WEARING KNEE WRAPS AFFECTS MECHANICAL
OUTPUT AND PERFORMANCE CHARACTERISTICS
BACK SQUAT EXERCISE
JASON P. LAKE, PATRICK J.C. CARDEN, AND KATH A. SHORTER
Department of Sport and Exercise Sciences, University of Chichester, Chichester, United Kingdom
ABSTRACT
Lake, JP, Carden, PJC, and Shorter, KA. Wearing knee wraps
affects mechanical output and performance characteristics of
back squat exercise. J Strength Cond Res 26(10): 28442849,
2012The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of
wearing knee wraps on mechanical output and performance
characteristics of back squat exercise. Ten resistance trained men
(back squat 1 repetition maximum [1RM]: 160.5 6 18.4 kg)
performed 6 single back squats with 80% 1RM, 3 wearing knee
wraps, 3 without. Mechanical output was obtained from ground
reaction force, performance characteristics from digitized motion
footage obtained from a single high-speed digital camera. Wearing
knee wraps led to a 39% reduction (0.09 compared with 0.11 m,
p = 0.037) in horizontal barbell displacement that continued during
the lifting phase. Lowering phase vertical impulse remained within
1% across conditions; however, the lowering phase was
performed 45% faster (1.13 compared with 1.57 seconds). This
demonstrated that vertical force applied to the center of mass
during the lowering phase was considerably larger and was likely
a consequence of the generation and storage of elastic energy
within the knee wrap. Subsequent vertical impulse applied to the
center of mass was 10% greater (192 compared with 169 N
s,
p = 0.018). Mechanical work involved in vertically displacing the
center of mass was performed 20% faster and was reflected by
a 10% increase in peak power (2,121 compared with 1,841 W,
p = 0.019). The elastic properties of knee wraps increased mec-
hanical output but altered back squat technique in a way that is
likely to alter the musculature targeted by the exercise and possibly
compromise the integrity of the knee joint. Knee wraps should not
be worn during the strength and condition process, and perceived
weakness in the knee joint should be assessed and treated.
KEY WORDS force, impulse, power, horizontal displacement,
ergogenic
Address correspondence to Jason P. Lake, j.lake@chi.ac.uk.
26(10)/28442849
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
2012 National Strength and Conditioning Association
the TM
2844 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Copyright National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Copyright National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
OF
INTRODUCTION
B
ack squat exercise is often used to develop and test
maximal lower-body strength and forms the basis
of many strength and conditioning programs and
powerlifting competition (2,3). Because relatively
heavy loads can be used during back squat exercise, support
equipment is often worn (3,7). Knee wraps are worn to both
support the knee joint and gain mechanical advantage during
back squat exercise, with anecdotal evidence suggesting that
wearing knee wraps enables athletes to lift greater loads or
perform more repetitions with a given load (37). It is
thought that this is because elastic energy is generated as
knee wraps stretch during the lowering phase, returning this
energy during the lifting phase (3,7).
Knee wraps are typically constructed from thick canvas that
is often interwoven with rubber filaments (3). To gain the
perception of support around the knee joint or mechanical
advantage, knee wraps must be applied as tightly as possible
and are often applied by another person (3,5,6). The tight fit
is known to cause considerable discomfort and can create
a wedge-like physical barrier at the back of the knee joint
that can cause changes in back squat technique, tipping the
athlete forward (3,7). However, little is currently known
about the effect that wearing knee wraps has on mechanical
output and performance characteristics of back squat
exercise. It is therefore critical that research is performed
to provide data that will enable strength and conditioning
practitioners to make informed decisions about knee wrap
use during back squat exercise.
Harman and Frykman (3) found that when knee wraps
were worn during simulated back squat exercise, significantly
greater forces, recorded by digital scale, were applied to the
center of mass at the conclusion of the lowering phase. They
concluded that increased force was a reflection of elastic
energy generated, and stored, as the wraps were stretched
across the knee joint during the descent phase (3). However,
although these findings offer some insight into the
mechanisms that underpin the mechanical advantage that
can be gained from wearing knee wraps, their methodology
was crude, and did not afford detailed study of changes in the
mechanical output and performance characteristics of back
squat exercise.
 the TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca.com

that wearing knee wraps had on

mechanical output and perfor-
mance characteristics of back
squat exercise.

METHODS
Experimental Approach to the
Problem
A counterbalanced design was
used to test the hypotheses
that wearing knee wraps during
back squat exercise would
significantly affect mechanical
output and performance char-
acteristics. These were quanti-
fied by the dependent variables
of vertical and horizontal imp-
ulse and peak power applied to
the center of mass, horizontal
displacement of the barbell, and
absolute and relative lowering
and lifting phase duration.
Resistance trained men with
experience of wearing knee
wraps during back squat exer-
Figure 1. Schematic of experimental protocol. cise took part in the study, half
wearing knee wraps first, the
other half wearing them after
performing back squats without
Mechanical output and performance characteristics of wraps. Mechanical output and performance characteristics
ground-based resistance exercise can be obtained by data were obtained from GRF and barbell motion recorded
manipulating ground reaction forces (GRFs) recorded in during back squat exercise with 80% of their 1-repetition
3 orthogonal axes at the foot-floor interface, using Newtons maximum (1RM). Data from back squats performed without
second law of motion. Impulse applied to the center of mass knee wraps were included as a control, to which dependent
describes the application of force in a given direction over variables recorded during back squat exercise wearing knee
a given time period and is obtained by summing the area wraps were compared using paired sample t-tests. The
under the force-time curve (1). Mechanical advantage gained magnitude of knee wrap effect was quantified using effect
from wearing knee wraps would be reflected by an increase sizes (ESs).
in vertical impulse applied to the center of mass. Power
applied to the center of mass describes the rate at which Subjects
mechanical work is performed (1) and is calculated by Ten resistance trained men, who had been free of lower-body
multiplying force applied to, by velocity of the center of mass, pathology for at least 6 months, volunteered to participate.
where velocity is obtained by integrating the product of They had a mean (SD) of 4.4 (1.4) years of experience with
dividing net force (force 2 weight) by barbell and lifter mass the back squat exercise and had all squatted with knee wraps.
(1). Assuming back squat exercise is controlled, increases in However, none of the subjects used knee wraps regularly
vertical impulse applied to the center of mass would lead to so undertook a familiarization session with the wrapping
an increase in the rate at which mechanical work is style used by Harman and Frykman (3). This occurred
performed. However, if knee wraps create a physical barrier approximately 15 minutes after 1RM testing and involved
at the back of the knee joint, it is likely that the lifter would performing several single repetitions with 6080% of their
be tipped forward. This would be reflected by increased 1RM. Subject physical and performance characteristics were
horizontal displacement of the barbell, obtained from age: 21.9 (2.2) years; mass: 93.3 (10) kg, stature: 171.8
digitized sagittal plane motion of the barbell and would (34.8) cm, and back squat 1RM: 160.5 (18.4) kg. All testing
likely affect horizontal impulse applied to the center of mass, was performed during February, 3 weeks into a 6-week post-
which would increase because of excessive forward motion. Christmas adaptation mesocycle. Ethical approval for this
Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the effect study was gained from the ethical review panel at the

VOLUME 26 | NUMBER 10 | OCTOBER 2012 | 2845

Copyright National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.

Copyright National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 Knee Wraps Affect Back Squat Performance

to perform submaximal back

squat testing, where after war-
ming up they performed 6 sets
of maximal effort single back
squats with 80% 1RM; 3 wear-
ing wraps, 3 without. This load
was selected because it repre-
sented a typical training load,
was heavy enough to overcome
resistance presented by wear-
ing knee wraps, but allowed for
repeat performance necessary
to obtain a set of representative
data. Knee wrap use order was
counterbalanced; with half of
Figure 2. Application of knee wraps using the Figure of eight method used by Harman and Frykman (3).
the subjects performing with
knee wraps first, the other half
performing without knee wraps
first. A rest period of 3 minutes
University of Chichester, Chichester, United Kingdom, was enforced between each lift. The descent phase of back
before data collection. After a thorough explanation of the squat performance continued until the tops of the thighs
experimental aims, procedures, and potential risks, the were parallel to the ground, after which the subjects were
subjects provided written informed consent. instructed to perform the ascent phase as quickly as possible.
Two sets of Hercules knee wraps (Strength Shop Ltd.,
Procedures Edinburgh, United Kingdom) that were 0.02 3 0.08 3 2.00 m
A schematic of the experimental procedures is presented in and composed of a heavy cotton fabric with interwoven
Figure 1. All the subjects attended the laboratory at the elastic rubber filaments, similar to those used in previous
same time of the day for each testing session, approximately research (3), were worn during back squat exercise. The
2 hours after a light lunch and 48 hours after their last figure of eight wrapping technique, described and used by
lower-body resistance training session. During the first session, Harman and Frykman (3), was used to fit the knee wraps
maximal back squat strength (1RM) was established using and is illustrated in Figure 2. The same experimenter
a protocol similar to the one used by Wallace et al. (8) (Figure 1). applied the wraps as tightly as possible immediately before
Seven days later, the subjects returned to the laboratory each trial, standardizing the number of wrap revolutions to

TABLE 1. Mean (SD) mechanical output and performance data from back squat exercise, mean percentage differences,
p value results from paired t-test comparison, and ESs.*

Wrapped Unwrapped % Difference p ES

Lowering horizontal displacement (m) 0.09 (0.03) 0.11 (0.04) 39 (83) 0.037 0.53 Small to moderate
Lifting horizontal displacement (m) 0.10 (0.10) 0.13 (0.16) 99 (254) 0.407 0.41 Small to moderate
Lowering horizontal impulse (N
s) 2269 (301) 283 (333) 7 (35) 0.366 0.17 , Small
Lifting horizontal impulse (N
s) 263 (315) 187 (209) 5 (37) 0.057 0.81 Moderate
Lowering vertical impulse (N
s) 92 (22) 91 (28) 1 (19) 0.409 0.11 Small
Lifting vertical impulse (N
s) 192 (81) 169 (66) 10 (21) 0.018 1.12 , Large
Lowering duration (s) 1.13 (0.46) 1.57 (0.61) 45 (44) 0.006 0.82 Moderate to large
Lowering duration 54 (11) 59 (9) 13 (32) 0.083 0.71 Moderate
(% of total exercise duration)
Lifting duration (s) 0.94 (0.40) 1.03 (0.19) 20 (34) 0.391 0.32 Small
Lifting duration 46 (11) 41 (9) 6 (24) 0.083 0.47 Small to moderate
(% of total exercise duration)
Peak power (W) 2,121 (1038) 1,841 (835) 10 (24) 0.019 1.10 Moderate to large
*ES = effect size.

the TM

2846 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

Copyright National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.

Copyright National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 the TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca.com

anterior-posterior force-time
curve during the lowering and
lifting phases, respectively. The
lowering and lifting phase was
identified from vertical dis-
placement of the barbell. Peak
power was defined as the
highest instantaneous vertical
power applied to the center of
mass during the lifting phase
and was calculated as the
product of vertical GRF and
vertical velocity of the center
of mass. Vertical velocity of
the center of mass was obtained
by integrating the result of
dividing net vertical force (ver-
tical GRFbarbell and lifter
weight) by barbell and lifter
mass. Horizontal displacement
of the barbell consisted of the
Figure 3. Typical horizontal displacement of the barbell during unwrapped back squat performance. The phase total horizontal displacement
between points a and b is the lowering phase, b to c, then c to d the lifting phase. recorded from a vertical refer-
ence line that began at the end
of the barbell in the top position
of the lift, immediately before
9 revolutions per subject. Pilot testing demonstrated that the start of the lowering phase and was calculated for
each wrap reached full stretch when a force of 446 N was both lowering and lifting phases. All horizontal displacement
applied to the wrap by suspending it from one end of the data were rectified to avoid negative displacements canceling
wrap while the other end was attached to an immovable out positive displacements, by calculating the square root
object. During a simulation of the procedure used during the of squared horizontal displacement. Absolute lowering
experiment, the experimenter applied a mean force of 343 and lifting phase duration was determined from changes in
(20.9) N to the wrap over 9 wraps. This was recorded by barbell displacement. Relative lowering and lifting phase
a hanging scale (HCB200K500 Kern and Sohn GmbH, duration was calculated by dividing absolute phase duration by
Balingen, Germany). the sum of absolute lowering and lifting phase duration
Before data collection, a spherical, retroreflective mar- respectively and multiplying these by 100, expressing these
ker illuminated by a spotlight positioned behind a high- as a percentage.
speed digital camera (Basler A602fc-2, Ahrensburg, Differences between dependent variables recorded with
Germany) was affixed to the end of an Olympic barbell. and without knee wraps were analyzed using paired sample
The camera, positioned 8 m from and perpendicular to t-tests. The magnitude of the effect that wearing knee
the right side of the subject, recorded back squat exercise at wraps had on dependent variables was quantified using ES,
100 Hz after first recording a 1-m-long calibration pole. which was calculated by dividing the differences between
Simultaneously, horizontal (anterior-posterior) and verti- back squat exercise with and without knee wraps by their
cal GRF of back squat exercise were recorded at 500 Hz pooled SDs. The magnitude of ES was quantified using the
from both feet with two 0.4 3 0.6 m in ground force scale recently presented by Hopkins et al. (4) where an ES
platforms (model: 9281E, Kistler Instruments Ltd., Hook, of 0.20, 0.60, 1.20, 2.0, and 4.0 represented small, moderate,
United Kingdom) using BioWare 3.21 software (Kistler large, very large, and extremely large effects, respectively.
Instruments Ltd.). Within- and between-session reliability of the dependent
variables was examined using intraclass correlations (ICC).
Statistical Analyses Statistical analysis was performed in SPSS (version 18,
Back squat exercise with and without knee wraps was the SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) and Microsoft Excel
independent variable, mechanical output and performance (Microsoft Ltd., Reading, United Kingdom) and an alpha
characteristics of back squat exercise the dependent value of p # 0.05 used to indicate statistical significance.
variables. Impulse applied to the center of mass were cal- Statistical power for the sample size used was between
culated as the sum of the area under the vertical and 1 2 b = 0.576 and 0.833.

VOLUME 26 | NUMBER 10 | OCTOBER 2012 | 2847

Copyright National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.

Copyright National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 Knee Wraps Affect Back Squat Performance
Figure 4. Typical horizontal displacement of the barbell during wrapped back squat performance. The phase
between points a and b is the lowering phase, b to c, then c to d the lifting phase.
RESULTS
Within- and between-session reliability of the dependent
variables was high, with ICC R values between 0.93 and 0.99.
Descriptive statistics, results from the paired t-tests, and ES
are presented in Table 1, whereas representative barbell
trajectories from back squat exercise with and without knee
wraps are presented in Figures 3 and 4.
Wearing knee wraps during back squat exercise signifi-
cantly reduced horizontal displacement during the lowering
phase (p = 0.037) but not the lifting phase (p = 0.407, Table 1).
Although lowering phase vertical (p = 0.366) and horizontal
(p = 0.409) impulse applied to the center of mass were not
affected by wearing knee wraps, the lifting phase equivalents
were, with both demonstrating a moderate to large ES
(vertical ES: 1.12, horizontal ES: 0.81). Wearing knee wraps
significantly reduced the absolute lowering phase duration
(p = 0.006) but not absolute lifting (p = 0.391), relative
lowering (p = 0.083), or relative lifting (p = 0.083) phase
duration. However, wearing knee wraps significantly
increased peak power (p = 0.019, Table 1).
DISCUSSION
Knee wraps are often worn during back squat exercise to
improve the load that can be lifted or the amount of rep-
etitions that can be performed with a given load (3). However,
this mechanical advantage has not been quantified. There-
fore, this study set out to establish whether wearing knee
wraps provided a mechanical advantage during single
the
2848 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Copyright National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Copyright National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
repetition back squat perfor-
mance with 80% 1RM and to
establish the effects on perfor-
mance characteristics.
The results showed that knee
wraps did provide a mechanical
advantage. Wearing knee wraps
during back squat exercise incre-
ased vertical impulse, decreased
lowering and lifting phase dura-
tion indicating that vertical force
applied to the center of mass
increased, particularly during the
lowering phase. This finding
validates the results presented
by Harman and Frykman (3),
who recorded the weight of
lifters who performed simulated
back squat exercise with and
without knee wraps, which invo-
lved subjects being lowered on
digital scales. They found that
lifters were significantly heavier
when knee wraps were worn.
However, the results of this
study progresses the work of Harman and Frykman (3),
establishing mechanisms underpinning their findings.
The lowering phase was performed faster when knee wraps
were worn, and elastic energy generated and stored within
the knee wraps was released, increasing vertical force applied to
the center of mass. In turn, this reduced the time in which the
mechanical work performed by vertically displacing the barbell
and body system center of mass through a standardized range of
motion could be performed; this was reflected by an increase in
peak power. Indeed, vertical impulse and peak power were the
only dependent variables that wearing knee wraps had an almost
large effect on.
An unlikely result of this study was the relatively large
reduction (lowering phase: 39%, lifting phase: 99%) in
horizontal displacement of the barbell when knee wraps
were worn. It was postulated that wearing knee wraps would
create a physical barrier at the back of the knee joint that
would tip the lifter forward. This result clearly demonstrates
that this was not the case and is supported by horizontal
impulse data. It was hypothesized that if the lifter tipped
forward, changes in anterior and posterior forces would
reflect this increasing to counterexcursion of the center of
mass. Instead, horizontal impulse decreased by 7% during the
lowering phase and increased by 5% during the lifting phase.
This finding raises concerns about the effect that wearing
knee wraps can have on back squat technique, both in terms of
training specificity and injury potential.
Wearing knee wraps appears to significantly affect
traditional movement patterns of back squat exercise, by
forcing the lifter to use different techniques. Unfortunately,
TM

analysis of performance motion was limited to horizontal
displacement of the barbell. However, the results of this
study suggest that wearing knee wraps restricted motion
around the hip joint, which caused (a) a more upright
posture and more importantly (b) forced greater flexion at
the knee joint. In terms of training specificity, this would
suggest that contribution of the powerful hip flexors and
extensors is restricted when knee wraps are worn, stored
elastic energy within the wrap compensating. In terms of
injury potential, this raises 2 concerns: (a) continued use of
knee wraps would restrict development of hip extensor and
flexor musculature and (b) continued flexion around the
physical barrier created by knee wraps may compromise the
integrity of the knee joint. Harman and Frykman (3) and
Totten (7) described the physical barrier at the back of the
knee joint caused by the use of knee wraps as a pivot that
can unhinge the knee joint. Although further research
would be needed to corroborate these claims, changes to
technique cannot be denied, and it is for this reason that we
feel that knee wraps should not be used during the strength
and conditioning process.
Although this is the first study to demonstrate a mechanical
advantage from wearing knee wraps during back squat
exercise, several experimental limitations must be considered.
The main limitation is that although the amount of wraps
applied to each subject was standardized, and back squat
performance was standardized so that subjects squatted until
thighs were parallel to the ground, the range of motion was
not controlled relative to subject anthropometry. Therefore,
some subjects may have performed back squat exercise
through a greater rage of motion, which may have resulted in
the generation of more elastic energy. This may explain the
high SDs that were reported in the results. Further, although
wearing knee wraps during back squat exercise provided
a mechanical advantage, it is important to remember that it
was found during single repetition performance with 80%
1RM. Typically, knee wraps are worn during either maximal
strength testing, whether in a competition environment or
not or with submaximal loads with the aim of performing
maximal repetitions. Although it is reasonable to assume that
the results of this study could be replicated in either of the
above scenarios, further research would be needed to clarify
this. The rationale for using this load was that it is often used
in training and demands proper technique but enables repeat
performances for statistical purposes.
Copyright National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Copyright National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
the TM
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca.com
PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS
The results of this study demonstrate that, when worn
during single repetition back squat performance with 80%
1RM, knee wraps create a mechanical advantage that
occurs when elastic energy, generated during the lowering
phase, is released. Wearing knee wraps alters the back squat
technique in a way that leads us to believe that (a)
development of balanced lower-body musculature may be
compromised and (b) that the combination of the modified
body position observed when knee wraps were worn and
the physical barrier at the back of the knee joint may
compromise the integrity of the knee joint. We therefore
propose that knee wraps should not be worn during the
strength and conditioning process and that if an athlete feels
that additional support is needed for the knee, the integrity
of the joint is thoroughly assessed and treated rather than
relying on artificial aid that could exacerbate any underlying
issues.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors thank Strength Shop Ltd., Edinburgh, United
Kingdom, who donated the knee wraps used in this inves-
tigation. However, the results of this study do not constitute
endorsement by the authors or the National Strength and
Conditioning Association.
REFERENCES
1. Grimshaw, P, Lees, A, Fowler, N, and Burden, AS. Sport and Exercise
Biomechanics (Bios Instant Notes). Abingdon, United Kingdom: Taylor
and Francis, 2006.
2. Gullet, JC, Tillman, MD, Gutierez, GM, and Chow, JW. A
biomechanical comparison of back and front squats in healthy trained
individuals. J Strength Cond Res 23: 284292, 2008.
3. Harman, E and Frykman, P. The effects of knee wraps on
weightlifting performance and injury. J Strength Cond Res 12: 3035,
1990.
4. Hopkins, WG, Marshall, SW, Batterham, AM, and Hanin, J.
Progressive statistics for studies in sports medicine and exercise
science. Med Sci Sports Exerc 41: 313, 2009.
5. Reichart, G. Thats a wrap: How to wrap your knees. Available at:
http://www.bodybuilding.com. Accessed January 10, 2011.
6. Tate, D. EFS classicKnee wraps: The ins and outs. Available at:
http://www.elitefts.com. Accessed January 7, 2011.
7. Totten, L. Knee wraps. J Strength Cond Res 12: 3638, 1990.
8. Wallace, BJ, Winchester, JB, and Mcguigan, MR. Effects of elastic
bands on force and power characteristics during the back squat
exercise. J Strength Cond Res 20: 268272, 2006.
VOLUME 26 | NUMBER 10 | OCTOBER 2012 | 2849