Estimation of hand forces and propelling efficiency during front crawl swimming with hand paddles

Effect of body roll amplitude and arm rotation speed on propulsion of arm amputee swimmers

“…Therefore, hydrodynamic forces acting on the upper arm should be lower than those acting on the hand. Gourgoulis et al (2008) derived hand forces of front crawl swimmers from experimental kinematic data. They estimated the mean resultant and propulsive forces at 11.9 72.6 and 8.1 71.4 N, respectively, for competitive female swimmers.…”

Using reverse engineering and computational fluid dynamics to investigate a lower arm amputee swimmer's performance

“…In this study, the mean forces (resultant and propulsive) for the upper arm in the propelling phase were found to be equal to 7.9 and 3.2 N, respectively. For able-bodied front crawl female swimmers, the mean resultant and propulsive hand forces derived from experimental kinematic data (Gourgoulis et al, 2008) were evaluated at 11.9 and 8.1 N, respectively. These results are pleasing since the forces have relatively the same order of magnitude.…”

Application of Video-Based Methods for Competitive Swimming Analysis: A Systematic Review

“…33,46 Various solutions have been developed to record underwater motion, including placing the camera in a waterproof housing; 25,47,53 using an underwater viewing window 24,31,46 or alternatively a periscope system 38,45 ( Figure 4). Although periscope systems were frequently used in the past, [55][56][57][58] waterproof camera housings would appear to now be the most popular choice and offer flexibility in positioning but have short camera to interface distances (the distance between the camera lens and the glass of the waterproof housing) which can result in reconstruction errors ( Figure 5). 22 Underwater viewing windows allow for increased camera to interface distances but video capture will be limited by access to a swimming pool or flume with built in windows included and may also result in issues with refraction.…”

“…Smaller frame sizes can result in lower reconstruction errors than larger frames. 55 These reconstruction error differences be attributed to various factors, including the effects of light refraction; image deformation when recording; the relative size of the reproduced image in relation to the capture volume or issues with the reconstruction algorithms used.…”