Conference Paper

COMPARISON OF BIOMECHANICAL DATA OF A SPRINT CYCLIST IN THE VELODROME AND IN THE LABORATORY

Authors:
To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the authors.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to develop a reliable testing method to measure biomechanical variables that describe sprint cycling performance on a velodrome track, compared to on an ergometer in a laboratory. Seven elite track sprint cyclists performed sprints on an isokinetic ergometer in a laboratory and over half lap distances in a velodrome. Key biomechanical variables characterising sprint cycling were measured. Relatively small differences in the variables were found between the ergometer and track sprints. However, the static task constraints of ergometer cycling led the cyclists to adopt a different position which seemed to allow them to increase overall power output and rate of force development. Future research is needed to assess whether the differences in joint angles and crank powers were due to the different environmental and task constraints between the ergometer and the track bicycle sprints.

No full-text available

Request Full-text Paper PDF

To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.

... Estimating a rider's CoM movement while cycling on an ergometer, treadmill, or overground can be done using an optical motion capture system (Ericson, Nisell, and Nemeth 1988;Miller, Martin, and Wells 1988;Burnie et al. 2018). However, there are limitations to each of these experimental setups. ...
... Treadmills can improve ecological validity, but performing maximal sprinting is problematic due to the danger of matching the belt velocity to the rapid acceleration and high velocity of the bicycle wheels. Overground cycling can be captured (Burnie et al. 2018), but the calibrated volume of the camera system will limit the number of cycles that can be collected. Thus, a method for tracking a rider's CoM motion when motion capture is not feasible would make it possible to examine the preferred movement pattern of cyclists outside of the laboratory. ...
Article
Instantaneous crank power does not equal total joint power if a rider’s centre of mass (CoM) gains and loses mechanical energy. Thus, estimating CoM motion and the associated energy changes can provide valuable information about the mechanics of cycling. To date, an accurate and precise method for tracking CoM motion during outdoor cycling has not been validated. Purpose To assess the suitability of using data from a single inertial measurement unit (IMU) secured to the lower back of the rider for estimating CoM motion during non-seated cycling by comparing vertical displacement derived from the IMU to that of an attached marker cluster and to a full-body kinematic estimate of vertical CoM displacement. Methods IMU and motion capture data were collected synchronously for 10 seconds while participants (n = 7) cycled on an ergometer in a non-seated posture at six combinations of power output and cadence. A limits of agreement analysis, corrected for repeated measures, was performed on the range of vertical displacement between the IMU and the two other measures. A total of 303 crank cycles were analysed. Results There was excellent agreement between the vertical displacement derived from the IMU and the attached marker cluster (accuracy = 1.6 mm, precision = 3.5 mm). Vertical displacement derived from the IMU systematically overestimated the kinematic estimate of whole-body CoM—with errors increasing linearly with displacement. Conclusion We interpret these findings as evidence that a single IMU secured to the lower back can provide a suitable approach for deriving a cyclist’s CoM displacement when they ride out of the saddle, but only if the linearly increasing overestimation is accounted for.
Article
Full-text available
Egon Brunswik proposed the concept of "representative design" for psychological experimentation, which has historically been overlooked or confused with another of Brunswik's terms, ecological validity. In this article, we reiterate the distinction between these two important concepts and highlight the relevance of the term representative design for sports psychology, practice, and experimental design. We draw links with ideas on learning design in the constraints-led approach to motor learning and nonlinear pedagogy. We propose the adoption of a new term, representative learning design, to help sport scientists, experimental psychologists, and pedagogues recognize the potential application of Brunswik's original concepts, and to ensure functionality and action fidelity in training and learning environments.
Article
Full-text available
A variety of biomechanical data are sampled from smooth n-dimensional spatiotemporal fields. These data are usually analyzed discretely, by extracting summary metrics from particular points or regions in the continuum. It has been shown that, in certain situations, such schemes can compromise the spatiotemporal integrity of the original fields. An alternative methodology called statistical parametric mapping (SPM), designed specifically for continuous field analysis, constructs statistical images that lie in the original, biomechanically meaningful sampling space. The current paper demonstrates how SPM can be used to analyze both experimental and simulated biomechanical field data of arbitrary spatiotemporal dimensionality. Firstly, 0-, 1-, 2-, and 3-dimensional spatiotemporal datasets derived from a pedobarographic experiment were analyzed using a common linear model to emphasize that SPM procedures are (practically) identical irrespective of the data's physical dimensionality. Secondly two probabilistic finite element simulation studies were conducted, examining heel pad stress and femoral strain fields, respectively, to demonstrate how SPM can be used to probe the significance of field-wide simulation results in the presence of uncontrollable or induced modeling uncertainty. Results were biomechanically intuitive and suggest that SPM may be suitable for a wide variety of mechanical field applications. SPM's main theoretical advantage is that it avoids problems associated with a priori assumptions regarding the spatiotemporal foci of field signals. SPM's main practical advantage is that a unified framework, encapsulated by a single linear equation, affords comprehensive statistical analyses of smooth scalar fields in arbitrarily bounded n-dimensional spaces.
Article
Full-text available
The aims of the present study were both to describe anthropometrics and cycling power-velocity characteristics in top-level track sprinters, and to test the hypothesis that these variables would represent interesting predictors of the 200 m track sprint cycling performance. Twelve elite cyclists volunteered to perform a torque-velocity test on a calibrated cycle ergometer, after the measurement of their lean leg volume (LLV) and frontal surface area (A(p)), in order to draw torque- and power-velocity relationships, and to evaluate the maximal power (P(max)), and both the optimal pedalling rate (f(opt)) and torque (T(opt)) at which P (max) is reached. The 200 m performances--i.e. velocity (V200) and pedalling rate (f 200)--were measured during international events (REC) and in the 2002 French Track Cycling Championships (NAT). P(max), f(opt), and T(opt) were respectively 1600 +/- 116 W, 129.8 +/- 4.7 rpm and 118.5 +/- 9.8 N . m. P(max) was strongly correlated with T(opt) (p < 0.001), which was correlated with LLV (p < 0.01). V200 was related to P(max) normalized by A(p) (p < or = 0.05) and also to f(opt) (p < 0.01) for REC and NAT. f 200 (155.2 +/- 3, REC; 149 +/- 4.3, NAT) were significantly higher than f(opt) (p < 0.001). These findings demonstrated that, in this population of world-class track cyclists, the optimization of the ratio between P(max) and A(p) represents a key factor of 200 m performance. Concerning the major role also played by f(opt), it is assumed that, considering high values of f 200, sprinters with a high value of optimal pedalling rate (i.e. lower f200-f(opt) difference) could be theoretically in better conditions to maximize their power output during the race and hence performance.
Article
Previous authors have reported power-pedaling rate relationships for maximal cycling. However, the joint-specific power-pedaling rate relationships that contribute to pedal power have not been reported. We determined absolute and relative contributions of joint-specific powers to pedal power across a range of pedaling rates during maximal cycling. Ten cyclists performed maximal 3s cycling trials at 60, 90, 120, 150, and 180 rpm. Joint-specific powers were averaged over complete pedal cycles, and extension and flexion actions. Effects of pedaling rate on relative joint-specific power, velocity and excursion were assessed with regression analyses and repeated measures ANOVA. Relative ankle plantar flexion power (25 to 8%; p=0.01; R2=0.90) decreased with increasing pedaling rate whereas relative hip extension power (41 to 59%; p<0.01; R2=0.92) and knee flexion power (34 to 49%; p < 0.01; R2=0.94) increased with increasing pedaling rate. Knee extension powers did not differ across pedaling rates. Ankle joint angular excursion decreased with increasing pedaling rate (48 to 20º) whereas hip joint excursion increased (42 to 48º). These results demonstrate that the often reported quadratic power-pedaling rate relationship arise from combined effects of dissimilar joint-specific power-pedaling rate relationships. These dissimilar relationships are likely influenced by musculoskeletal constraints (i.e., muscle architecture, morphology) and/or motor control strategies.
Article
Abstract Two distinctly separate training facilities (dry-land and aquatic) are routinely used in springboard diving and pose an interesting problem for learning, given the inherent differences in landing (head first vs. feet first) imposed by the different task constraints. Although divers may practise the same preparation phase, take-off and initial aerial rotation in both environments, there is no evidence to suggest that the tasks completed in the dry-land training environment are representative of those performed in the aquatic competition environment. The aim of this study was to compare the kinematics of the preparation phase of reverse dives routinely practised in each environment. Despite their high skill level, it was predicted that individual analyses of elite springboard divers would reveal differences in the joint coordination and board-work between take-offs. The two-dimensional kinematic characteristics were recorded during normal training sessions and used for intra-individual analysis. Kinematic characteristics of the preparatory take-off phase revealed differences in board-work (step lengths, jump height, board depression angles) for all participants at key events. However, the presence of scaled global topological characteristics suggested that all participants adopted similar joint coordination patterns in both environments. These findings suggest that the task constraints of wet and dry training environments are not similar, and highlight the need for coaches to consider representative learning designs in high performance diving programmes.
Article
There has been no direct attempt to evaluate whether gait performed overground and on a treadmill is the same for lower limb amputees. A multiple case study approach was adopted to explore the degenerate movement behavior displayed by three male amputees. Participants walked overground at a self-selected preferred pace and when this speed was enforced on a treadmill (50 stride cycles per condition). The extremities of motion (i.e., maximum flexion) for the hip and knee joints differed between conditions (0.2-3.8 degrees). For two participants, the temporal asymmetry of gait was reduced on the treadmill. Initial data suggest that research on amputees simulating overground walking on a treadmill might need to be interpreted with some caution.
Article
Zatsiorsky et al. (in Contemporary Problems in Biomechanics, pp. 272-291, CRC Press, Massachusetts, 1990a) obtained, by means of a gamma-ray scanning technique, the relative body segment masses, center of mass (CM) positions, and radii of gyration for samples of college-aged Caucasian males and females. Although these data are the only available and comprehensive set of inertial parameters regarding young adult Caucasians, they have been rarely utilized for biomechanical analyses of subjects belonging to the same or a similar population. The main reason is probably that Zatsiorsky et al. used bony landmarks as reference points for locating segment CMs and defining segment lengths. Some of these landmarks were markedly distant from the joint centers currently used by most researchers as reference points. The purpose of this study was to adjust the mean relative CM positions and radii of gyration reported by Zatsiorsky et al., in order to reference them to the joint centers or other commonly used landmarks, rather than the original landmarks. The adjustments were based on a number of carefully selected sources of anthropometric data.
Article
Performance models provide an opportunity to examine cycling in a broad parameter space. Variables used to drive such models have traditionally been measured in the laboratory. The assumption, however, that maximal laboratory power is similar to field power has received limited attention. The purpose of the study was to compare the maximal torque- and power-pedaling rate relationships during "all-out" sprints performed on laboratory ergometers and on moving bicycles with elite cyclists. Over a 3-day period, seven male (mean +/- SD; 180.0 +/- 3.0 cm; 86.2 +/- 6.1 kg) elite track cyclists completed two maximal 6 s cycle ergometer trials and two 65 m sprints on a moving bicycle; calibrated SRM powermeters were used and data were analyzed per revolution to establish torque- and power-pedaling rate relationships, maximum power, maximum torque and maximum pedaling rate. The inertial load of our laboratory test was (37.16 +/- 0.37 kg m(2)), approximately half as large as the field trials (69.7 +/- 3.8 kg m(2)). There were no statistically significant differences between laboratory and field maximum power (1791 +/- 169; 1792 +/- 156 W; P = 0.863), optimal pedaling rate (128 +/- 7; 129 +/- 9 rpm; P = 0.863), torque-pedaling rate linear regression slope (-1.040 +/- 0.09; -1.035 +/- 0.10; P = 0.891) and maximum torque (266 +/- 20; 266 +/- 13 Nm; P = 0.840), respectively. Similar torque- and power-pedaling rate relationships were demonstrated in laboratory and field settings. The findings suggest that maximal laboratory data may provide an accurate means of modeling cycling performance.