed is important
for understanding basic principles of normal gait, as
well as applying these parameters to the evaluation of
abnormal gait.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the hy-
pothesis that joint power will change with walking
speed. In addition, mechanical work, the integral over
time of joint power, was used to evaluate the change in
work distributed at the hip, knee and ankle as a func-
tion of walking speed.
2. Materials and methods
Ten children with an average age of 7 years (range
5-11 years) were studied. The children were selected on
the basis of a normal orthopaedic examination and no
prior conditions or diseases that may influence the
ability to ambulate normally. The average height was
1.25 m (range 1.l 1 - 1.48 m). The average weight was 26
kg (range 18-42 kg). Each subject was tested while
172 I.H. Chen et al. ,J Gait and Posture
walking the length of a 10 m walkway. The subjects
were randomly instructed to walk at various walking
speeds. The subjects were observed bilaterally. The
resulting protocol provided 60 trials over a range of
walking speeds which were subsequently classified into
three categories based on the actual walking speed
rather than the speed based on the instruction. Slow
was considered to be less than 0.9 m/s, normal was
between 0.9- 1.2 m/s and fast was greater than 1.2 m/s.
The instrumentation included a video based system
for motion analysis (CFTC), a force plate (Bertec) and
a computer for data acquisition and processing [g-11].
The video system utilizes two cameras to obtain three
dimensional reconstruction of reflective markers placed
along the lower extremities. The experimental observa-
tions were based on an idealization that considered the
lower extremities as a three-dimensional linkage with
movable joints at the hip, knee and ankle. The joints
were assumed to have axes fixed in the distal segment
[12]. The location of the joint centers and motion of
each limb segment were monitored by observing the
spatial position of reflective markers placed on the skin
of the anterior superior iliac spine, at the center of the
greater trochanter, over the mid-point of the lateral
joint line of the knee, on the lateral aspect of the lateral
malleolus of the ankle, the base of the calcaneus and
the head of the fifth metatarsal.
2.1. Joint power and work calculation
At a given joint, the instantaneous flexion-extension
power is the product of the net flexion-extension mo-
ment and angular velocity [5]:
Pi = Aqi
where Pi is power, Mj is the flexion-extension moment
and Wj is the joint angular velocity (rad/sec) for joint j.
Where j is an index representing the hip, knee or ankle.
Mechanical work at joint j was described as the time
integration of the power [5]:
f2 ‘3
WT = Pj dt W,- = Pi dt (2)
s*I s*2
The limits tl to t, and t2 to t3 of the integrals shown in
Eq. (2) were determined by the time intervals of the
positive and negative regions of the power curve, re-
spectively. The total mechanical work during stance
phase was defined as:
W; = 0* IPj)dt
s ages of mechanical work was absorbed at the knee at
where the limits from 0 to T represent the total stance
phase time.
The WjT represented the absolute sum of both the
negative and positive portion of the power curve. At
each joint, the positive and negative components of the
6 (1997) 171-l 76
work was expressed as a percent of the total work.
Similarly, the positive, negative components of the total
work were summed at the hip, knee and ankle to obtain
a parameter representing total mechanical work contri-
bution at each joint from over stance phase [13]. The
mechanical work W was normalized to total stance
time and described as work rate. Mechanical power and
work were normalized to the subjects’ weight and ex-
pressed as watt per kilogram and joules per kilogram,
respectively. Subsequently, two work-related variables
were analyzed, work-rate and work-contribution. Each
of these variables were tested for correlations with
walking speed using Pearsons correlation co-efficient at
a level of P < 0.05 as significant.
3. Results
The pattern of the curves of instantaneous power
over the stance phase had several characteristics that
were common to all subjects (Fig. 1). At the hip, the
mechanical power was positive during the first half of
stance phase, while in late stance phase, the hip power
curve became negative. At the knee, the mechanical
power was primarily negative throughout stance phase.
At the ankle, the mechanical power was negative during
the early and middle portion of stance phase with a
large positive peak during late stance phase. The me-
chanical power measurements were classified on the
basis of speed by selecting measurements grouped as
slow (less than 0.9 m/s), normal (0.9- 1.2 m/s) or fast
(greater than 1.2 m/s). The average power curves at the
hip, knee and ankle were analyzed on the basis of these
speed groupings (Fig. 1). The curves at the hip, knee
(1)
and ankle did not substantially change their phasic
characteristics over the range of walking speed. The
peak magnitudes (both negative and positive) of the
power curves at the hip and knee increased with walk-
ing speed. However, at the ankle, the peak positive
magnitude decreased with walking speed.
The integral of the positive, negative and total stance
phase of the power curve provided the mechanical work
at the hip, knee and ankle (Fig. 2). The largest positive
work at all walking speeds was generated at the ankle.
For the slow speed group (0.78 m/s), more than 60% of
the total positive work was generated at the ankle,
whereas at the fast speed, 42% of the total positive
work was generated at the ankle.
The largest increase in negative work absorbed with
(3) increasing speed was at the knee. The greatest percent-
the normal and fastest speeds.
Mechanical work was correlated with walking speed.
The work ratio had significant positive correlation with
walking speed at the hip joint and knee joint, but not at
the ankle joint (R = 0.72, R = 0.80, R = 0.032, respec-
 I.H.
HIP
H4el stflke Toeoff
2.0 7
Time (see)
Fig. 1. Example of power curves for a typical measurement in this study. The subject was a 6 year old female who walked ;I$ ;I q~cd ot Il.92 WL.
cadence I7/min
tively) (Fig. 3). The contribution of work about individ-
ual joints, expressed as percentages of mechanical work,
also changed with speed: The contribution from the
muscles about the hip and knee showed significant
increases with increasing speed, while the contribution
of work from the muscles about the ankle substantially
decreased with speed (R = 0.41, R= 0.58, R= - 0.63,
respectively) (Fig. 4). The curves of joint power and the
mechanical work calculated about the hip, knee and
ankle were related to walking speed. The joint power
calculated about the hip and knee increased with in-
creasing walking speed. whereas the power generated
by the muscles about the ankle remains statistically
unchanged. The characteristics of the joint power
curves about the hip and knee remained basically the
same over a range of walking speeds. At the ankle, the
negative power phase was composed of two waves and
a relatively longer duration during slower gait and, as
the speed increased, the negative power phase consisted
of only one peak (Table 1j.
4. Discussion
This study demonstrated that mechanical power and
work about the joints of the lower extremity are influ-
enced by walking speed. Thus, in comparing power
calculated among different walking trials, speed differ-
ences should be minimized.
The usual method to assess different power curves
include observing curve patterns and comparing peak
values. These methods do not account for the time the
peak value must be maintained. Work. on the other
Uwn et al. /‘Gait und P~~.~turt~ 6 (1997) 171 170 / 7,:
KNEE ANKLE
Heel Sblke
TOeOff Heel St&e TOeOft
-0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 Oi
Time (see) TiR?M(see)
hand, quantifies the peak of the power starves as well as
the time by integrating the power curve 12ver time.
Walking speed influenced the mechanical work that
was performed by the muscles acting at the hip. knee,
and ankle. The work rate at the knee increased most in
response to speed changes, suggesting that the human
body tends to utilize the quadriceps muscle first to
increase overall speed on level walking. The work rate
at the hip was also increased with walking speed, but to
a lesser extent than at the knee. The work at the ankle.
however, did not change with speed changes When
expressed as a percentage of work contribution, the
diverse behavior between the work generated at the
ankle, hip or knee becomes even more obvious: At a
slow walking speed. e.g. 0.6 m.‘s, 6.J”<, of the total
mechanical work comes from the muscles about the
ankle; when the speed is up to 1.8 m/s, only i8’!~ of the
total mechanical work comes from the muscles about
the ankle. The transition between work generated at the
ankle, knee and hip musculature with speed suggests a
transfer of work to larger muscle groups wheE walking
at faster speeds. This transfer of work to larger and
more proximal muscle groups would permit the muscles
to work at a lower percentage of their maximum cdpac-
ity and therefore optimize energy consumption during
gait.
As for the unique behavior of muscles of the ankle.
there are parallel findings in the literature. Brandell.
[ 151 in his electromyographic study. showed that the
muscle activities of the triceps surae were insensitive tc
the change of walking speed. Andriacchi I.161 in 1985.
also demonstrated that the muscle moment about the
hip and knee showed great dependem>) :~n speed.
174 I.H. Chen et al. /Gait and Posture 6 (1997) 171-I 76

observation. This observation may help to clarify some

0.25 L
SIOW NOfIIld
Walking Speeds
Fig. 2. Mean power of the hip, knee and ankle during stance phase of
level walking in slow, normal and fast groups.
whereas, the moment about the ankle did not substan-
tially change with walking speed.
Both studies indicated constant activities of ankle
muscles despite speed changes and give support to our
controversies on the role of the calf muscles for stability
of propulsion during push-off [14,17-191. Perry [17]
describes the role of the calf muscle as a joint stabilizer,
whereas Winter [14] felt the big positive peak in the
ankle power curve during terminal stance represented
propulsion during push-off. In this study, our power
curve and work calculation have shown that there was
a considerable positive joint work at the ankle which
may be responsible for push-off action as described by
Winter. However, its importance was speed-dependent
as we pointed out earlier: During slow walking, work
produced by the ankle musculature was the main
source of body propulsion; when walking faster, it was
the work of the muscles at the hip and knee joints
which were responsible for the acceleration of the body,
not that of the ankle. Thus, the calf muscles change
their role from primarily propulsion at slower speeds to
stability at faster speeds.
In this study, joint power and work were calculated
over a range of walking speeds. There was a positive
correlation between walking speeds and the joint work
at the hip and knee; whereas, there was a negative
correlation at the ankle. These data provide a basis for
the application of joint power to pathological gait,
where patients and normal subjects may walk at differ-
Fast ent speeds.
The interpretation of the results of this study should
take into consideration that only muscle generated
work about the joint in the sagittal plane was analyzed.
The work done in the coronal and transverse planes,
though small in amount, may become the source of
error. In addition, the mechanical work described in
this paper does not represent the physiological work of
the muscle. The actual energy consumed during isomet-
ric muscle contraction is not accounted for by mechan-

ANKLE
Y=421+USX
R-e.72 pc0.001 R=e.@32 p-o.41

Y----l-
$--I-
1.8 I 1 I

1.5 - 1.5 .

0.0 - A A A 0.8
.
0.6 . .
' f
&A A
0.3 - * . AA
12-/ A4 i

Fig. 3. Different effect of walking speeds on work rate in the hip, knee and ankle in 58 measurements. Data were analyzed by Pearson correlation
coefficient.
 I. H. Chen et al. i Gait and Posture 6 (1997) 171 ! 76

Y =0.06+12.75x Y - 7.64+23.lox
R-O.41 p - 0.001 R10.58 pea001
100 ----T--
90
80
70
60
I------

01 1 , I I ol~J
0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5 1.8 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5 1.8 0.8 0.9 1.2 1.5 1.8
Velocity (mhec) Velocity (mhec)
Fig. 4. Effect of walking speeds on work contribution in the hip, knee, and ankle in 58 measurements. There IS II neg~at~vc~5)::~Lttton of the work
to walking speeds in the ankle

Table I
Joint mechanical work tJ,kg) per step in three walking groups
---.-..-_-.-~. -... .__--_ ___. _--- .-- --..--~ --.---~. ..-.-
Hip Knee Ankle SUtll
--- -.~---l_.-l_ ---.~--.~.

PO% Neg. Total Pos. Neg. Total Pos. Neg. Total PO%

Slow”
Mean 0.08 0.03 0.11 0.04 0.11
STD 0.(1? 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.05
'I II 13 4 18 7 17

Norm&
Mean 0.12 0.04 0.16 0.06 0.18
STD 0.05 0.02 0.05 0.04 0.06
'?/I 17 s 2.1 8 25

Fast’
Mean 0.15 O.Oh 0.22 0.10 0.23
STD 0.07 0.03 0.07 0.07 0.05
+, , 19 8 27 12 27
---- _--- .---- -__
Pas.. positive work: Neg., negative work.
d Average speed: 0.78m:s, average cadence: 115, n = 16.
h Average speed: 1.03 m/s. average cadence: 136, n = 28
’ Average speed: I .37m&, average cadence: 149, n = 14.

ical work or power calculations. Thus, care must be [4] Ounpuu S. Gage JR. Davis RB. Three-dimensional lower ex-
tremity joint kinetics in normal pediatric gait I Pediarr Orthop
taken when attempting to relate these calculations to 1991;11:341-9.
fatigue or energy consumption during walking. [5] Winter, D. Biomechanics of Human Movement New York:
John Wiley, 1979:84-- 107.
[6] Grieve DW. Gear RJ. The relationship between the length of
stride, step frequency, time of swing and speed of walking for
References children and adults. Ergonomics 1966;5:379 9%.
[7] Cavanagh PR. Gregor RJ. Knee joint torque during the swing
[l] Czerniecki JM, Gitter A, Munro C. Joint moment and muscle phase of normal treadmill walking. J Biomech 1975:8:337 -44.
power output characteristics of below knee amputees during [S] Andriacchi TP. Ogle JA, Galante JO. Walking speed as a basis
running: The influence of energy storing prosthetic feet. J for normal and abnormal gait measurements .J Biomech
Biomech 1991:24:63--75. 1976;10:261-8.
[2] Olney SJ. Macphall HA, Hedden DM. Boyce WF. Work and [9] Andriacchi TP. Hampton SJ. Shuhz AB, Galante JO. Three
power in hemiplegic cerebral palsy gait. Phys Ther 1990;70:43 I- dimensional coordinate data processing in human motion analy-
8. sis. J Biomech Eng 1979;101:279-83.
[3] Olney SJ. Costigan PA, Hedden DM. Mechanical energy pat- [IO] Andriacchi TP, Galante JO, Fermier RW. The infhrenoc 01. total
terns in gait of cerebral palsied children with hemiplegia. Phys knee replacement design on walking and stair-climbing. J Bone
Ther 198767: 1348 54. Joint Surg 1982:64A: I338 35.
176 I.H. Chen et al. / Gait and Posture
[I l] Prodromos CC, Andriacchi TP. Galante JO. A relationship
between gait and clinical changes following high tibia1 os-
teotomy. J Bone Joint Surg 1985:67A:1188-94.
[12] Cappozzo A, Leo T, Pedotti A. A general computing method for
the analysis of human locomotion. J Biomech 1975;8:307-20.
[13] Mikosz RP, Andriacchi TP, Hampton SJ, Galante JO. The
importance of limb segment inertia on joint loads during gait.
Adv Bioengin ASME 1978:63-65.
[14] Winter DA. Energy generation and absorption at the ankle and
knee during fast, natural and slow cadences. Clin Orthop
1993;175:147-54.
[15] Brandell BR. Functional roles of the calf and vastus muscles in
locomotion. Am J Phys Med 1977;56:59-74.
6 (1997) 171- 176
[16] Andriacchi TP, Strickland AB. Lower limb kinetics applied to
the study of normal and abnormal walking. In: Berme N, Engin
AE, Silva CD, editors. Biomechanics of Normal and Pathologi-
cal Human Afficulating Joints, NATO AS1 series, Series E
No.93. Boston: Nijhoff, 1985:83-102.
[17] Perry J. Kinesiology of lower extremity bracing. Clin Orthop
1974;102:18.
[IQ Simon SR, Mann RA, Hagy JL. Larsen LR. Role of the
posterior calf muscles in normal gait. J Bone Joint Surg
1978;6OA2:465-72.
1191 Sutherland DH. An electromyographic study of the plantarflex-
ors of the ankle in normal walking on the level. J Bone Joint
Surg 1966;48A:66-71.