Measurement 95 (2017) 230238

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Measurement
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/measurement

Instrumented measurement analysis system for soldiers load carriage

movement using 3-D kinematics and spatio-temporal features
D.N. Filzah Pg Damit a,b, S.M.N. Arosha Senanayake a,, Owais A. Malik a, Pg Norjaidi bin Pg Tuah a
a
b

Faculty of Science, Universiti Brunei Darussalam, Tungku Link, Gadong, BE 1410, Brunei Darussalam
Human Performance Lab, Performance Optimisation Centre, Ministry of Defence, Bolkiah Garrison, BB 3510, Brunei Darussalam

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received 14 October 2015
Received in revised form 20 July 2016
Accepted 7 October 2016
Available online 10 October 2016
Keywords:
Motion capture system
Load carriage
Gait analysis
Kinematics
Military

a b s t r a c t
A comprehensive measurement analysis of soldiers gait and motion during prolonged loaded March is
vital in order to analyse the consistency of soldiers performance during combat and training.
Prolonged loaded March has been reported to cause fatigue and overuse injuries to the trunk and lower
extremity, thus inhibiting soldiers to attain their optimal performance. A motion capture system, considered as the reference standard in motion analysis, is used in a controlled environment for this research.
Data were collected from 10 healthy male soldiers (26.3 5.8 years old), performing load March on treadmill at 6.4 km/h (1% elevation) while carrying 15 kg loaded military backpack for 30 min. The study was
able to address the complete 3-dimensional measurement analysis of soldiers gait (kinematics and
spatio-temporal data), heart rate and their perceived exertion. Different kinematic features such as angular changes and range of motion in critical joints; ankle, knee, hip, pelvis and trunk, integrated with the
spatio-temporal features; physiological data such as heart rate (HR) and subjective responses such as rating of perceived exertion (RPE) at critically important gait events were examined. The results prove significant changes (p < 0.05) in kinematic features such as angular changes of ankle joint at frontal plane
during toe-off and angular changes of knee joint at transverse plane during all gait events, including significant increase in HR and RPE values towards the end of the load carriage trial. The study was able to
identify which critical joint at a particular plane and gait event that was affected first and most significantly by the load carriage trial. It has also shown that due to the load weight, speed and duration of
the task that is routinely used in military training and soldier fitness regime, subjects were able to consistently replicate their kinematic patterns throughout the experimental task.
2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Gait analysis is the systematic study of human walking aimed at
quantification and understanding the locomotion process [1]
which involves the observation of body movements, mechanics
and muscle activities. Gait analysis is typically carried out for clinical purposes such as discriminating between normal and abnormal gait and to assess changes in walking over time [2] but it
can also be used to enhance knowledge and further understanding
of human gait [1]. Over the years human gait analysis have been
investigated using numerous techniques and technologies. These
measurements have evolved and modern gait analysis has become
a useful clinical tool ranging from relating muscle function to joint
motion and phases of the gait cycle to aiding in surgical procedures
that can help improve gait for those suffering from neuromuscular
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: arosha.senanayake@ubd.edu.bn (S.M.N.A. Senanayake).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2016.10.017
0263-2241/ 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

disorders [3]. Gait analysis can be measured from a different perspective and interest such as muscles activity or function that contributes to gait deviations observed [3], kinetic data that looks into
forces responsible for changing a bodys state of motion [4] and
kinematic data, which looks at motion characteristics and body
movement in space such as position, velocity, acceleration, etc.
[4,5].
Some of the technologies and instrumentation involved in the
measurement of gait are the use of picture video system, temporal
gait measurements, foot pressure instruments, motion analysis
system (for vital measurements of kinematic patterns of walking
as a basis of interpreting other gait data such as EMG, force, stride
characteristics), force measurement system, and electromyography
(EMG) (to provide an accurate representation of what the muscles
are doing to contribute to the gait deviations observed and measured by other instrumentation) [3,4,68]. To obtain comprehensive and accurate measurements for gait performance it is
necessary to obtain detailed parameters with a combination of

D.N. Filzah Pg Damit et al. / Measurement 95 (2017) 230238

measurement techniques such as the inclusion of temporal gait

measurements (a valuable analytical tool that quantifies the timing
of critical events in the cycle) and motion analysis system (for vital
measurements of kinematic patterns of walking as a basis of interpreting other gait data such as EMG, force, stride characteristics)
[3]. Temporal gait measurements include measuring parameters
such as cadence, gait cycle duration, stance and swing times, single
limb support, and initial and terminal double limb support and this
is usually measured using foot switches and gait mats and motion
analysis system ranges from electrogoniometers to video motion
system, that uses either active or passive marker systems in twodimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) coordinates [3].
Optical motion capture system has the technology to measure different parameters such as kinematic, kinetic and temporal gait
data combined and this is the reference standard for motion analysis [3].
The use of optical motion capture system for gait analysis
ranges from its use in the clinical settings for patients with neuromuscular disorders, in sports settings assisting coaches during athletes training session, as well as for the military in order to improve
and enhance their soldiers performance. One important activity
that soldiers all around the world have in common during operations or missions is the requirement to walk, run or March on foot
while carrying military load carriage system over a long period of
time. In order to perform prolonged load carriage March effectively, the personnel (his/her physiological profile), equipment
and training of their body or legs (conditioning through fitness
training) must be balanced and in synchronization to support the
load [9,10] as this has an impact on their performance and survival
rate in the battlefield. Prolonged loaded foot March can lead to fatigue and injuries that can affect soldiers mobility and reduce the
effectiveness of the entire unit [10]. Types of injuries that are associated with load carriage include foot blisters, back problems,
metatarsalgia, stress fractures (particularly in the lower extremities), knee pain and rucksack palsy [10]. Thus, a comprehensive
measurement analysis of soldiers motion or gait performance during prolonged loaded March is vital in order to analyse the consistency of their performance during combat in order minimise
injuries and enhance performance.
Previous studies have looked into motion and gait analysis of
soldiers during load carriage [1022] and the choice of measurements, equipment and experimental protocol used were based
on the interest of each study for their military population. This
includes different load conditions, duration of loaded March, activities performed with load, load distribution or pack design [10]. For
this particular study, measurement of kinematic and spatiotemporal data using optical motion capture system is the most relevant type of experimental set-up to be used. Gait characteristics
or events that are of particular interest, according to the Ranchos
Los Amigos (RLA) system are initial contact during heel strike
(the instant when the foot contacts the ground, typically the heel),
mid stance (the first half of the single limb support interval, where
one foot is lifted and continues until body weight is aligned over
the forefoot) and toe-off (when foot is lifted from the floor seen
as the toe lifted) [23]. These three events play a major role in
enabling the limbs to accomplish three important basic tasks or
weight acceptance, single-limb support and limb advancement
[23]. Several studies have used this type of data and have provided
different results such as a decrease in duration of swing phase and
an increase in stance time seen with increase load weight
[15,17,2426]. Decrease in step length, greater flexion at the hips
and forward inclination of trunk with increase in load weight has
also been seen [1315,18,22,24,2729], with results varying for
knee and ankle angles, with some reported greater knee flexion
and dorsiflexion of the foot and others with no or little changes

231

seen, and this is dependent on the type of test protocols used

[11,1315,17,18,2022,24,27].
The aim of this research is to introduce a comprehensive instrumented measurement analysis system for soldiers load carriage
movement. This system will allow us to quantify gait measurements during loaded March using 3-Dimensional kinematics of
the trunk and lower limbs, including spatio-temporal features of
soldiers in accordance to the standard operating procedure of the
Royal Brunei Armed Forces (RBAF); Annual Combat Fitness Test
(an annual test to measure aerobic capacity of soldiers while performing loaded March). These measurements are essential since
prolonged marching with load carriage leads some kinematic
changes in the critical joints together with changes in their physiological and subjective responses. Hence, this research work allows
the establishment of standards for these measurements for
the RBAF in order to decide on a hypothesis using comprehensive
3-D kinematics and spatio-temporal features of soldiers in RBAF.
The hypothesis will be novel since no previous research has
reported kinematics measurements using motion capture system,
which is considered the gold standard in gait analysis, coupled
with spatio-temporal measurements.
2. Methods
2.1. Subjects
Ten healthy Physical Training Instructors from the RBAF with
age 26.3 5.8 years, height 167.8 5.8 cm, weight 64.9 7.7 kg
(mean standard deviation), participated in this study. Before
enrolment all participants were screened on their medical history
to ensure no history of significant musculoskeletal injuries especially to the spine and lower extremities. They also must not have
any history of significant cardiopulmonary pathology and have
experiences in carrying military load carriage during training or
duties. These individuals are also within the normal Body Mass
Index range according to the RBAFs standard. All participants gave
informed consent to participate in the study and investigators
adhered to the Universiti Brunei Darussalams ethical policies for
their participants.
2.2. Load carriage measurement protocol
Each participant was asked to warm-up prior to testing, which
includes stretching and walking on treadmill without load. After
warming-up participants underwent a familiarisation protocol of
walking with the prescribed load for five minutes on a selfselected pace. There was a rest period of five to ten minutes before
the load carriage trial started to prevent carryover effects and this
experiment was conducted in a climate-controlled laboratory. During the load carriage trial the participants were instructed to complete 30 min of fast March or jogging (whichever is preferable) on
the treadmill with a speed of 6.4 km/h and 1% elevation. Kinematic
data including spatio-temporal features were recorded twice for
30 s, during the start, after 5 min of the walking to ensure participants had reached steady state walking, and at the final 30 s of the
end of the 30 min trial. HR and Rating of Perceived Exertion (RPE)
were monitored at every 5 min intervals, from zero minutes till the
last 30 min of the test.
2.3. Load carriage movement measurements using acquired signals
The overview of instrumented load carriage movement analysis
system is illustrated in Fig. 1. It consists of four different phases;
data collection, data processing, feature extraction and statistical

232

D.N. Filzah Pg Damit et al. / Measurement 95 (2017) 230238

Motion Capture Camera

System (Qualisys)

Data Collection
Heart Rate
Monitor
(strapped to
chest)

Borgs 6-20
Rating of
Perceived
Exertion Scale

Reflective Markers

Data Processing
Track Marker Data
Build Musculoskeletal
Model
Signal Processing
Create Gait Events
Compute Kinematic Data

Parameter Extraction
Spatio-temporal data
Angular changes at trunk, pelvis, hip, knee and
ankle joints at different planes during Heel strike,
Mid Stance and Toe-Off
Range of motion for different joints at different
planes
HR data and RP scores extracted

Statistical Analysis
Kinematic value
HR values
RPE values

Fig. 1. An overview of instrumented measurement analysis system for soldiers load carriage movement.

analysis. 3-D kinematic measurements of angular changes in the

ankle, knee, hip, pelvis and trunk joint were captured using six
Oqus motion capture camera (Qualisys AB, Sweden) at a sampling
rate of 350 Hz, including spatio-temporal features. 19 reflective
markers were placed at different anatomical parts of the body

(refer to Fig. 2a and b): superior surface of acromion, anterior superior iliac spine, sacrum, superior of patella, knee joint line, tuberosity of tibia, lateral malleolus, heel, 1st and 5th metatarsal bone
(Developed at Lundberg Motion Analysis Laboratory at Sahlgrenska
University Hospital for Qualisys). A heart rate monitor (Polar ST4

Fig. 2. (a) Front view of reflective marker placement on a participant to be captured using motion capture system. (b) Rear view of participant with reflective markers placed.
(c) Side view of soldier performing load carriage trial on Biodex treadmill fitted with a 15 kg loaded military backpack.

233

D.N. Filzah Pg Damit et al. / Measurement 95 (2017) 230238

watch, Polar, Kempele, Finland) was strapped to the chest in order

to monitor changes in their heart rate throughout the trial. Exertion levels were also assessed using Borgs 620 RPE scale [30].
For the load carriage trial soldiers were instructed to walk on a Biodex treadmill fitted with a 15 kg loaded military backpack (standard issue RBAF webbing and backpack) as illustrated in Fig. 2c.
All participants used individual compressive sports pants, sleeveless shirt and sport shoes.
Qualisys Track Manager Software (Qualisys AB, Sweden) was
used to track marker data. To derive 3-D kinematic data, Visual3D
motion analysis software (C-Motion, Inc.) was used, where hip
joint landmarks were created through estimates of the right and
left hip joint centre. The location of landmark is defined as:
0.36 ASIS_Distance,
0.19 ASIS_Distance,
0.3 ASIS_Distance
[31,32].
Pelvis segment was normalized to cater Visual3D requirements
based on Coda pelvis created. It was tilted forward approximately
20 degrees from the transverse (horizontal) plane, thus it is convenient to define a pelvis angle that has a frontal plane parallel to the
floor (i.e. zero tilt) when describing orientation of the pelvis or hip
joint angle (Visual3D, C-Motion, Inc.). A virtual foot segment was
also created so that the segment coordinate system of the foot is
defined such a way that the joint angle has a more clinically relevant meaning. Gait events for heel strike and toe-off were computed using only kinematic data based on the heel marker
velocity data [33], but mid stance was computed manually. All
joint angles were calculated using a Cardan XYZ rotation sequence
which define flexion-extension, abduction-adduction and internalexternal rotation respectively. For pelvis segment the sequence of
rotation is relative to the laboratory ZYX: axial rotation, obliquity
and tilt [34]. Kinematic data were filtered through low-pass
second-order Butterworth filter using a 6 Hz cut-off [21,35].
Ankle angle was defined as the movement of the virtual foot
coordinate system relative to the shank coordinate system [36].
Knee angle was defined as a movement of shank coordinate system
relative to the thigh coordinate system [36]. Hip angle was defined
as a movement of thigh coordinate system relative to the normalized pelvis coordinate system [15,18]. Pelvis angle was defined as a
movement of normalized pelvis relative to the global coordinate
system for sagittal and frontal plane [15,18]. Pelvis rotation was
defined as a movement of normalized pelvis relative to trunk coordinate system [15,18]. Trunk rotation was defined as a movement
of trunk technical coordinate system relative to the pelvis technical
coordinate system. Range of motion (ROM) was computed by calculating the difference of the maximum and minimum joint angles
at one gait cycle [18]. Data were also time normalized to 100%
stance phase (heel strike to toe-off) for visual representation.
Despite action being taken to minimise missing markers, trials
with distorted results due to missing marker or equipment failure
where removed. Only six to eight subjects were analysed that had
consistent results seen for the different joints at specific planes.
Mean values for each participant at start and end during 30 s trial
were calculated (consisted of 3040 gait cycles each). Mean values
for each parameter were calculated for all participants in order to
obtain a single representation of these data.
2.4. Measured and computed parameters
For 3-D kinematic of load carriage movement, joint angles of
ankle, knee, hip, pelvis and trunk from all three planes; sagittal,
frontal and transverse plane were extracted and computed. Fig. 3
illustrates the relative pose used for joint angle computation. Upon
data processing some data were discarded due to inconsistent data
patterns presented and missing marker data. In the sagittal plane,
angular changes and Range of Motion (ROM) for ankle, knee, hip
and pelvis at different events of gait cycle (heel strike, mid stance

and toe-off) were computed. In the frontal plane, angular changes

and ROM in the ankle, and hip were extracted. For the transverse
plane, angular changes and ROM in ankle, knee, pelvis and trunk
were computed. Spatio-temporal data were also computed: stride
width, stride length, step length, double support time, swing time
and stance time, including HR and RPE. Table 1 represents measured parameters such as HR, RPE and spatio-temporal data in all
planes and Table 2 represents measured kinematic patterns for different joints at all planes during a gait cycle using pre-defined protocols in a climate-controlled environment. Mean (Standard
Deviation - SD) values for all the parameters were computed.
The dynamic ROMs of the ankle, knee, hip, pelvis and trunk in
all planes is defined as the differences between the maximum
and the minimum angle value for each joint in a gait cycle. The
maximum and the minimum angle values were obtained from
means (or average) of 3040 gait cycles (30 s gait). Fig. 4 illustrates
knee ROM during Midstance. Thus, calculations for ROM of a joint
in this study is as follows.

ROM Joint; 3040 gait cycle Average Maximum Angle

Minimum Angle
2.5. Statistical analysis
Statistical Package for the Social Sciences V. 22 (SPSS, Inc.,
Chicago, IL, USA) was used for statistical analysis of measured
and computed parameters. Descriptive statistics were calculated
for all parameters. Statistical differences between the start and
end of the load carriage trial were calculated for each parameter
using a paired two-tailed t-test. Statistical significance for the
applied statistical tests was set at p < 0.05.
3. Results
The mean (SD) value of HR and RPE results are as presented in
Table 3 (P1 and P2 respectively). The HR (p = 0.000) and RPE
(p = 0.001) data showed significant increase in value between the
start and the end of the load carriage trial. There were no significant differences or changes (p > 0.05) seen for all spatio-temporal
features extracted (refer to Table 3: S1 through S6).
The mean (SD) values for the kinematic data of joint angles at
heel strike, mid stance and toe-off are presented in Table 4. The
knee joint at transverse plane showed a significant increase in
external rotation during heel strike (p = 0.043) and mid stance
(p = 0.029), together with a significant decrease in internal rotation
during toe-off (p = 0.035) at the end of the trial (as illustrated in
Fig. 5a). The ankle angle at frontal plane only showed significant
decrease (p = 0.05) in inversion when the foot push-off from the
ground towards the end of the load carriage trial (illustrated in
Fig. 5b). Other joints at different planes have shown no significant
angular changes in their kinematic parameters at the three gait
events and these are presented in Table 4.
Descriptive statistics for Range of Motion (ROM) for the respective joint angles are shown in Table 5. There were no significant
changes (p > 0.05) seen in all ROM data computed for all joints
and planes during the load carriage trial.
4. Discussion
The results obtained from this study suggest that carrying a
15 kg load while performing a fast March or running on the treadmill for 30 min, did not have an effect on the gait, i.e. kinematics
and spatio-temporal features, including motion of the soldiers.
In general, only kinematic data for the ankle and knee joint at
frontal (toe-off only) and transverse plane (all three gait events)

234

D.N. Filzah Pg Damit et al. / Measurement 95 (2017) 230238

1) Relative pose of a joint shallbe defined as:

R(joint) = R(distal) * R(proximal)
2) Knee
R(knee_joint) = R(shank) * R(thigh)

Proximal
Frame
z

3) Ankle
R(ankle_joint) = R(virtualfoot) * R(shank)

Distal
Frame D
z

4) Hip
R(hip_joint) = R(thigh) * R(pelvis)
5) Pelvis (sagittal & frontal plane)
R(pelvis_joint) = R(pelvis) * R(trunk)

6) Trunk (transverse)
R(trunk_joint) = R(trunk) * R(pelvis)
Fig. 3. Relative pose used for joint angle computation during soldiers load carriage movement.

Table 1
Measured HR, RPE and spatio-temporal parameters during a gait cycle using predefined protocols in a climate-controlled environment.
Parameters

Variable

Unit

Heart rate
Rating of perceived exertion scale

P1
P2

Beats/min
620 scale

Spatio-temporal data

S1
S2
S3
S4
S5
S6

Meters (m)

Stride width
Stride length
Step length
Double support time
Swing time
Stance time

Seconds (s)

respectively showed significant difference between the start and

the end of the trial, including HR levels and the soldiers perceived
exertion. The significant changes observed proved that these joints
and areas of the body are the first and highly affected by loaded
March and by using optical motion capture camera system it is
able to capture these minute changes comprehensively.
An interesting insight on this study is the completeness and the
extensiveness of the parameters and data measured and being
taken into consideration. For instance, despite the lack of changes
seen in the ankle joint at heel strike and mid stance for all planes
including ankle ROM, a significant effect was still observed during
toe-off at frontal angle. This shows that this particular load carriage
trial has an effect on the lower extremity by affecting the ankle
joint first during toe-off as the degree of inversion was altered,
where the medial border of the foot moves towards the medial
leg [5]. Previous studies have not investigated specifically on all

three planes for all the trunk and lower limb angles at these three
specific gait events. For example, studies that have looked into
angular changes in the ankle joint have only investigated kinematic changes in one plane on different gait events or for all planes
at one gait cycle or stance phase only at a time but never for all
three planes at all three gait events together. Despite slight differences in experimental analysis and set-up there are still similar
results and arguments that can be derived in relation to this study.
For instance, previous studies have reported similar results on the
lack of significant changes observed in ankle kinematics, especially
in the sagittal plane, and ankle ROM. This was suggested to be due
to the military marchers attempt to replicate their kinematic patterns, regardless of backpack loading conditions, which is common
for militarys penchant for uniformity during marching [12]. However, studies that have reported changes observed in ankle kinematics justified these changes were due to responses observed at
the knees as a primary adjustment made in reaction to the load
[24].
Muscles also play essential role during walking or running, such
as during toe-off the triceps surae muscle group (gastrocnemius
and soleus) mediate through a stiff subtalar joint allowing for an
efficient transfer of the muscular force. Additionally, future
research should consider investigation into the effects these muscles on gait during load carriage over prolonged period of time for
this military population.
For angular changes in the knee joint kinematics, only those in
the transverse plane exhibited significant changes in all three gait
events. The lack of changes observed in the sagittal plane for knee

Table 2
Measured kinematic parameters for different joints in all planes during a gait cycle using pre-defined protocols in climate-controlled environment.
Parameters

Joints

Planes

Kinematic data

Ankle

Sagittal (x-axis)
Frontal (y-axis)
Transverse (z-axis)
Sagittal
Transverse
Sagittal
Frontal
Sagittal
Transverse
Transverse

Knee
Hip
Pelvis
Trunk

Gait events
Heel strike

Mid stance

Toe-off

H1
H2
H3
H4
H5
H6
H7
H8
H9
H10

M1
M2
M3
M4
M5
M6
M7
M8
M9
M10

T1
T2
T3
T4
T5
T6
T7
T8
T9
T10

ROM

Unit

R1
R2
R3
R4
R5
R6
R7
R8
R9
R10

Degrees ()

235

D.N. Filzah Pg Damit et al. / Measurement 95 (2017) 230238

Degrees of Motion

70

Knee Flexion/Extension (Sagittal Plane)

Max Angle

60
50
40
30
20
10

Min Angle

Gait Cycle

Fig. 4. Dynamic ROM for the knee joint angle during Midstance of load carriage movement.

Table 3
Changes in mean (SD) in HR, RPE and spatio-temporal data during load carriage trial.

Parameters

Start

End

p-Value

P1
P2
S1
S2
S3
S4
S5
S6

100 (9.79)
8.4 (1.51)
0.0176 (0.0085)
1.6096 (0.2947)
0.8630 (0.1397)
0.2196 (0.0701)
0.309 (0.0253)
0.5262 (0.0771)

132 (12.48)
11.9 (2.64)
0.0241 (0.0262)
1.4082 (0.5110)
0.9077 (0.1299)
0.2473 (0.0627)
0.3188 (0.0287)
0.5487 (0.0745)

0.000a
0.001a
0.405
0.391
0.093
0.089
0.184
0.126

Represents statistical significance, where p-value <0.05.

kinematics were consistent with previous studies. It was postulated that this was due to the light aerobic intensity performed.
Hence, muscular fatigue was not induced [21] leading to no
changes observed in the biomechanical-related performance

parameters [16]. Fatigue was not reported as the nature of their

experimental protocol was consistent with their military load carriage training criteria and only backpack was used in isolation of
other operational equipment [21]. These conclusions are comparable to the reported results in this research where there was no fatigue induced due to the speed, duration and load magnitude which
were in accordance to RBAFs combat military fitness test protocols
and no other operational equipment was used in addition to the
backpack. Few researchers have also concluded different outcomes
where significant changes were observed in knee flexion and
extension ROM as load increases. These results were based on
heavier loads of 24 kg and it was suggested to be due to knee flexion, along with the muscular system of the thigh that served as a
shock absorber.
The changes observed in the transverse plane on rotation of the
knee joint during load carriage suggest that as the time increases

Table 4
Mean (SD) of angular changes for different joints in different planes at different gait events (HS, MS, TO) of a gait cycle during load carriage trial.

Gait events

Var

Start

End

p-Value

Heel strike

H1
H2
H3
H4
H5
H6
H7
H8
H9
H10

7.171 (2.443)

0.048 (4.109)

5.821 (10.498)
9.401 (6.756)

3.379 (6.720)
28.951 (11.997)
6.421 (4.253)
4.855 (9.308)

4.068 (2.950)
4.068 (2.950)

5.620 (3.476)

0.879 (3.149)

1757 (8.647)
7.866 (4.270)

5.894 (5.253)
27.885 (9.807)
5.565 (3.839)
4.307 (8.091)

7.025 (4.707)
7.025 (4.707)

0.184
0.548
0.196
0.346
0.043a
0.435
0.109
0.458
0.117
0.117

Mid stance

M1
M2
M3
M4
M5
M6
M7
M8
M9
M10

13.198 (3.166)

7.600 (6.055)

3.295 (9.941)
22.265 (9.854)

2.095 (6.402)
5.052 (12.163)
2.506 (5.045)
2.358 (10.474)

0.956 (1.769)
0.956 (1.769)

12.395 (2.087)

7.1702 (4.38)

0.5740 (8.044)
20.966 (5.915)

4.987 (6.395)
3.8412 (9.600)
1.377 (4.685)
1.376 (9.753)

2.846 (4.019)
2.846 (4.019)

0.362
0.612
0.286
0.486
0.029a
0.522
0.534
0.305
0.214
0.214

Toe-off

T1
T2
T3
T4
T5
T6
T7
T8
T9
T10

17.193 (5.289)
4.086 (1.291)
6.856 (12.906)
39.582 (4.495)
1.050 (6.201)

16.479 (11.729)

9.454 (4.429)
1.530 (11.227)
4.438 (4.274)

4.438 (4.274)

18.915 (4.142)
1.278 (3.750)
10.134 (10.583)
39.163 (5.152)

2.022 (5.525)

17.650 (12.061)

9.378 (7.404)
0.8766 (10.978)
3.687 (4.515)

3.687 (4.515)

0.525
0.05a
0.207
0.797
0.035a
0.439
0.963
0.489
0.665
0.665

Represents statistical significance (p-value <0.05).

236

D.N. Filzah Pg Damit et al. / Measurement 95 (2017) 230238

Joint Angle ()

1 Heel
Strike

0
-1 0
-2
-3
-4
-5
-6
-7

Mid Stance
20

40

Toe-Off
60

80

Toe-Off

6
4
2
0
-2 0

20

40

60

80

-4
-6
-8
-10

Fig. 5. Results illustrating significant changes on joint angles as a percentage of stance phase between the start (dotted line) and the end (solid line) of the load carriage trial.
(a) Significant angular changes in knee joint at transverse plane at all gait events. (b) Significant angular changes in ankle joint at frontal plane during toe-off only.

Table 5
Mean (SD) of ROM for respective joint angles in different planes within a gait cycle
during load carriage trial.
Parameters

Start

End

p-Value

R1
R2
R3
R4
R5
R6
R7
R8
R9
R10

33.348 (3.819)
14.645 (3.431)
15.992 (3.397)
67.046 (7.553)
8.662 (1.649)
59.069 (7.575)
16.094 (7.118)
5.816 (1.634)
11.839 (8.174)
11.831 (8.245)

33.634 (3.400)
12.520 (2.619)
15.834 (3.825)
67.264 (7.754)
7.872 (1.257)
60.157 (10.384)
15.389 (6.021)
6.580 (2.496)
11.825 (7.819)
11.825 (7.819)

0.811
0.206
0.861
0.745
0.152
0.519
0.516
0.118
0.986
0.994

together with addition of load, the knee was observed to rotate

more and this can be a risk factor for acute or overuse injury to
the knee, such as stress fractures of tibia and knee joint problems.
One possible reason for this occurrence was due to the knee slowly
getting tired or fatiguing from the impact forces of the weight carried and affecting the rotation of the knee joint first. Future
research will be concentrated into activity of muscular changes
in load carriage trial and the effects of fatigue on it.
For other kinematics data, such as the hip, pelvis and trunk joint
angles, that has shown a lack of significant changes in different
planes at all three gait events which were consistent previous
results reported in the literature. In case of the hip angular
changes, Almosnino et al. [21] used similar experimental protocol
to the current study and thus obtained similar results. Increase
in hip ROM was also considered as a protective strategy to help
absorb increased impact forces during load carriage [15] and
increased in hip flexion helped lower bodys CoM for stability
[13]. Therefore, the results reported in this research indicated that
subjects stability was maintained throughout the trial leading to
neither changes in their gait patterns nor fatigue monitored.
For the pelvis kinematic data in this research, the arms were
able to swing more freely and subjects moved more comfortably
with their assigned military backpacks. This could account for
the lack of changes observed in pelvic rotations. The lack of
changes observed are also consistent with the study conducted
by Birrell and Haslam [17] that have reported no changes in pelvic
tilt and obliquity despite having changes in pelvic rotation. For
trunk kinematics a majority of the previous studies have only
investigated changes in trunk lean angle at sagittal plane and
rarely for trunk rotation [35,37]. Therefore, in this study as it was
conducted at a constant speed and no changes were observed in
the pelvis, no occurrence of counter balance in the momentum of
rotation between the upper and lower body was reported. Further,
the load carried may increase trunk stiffness leading to lack of
changes monitored in trunk rotation.

Previous studies did not do measurement analysis of all lower

limb joints at different planes at these specific three gait events
and there is lack of evidence shown to relate with the current
study. One of the advantages of gait measurements carried out in
this research is the ability to detect the influence of specific joints
in one of three planes based on the load carriage trial. This research
work differs from others as the protocol and nature of the experiment is specific to its relation with the RBAF Annual Combat Fitness Test. Hence, the importance of establishing gait
measurement standards in this particular military population,
which has not at all been previously investigated. These results
can still relate to other soldiers in this region and act as a guideline
for future investigation to be carried out.
The spatio-temporal features have shown no significant
changes between the start and the end of the load carriage trial.
Similar to these results, a study by Qu and Yeo [18] and Simpson
et al. [29] have also found no significant changes in step length,
suggesting that this was due to measurement being less sensitive
to fatigue and load carriage. This may suggest that the load carried
by the subjects are comfortably and efficiently positioned on the
subjects body and due to the climate controlled environment and
running or fast marching on the treadmill, may contribute on the
lack of changes observed. Moreover, well-trained soldiers were
used in this study for carrying loads during their marches. In this
study no modification is observed in gait pattern during load carriage, which indicates that either the subjects were able to maintain their balance and stability during marching, due to the
nature of the experimental protocol used, or have not made the
necessary adjustments in order to reduce the risk of injuries. For
insignificant changes observed in the stance or swing time the
results were consistent with previous studies [24,38]. These results
are related to the lack of changes reported in other spatiotemporal
parameters, especially double support time, and as well as subjects
did not exhibit any modifications in their gait patterns.
The second aim of this research was to assess the physiological
and subjective consequences of 15 kg load carriage trial in a duration of 30 min at 6.4 km/h. The increase in the heart rate was consistent with the increase in the RPE scale during the trial despite
the lack of changes seen in the kinematic and spatio-temporal values. These increases in HR and RPE were consistent with previous
studies that have compared loaded conditions verses increase in
time or distance [28,39]. This also shows that RPE is sensitive to
musculoskeletal and cardiovascular load [19]. It was also suggested that backpack loads can increase subjective ratings of exertion by twice the amount of the physiological measures of exertion,
inferring that RPE may be able to detect changes in load where
heart rate cannot during self-paced tasks [40]. As combat fitness
test, where the protocol is followed by this load carriage trial, is
a measure of aerobic capacity using a physically demanding criterion task (which is loaded March). Thus, changes in heart rate
and perceived exertion were to be expected in order to account

D.N. Filzah Pg Damit et al. / Measurement 95 (2017) 230238

for generic differences in aerobic fitness requirements between

soldiers. Loaded March exercises involve the skills, muscle groups,
energy systems and related components of fitness that were
important for the performance of this task [41]. Therefore, changes
in the cardio-respiratory and perceived exertion is essential in
order to evaluate how the soldiers performed.
Comprehensive measurements and derived parameters investigated in this research were more than sufficient to contribute and
to provide as the benchmark on to the effects of load on soldiers
performance. This study also opens new avenues for further
research such as investigations into the effects of fatigue during
load carriage trial on muscular, including mental fatigue.
5. Conclusion
There were no previous literature that conducted a comprehensive study on 3-D kinematic data coupled with spatio-temporal
data for prolonged loaded March trial. Based on the measured
parameters the lack of changes reported in the majority of the
kinematic and spatio-temporal features were due to the experimental protocol used, such as the speed and load magnitude that
were in accordance with the RBAF guidelines for annual combat fitness test (prolonged loaded March test) and training regime. The
study also assessed soldiers carrying a backpack only in isolation
of other equipment typically carried by soldiers during combat
operations. The study was able to detect some changes in specific
lower limb joints during the trial. Soldiers of RBAF were able to
consistently replicate their kinematic patterns throughout the
experimental task which allowed the establishment of knowledge
base of kinematic patterns of RBAF. An instrumented measurement
analysis system introduced in this research is capable to benchmark RBAF soldiers loaded prolonged March during training
regime. Further investigations will be carried using electromyography (EMG) in order to analyse specific muscle activity in the lower
trunk and lower limb extremity, as well as electroencephalography
(EEG), for measuring brain signals, in order to detect the induced
fatigue in load carriage trial and the effects of joints during soldiers motion.
Acknowledgements
Authors would like to thank all participants for their time and
effort. Authors would also like to thank Dr. Mike Steele of Universiti Brunei Darussalam for his support in the statistical analysis and
proof reading the article. The authors appreciate Performance Optimization Centre of Ministry of Defense, Brunei and Royal Brunei
Armed Forces, Brunei for their contribution and assistance in the
study.
References
[1] M. Whittle, Gait Analysis: An Introduction, third ed., Butterworth-Heinemann,
Oxford, 2002.
[2] R. Baker, Gait analysis methods in rehabilitation, J. Neuro Eng. Rehabil. 3
(2006) 4.
[3] J.A. DeLisa, Gait Analysis in the Science of Rehabilitation: Section Two:
Instrumented Gait Analysis by Ernest Bontrager, DIANE Publishing, 1998.
[4] S.M.N.A. Senanayake, Chong Yuen Shen, J. Chong, R.G. Sirisinghe, Instrumented
orthopaedics analysis system, in: International Conference on Automation
Science and Engineering, Shanghai, China, 810 October, 2006, pp. 194199.
ISBN: 1-4244-0311-1.
[5] J. Hamill, K.M. Knutzen, Biomechanical Basis of Human Movement, Lippincott
Williams & Wilkins, USA, 1995.
[6] H. Yu, M. Alaqtash, E. Spier, T. Sarkodie-Gyan, Analysis of muscle activity
during gait cycle using fuzzy rule-based reasoning, Measurement 43 (9) (2010)
11061114.
[7] T. Liu, Y. Inoue, K. Shibata, Development of a wearable sensor system for
quantitative gait analysis, Measurement 42 (7) (2009) 978988.
[8] F. Joao, Human Gait Acquisition and Characterization, IEEE Instrum. Meas. Soc.
58 (9) (2009) 29792988.

237

[9] R.J. Dunn, The impact of a declining defense budget on combat readiness,
Accessed
from
<http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/07/theimpact-of-a-declining-defense-budget-on-combat-readiness#_ftn1>, 2013.
[10] J. Knapik, K.L. Reynolds, E.H. Harman, Soldier Load Carriage: Historical,
Physiological, Biomechanical and Medical Aspects, Mil. Med. 169 (2004)
145.
[11] D. Tilbury-Davis, R. Hooper, The kinetics and kinematics effects of increasing
load carriage upon the lower limb, Hum. Mov. Sci. 18 (1999) 693700.
[12] P. Quesada, L. Mengelkoch, R. Hale, S. Simon, Biomechanical and metabolic
effects of varying backpack loading on simulated marching, Ergonomics 43 (3)
(2000) 293309.
[13] Harman et al., The Effects of Backpack Weight on the Biomechanics of Load
Carriage, US Army Research Institute of Environmental Science, Natick, MA,
2000.
[14] W. Ling, V. Houston, Y. Tsai, K. Chui, J. Kirk, Womens load carriage
performance using modular lightweight load-carrying equipment, Mil. Med.
169 (11) (2004) 914.
[15] R. Attwells, S. Birrell, R. Hooper, N. Mansfield, Influence of carrying heavy loads
on soldiers posture, movements and gait, Ergonomics 49 (14) (2006) 1527
1537.
[16] M. Beekley, J. Alt, C. Buckley, M. Duffey, T. Crowder, Effects of Heavy load
carriage during constant-speed, simulated, road marching, Mil. Med. 172 (6)
(2007) 592.
[17] S. Birrell, R. Haslam, The effect of military load carriage on 3-D lower limb
kinematics and spatiotemporal parameters, Ergonomics 52 (10) (2009) 1298
1304.
[18] X. Qu, J.C. Yeo, Effects of load carriage and fatigue on gait characteristics, J.
Biomech. 44 (2011) 12591263.
[19] B. Larsen, K. Netto, D. Skovli, K. Vincs, S. Vu, B. Aisbett, Body armor,
performance, and physiology during repeated high-intensity work tasks, Mil.
Med. 177 (11) (2012) 1308.
[20] H. Wang, J. Frame, E. Ozimek, O. Leib, E. Dugan, The effects of load carriage and
muscle fatigue on lower-extremity joint mechanics, Res. Quart. Exerc. Sports
84 (2013) 305312.
[21] S. Almosnino, D.C. Kingston, D.D. Bardana, J.M. Stevenson, R.B. Graham, Effects
of prolonged load carriage walking on lower extremity and trunk kinematics,
heart rate, and subjective responses, in: Presented at the American Society of
Biomechanics 37th Annual Meeting, Omaha, Nebraska, USA, September 47,
2013.
[22] J.F. Seay, R.E. Fellin, S.G. Sauer, P.E. Frykman, C.K. Bensel, Lower extremity
biomechanical changes associated with symmetrical torso loading during
simulated marching, Mil. Med. 179 (2014) 185.
[23] Ranchos Los Amigos National Rehabilitation Center, Observational Gait
Analysis, Los Amigos Research and Education Center, USA, 2001.
[24] H. Kinoshita, Effects of different loads and carrying systems on selected
biomechanical parameters describing walking gait, Ergonomics 28 (1985)
13471362.
[25] J.J. Knapik, E. Harman, K.L. Reynolds, Soldier performance and strenuous road
marching: influence of load mass and load distribution, Mil. Med. 162 (1997)
6267.
[26] R.J. Woods, A.F. Polcyn, B.E. OHearn, R.A. Rosenstein, C.K. Bensel, Analysis of
the Effects of Body Armor and Load-Carrying Equipment on Soldiers
Movement, U.S. Army Soldier Systems Command, Natick Research,
Development and Engineering Centre, 1996.
[27] A. Polcyn, C. Bensel, E. Harman, J. Obusek, C. Pandorf, P. Frykman, Effects of
Weight Carried by Soldiers: Combined Analysis of Four Studies on Maximal
Performance, Physiology, Biomechanics, U.S. Army Soldier and Biological
Chemical Command, Soldier Systems, Natick, 2002.
[28] K. Simpson, B. Munro, J. Steel, Effect of load mass on posture, heart rate and
subjective responses of recreational female hikers to prolonged load carriage,
Appl. Ergon. 42 (2011) 403410.
[29] K. Simpson, B. Munro, J. Steel, Does load position affect gait and subjective
responses of female during load carriage?, Appl Ergon. 43 (2012) 479485.
[30] G. Borg, Psychophysical bases of perceived exertion, Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 14
(5) (1982) 377381.
[31] A.L. Bell, D.R. Pedersen, R.A. Brand, Prediction of hip joint center location from
external landmarks, Hum. Mov. Sci. 8 (1989) 316.
[32] A.L. Bell, D.R. Pedersen, R.A. Brand, A comparison of the accuracy of several hip
center location prediction methods, J. Biomech. 23 (1990) 617621.
[33] J.A. Zeni, J.G. Richards, J.S. Higginson, Two simple methods for determining gait
events during treadmill and overground walking using kinematic data, Gait
Posture 27 (2008) 710714.
[34] R. Baker, Pelvic angles: a mathematically rigorous definition which is
consistent with a conventional clinical understanding of the terms, Gait
Posture 13 (2001) 16.
[35] M. LaFiandra, R. Wagenaar, K. Holt, J. Obusek, How do load carriage and
walking speed influence trunk co-ordination and stride parameters?, J
Biomech. 36 (2003) 8795.
[36] J. Kertis, Biomechanical Evaluation of an Optical System for Quantitative
Human Motion Analysis, Available on <http://epublications.marquette.edu/
cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1165&context=theses_opens>, 2012.
[37] S. Sharpe, K. Holt, E. Saltzman, R. Wagenaar, Effects of hip belt on transverse
plane trunk coordination and stability during load carriage, J. Biomech. 41
(2006) 968976.
[38] E. Harman, et al., Physiological, biomechanical, and maximal performance
comparisons of female soldiers carrying loads using prototype U.S. Marine

238

D.N. Filzah Pg Damit et al. / Measurement 95 (2017) 230238

Corps Modular Lightweight Load-Carrying Equipment (MOLLE) with

Interceptor body armor and U.S. Army All-Purpose Lightweight Individual,
US Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine, Natick, MA, 1999.
[39] P. Martin, D.W. Morgan, Biomechanical considerations for economical walking
and running, Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 24 (4) (1992) 467474.

[40] B.R. Goslin, S.C. Rorke, The perception of exertion during load carriage,
Ergonomics 29 (5) (1986) 677686.
[41] J. Knapik, E.A. Harman, R.A. Steelman, B.S. Graham, A systematic review of the
effects of physical training on load carriage performance, J. Strength Cond. Res.
26 (2) (2012) 585597.