Gender Differences in Bicycle Saddle Pressure Distribution during Seated Cycling

Abstract

There are significant gender-related differences in saddle loading which are important to consider when designing saddles. These differences are especially important when riders are in the handlebar drops and more weight is supported on the anterior pelvic structures.

A field-based approach for examining bicycle seat design effects on seat pressure and perceived stability

“…In contrast, when females rode in the aerodynamic position seat pressure values increased over the anterior seat region and did not change over the posterior region. These results have been supported recently (Potter et al, 2008) and may be attributed to gender differences in pelvis-saddle interactions and differences in segmental mass distribution. With respect to other seat design studies, females were either not included because of the measurement made (Breda et al, 2005;Gemery et al, 2007;Jeong et al, 2002;Munarriz et al, 2005;Schwarzer et al, 2002), or if they were included as participants, they were grouped into the same analyses as males (Lowe et al, 2004), which negates the ability to generalize results to either gender.…”

“…We expected that gender differences in perineal anatomy, pelvic bone geometry, and segmental center of gravity would influence interface pressure responses. These anatomical differences may have been more influential had the seats tested not been unisex and the posterior region was wider (de Vey Mestdagh, 1998;Potter et al, 2008). Narrower racing saddles for example, may have supported the male pelvic bone geometry better than the females because a wider pubic arch and a greater distance between ishchial tuberosities in females may increase perineal contact with the seat.…”

“…A poorly designed seat will not distribute body weight or reduce pressure effectively over the perineum and thus increase the risk of seat discomfort or injury, which seems to be a common occurrence among cyclists (Anderson and Bovin, 1997;Keytel and Noakes, 2002;Schrader et al, 2002;Weiss, 1994). Previous researchers have reported insightful information on how seat design influences seat interface pressure during stationary bicycling (Lowe et al, 2004;Potter et al, 2008), however, a field-based approach that considers the stability of the saddle and factors that interact with saddle design (e.g., gender) during actual road riding have not been tested previously.…”

“…Previous seat design research (Bressel and Larson, 2003;Lowe et al, 2004;Potter et al, 2008) used stationary bicycles or ergometers and therefore participants did not need to stabilize or steer the bicycle. Some seats, with no protruding nose, lack leverage for stability and therefore may present stability problems when riding on the road.…”

Anthropometric measurements of the female perineum for design of the opening shape of urination device

“…To investigate the impact of gender, power, hand position, and ischial tuberosity width on saddle pressure during seated stationary cycling, the ischial tuberosity width of twenty-two experienced cyclists was measured with a pressure mat. In this study, the measured value for the female ischial tuberosity was 13.53 cm (Potter et al, 2008). The lateral separation of ischial tuberosity for the design of body waste management facilities was measured by David, who obtained a range of 11e16 cm (Liskowsky, 2010).…”