1 ORIGINAL RESEARCH 204 Reiser, Peterson, and Broker JOURNAL OF APPLIED BIOMECHANICS, 2001, 17, by Human Kinetics Publishers, Inc. Anaerobic Cycling Power Output With Variations in Recumbent Body Configuration Raoul F. Reiser II, Michael L. Peterson, and Jeffrey P. Broker While the recumbent cycling position has become common for high-performance human-powered vehicles, questions still remain as to the influence of familiarity on recumbent cycling, the optimal riding position, and how recumbent cycling positions compare to the standard cycling position (SCP). Eight recumbentfamiliar cyclists and 10 recreational control cyclists were compared using the 30-s Wingate test in 5 recumbent positions as well as the SCP. For the recumbent positions, hip position was maintained 15 below the bottom bracket while the backrest was altered to investigate body configuration angle (BCA: the angle between the bottom bracket, hip, and a marker at mid-torso) changes from 100 to 140 in 10 increments. Between-groups analysis found that only 4 of the 126 analyzed parameters differed significantly, with all trends in the same direction. Therefore both groups were combined for further analysis. Whole-group peak power (14.6 W/kg body mass) and average power (9.9 and 9.8 W/kg body mass, respectively) were greatest in the 130 and 140 BCA positions, with power dropping off as BCA decreased through 100 (peak = 12.4 W/kg body mass; avg. = 9.0 W/kg body mass). Power output in the SCP (peak = 14.6 W/kg body mass; avg. = 9.7 W/kg body mass) was similar to that produced in the 130 and 140 recumbent BCA. Average hip and ankle angles increased (became more extended/ plantar-flexed), 36 and 10, respectively, with recumbent BCA, while knee angles remained constant. The lower extremity kinematics of the 130 and 140 BCA were most similar to those of the SCP. However, SCP hip and knee joints were slightly extended and the ankle joint was slightly plantar-flexed compared to these two recumbent positions, even though the BCA of the SCP was not significantly different. These findings suggest: (a) the amount of recumbent familiarity in this study did not produce changes in power output or kinematics; (b) BCA is a major determinant of power output; and (c) recumbent-position anaerobic power output matches that of the SCP when BCA is maintained, even though lower extremity kinematics may be altered. Key Words: peak power, Wingate, cycling kinematics R.F. Reiser is with the Div. of Kinesiology & Health, 115 Corbett Bldg, Univ. of Wyoming, Laramie, WY ; M.L. Peterson is with the Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, Univ. of Maine, Orono, ME 04469; J.P. Broker is with the Sport Science & Technology Div., U.S. Olympic Committee, Colorado Springs, CO
2 Cycling Power Output Variations 205 Introduction The recumbent cycling position has become popular for high-performance humanpowered vehicles due to its reduced aerodynamic drag compared to a fully crouched standard racing position (Gross, Kyle, & Malewicki, 1983). With the hips almost directly behind the crank, horizontally, and the torso elevated only slightly to see forward (Figure 1), the recumbent cycling position reduces the effective frontal area, and in turn the aerodynamic drag compared to the standard cycling position (SCP: riding with a 75 seat-tube angle and variable forward torso lean). The orientation of the lower extremity and torso may be manipulated independently or simultaneously to modify the aerodynamics and riding position of the vehicle. Rider position may be critical in determining the rider s peak-power output capacity (Too, 1991, 1994; Yoshihuku & Herzog, 1996), and therefore also the top speed of the vehicle. Rider position is defined by the configuration of the body segments relative to each other, termed body configuration angle (BCA: the angle between the bottom bracket, hip joint center, and a marker at mid-torso), and the orientation of the lower extremity relative to gravity, termed the hip orientation angle (the angle between a line drawn between the bottom bracket and hip joint, relative to the horizontal), as shown in Figure 1. Altering the BCA will mainly affect the mean hip angle while cycling, with only small adjustments at the knee and ankle (Heil, Derrick, & Whittlesey, 1997; Heil, Wilcox, & Quinn, 1995; Price & Donne, 1997; Too, 1991; Umberger, Scheuchenzuber, & Manos, 1998). Likewise, altering the hip orientation angle will mainly affect the relative pull of gravity on the body segments that may directly change the effective forces on the pedal (Browning, Gregor, & Broker, 1992; De Groot, Figure 1 The variable seating device interfaced with cycling ergometer used in data collection with overlay of defined terms: ankle angle (AA), backrest angle (BA), body configuration angle (BCA), hip angle (HA), hip orientation angle (HOA), knee angle (KA), pedal angle (PA), and torso angle (TA).
3 206 Reiser, Peterson, and Broker Welbergen, Clijsen, et al., 1994) and cause small adjustments at the ankle, knee, and hip (Brown, Kautz, & Dairaghi, 1996). The effects on peak-power output by altering the body configuration in some manner have been examined in both the recumbent (Too, 1991; Welbergen & Clijsen, 1990) and the standard cycling position (Umberger et al., 1998; Welbergen & Clijsen, 1990). However, each of these studies has limitations that reduce its applicability in determining the true effect of altering BCA on peak-power output. To date, we know of no study that has effectively isolated the effect of BCA on peak-power output in recumbent cycling positions. Since the tradeoffs between the aerodynamic improvements made based on BCA adjustments and the effects on power output are not well understood, it is presently impossible to optimize the design of a human-powered vehicle for high speeds. In addition to the lack of understanding concerning the effects of body configuration on peak-power output, it is unclear how power outputs in recumbent cycling positions compare to those measured in the SCP, in terms of both peak-power output and the influence of training. This information is critical for two reasons: (a) cyclists with no recumbent cycling experience are often recruited to ride recumbent vehicles and given only a short period of time to train in the recumbent position prior to competition; and (b) recumbent vehicles are often designed with power output parameters defined based on tests performed in the SCP. The objectives of this investigation were threefold: (a) Determine whether having a cyclist train in a recumbent position for a short period of time will produce adaptations that alter recumbent cycling peak-power output and lower extremity kinematics. (b) Determine the effects of changes in BCA, while keeping hip orientation constant, on peak-power output in recumbent cycling. (c) Determine how peak-power output in the SCP compares to similar measures taken during recumbent cycling. Methods Eighteen male recreational cyclists were separated into two groups based on their familiarity with the recumbent cycling position (familiar: n = 8; control: n = 10). Familiar-group cyclists averaged one or more cycling sessions per week of at least 30 min duration on a Schwinn 205P stationary recumbent trainer (Schwinn Cycling & Fitness, Inc., Boulder, CO) during the 8 weeks prior to testing (mean ± SD = 1.5 ± 0.4 sessions a week) The control group performed no recumbent cycling except for one cyclist who began the recumbent training but did not continue. There was no history of recumbent cycling experience for any of the cyclists. No restrictions were placed on the amount of cycling in the SCP for either group during the 8 weeks prior to the start of testing. Prior to participation, data were collected on the cyclists age, mass, standing height, and lower extremity anthropometric measures of the right side (Table 1). For both groups, the maximum hip-to-pedal distance while cycling was set at the beginning of each session at 105% of the standing leg length from greater trochanter to the floor. To accommodate the changes in BCA required of this study and maintain consistent hip orientation and hip-to-pedal distance, a custom built, variable seating device was interfaced with a Monark 824E bicycle ergometer (Monark Exercise AB, Varberg, Sweden) (Figure 1). The ergometer was equipped with 175-mm crank arms and Shimano SPD compatible clipless pedals (Shimano American Corp., Irvine, CA).
4 Cycling Power Output Variations 207 Table 1 Average (± SD) Recumbent-Familiar, Control, and Whole-Group Anthropometrics Age Mass Lower Group (yrs) (kg) Height Thigh leg Foot HPD Familiar (n = 8) (4.7) (13.8) (10) (3) (4) (1) (7) Control (n = 10) (3.9) (6.5) (11) (3) (2) (1) (5) Whole (N = 18) (4.2) (10.3) (10) (3) (3) (1) (6) Note: Length measures (in cm) taken from participant s right side. HPD = maximum hip-topedal distance. Seven test sessions were required of each participant. The first session obtained university-approved informed consent, information on cycling experience, anthropometric measures, and health status. Additionally, since pilot testing showed a one-test learning curve, a test was administered in a random position to familiarize participants with the apparatus and procedures. Each of the remaining 6 sessions tested a different cycling position in a random order, with the position of the orientation session repeated last. Five of the cycling positions tested were recumbent with a 15 hip orientation angle and backrest angle of 30, 40, 50, 60, or 70 (torso angle of 25, 35, 45, 55, or 65 ), allowing for analysis of BCA from 140 to 100. The 6th position was a SCP with a 75 hip orientation angle and no backrest so that the participant could choose his own angle of torso lean by adjusting handlebar height and rotation. The 15 hip orientation angle was selected for its practicality in a streamlined recumbent vehicle. In this position the feet do not drop below the lowest point of the buttocks and increase the frontal cross-sectional area of the vehicle. The maximum and minimum backrest angles of 70 and 30, respectively, were set after selecting the hip orientation angle. Again, practicality in a streamlined vehicle was the main criterion for selecting this range. However, care was also taken to ensure that the BCA range included the one normally used by cyclists in the SCP. There was a minimum of 24 hours between test sessions and a maximum window of 14 days to complete all sessions. Each participant tested at the same time of day, and exercise was to be kept to a minimum during the hours prior to testing. For each recumbent position, the participant was strapped to the seating device with both a hip and mid-torso belt. Participants remained seated; however, no belts were worn during the SCP testing. In order to quantify body position and lower extremity joint kinematics while cycling, we placed reflective markers on each cyclist s right mid-torso (mid rib cage, in line with hip/shoulder axis), hip (approximating the greater trochanter), knee (lateral femoral epicondyle), ankle (lateral malleolus), and toe (head of 5th metatarsal).
5 208 Reiser, Peterson, and Broker Markers were also placed on the ergometer at the crank and pedal spindle centers (Figure 1). The 30-s Wingate test, which is generally accepted as a valid tool for assessing maximal anaerobic power output (Bar-Or, 1987), was chosen for this study. The test protocol was similar to that utilized by the Sport Science & Technology Division of the U.S. Olympic Committee (R.L. Wilber of USOC, responsible for testing elite cyclists, personal communication, March 1998). The protocol consisted of a 5-min warm-up with a load of 2.0% body mass in the test position of that session. During the warm-up period, two 5-s sprints with a load of 4.1% body mass were performed at the 3- and 4-min marks. A 3-min recovery period followed the warm-up prior to the test. To begin the test, each participant cycled at 60 rpm against zero load until, after a 5-s countdown, the resistance was increased to 8.5% body mass and he pedaled as hard and fast as possible for the next 30 s. After the test, the participant was allowed to continue cycling against a light load for recovery. Power output during the test was measured with the OptoSensor 2000 (Sports Medicine Industries, Inc., St. Cloud, MN). Power was calculated at 1-s increments throughout the test using the velocity of the flywheel, belt friction torque, and the inertial contribution of both the flywheel and crank from their respective angular accelerations (Reiser, Broker, & Peterson, 2000). From each test, peak-power and minimum-power output were calculated by averaging the largest and smallest powers computed during rolling consecutive 5-s intervals, respectively. Peak power and minimum power were then used to calculate the fatigue index (percentile difference of peak power minus minimum power divided by peak power). Average-power output was calculated over the entire test. Also during the test, the participants were videotaped by a camera positioned orthogonally to the plane of motion at a distance of approximately 4 m and operating with a shutter speed of s. The reflective markers were automatically digitized (Peak Motus System, Peak Performance Technologies, Inc., Englewood, CO) at 30 Hz for three successive pedal revolutions that crossed the 15-s mark during the test, beginning at top dead center. The 2-D coordinate data were then smoothed at 5 Hz using a recursive, low-pass Butterworth filter. Hip orientation angle, torso angle, BCA, and maximum hip-to-pedal distance were all calculated along with maximum, average, and minimum hip, knee, ankle, and pedal angles (Figure 1). Hip angle was defined as the angle between the midtorso, hip, and knee markers. Knee angle was defined as the angle between hip, knee, and ankle markers, with zero referenced at full extension and the angle increasing with knee flexion. Ankle angle was defined as the angle between the knee, ankle, and toe markers. Pedal angle was defined as the angle produced by the line connecting the toe marker with the center of the pedal spindle relative to vertical. Maximum and minimum values are an average of the three maxima or minima from the digitized pedal cycles, while the remaining kinematic parameters are an average of the entire three pedal cycles. Both groups were compared, position for position, using Student s t-test (twotailed, two sample with equal variance). The between-groups analysis found no significant differences in any of the 21 kinetic parameters, and only 4 differences (p = 0.05) in any of the 105 kinematic parameters (minimum hip angle in the 130 BCA position, minimum knee angle and maximum hip-to-pedal distance in the 120 BCA position, and maximum hip-to-pedal distance in the 130 BCA position). Due to the lack of differences and the similarity in all trends between groups,
6 Cycling Power Output Variations 209 both groups were combined for comparisons across the positions. The 5 recumbent positions and SCP were compared using repeated-measures analysis of variance with post hoc analysis using Tukey s honestly significant difference. (Due to the extreme differences in torso angle and pedal angle between the recumbent positions and the SCP, the SCP values were held out of the statistical procedures for these two parameters.) Additionally, the optimal recumbent peak-power output position (ORP) for each cyclist was selected from one of the 5 recumbent positions for comparison with the SCP. Between the ORP and the SCP, Student s t-test (two-tailed with repeated measures) was used for comparison. All significance was evaluated at the P = 0.05 level. Results Hip orientation angle, torso angle, BCA, and maximum hip-to-pedal distance were well controlled in the experiment (Table 2). The BCA produced through the combined hip orientation angle and torso angle were within 2 of the expected BCA. Each recumbent BCA differed significantly from the others. However, the average BCA in the SCP was not significantly different from either the 130 or 140 recumbent BCA. The BCA for the ORP was within 1 of the SCP. The maximum hip-to-pedal distance, Table 2 Summary of Controlled Kinematic Parameters (± SD) Body Configuration Angle ORP SCP Hip orientation angle * 75 (1) (2) (1) (2) (2) (2) (2) Torso angle * 120 (9) (6) (8) (5) (7) (8) (10) Backrest angle BCA (measured) (9) (7) (8) (6) (8) (9) (11) Maximum Hip-to-pedal distance (3) (3) (3) (3) (2) (3) (3) Note: Maximum hip-to-pedal distance reported as percent standing floor to greater trochanter length; Angles reported in degrees. Not all statistically different parameters marked in table (see text for details). *p < 0.05 between ORP and SCP; p < 0.05 with 105 HPD; + p < 0.05 with all other recumbent positions.
7 210 Reiser, Peterson, and Broker expressed as a percentage of the participant s standing leg length, showed slightly greater variation than the other controlled parameters. Five out of 6 positions averaged 104% or 105%. The 7th position (BCA = 110 ) averaged 103%, which was significantly different from the 105% maximum hip-to-pedal distance. Peak power and average power exhibited similar trends across positions (Figure 2 and Table 3). Both peak power and average power were greatest in the 130 and 140 BCA positions, creating a small zone of maximum performance, with power dropping off as much as 15% as BCA decreased further. The power output of these two recumbent positions was similar to that produced in the SCP. The fatigue index values showed a small amount of decline as BCA was reduced. However, only the fatigue index in the 100 BCA position was significantly less than the other positions, including the SCP. The ORP was evenly distributed between the 130 and 140 BCA positions. The only exception to this was one member of the recumbent-familiar group who produced peak power in the 120 BCA position. The peak power and average power produced in the ORP were greater than those in the SCP, with the average power being significantly greater. Changes in power output with BCA were accompanied by changes in lower extremity kinematics (Table 4). The 10 increases in BCA produced roughly 10 increases in hip angles (Figure 3). All recumbent hip angles were significantly different from each other, except for the maximum hip angles in the 120 and 110 BCA positions. The hip angles in the SCP were significantly greater than all the recumbentposition hip angles, except for the 140 BCA position. Changes in BCA did not produce any consistent or significant changes in knee angle. However, the knee angles in the SCP were significantly lower than the knee angles of all recumbent positions. Figure 2 Whole-group peak-power and average-power output relative to participant body mass.
8 Cycling Power Output Variations 211 Table 3 Relative Whole-Group Peak Power, Average Power, and Fatigue Index (± SD) Body Configuration Angle ORP SCP Peak (1.2) (1.2) (1.2) (1.0) (1.3) (1.1) (1.1) Average * 9.7 (0.7) (0.7) (0.6) (0.5) (0.6) (0.5) (0.7) Fatigue Index (%) (7) (6) (5) (5) (6) (5) (6) Note: Not all statistically different parameters marked in table (see text for details). *p < 0.05 between ORP and SCP; p < 0.05 with 100 and 110 BCA; + p < 0.05 with 100, 110, and 120 BCA; p < 0.05 with all other. Figure 3 Average measured whole-group body configuration angles (BCA) and hip angles.
9 212 Reiser, Peterson, and Broker Table 4 Summary of Lower Extremity Kinematics (± SD) Body Configuration Angle ORP SCP Hip angle Maximum * 122 (7) (7) (7) (4) (8) (9) (9) Average (7) (8) (8) (5) (9) (10) (11) Minimum (8) (9) (9) (6) (11) (13) (14) Knee angle Maximum * 108 (4) (5) (5) (4) (6) (6) (4) Average * 74 (4) (5) (5) (4) (6) (5) (5) Minimum * 38 (8) (8) (8) (7) (7) (7) (8) Ankle angle Maximum (9) (9) (9) (11) (11) (10) (10) Average * 121 (8) (6) (7) (9) (7) (8) (7) Minimum * 107 (7) (6) (7) (9) (7) (8) (6) Pedal angle Maximum * 64 (22) (18) (18) (16) (16) (15) (22) Average * 26 (19) (18) (13) (13) (14) (12) (18) Minimum * 12 (19) (17) (16) (14) (16) (12) (19) Note: Not all statistically different parameters marked in table (see text for details). Angles reported in degrees. *p < 0.05 between ORP and SCP; p < 0.05 with 100 and 110 BCA; + p < 0.05 with all other recumbent positions.
10 Cycling Power Output Variations 213 Ankle angles exhibited a general increase of about 10 total as the BCA increased across the studied range. Ankle angles in the 130 and 140 BCA positions were significantly greater than those in the 100 and 110 BCA positions. Average and minimum ankle angles in the 120 BCA position were also significantly greater than those in the 100 BCA position. Ankle angles in the SCP were significantly greater than all those in the recumbent positions except for the 130 and 140 BCA positions. There were no significant differences in the pedal angles of the recumbent positions. However, pedal angles in the recumbent positions were significantly greater than those in the SCP. Even though the BCA of the ORP was only 1 more than that of the SCP, 6 out of 9 lower extremity joint angles were significantly different (Table 4). The hip and ankle angles were lower in the ORP compared to the SCP, with the maximum hip angle and the average and minimum ankle angles significantly lower. All knee angles were significantly greater in the ORP compared to the SCP. Discussion Familiarity with recumbent cycling may have produced some minimal, but generally not significantly different, changes in both power output and cycling kinematics. However, the degree to which the differences between groups may be attributed to recumbent familiarity is limited. Participants were not pretested 8 weeks prior to being posttested, thus general fitness level and cycling kinematics prior to any recumbent training could not be compared. Additionally, the control group was not required to add any further SCP cycling training to their regimen to account for the additional cycling of the recumbent-familiar group. The lack of consistent differences in power output and cycling kinematics between groups is plausible, given the similar BCA of the recumbent cyclists to the SCP and the limited amount of intense recumbent training by the recumbent-familiar group. Even though the participants in that group were aware that they would be tested with a sprint test at the end of 8 weeks of training, most of the training was of relatively low intensity and could not be expected to improve power output dramatically. The small zone of stable power output followed by a significant (15%) decrease in peak-power output with reduced BCA found in this study is consistent with Yoshihuku and Herzog (1996); they found peak-power output to be stable near the optimal hip angle, with power dropping from 10 to 17% (depending on definition of muscle model) as the pelvis was rotated forward up to 30 from the optimal position. It is likely that the 40 change in BCA in this study was due to both changes in pelvic tilt and, to a small degree, to spinal flexion. However, pelvic tilt could not be measured due to obstruction of view by the hip belt. The optimal zone around the 130 to 140 BCA is consistent with the majority of the work where the effects of BCA on cycling performance were examined (Heil et al., 1995; Umberger et al., 1998; Welbergen & Clijsen, 1990). However, several studies were not necessarily supportive of these findings. From the measures taken by Price and Donne (1997), the BCA could not be determined, and Heil et al. (1997) found no consistent trends except that participants were most efficient in BCA positions that matched their road bicycles. Additionally, Too (1991) reported an optimal BCA near 115, outside the optimal zone found in this study. Other factors such as altering hip orientation angle in
11 214 Reiser, Peterson, and Broker conjunction with BCA, limited number of positions tested, and participant population may have contributed to the different results between this study and that of Too (1991). The major reason for the difference in optimal BCA between this study and the one by Too (1991) is most likely the different populations tested. Both studies used participants classified as recreational cyclists. However, the ones in the present study were recreational off-road cyclists while those in Too s study were recreational road cyclists. The two types of cycling require slightly different BCA. The optimal recumbent position BCA found here matched the preferred BCA of the participants in the SCP. Too (1991) did not test the participants in the SCP, but the BCA which he found to be optimal is very similar to that which has been measured on track cyclists (Cavanagh & Sanderson, 1986). The track cycling BCA is expected to be very similar to the crouched road cycling BCA used in sprinting. Given adequate training, the muscles acting at the hip may be able to alter their force-length properties enough to change the joint angles where peak power is achieved (Herzog, Guimaraes, Anton, & Carter-Erdman, 1991). BCA alterations caused the greatest changes in hip angle, with smaller changes in ankle angle and virtually no changes in knee angle. These findings are consistent with those of other researchers (Heil et al., 1995; 1997; Price & Donne, 1997; Too, 1991; Umberger et al., 1998). The present study along with Heil et al. (1995) have been the only two to find significant differences in ankle angles with changes in hip orientation angles. This is most likely due to the relatively large number of participants in these two studies, as well as the relatively large range in hip orientation angles compared to the other studies. It appears that the body attempts to maintain the knee motion at the expense of hip and ankle motion. This suggests that the uniarticular muscles acting across the knee joint (three vasti and short head of the biceps femoris) may be the most critical muscles for power production in cycling, in terms of operating length and joint moments. The bi-articular muscles acting across the knee (rectus femoris, long head of biceps femoris, semitendinosus, semimembranosus, gracilis, sartorius, and gastrocnemius) may be compensated by alterations of motion at the hip and ankle. This is plausible given that knee joint muscle power is greater than that of both the hip and ankle, and that it is substantial in both extension and flexion (Broker & Gregor, 1994). Raasch, Zajac, Ma, and Levine (1997) elucidated upon this by simulating maximal-effort pedaling with a musculoskeletal model and found that the uniarticular knee extensors generated most of the power. Additionally, the ankle joint is more of a transfer joint than one for generating power (Raasch et al., 1997; Yoshihuku & Herzog, 1996), making the ankle angle less critical than the knee angle. Alternatively, changing the reaction forces and skeletal loading of the knee may affect power output through neural feedback mechanisms. However, without more in-depth analysis of the musculoskeletal biomechanics, including kinetics, little can be concluded as to how the muscles are affected by the altered BCA, especially since pelvic rotation and familiarity may also play a role. It also appears that there is a preferred pedal orientation for force application while cycling, which is maintained at the expense of the hip and ankle motion. Changing the pedal orientation may reduce the effective forces on the pedal, or cause detrimental joint reaction forces. Peak power and average power are not reduced by cycling in a recumbent position, as long as the BCA that is preferred by the cyclist in the SCP is maintained. In fact, peak power and average power may increase slightly, as shown in the ORP com-
12 Cycling Power Output Variations 215 pared to the SCP. This slight improvement may be due to having a firm seat and backrest to push against while cycling in the recumbent position. However, this may not be the case in more extreme recumbent hip orientation angles. The kinematics produced in the ORP were the most similar of the recumbent positions compared to the SCP. However, the differences were generally large enough to be significant. These differences may be a result of comparing the best of the 10 incremented recumbent positions with that of the subject-selected SCP. There may also be some changes induced in the kinematics from the altered hip orientation angles, and an altered pull from gravity on the segments of the lower extremity. The altered pull on the segments may produce slightly different moments about the joints, resulting in different preferred joint angles. Additionally, the forces on the pedals may be altered, causing slightly different cycling kinematics. In the SCP there is positive gravitational force for cycling during the propulsive phase of the pedal cycle. However, in the recumbent positions, with the hips behind the bottom bracket, there is positive gravitational force only after the propulsive phase is considered over. There is also an inertial contribution to the pedal force that may be altered by different segment orientations. However, these gravitational and inertial effects do not seem to alter the BCA that was found to be optimal, or the ability to produce power in the positions tested. This is consistent with Brown et al. (1996), who conducted a steady-state, low-power output study and found that lower extremity kinematics were altered by changes in hip orientation angle. However, it was suggested that these changes were not large enough to produce significant changes in muscle length, and therefore power output. From the present investigation, five main conclusions may be drawn: (a) If large training effects are expected during recumbent cycling compared to standard cycling, a longer time period, increased intensity, vastly different BCA, or a combination of these variables is needed to elicit these changes. (b) Small changes on the order of 10 from the optimal BCA zone may not reduce peak-power output significantly, but may reduce power output enough to influence the top speed while sprint cycling in a less-than-optimal BCA. (c) The optimal recumbent cycling BCA is most similar to the BCA chosen by the rider when tested in the SCP. The power output in the optimal recumbent cycling BCA position is not reduced relative to the SCP, and may actually be enhanced by having a firm seat to push against. (d) Manipulating hip orientation will induce small changes in lower extremity kinematics. However, these effects on power output are insignificant. (e) While this research adds to our knowledge of recumbent cycling, more research is needed on the influences of training on BCA and power output. References Bar-Or, O. (1987). The Wingate anaerobic test: An update on methodology, reliability and validity. Sports Medicine, 4, Broker, J.P., & Gregor, R.J. (1994). Mechanical energy management in cycling: Source relations and energy expenditure. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 26, Brown, D.A., Kautz, S.A., & Dairaghi, C.A. (1996). Muscle activity patterns altered during pedaling at different body orientations. Journal of Biomechanics, 29, Browning, R.C., Gregor, R.J., & Broker, J.P. (1992). Lower extremity kinetics in elite athletes in aerodynamic cycling positions. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 24(Suppl.), S186.
13 216 Reiser, Peterson, and Broker Cavanagh, P.R., & Sanderson, D.J. (1986). The biomechanics of cycling: Studies of the pedaling mechanics of elite pursuit riders. In E.R. Burke (Ed.), Science of cycling (pp ). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. De Groot, G., Welbergen, E., Clijsen, L., Clarijs, J., Cabri, J., & Antonis, J. (1994). Power, muscular work, and external forces in cycling. Ergonomics, 37, Gross, A.C., Kyle, C.R., & Malewicki, D.J. (1983). The aerodynamics of human-powered land vehicles. Scientific American, 249, Heil, D.P., Derrick, T.R., & Whittlesey, S. (1997). The relationship between preferred and optimal positioning during cycle ergometry. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 75, Heil, D.P., Wilcox, A.R., & Quinn, C.M. (1995). Cardiorespiratory responses to seat-tube angle variation during steady-state cycling. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 27, Herzog, W., Guimaraes, A.C., Anton, M.G., & Carter-Erdman, K.A. (1991). Moment length relations of rectus femoris muscles of speed skaters/cyclists and runners. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 23, Price, D., & Donne, B. (1997). Effect of variation in seat tube angle at different seat heights on submaximal cycling performance in man. Journal of Sports Sciences, 15, Raasch, C.C., Zajac, F.E., Ma, B., & Levine, W.S. (1997). Muscle coordination of maximumspeed pedaling. Journal of Biomechanics, 30, Reiser, R., Broker, J.P., & Peterson, M.L. (2000). Inertial effects on mechanically braked Wingate power calculations. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 32, Too, D. (1991). The effect of hip position/configuration on anaerobic power and capacity in cycling. International Journal of Sport Biomechanics, 7, Too, D. (1994). The effect of trunk angle on power production in cycling. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 65, Umberger, B.R., Scheuchenzuber, H.J., & Manos, T.M. (1998). Differences in power output during cycling at different seat tube angles. Journal of Human Movement Studies, 35, Welbergen, E., & Clijsen, L.P.V.M. (1990). The influence of body position on maximal performance in cycling. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 61, Yoshihuku, Y., & Herzog, W. (1996). Maximal muscle power output in cycling: A modelling approach. Journal of Sports Sciences, 14, Acknowledgments This project was sponsored in part by the Department of Education GAANN program (award #P200A70433). Special thanks to Randy Wilber, PhD, of the USOC s Sport Science & Technology Division for his assistance with the experimental design as well as use of selected pieces of equipment. Also, thanks to all participants, without whom this project would not have been possible.
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com Engineering 2 00 (2010) (2009) 3211 3215 000 000 Engineering www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia 8 th Conference of the International Sports Engineering Association
117 Biomechanics Symposia 2001 / University of San Francisco INVESTIGATION OF POWER OUTPUT ON A NOVEL BICYCLE DRIVE IN COMPARISON WITH THE COMMON BICYCLE DRIVE T. Angeli and R. Pawlik Institute for Machine
5/19/2011 Retül Notes Report Specialized Dolce PRE-FIT NOTES Courtney is a recreational cyclist coming in today for a fit on her road bike. She enjoys riding with friends and in group rides. She has had
INTERACTION OF STEP LENGTH AND STEP RATE DURING SPRINT RUNNING Joseph P. Hunter 1, Robert N. Marshall 1,, and Peter J. McNair 3 1 Department of Sport and Exercise Science, The University of Auckland, Auckland,
International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 2008, 3, 88-93 2008 Human Kinetics, Inc. The Optimal Downhill Slope for Acute Overspeed Running William P. Ebben Purpose: This study evaluated
Bike Fit Clinic 3/11/2014 James Cunningham, PT, DPT, OCS 1. Zinn, L. (2009). Zinn and the Art of Road Bike Maintenance, 3rd Ed. Boulder, CO: Velo Press. Basic frame guidelines Should be able to have at
Positive running, a model for high speed running Frans Bosch positive running posture sums up the right technique for top speed building blocks in running: Pelvic rotation for- and backward and hamstring
A Biomechanical Approach to Javelin Blake Vajgrt Concordia University December 5 th, 2012 The Biomechanical Approach to Javelin 2 The Biomechanical Approach to Javelin Javelin is one of the four throwing
Brigham Young University BYU ScholarsArchive All Faculty Publications 2003-12-01 A New Approach to Modeling Vertical Stiffness in Heel-Toe Distance Runners Iain Hunter email@example.com Follow this and
Kinematic, Kinetic & Electromyographic Characteristics of the Sprinting Stride of Top Female Sprinters Milan Coh, Ales Dolenec & Bojan Jost University of Ljubljana, Slovenia The main purpose of this study
JOURNAL OF APPLIED BIOMECHANICS, 1994,10, 393-399 O 1994 by Human Kinetics Publishers, Inc. Relationship Between Glide Speed and Olympic Cross-Country Ski Performance Glenn M. Street and Robert W. Gregory
University of Kentucky UKnowledge Theses and Dissertations--Kinesiology and Health Promotion Kinesiology and Health Promotion 2012 THE EFFECTS OF SEAT POST ANGLE IN CYCLING PERFORMANCE Saori Hanaki-Martin
Original Research Differences between the Grab Start and Track Start in Collegiate Swimmers ALEXANDER S. DASSOFF*, NAOMI R. FORWARD*, and CHARLIE P. KATICA Department of Kinesiology, Pacific Lutheran University,
Brigham Young University BYU ScholarsArchive All Theses and Dissertations 2014-12-01 Ground Forces Impact on Release of Rotational Shot Put Technique Niklas B. Arrhenius Brigham Young University - Provo
Section 4 25 Section 4 Muscles and Movements Section 4 26 HIP ABDUCTORS Gluteus Medius Gluteus Minimus Tensor Fascia Lata Gluteus Maximus Figure 4-1. Hip Abductors. The hip abductors are a group of four
PROPER PITCHING MECHANICS While each pitcher is a different person and can display some individuality in his mechanics, everyone has similar anatomy (the same muscles, bones and ligaments in the same locations)
Gait and Posture 19 (2004) 194 205 Muscle force redistributes segmental power for body progression during walking R.R. Neptune a,b,, F.E. Zajac b,c,d, S.A. Kautz b,e,f,g a Department of Mechanical Engineering,
UNLV Theses, Dissertations, Professional Papers, and Capstones 12-1-2013 Field Testing the Upright Versus the Aero Cycling Position Curtis Scrugham University of Nevada, Las Vegas, firstname.lastname@example.org Follow
THE BACKSPIN BACKHAND DRIVE IN TENNIS TO BALLS OF VARYING HEIGHT B. Elliott and M. Christmass The Department of Human Movement The University of Western Australia Nedlands, Australia INTRODUCfION Modem
Mathematical model to crouch start in athletics 1 Amr Soliman Mohamed, 1 Lecture in Department of kinesiology faculty of physical education - Minia University, Egypt 1. Introduction Science is the cause
by Michael Young Human Performance Consulting The high performance division of USATF commissioned research to determine what variables were most critical to success in the shot put The objective of the
856 ISBS 2005 / Beijing, China MOVEMENT QUALITY OF MARTIAL ART OUTSIDE KICKS Manfred Vieten and Hartmut Riehle University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany KEY WORDS: martial arts, simulation, muscle energy,
Rugby Strength Coach Speed development guide Outline Why do Newton's laws of motion matter? What is speed? The technique and physical demands of speed Speed training parameters Rugby specific speed training
Biomechanics and the Rules of Race Walking Brian Hanley Biomechanics and the Rules of Race Walking Brian Hanley email@example.com www.evaa.ch The rules and judging Judging is probably the most contentious
MUSCULOSCELETAL EFFICIENCY IN CYCLING AND HANDCYCLING Dr. Harald Böhm Orthopaedic Hospital for Children Aschau im Chiemgau, Germary Agenda Index of efficiency: Definition and relevance in cycling Musculoskeletal
Lupo Corrado, Giancarlo Condello, and Antonio Tessitore. (2014). Women s Water Polo World Championships: Technical and Tactical Aspects of Winning and Losing Teams in Close and Unbalanced Games. Journal
Simulation-based design to reduce metabolic cost Overview: Lecture + Hands On Exercise 1. Generating and evaluating a muscledriven simulation of walking 2. Metabolics 101 3. Designing and evaluating devices
schouweiler, hess UW-L Journal of Undergraduate Research XIII (21) Comparison of Kinematics and Kinetics During Drop and Drop Jump Performance Ryan Schouweiler, Karina Hess Faculty Sponsor: Thomas Kernozek,
Proceedings Kinematic Differences between Set- and Jump-Shot Motions in Basketball Hiroki Okubo 1, * and Mont Hubbard 2 1 Department of Advanced Robotics, Chiba Institute of Technology, 2-17-1 Tsudanuma,
Journal of Applied Biomechanics, 2009, 25, 210-218 2009 Human Kinetics, Inc. A Comparison of Age Level on Baseball Hitting Kinematics Rafael F. Escamilla, 1,2 Glenn S. Fleisig, 3 Coop DeRenne, 4 Marcus
Current issues regarding induced acceleration analysis of walking using the integration method to decompose the GRF George Chen May 17, 2002 Stanford Neuromuscular Biomechanics Lab Group Muscle contribution
Biomechanical Analysis of a Sprint Start Anna Reponen JD Welch Introduction Our presentation will cover the Key Elements of our project. They will be presented along with the methods, results and discussion
Personal Bicycle Fitting Report KEVIN BATCHELOR 2014-05-30 15:01 RIDER Kevin Batchelor Age: 32 Male Blank@Blank.com BIKE MAKE/MODEL: Mosaic, RT-1 SIZE: Custom YEAR: 2013 TYPE: Road SITE Retul HQ 5445 Conestoga
Acta Facultatis Educationis Physicae Universitatis Comenianae Vol. 57 No 1 2017 RELATION BETWEEN MAXIMAL ANAEROBIC POWER OUTPUT AND TESTS ON ROWING ERGOMETER Matej Šmída, Michal Clementis, Dušan Hamar,
Qualitative Analysis of Jumping Standing Long Jump *Any time a person or object is launched into the air Ex- jumping, diving, gymnastics, throwing, or striking Goals: 1. Distance Ex: standing long jump,
Javelin Throwing Technique and Biomechanics Riku Valleala KIHU Research Institute for Olympic Sports Athletics Coaches Seminar, 6-8 Nowember 2015, Oslo Contents of this presentation Basics of biomechanics
Normal and Abnormal Gait Adrielle Fry, MD EvergreenHealth, Division of Sport and Spine University of Washington Board Review Course March 6, 2017 What are we going to cover? Definitions and key concepts
La Gait Analysis grandezze dinamiche e casi clinici. Manuela Galli, DEIB, POLITECNICO DI MILANO Programma 3. La valutazione del cammino Gait analysis 3.1. Obiettivi della valutazione quantitativa del cammino
Preface Taekwondo is a free-fighting, combat sport that is popular in Hong Kong. It is an international sport, with over 18 million participants worldwide, and is one of the new Olympic sports in the Sydney
Thursday 14:00-17:00 Go forth final Paper Assignment Effects of foot-pedal interface rigidity on high frequency cycling acceleration John Romanishin 5/9/2011 2.671 Measurement and Instrumentation Professor
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com Procedia Engineering 200 (2010) (2009) 000 000 2413 2418 Procedia Engineering www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia 8 th Conference of the International Sports Engineering
1 Butterfly Technique Checklist Marion Alexander, Brad Gerbrandt Sport Biomechanics Laboratory, University of Manitoba Armstroke Entry - Arms enter the water with hands about shoulder width apart and slice
Approach Run PRECEPTS RALPH LINDEMAN Head Men s and Women s Track & Field Coach US Air Force Academy Coaching Staff, USA Men s Team, 2004 Olympic Games, Athens, Greece Coaching Staff, USA Men s Team, 2007
Proposed Paralympic Classification System for Va a Information for National federations and National Paralympic Committees Prepared by the research team Johanna Rosén, MSc, PhD student, member Paracanoe
USA Track & Field Heptathlon Summit- November 1994 1 I. Technical considerations in the sprint hurdles Practical Biomechanics For the 100m Hurdles By Gary Winckler University of Illinois A. General flow
Brigham Young University BYU ScholarsArchive All Theses and Dissertations 2004-12-02 A Biomechanical Analysis of Sprinters vs. Distance Runners at Equal and Maximal Speeds Tyler D. Bushnell Brigham Young
12 Week Winter Maintenance Olympic Bridge to Half Ironman This program should be used for an athlete who is coming off an Olympic Distance Race and: 1. They have a very strong base of 4-6 months of consistent
THE JAVELIN RUN-UP By Hans Torim A detailed description of the author s views on the javelin run-up from the initial stages to the impulse stride and the pre-delivery position. The article is a slightly
Created as a free resource by Clinical Edge Based on Physio Edge podcast 59 with Greg Lehman, Tom Goom and Dr Christian Barton Get your free trial of online Physio education at Why do runners get injured?
Tadasana Variation 7 Pro ps 2 ropes or belts, Thighs back, buttocks in (with two helpers) 2 helpers This variation produces a similar effect to the previous one but with a different method. Stand in Tadasana
Ground Reaction Forces and Lower Extremity Kinematics When Running With Suppressed Arm Swing Ross H. Miller 1 e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org Graham E. Caldwell Richard E. A. Van Emmerik Brian R. Umberger
TEMPORAL STRUCTURE OF A LEFT HAND TOSS VS. A RIGHT-HAND TOSS OF THE VOLLEYBALL JUMP SERVE C.L. Tant Iowa State University, Arnes, IA USA K. J. Witte Ohio Northern University, Ada, OH USA The volleyball
SECTION PART 5 5 CHAPTER 12 13 CHAPTER 12: Biomechanical movement Practice questions - text book pages 169-172 1) For which of the following is the athlete s centre of mass most likely to lie outside of
APPLICATION OF THREE DIMENSIONAL ACCELEROMETRY TO HUMAN MOTION ANALYSIS INTRODUCTION Ken'ichi Egawa, T. Tsuboi, T. Satoh, and M. Miyazaki Graduate School of Human Sciences, Waseda University Three dimensional
Swimming Stroke Mechanics What we continue to learn from High-speed Videography and Biomechanical Motion Analysis Jan Prins, Ph.D. Aquatic Research Laboratory University of Hawaii Swimming Biomechanics,
Analysis of stroke technique using acceleration sensor IC in freestyle swimming Y. Ohgi, M. Yasumura Faculty of Environmental Information, Keio Univ., Japan H. Ichikawa Doctoral Prog. of Health and Sport
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com ScienceDirect Procedia Manufacturing 2 (2015 ) 268 274 2nd International Materials, Industrial, and Manufacturing Engineering Conference, MIMEC2015, 4-6 February
SPORTSCIENCE sportsci.org Original Research / Performance Competitive Performance of Elite Olympic-Distance Triathletes: Reliability and Smallest Worthwhile Enhancement Carl D Paton, Will G Hopkins Sportscience
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com ScienceDirect Procedia Engineering 112 (2015 ) 540 545 7th Asia-Pacific Congress on Sports Technology, APCST 2015 Movement variability of professional pool billiards
Loughborough University Institutional Repository Model based automated cycling ergometer This item was submitted to Loughborough University's Institutional Repository by the/an author. Citation: CHAKRAVORTI,
Guidelines for Using the UMTRI ATD Positioning Procedure for ATD and Seat Positioning July 2002 Insurance Institute for Highway Safety Guidelines for Using the UMTRI ATD Positioning Procedure for ATD and
Numerical study on the wrist action during the golf downswing C.C. Chen, Y. Inoue and K. Shibara Department of Intelligent Mechanical Systems Engineering, Kochi University of Technology, Kochi-prefecture,
UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository) Hip and groin pain in athletes Tak, I.J.R. Link to publication Citation for published version (APA): Tak, I. J. R. (2017). Hip and groin pain in athletes: Morphology,
STUDIES IN PHYSICAL CULTURE AND TOURISM Vol. 16, No. 2, 2009 JAN KONARSKI, RYSZARD STRZELCZYK Department of Theory of Sport, University School of Physical Education, Poznań, Poland CHARACTERISTICS OF DIFFERENCES
CHAPTER_2 THE FOUNDATION OF THE SHOT Success in archery depends on consistency and consistency starts with a solid foundation. Fully understanding and being able to apply the fundamentals is the key to
World Journal of Sport Sciences 5 (4): 237-244, 2011 ISSN 2078-4724 IDOSI Publications, 2011 Kinematics of the Mawashi Shoudan Kick as a Parameter of Designing a Training Program for Karate Juniors Alaa
ARE YOU A SLOW- OR A FAST-TWITCH RUNNER? How can we individualize our training towards our different goals based on our muscular makeup? In this article you will learn how to decide if you are a Fast-twitch,
Gait Motion Analysis Ashley Forbes, PT, DPT Ann Marie Schroeder Pace, PT, MPT Walking How we get from one place to another 1 Reciprocal Symmetric Reproducible Efficient Dynamic Components of gait Stride
ZIN Technologies PHi Engineering Support PHi-RPT-0002 CFD Analysis of Large Bubble Mixing Proprietary ZIN Technologies, Inc. For nearly five decades, ZIN Technologies has provided integrated products and
HOW DO WE ACCELERATE WHILE RUNNING? by Daniel J. Schuster April 2015 Director of Thesis: Dr. Paul DeVita Major Department: Kinesiology Running biomechanics are well established in terms of lower extremity
INGLESE - COD. 22883-12-09-13 design and quality MADE IN ITALY since 1980 7 versions 2 models: front drive and posterior, just one frame folding frame gait trainer with constant center of gravity precise
By Lauren Russell Structure (Down plane) The body (toes, knees, hips, wrists and shoulders) is aligned parallel to the intended target line. The torso is tilted over the ball from the hips whilst maintaining
www.euroncap.com EUROPEAN NEW CAR ASSESSMENT PROGRAMME (Euro NCAP) SLED TEST PROCEDURE FOR ASSESSING KNEE IMPACT AREAS Version 1.0a December 2004 Sled Test Procedure for Assessing Knee Impact Areas (V1.0a)
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPORT BIOMECHANICS, 1988,4, 231-259 Factors Contributing to Maximum Height of Dives After Takeoff From the 3M Springboard Ross H. Sanders and Barry D. Wilson This study investigated
THE IMPULSE-STEP IN THE JAVELIN THROW Terseus Liebenberg North-West University Potchefstroom South Africa The most important biomechanical principle ultimately determining throwing distance is the release
Kinetic Comparison Among the Fastball, Curveball, Change-up, and Slider in Collegiate Baseball Pitchers Glenn S. Fleisig,* PhD, David S. Kingsley, Jeremy W. Loftice, Kenneth P. Dinnen, MS, Rajiv Ranganathan,
INTRODUCTION TO GAIT ANALYSIS DATA 1. Phases of gait a. Stance (% gc) i. Loading response (10%) ii. Mid- and terminal stance (%) iii. Pre-swing (10%) b. Swing (% gc) i. Initial swing ii. Mid-swing iii.
Fundamental Mechanics of Alpine Skiing Across Adaptive Disciplines Produced by PSIA-AASI, in cooperation with Disabled Sports USA. Balance & Stance - Beginner/Novice Zone Control the relationship of the
Journal of Sound and Vibration (1998) 17(1), 17 31 Article No. sv981733 A NEW GOLF-SWING ROBOT MODEL UTILIZING SHAFT ELASTICITY S. SUZUKI Department of Mechanical System Engineering, Kitami Institute of
Running Form Modification: When Self-selected is Not Preferred Bryan Heiderscheit, PT, PhD Department of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation Department of Biomedical Engineering University of Wisconsin-Madison
ISSN 1750-9823 (print) 185 International Journal of Sports Science and Engineering Vol. 02 (2008) No. 03, pp. 185-192 The springboard diving techniques analysis Qining Wang Nanjing sports institute, Nanjing,
by Michael R. Bracko, EdD sports medicine Biomechanics powers ice hockey performance Skating in ice hockey is a complex motor skill. Howie Green, of the University of Waterloo in Ontario has written, Hockey
Int. J. Mech. Eng. & Rob. Res. 2013 S M Nacy et al., 2013 Research Paper ISSN 2278 0149 www.ijmerr.com Vol. 2, No. 2, April 2013 2013 IJMERR. All Rights Reserved A MODIFIED DYNAMI MODEL OF THE HUMAN LOWER
SKILL ANALYSIS SAMPLE F MOTOR SKILL: SOCCER SHOT (BALL STATIONARY) Aim/Purpose: The aim of this experiment is to record and analyse the movement process and technique required when kicking a soccer ball
Original Research Quantifying Inter-Segmental Coordination during the Instep Soccer Kicks YUMENG LI 1, MARION ALEXANDER 2, CHERYL GLAZEBROOK 2, and JEFF LEITER 3 1 Department of Kinesiology, University
Your consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.