Comfort on bicycles and the validity of a commercial bicycle fitting system

Christiaans, Henri; Bremner, Angus

doi:10.1016/s0003-6870(97)00052-5

Cited by 53 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The configuration of bicycle components to the cyclist (bicycle fitting) has been usually conducted using tape measures and plumb bobs [3] with the dimensions of bicycle components related to anthropometric dimensions of the cyclist [4,5]. For the configuration of bicycle components (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison of static and dynamic measures of lower limb joint angles in cycling: application to bicycle fitting

Bini¹,

Hume²

2018

Hum Mov.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose. Configuration of bicycle components to the cyclist (bicycle fitting) commonly uses static poses of the cyclist on the bicycle at the 6 o'clock crank position to represent dynamic cycling positions. However, the validity of this approach and the potential use of the different crank position (e.g. 3 o'clock) have not been fully explored. Therefore, this study compared lower limb joint angles of cyclists in static poses (3 and 6 o'clock) compared to dynamic cycling. Methods. Using a digital camera, right sagittal plane images were taken of thirty cyclists seated on their own bicycles mounted on a stationary trainer with the crank at 3 o'clock and 6 o'clock positions. Video was then recorded during pedalling at a self-selected gear ratio and pedalling cadence. Sagittal plane hip, knee and ankle angles were digitised. Results. Differences between static and dynamic angles were large at the 6 o'clock crank position with greater mean hip angle (4.9 ± 3°), smaller knee angle (8.2 ± 5°) and smaller ankle angle (8.2 ± 5.3°) for static angles. Differences between static and dynamic angles (< 1.4°) were trivial to small for the 3 o'clock crank position. Conclusions. To perform bicycle fitting, joint angles should be measured dynamically or with the cyclist in a static pose at the 3 o'clock crank position.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison of static and dynamic measures of lower limb joint angles in cycling: application to bicycle fitting

Bini¹,

Hume²

2018

Hum Mov.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, taking biomechanics as the starting point, Christiaans and Bremner (1998) attempted to measure and analyze the riding dimensions of the human body by using an adjustable bicycle model. Then, by measuring the bike in a dynamic way, they obtained the most suitable sizes and joint angles related to riding.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Applying riding-posture optimization on bicycle frame design

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Even within the context of the specific bicycle example, it has been demonstrated that considering both individual user preference and user anthropometry offers a more accurate method of predicting bicycle configuration than anthropometry alone. Christiaans and Bremner (1998) support this conclusion and recommend the use of a highly adjustable bicycle simulator when fitting a bicycle to its rider, rather than relying upon rules of thumb that consider only anthropometry (although these guidelines may define a useful starting point in bicycle fitting).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…Common methods for optimally sizing a bicycle saddle height reflect objectives of maximising power output or efficiency. To do this, relevant leg dimensions are multiplied by predetermined constants (Christiaans and Bremner 1998). One method makes use of the crotch height (i.e.…”

Section: Manikins Derived From Proportionality Constantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison of methodologies for designing for human variability

Garneau

Parkinson

2011

Journal of Engineering Design

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the design of artefacts that interact with people, the spatial dimensions of the user population are often used to size and engineer the artefact. The variability in anthropometry indicates the fixed allocation of space, adjustability requirements, or how many sizes are needed to accommodate the intended user population. Various tools are used to achieve this goal, including boundary manikins, digital human models, prototypes and population models, and hybrid methods that combine the approaches. The present work explores each of these and their relative strengths and weaknesses. This is done in the context of a univariate case study involving the adjustability requirements of a stationary bicycle.

show abstract

Comfort on bicycles and the validity of a commercial bicycle fitting system

Cited by 53 publications

References 7 publications

A comparison of static and dynamic measures of lower limb joint angles in cycling: application to bicycle fitting

A comparison of static and dynamic measures of lower limb joint angles in cycling: application to bicycle fitting

Applying riding-posture optimization on bicycle frame design

A comparison of methodologies for designing for human variability

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About