Kinematics of Running at Different Slopes and Speeds

Abstract

The aim of this study was to verify the influence of the combination of different running speeds and slopes based on main kinematic parameters in both groups of elite (RE) and amateur (RA) marathon runners. All subjects performed various tests on a treadmill at 0, 2, and 7% slopes at different speeds: 3.89, 4.17, 4.44, 4.72, and 5.00 m·s. A high speed digital camera, 210 Hz, has been used to record; Dartfish 5.5Pro has been used to perform a 2D video analysis. Step length (SL), step frequency (SF), flight time (FT), and contact time (CT) were determined and used for comparison. SL, SF, and FT parameters increased, and CT parameter decreased as speed increased. As slopes increased, SL and FT decreased and SF increased in both groups and only CT decreased in RE, whereas in RA, it increased. Data were fitted to the linear regression line (R > 0.95). The 2 groups were significantly different (p < 0.05) in FT, SL, and SF at all speeds in level running. A significant difference between the 2 groups was found in FT at 2 and 7% slopes at all speeds (p < 0.05). Percentage alterations in all variables were greater in the RA group. In conclusion, the choice of optimum SL and SF, through efficient running can be maintained, is influenced not only by speed but also by slopes. Elite runners perform more efficiently than amateur runners who have less experience.

The effect of running velocity on footstrike angle – A curve-clustering approach

“…were in good overall agreement with previous studies [23][24][25][26][27]. Furthermore, the difference in these variables between Clusters 1 and 3 were in agreement with studies comparing MFS / FFS and RFS runners [5,9].…”

Kinematic Analysis of Soccer Players in Shuttle Running

“…SL F (1,11) = 6.72, p = 0.025 and η 2 = 0.379, (Y 1 138 ± 6.4 and MAV 95 % 144 ± 5.2 cm). CT F (1,11) = 179.37, p < 0.0001 and η 2 = 0.942, (Y 1 194 ± 8.3 and MAV 95 % 175 ± 2.6 ms). The diff erence between the fi rst step and the last step in all the variables investigated was also signifi cant.…”

“…However, during the Y 1 test and during exercise at a specifi c percentage of oxygen uptake (VO 2max ) various authors have predominantly considered metabolic parameters (VO 2 -heart rate and lactate) only, neglecting the mechanical parameters [ 10 , 13 ] . In all forms of locomotion [ 11 ] , biomechanical parameters including mechanical parameters associated with muscle strength are pertinent as intensity changes as a function of time [ 10 ] . For instance it is well known that a reduction in contact time is associated with an increased ground reaction force (GRF) as a consequence of increased step length [ 14 ] .…”

Walking and running on treadmill: the standard criteria for kinematics studies

“…In fact the shoe's kinetic energy (KEY) at its initial impact on the ground may be calculated with this equation: KEY = ½ · m · v 2 (where m is the shoe's mass and v its speed at the impact) 16 . Usually, the mass of the shoes is highly variable (0.1 ÷ 0.5 kg) and depends on the runner's body weight and his/her usual speed [18][19][20] . A simple kinematics study is represented by the footstep analysis in terms of CT, FT, step frequency (SF [Hz]), and step length (SL [m]) detection.…”

“…It is 64 steps 35 for subject [18][19][20]36,37 with a lot of experience and 400 steps for beginners 38 . Such step number choices are considered adequate to cope adequately with actual footstep variability 35,38 .…”