Fig 1.
Overview of the proposed simulation pipeline.
In this figure, the adopted workflow for this work is presented. In the first layer, the implemented methods and software tools used in this work are presented. The second layer illustrates all the examined scenarios. Finally, in the third layer the measured parameters that are related to ACL injuries during single-leg landings are demonstrated.
Fig 2.
The three musculoskeletal models that are used throughout the simulations of this work.
They appear in order of increasing complexity from left to right. (a) The “Human0916”, (b) “Gait2354”, and (c) “Gait2392” model.
Fig 3.
Initial and final states of the singles-leg landing motion.
(a) The initial and (b) the final states of the “Human0916” musculoskeletal model for prediction of single-leg landing motion in SCONE. The reference axis of the defined initial joint angles are about the z-axis of each parent frame that coincides with the global z-axis, since the adopted model is planar.
Fig 4.
Schematic diagram of the “Gait2392” musculoskeletal model.
Schematic diagram of the “Gait2392” model with only the left side muscles. Foot-ground contact was modeled with five contact spheres per foot.
Table 1.
Overview of the investigated scenarios to identify ACL injury risk factors during single-leg landings.
Fig 5.
Vertical GRF (a) and, knee joint AF (b) for the landing height case study.
Table 2.
Vertical GRF, AF, AbdM and Q/H force ratio at peak vGRF time instance for multiple drop-landing heights.
Fig 6.
Hip adduction (a) and vGRF (b) for the hip internal rotation case study.
Table 3.
Vertical GRF, knee JRF and JRM and Q/H force ratio at peak vGRF time instance for various hip internal rotation angles.
Fig 7.
Hip adduction (a) and vGRF (b) for the hip external rotation case study.
Table 4.
Vertical GRF, knee JRF and JRM and Q/H force ratio at peak vGRF time instance for various hip external rotation angles.
Table 5.
Vertical GRF, knee JRF and JRM and Q/H force ratio at peak vGRF time instance for multiple lumbar flexion angles.
Table 6.
Vertical GRF, knee JRF and JRM and Q/H force ratio at peak vGRF time instance for multiple lumbar extension angles.
Table 7.
Vertical GRF, knee JRF and JRM and Q/H force ratio at peak vGRF time instance for multiple trunk right bending angles.
Table 8.
Vertical GRF, knee JRF and JRM and Q/H force ratio at peak vGRF time instance for for multiple trunk left bending angles.
Fig 8.
Quadriceps (a) and Hamstrings (b) force for the permutations of the knee joint agonists and antagonists muscles case study.
Fig 9.
Vertical GRF (a) and AF (b) for the permutations of the knee joint agonists and antagonists muscles case study.
Table 9.
Demonstration of the nine cases with different combinations of normal, weak and strong quadricep and hamstring muscles.
Table 10.
Knee vGRF, AF, Quadricpes force, Hamstrings force and Q/H ratio at peak vGRF time instance for scenarios of normal, weak and strong knee joint agonist antagonist muscles.
Table 11.
Vertical GRF, AF, Q/H force ratio at peak vGRF time instance for the Moco Control goal weight case.
Fig 10.
Quadriceps (a) and hamstrings (b) force for the Moco Control goal weight case study.