No abstract

Ten male recreational runners were filmed using three-dimensional cinematography while running on a treadmill at 3.8 m/s, 4.5 m/s, and 5.4 m/s. A 14-segment mathematical model was used to examine the contributions of the arms to the total-body angular momentum about three orthogonal axes passing through the body center of mass. The results showed that while the body possessed varying amounts of angular momentum about all three coordinate axes, the arms made a meaningful contribution to only the vertical component (Hz). The arms were found to generate an alternating positive and negative Hzpattern during the running cycle. This tended to cancel out an opposite Hzpattern of the legs. The trunk was found to be an active participant in this balance of angular momentum, the upper trunk rotating back and forth with the arms and, to a lesser extent, the lower trunk with the legs. The result was a relatively small total-body Hzthroughout the running cycle. The inverse relationship between upper- and lower-body angular momentum suggests that the arms and upper trunk provide the majority of the angular impulse about the z axis needed to put the legs through their alternating strides in running.

The aims of this study were to identify differences in the centre of buoyancy (CB) and centre of mass (CM) locations of male and female collegiate swimmers, and to assess the influence that buoyancy has on freestyle kicking performance. Sixteen female collegiate swimmers (mean +/- s: age 19.1 +/- 1.2 years) had significantly more adipose tissue (20.2 +/- 4.4%) than 15 male collegiate swimmers (19.9 +/- 1.0 years, 12.6 +/- 3.8%). The ratio of the sum of abdominal and suprailiac skinfolds to the thigh skinfold was significantly greater for the males (2.07 +/- 0.37) than the females (1.31 +/- 0.32), implying that females had proportionately more fatty tissue caudally than males. The distance d between the centres of buoyancy and mass was significantly larger for the males (0.79 +/- 0.43 cm) than the females (0.16 +/- 0.34 cm). Both points were more caudal in the female subjects (59.9 +/- 0.7% and 59.8 +/- 0.7% of body height respectively) than in the male subjects (61.7 +/- 0.8% and 61.2 +/- 0.9% respectively). These data suggest that the difference in d may be attributed to the difference in the location of the centre of buoyancy, because the centre of mass difference was not significant and was characterized by a smaller effect size. The amount and distribution of adipose tissue accounted for a significant proportion of variance in d (R2 = 0.25 and 0.29 respectively). Males had a significantly higher proportional kick time, defined as the ratio of times to complete a 22.9 m sprint when kicking and swimming respectively, than females (1.57 +/- 0.09 and 1.51 +/- 0.13 respectively). This shows that the male swimmers kicked proportionally more slowly than the female swimmers. However, the distance d did not account for a significant proportion of variance in the proportional kick time. Therefore, our results do not support the notion that skilled male swimmers are at a performance disadvantage in terms of natural buoyancy characteristics.

The aim of this study was to compare three competitive swimming starts (grab, rear-weighted track, and front-weighted track). The starts were compared in terms of time and instantaneous horizontal velocity, both at take-off from the block and at 5 m from the wall. Twenty US college female swimmers performed three trials of each of the three randomly ordered starts. Swimmers left the block significantly sooner using the front-weighted track start (0.80 s) than the other two starts (both 0.87 s; P < 0.001). In the rear-weighted track start, however, the athletes left the blocks with significantly higher horizontal velocity than in the grab or front-weighted track start (3.99 vs. 3.87 and 3.90 m/s, respectively; each P < 0.001). By 5 m, the front-weighted track start maintained its time advantage over the grab start (2.19 vs. 2.24s; P = 0.008) but not the rear-weighted track start (2.19 vs. 2.21 s; P = 0.336). However, the rear-weighted track start had a significant advantage over the front-weighted track start in terms of instantaneous horizontal velocity at 5 m (2.25 vs. 2.18 m/s; P = 0.009). Therefore, the rear-weighted track start had a better combination of time and velocity than the front-weighted track start. There was also a trend for the rear-weighted track start to have higher velocity at 5 m than the grab start, although this did not reach statistical significance (2.25 vs. 2.20 m/s; P = 0.042). Overall, these results favour the rear-weighted track start for female swimmers even though most of the athletes had little or no prior experience with it. Additional research is needed to determine whether males would respond similarly to females in these three different swimming starts.

Biomechanics principally stems from two disciplines, mechanics and biology. However, both the application and language of the mechanical constructs are not always adhered to when applied to biological systems, which can lead to errors and misunderstandings within the scientific literature. Here we address three topics that seem to be common points of confusion and misconception, with a specific focus on sports biomechanics applications: (1) joint reaction forces as they pertain to loads actually experienced by biological joints; (2) the partitioning of scalar quantities into directional components; and (3) weight and gravity alteration. For each topic, we discuss how mechanical concepts have been commonly misapplied in peer-reviewed publications, the consequences of those misapplications, and how biomechanics, exercise science, and other related disciplines can collectively benefit by more carefully adhering to and applying concepts of classical mechanics.