Research

Recumbent vs. upright bicycles:3D trajectory of body centre of mass, limb mechanical work, and operative range of propulsive muscles


Reference:

Telli, R., Seminati, E., Pavei, G. and Minetti, A. E., 2017. Recumbent vs. upright bicycles:3D trajectory of body centre of mass, limb mechanical work, and operative range of propulsive muscles. Journal of Sports Sciences, 35 (5), pp. 491-499.

Related documents:

[img] PDF (Recumbent vs upright bicycles_PURE_April_2016) - Repository staff only until 22 October 2017 - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
Download (14MB) | Contact Author

    Official URL:

    http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2016.1175650

    Abstract

    Recumbent bicycles (RB) are high performance, human-powered vehicles. In comparison to normal/upright bicycles (NB) the RB may allow individuals to reach higher speeds due to aerodynamic advantages. The purpose of this investigation was to compare the non-aerodynamic factors that may potentially influence the performance of the two bicycles. 3D body centre of mass (BCoM) trajectory, its symmetries, and the components of the total mechanical work necessary to sustain cycling were assessed through 3D kinematics and computer simulations. Data collected at 50, 70, 90 110 rpm during stationary cycling were used to drive musculoskeletal modelling simulation and estimate muscle-tendon length. Results demonstrated that BCoM trajectory, confined in a 15-mm side cube, changed its orientation, maintaining a similar pattern across all cadences in both bicycles. RB displayed a reduced additional mechanical external power (16.1 ± 9.7 W on RB vs. 20.3 ± 8.8 W on NB), a greater symmetry on the progression axis, and no differences in the internal mechanical power compared to NB. Simulated muscle activity revealed small significant differences for only selected muscles. On the RB, quadriceps and gluteus demonstrated greater shortening, while biceps femoris, iliacus, and psoas exhibited greater stretch; however, aerodynamics still remains the principal benefit.

    Details

    Item Type Articles
    CreatorsTelli, R., Seminati, E., Pavei, G. and Minetti, A. E.
    DOI10.1080/02640414.2016.1175650
    DepartmentsFaculty of Humanities & Social Sciences > Health
    Publisher StatementRecumbent_vs_upright_bicycles_PURE_April_2016.pdf: This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Journal of Sports Sciences on 22/04/2016, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/02640414.2016.1175650
    RefereedYes
    StatusPublished
    ID Code50094

    Export

    Actions (login required)

    View Item