Thomas Bjørnsen
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Subjects
Research Interests
Thomas Bjørnsen has a total of 4 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Gøran Paulsen
Department of Physical Performance, Norwegian School of Sport Sciences, Oslo, Norway
1 shared publication - Kolbjørn Lindberg
Department of Sport Science and Physical Education, Faculty of Health and Sport Sciences, University of Agder, Kristiansand, Norway
1 shared publication - Maarten Frank Bobbert
Department of Human Movement Sciences, Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, The Netherlands
1 shared publication - Paul André Solberg
Norwegian Olympic and Paralympic Committee and Confederation of Sports Oslo Norway
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- Open Access
- 18 March 2023
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
- Vol. 55 (7) , 1241-1249
The Force–Velocity Profile for Jumping: What It Is and What It Is Not
Introduction: Force–velocity profiling has been proposed in the literature as a method to identify the overall mechanical characteristics of lower extremities. A force–velocity profile is obtained by plotting for jumps at different loads the effective work as a function of the average push-off velocity, fitting a straight line to the results, and extrapolating this line to find the theoretical maximum isometric force and unloaded shortening velocity. Here we investigated whether the force–velocity profile and its characteristics can be related to the intrinsic force–velocity relationship. Methods: We used simulation models of various complexity, ranging from a simple mass actuated by a linearly damped force to a planar musculoskeletal model comprising four segments and six muscle–tendon complexes. The intrinsic force–velocity relationship of each model was obtained by maximizing the effective work during isokinetic extension at different velocities. Results: Several observations were made. First, at the same average velocity, less effective work can be done during jumping than during isokinetic lower extremity extension at this velocity. Second, the intrinsic relationship is curved; fitting a straight line and extrapolating it seem arbitrary. Third, the maximal isometric force and the maximal velocity corresponding to the profile are not independent. Fourth, they both vary with inertial properties of the system. Conclusions: For these reasons, we concluded that the force–velocity profile is specific for the task and is just what it is: the relationship between effective work and an arbitrary estimate of average velocity; it does not represent the intrinsic force–velocity relationship of the lower extremities.
- 18 March 2023
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
- Vol. 55 (7) , 1241-1249
Open AccessThe Force–Velocity Profile for Jumping: What It Is and What It Is Not
Introduction: Force–velocity profiling has been proposed in the literature as a method to identify the overall mechanical characteristics of lower extremities. A force–velocity profile is obtained by plotting for jumps at different loads the effective work as a function of the average push-off velocity, fitting a straight line to the results, and extrapolating this line to find the theoretical maximum isometric force and unloaded shortening velocity. Here we investigated whether the force–velocity profile and its characteristics can be related to the intrinsic force–velocity relationship. Methods: We used simulation models of various complexity, ranging from a simple mass actuated by a linearly damped force to a planar musculoskeletal model comprising four segments and six muscle–tendon complexes. The intrinsic force–velocity relationship of each model was obtained by maximizing the effective work during isokinetic extension at different velocities. Results: Several observations were made. First, at the same average velocity, less effective work can be done during jumping than during isokinetic lower extremity extension at this velocity. Second, the intrinsic relationship is curved; fitting a straight line and extrapolating it seem arbitrary. Third, the maximal isometric force and the maximal velocity corresponding to the profile are not independent. Fourth, they both vary with inertial properties of the system. Conclusions: For these reasons, we concluded that the force–velocity profile is specific for the task and is just what it is: the relationship between effective work and an arbitrary estimate of average velocity; it does not represent the intrinsic force–velocity relationship of the lower extremities.