Back

Scaling contact force parameters across body size, limb count, and number of contact spheres

van Bijlert, P. A.

2025-11-29 biophysics
10.1101/2025.11.26.690874 bioRxiv
Show abstract

A popular way to model contact interactions in musculoskeletal simulations uses Hertz theory applied to contact spheres, with Hunt Crossley based dissipation. Suitable contact parameters for dynamic simulations will be highly dependent on the morphology, scale, materials, and movement in question. Inappropriate parameter choices can manifest in unpredictable ways during simulations, potentially resulting in misinterpretations or failed simulations. Here, I demonstrate that both the plane strain modulus and the dissipation parameters are not scale invariant. I derive equations to scale the contact parameters in dimensionless form, which allows accounting for differences in body size, number of legs, contact sphere radius, and number of spheres per foot. As a demonstration of this scaling approach, I scale the contact parameters of a 62 kg human to a 500 kg human, a mouse (0.02 kg), an emu (37.8 kg), a horse (545 kg), and a giraffe (1190 kg), and demonstrate that geometrically and dynamically similar contact behaviour is achieved in all cases. The scaling approach presented here can be used to scale parameters known to work for one model to a completely different model, which is particularly useful in studies that simulate the effects of allometric scaling. I also provide equations to estimate suitable contact parameters for a model directly, without using a different model as a starting point. The limitations of Hertz Hunt Crossley contact models in biomechanical simulations are discussed. Lastly, I derive dimensionless expressions and scaling guidelines for the smoothed contact force implementation "SmoothSphereHalfSpaceForce" in the popular biomechanical simulator OpenSim.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Biomechanics and Modeling in Mechanobiology
25 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
22.2%
2
Journal of Biomechanics
57 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
17.3%
3
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 15%
12.5%
50% of probability mass above
4
Journal of Biomechanical Engineering
17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.2%
5
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 8%
4.3%
6
Annals of Biomedical Engineering
34 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.9%
7
Biophysical Journal
545 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.6%
8
International Journal for Numerical Methods in Biomedical Engineering
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.6%
9
Bulletin of Mathematical Biology
84 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
1.9%
10
Bioinspiration & Biomimetics
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.8%
11
Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences
15 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
12
Cytoskeleton
23 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
13
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
189 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
14
Journal of Theoretical Biology
144 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.3%
15
Journal of Experimental Biology
249 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
16
European Biophysics Journal
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.1%
17
Physical Biology
43 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
18
Acta Biomaterialia
85 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.9%
19
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 71%
0.9%
20
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
88 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
21
Royal Society Open Science
193 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
22
IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering
38 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.7%
23
Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials
22 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.7%
24
Frontiers in Physiology
93 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.6%
25
Experimental Physiology
19 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.6%
26
Physical Review E
95 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%