Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 24, 2026

Author Spotlight: Implementation of BIVA for Analyzing Disease Risk Factors in Patients with Low Body Cell Mass
Published on: July 14, 2023
Body configuration as a predictor of centre of mass displacement in a forward reactive step
Daniel P Armstrong1, Steven P Pretty1, Tyler B Weaver1
1Department of Kinesiology, University of Waterloo, 200 University Ave West, Waterloo, Ontario N2L 3G1, Canada.
Abstract:
In balance perturbations that elicit backwards reactive steps, body configuration at stepping contact is related to likelihood of balance recovery. However, less is known about the relationship between body configuration (at stepping contact) and underlying centre of mass (COM) dynamics during dynamic perturbations requiring a forward reactive step. Accordingly, the primary objective of this study was to characterize the potential relationships between body configuration and COM displacement during simulated trips. Towards determining the robustness of these relationships, trips were simulated in both baseline and increased passive joint stiffness conditions. Sixteen healthy adults participated in this study. Trips were simulated using a tether release paradigm where participants were suddenly released, necessitating a forward step (onto a force plate) to recover their balance. Trials were performed in a baseline unconstrained condition, and in a 'corset' condition to increase passive stiffness of the trunk and hips. In all trials, whole body kinematics and kinetics were collected. Multiple linear regression models were run to assess the relationship of body angles to COM displacement in both the anteroposterior (AP) and mediolateral (ML) planes. Regression models showed a significant association of sagittal plane body configuration to both COM displacement at stepping contact and maximum COM displacement in the AP plane. Across models, the strongest predictor was the trail leg angle. Associations were stronger in the increased passive stiffness condition (average R2 = 0.366) compared to the baseline condition (average R2 = 0.266). Poor association of body configuration to COM displacement was found in the ML plane. The significant associations observed between body configuration and COM dynamics in simulated trips supports the potential downstream application of these models in identifying individuals with impaired balance control and increased fall risk.
Related Concept Videos
Steps for Free-Body Diagram
To find the acceleration of the system, it is first necessary to calculate the net force on the system. In order to accomplish this, a free-body diagram can be created to...
Reduced Mass Coordinates: Isolated Two-body Problem
Electron Configurations
The relative energies of the subshells determine the order in which atomic orbitals are filled (1s, 2s, 2p, 3s, 3p,...
Controller Configurations
Control-system compensation involves various configurations, most commonly series or cascade compensation, in which the controller...
Electron Configuration of Multielectron Atoms
Position and Displacement

