TABLE 3.

Predicted, peak ankle mechanics (mean ± standard deviation) across six, 1000-trial Monte Carlo simulations. Input parameter combinations are specified in (Table 1). Kinematics corresponding to subtalar and talocrural axes were extracted directly from the OpenSim model (Inman, 1976; Delp et al., 1990). Kinematics for a non-orthogonal joint coordinate system (JCS) of the tibia-calcaneus ankle complex were also resolved (Figure 3) (Wu et al., 2002). Peak moment borne by each passive bushing (anatomy, brace ^b) at the instant of peak supination were computed as orthogonal projections of ground-referenced moments onto each anatomic and JCS axis.

Monte Carlo Study (#)			1	2	3	4	5	6
		Angle	1 ± 5	49 ± 2	41 ± 3	29 ± 5	30 ± 1	29 ± 3
Subtalar Axis (Sup. +)		Velocity	135 ± 82	886 ± 72	878 ± 82	671 ± 115	911 ± 208	799 ± 81
		Moment	0.7 ± 1.1	31.0 ± 6.1	15.1 ± 4.9	4.3 ± 1.9	4.9 ± 0.8 61.8 ± 5.0 b	4.3 ± 1.6 13.2 ± 5.0 b
		Angle	17 ± 1	19 ± 2	19 ± 1	18 ± 2	21 ± 1	20 ± 2
Talocrural Axis (Dorsi. +)		Velocity	1650 ± 365	1684 ± 356	1644 ± 349	1568 ± 337	2284 ± 717	1675 ± 365
		Moment	4.4 ± 0.7	-5.6 ± 1.8	-3.0 ± 1.0	0.9 ± 1.0	2.5 ± 0.5 11.5 ± 3.5 b	1.5 ± 0.5 2.2 ± 1.2 b
Ankle-Foot Complex JCS	Sagittal (Dorsi. +)	Angle	19 ± 1	8 ± 1	8 ± 1	10 ± 2	13 ± 1	11 ± 1
		Velocity	1622 ± 347	1641 ± 330	1604 ± 326	1532 ± 315	2324 ± 743	1641 ± 348
		Moment	4.4 ± 0.7	1.0 ± 0.5	0.9 ± 0.7	1.2 ± 0.9	2.6 ± 0.5 12.4 ± 3.4 b	1.6 ± 0.4 2.4 ± 1.1 b
	Frontal (Inv. +)	Angle	−9 ± 4	23 ± 1	19 ± 2	11 ± 3	12 ± 1	11 ± 2
		Velocity	103 ± 62	650 ± 57	652 ± 60	501 ± 88	702 ± 167	599 ± 62
		Moment	0.3 ± 0.9	24.5 ± 4.6	13.2 ± 3.8	4.8 ± 1.6	5.3 ± 0.8 59.5 ± 4.4 b	4.8 ± 1.4 13.5 ± 4.1 b
	Transverse (Int. +)	Angle	7 ± 3	39 ± 2	33 ± 3	24 ± 3	25 ± 1	24 ± 2
		Velocity	77 ± 48	572 ± 58	537 ± 55	398 ± 68	520 ± 117	471 ± 48
		Moment	0.3 ± 0.5	10 ± 1.6	5.5 ± 1.6	1.9 ± 0.9	2.0 ± 0.4 23.9 ± 3.1 b	2.0 ± 0.7 6.1 ± 2.1 b