Conference PaperPDF Available

Effects of changing seat height on bike handling

Authors:
  • Fonda Sport Performance

Abstract

Background: According to the Statistical Release by the Department for Transport, in the United Kingdom 19.000 cyclists are killed or seriously injured every year, with losing control being one of the most common reasons. Research on bike handling went under a revival, but it is still inconclusive on how humans balance and control trajectories and direction during cycling. Adjusting body position on a bicycle has been previously addressed with an aim to improve physical performance (Ashe et al. designed guidelines based on kinematics and/or morphological measures to properly set up a bicycle. Seat height has been an issue of interest among researchers (Games et al., 2008, The Engineering of Sport, 255-260; Peveler et al., 2005, Journal of Exercise Physiology Online, 8(1), 51-55), but never with an objective of improving bike handling. Therefore, our aim was to test the effects of different seat heights on bike handling.
2
nd
World Congress of Cycling Science, 2
nd
and 3
rd
July 2014, Leeds J Sci Cycling. Vol. 3(2), 19
© 2014 2nd World Congress of Cycling Science, 2nd and 3rd July 2014, Leedst; licensee JSC. This is an Open Access article distributed under the
terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and
reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
BOOK OF ABSTRACTS
Open Access
Effects of changing seat height on bike
handling
B. Fonda
1, 2
, N Sarabon
2
, R Blacklock
1
and FX Li
1
Abstract
Background: According to the Statistical Release by the Department for Transport, in the United Kingdom 19.000
cyclists are killed or seriously injured every year, with losing control being one of the most common reasons.
Research on bike handling went under a revival, but it is still inconclusive on how humans balance and control
trajectories and direction during cycling. Adjusting body position on a bicycle has been previously addressed with an
aim to improve physical performance (Ashe et al., 2003, British Journal of Sport Medicine, 37(5), 441-444) or reduce
the risk of injury occurrence (Bini et al., 2011, Sports Medicine, 41(6), 463-476). Based on the research and practice,
some authors (Burke, 1994, Clinics in Sports Medicine, 13(1), 1-14) designed guidelines based on kinematics and/or
morphological measures to properly set up a bicycle. Seat height has been an issue of interest among researchers
(Games et al., 2008, The Engineering of Sport, 255-260; Peveler et al., 2005, Journal of Exercise Physiology Online,
8(1), 51-55), but never with an objective of improving bike handling. Therefore, our aim was to test the effects of
different seat heights on bike handling.
Methods: 42 participants (18 males (27.1 ± 11.3 years) and 24 females (24.3 ± 7.7 years)) volunteered to take part
in this study. Participants were asked to ride a commuting bike for 7 m in the middle of the 60 cm wide cycling lanes
as straight as possible. They repeated this task five times at four different seat heights. Initial seat height (100%)
was defined as 109 % of the inner leg length. Two lower seat heights (97% and 94%) and one higher (103%) of the
initial seat height completed the experimental conditions. Trials at different seat height were carried out in a random
order. We assessed lateral deviation from the centre of the lane, steering angle and bike leaning angle (range and
standard deviation (SD)). Mean of five trials for each condition were compared among the seat heights by means of
repeated measure ANOVA. In case of a statistical significance (p < 0.05), Bonferroni post-hoc tests were used for
pairwise comparisons.
Results: We found no statistically significant difference for lateral deviation SD
(F(3,123) = 0.927; p = 0.430; ω
2
=
0.022)
and range (F(3,123) = 0.618; p = 0.605; ω
2
= 0.015). There was a statistically significant difference for
steering SD (F(3,123) = 4.121; p = 0.008; ω
2
= 0.091),
steering
range (F(3,123) = 4.338; p = 0.006; ω
2
= 0.096),
leaning SD (F(3,123) = 3.006; p = 0.033; ω
2
= 0.068)
and range (F(3,123) = 5.971; p = 0.001; ω
2
= 0.127). The
participants perceived subjectively 97% as the most comfortable seat height to cycle at.
Discussion: Results of the present study showed that seat height does not the accuracy of completing a trial.
However, we have observed that cyclists completed the trial using different mechanisms of bike handling depending
on the seat height. Variability of leaning is increased at seat heights set higher than the current recommended
guidelines. Practical implications of the present study are that seat height should be set to fulfil other aims, e.g.
comfort and efficiency. Further research should focus on training schemes to improve bike handling skills and on the
effects of changing upper body position and how this affects bike handling.
Contact email: bxf203@bham.ac.uk (B. Fonda)
1
School of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of
Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
2
S2P, Laboratory for Motor Control and Motor Behaviour, Science to
Practice, Ltd., Ljubljana, Slovenia.
__________________________________________________
Received: 1 May 2014. Accepted: 1 June 2014.
... In addition, many authors recognised the importance of bike handling or 'technical' skills in high-speed courses with sharp corners (Jeukendrup et al., 2000) and technical content (e.g. technical descents), either from a safety (Fonda, Sarabon, Blacklock, et al., 2014;Fonda, Sarabon, & Lee, 2014) and a performance perspective (Phillips & Hopkins, 2020). In spite of its popularity among the community of coaches and sport scientists, bike handling still lacks a precise definition and an objective assessment methodology that can be used to differentiate, discriminate and characterize technical skills in races. ...
Article
Full-text available
A methodology to study bike handling of cyclists during individual time trials (ITT) is presented. Lateral and longitudinal accelerations were estimated from GPS data of professional cyclists (n=53) racing in two ITT of different length and technical content. Acceleration points were plotted on a plot (g-g diagram) and they were enclosed in an ellipse. A correlation analysis was conducted between the area of the ellipse and the final ITT ranking. It was hypothesized that a larger area was associated to a better performance. An analytical model for the bike-cyclist system dynamics was used to conduct a parametric analysis on the influence of riding position on the shape of the g-g diagram. A moderate (n=27, r=-0.40, p=0.038) and a very large (n=26, r=-0.83, p<0.0001) association were found between the area of the enclosing ellipse and the final ranking in the two ITT. Interestingly, this association was larger in the shorter race with higher technical content. The analytical model suggested that maximal decelerations are highly influenced by the cycling position, road slope and speed. This investigation, for the first time, explores a novel methodology that can provide insights into bike handling, a large unexplored area of cycling performance.
... Moreover, saddle height impacts cycling performance and particularly physiological parameters [9]- [14] and crank power output production [20]. Finally, a proper saddle height is essential for the bike handling [12], the comfort [19]- [28] and the perception of fatigue and pain while cycling [25]. However, there is some controversy between the proposed methods to adjust the saddle height [4]. ...
Article
Purpose: Bike-fitting methods based on knee kinematics have been proposed to determine optimal saddle height. The Holmes method recommends that knee angle be between 25° and 35° when the pedal is at bottom dead centre in static. Other authors advocate knee angle of 30-40° during maximum knee extension while pedalling. Although knee angle would be 5-10° greater at bottom dead centre during pedalling, no study has reported reference values in this condition. The purpose of this study was to compare these three methodologies on knee, hip, and ankle angles and to develop new dynamic reference range at bottom dead centre. Methods: Twenty-six cyclists volunteered for this experiment and performed a pedalling test on their personal road or mountain bike. Knee, hip, and ankle angles were assessed by two-dimensional video analysis. Results: Dynamic knee angle was 8° significantly greater than static knee angle when the pedal was at bottom dead centre. Moreover, dynamic knee angle with the pedal at bottom dead centre was 3° significantly greater than dynamic knee angle during maximum knee extension. The chosen methodology also significantly impacted hip and ankle angles under most conditions. Conclusions: The results allow us to suggest a new range of 33-43° when the pedal is at bottom dead centre during pedalling. Thus, this study defines clearly the different ranges to determine optimal saddle height in cycling according to the condition of measurement. These findings are important for researchers and bike-fitting professionals to avoid saddle height adjustment errors that can affect cyclists' health and performance.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.