A Rigid-Body Pendulum Model for Plyometric Push-Up Biomechanics: Analytical Derivation and Numerical Quantification of Flight Time, Arc Displacement, Maximum Height, and Mechanical Power Output

Read the full article See related articles

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Listed in

This article is not in any list yet, why not save it to one of your lists.
Log in to save this article

Abstract

Aim: Conventional free-fall kinematic models applied to plyometric push-up assessment treat the upper body as a vertically translating point mass, ignoring the curvilinear trajectory imposed by the ankle pivot and systematically biasing flight-time and height estimates. Methods: A planar rigid-body pendulum pivoting about the ankle axis was formulated via two independent derivation pathways (static moment equilibrium and a gravitational-torque coordinate approach), yielding effective pendulum length L = (MW/M) × LOS. Closed-form expressions for flight time, arc displacement, maximum height, and mean mechanical power were derived analytically from energy conservation and compared against free-fall predictions across seven pendulum arm lengths (LOW = 0.50–2.00 m) and 500 initial hand velocities per length, using adaptive Gauss–Kronrod quadrature (relative tolerance 10−10) with ODE cross-validation (maximum discrepancy < 2.5 × 10−7 s). Results: Flight time equivalence (tH = tG) was formally established. The free-fall model overestimated flight time by up to 18.82% (Δt = 0.096 s; LOW = 0.50 m, VH,0 = 2.50 m/s) and maximum height by up to 28.43% (Δh = 0.087 m; LOW = 0.50 m, tflight = 0.50 s), with both errors growing nonlinearly with initial velocity. Overestimation in height was proportionally larger at shorter pendulum arm lengths (18.18% at tflight = 0.30 s for LOW = 0.50 m vs. 10.91% for LOW = 1.00 m). Conclusions: The pendulum model provides a physically consistent, analytically tractable framework for geometry-adjusted upper-body power assessment from four field-obtainable anthropometric inputs. These results reflect computational self-consistency; prospective experimental validation against force-plate kinematics is required before applied deployment. Prospective empirical validation against dual force-plate and motion-capture reference data is required to establish the model’s accuracy boundaries under real push-up kinematics.

Article activity feed