Optimal cycling time trial position models: Aerodynamics versus power output and metabolic energy

Fintelman, D.M.; Sterling, Mark; Hemida, Hassan; Li, F.-X.

doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2014.02.029

Cited by 43 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The mean cycling intensity of 276 W used in this study corresponds to a cycling velocity of about 38 km/h in the 16° time trial position. Based on mathematical performance models, it could be estimated that at this cycling intensity, the 40‐km time would be reduced by approximately 91 s when lowering position (Martin et al., ; Fintelman et al., ). It should be noted that lowering torso angle position significantly reduces maximal power output and efficiency (Gnehm et al., ; Jobson et al., ; Fintelman et al., ), and therefore, a small torso angle position might not be the optimal position.…”

Section: Perspectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of different aerodynamic time trial cycling positions on muscle activation and crank torque

Fintelman

Sterling

Hemida

et al. 2015

Scandinavian Med Sci Sports

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To reduce air resistance, time trial cyclists and triathletes lower their torso angle. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of lowering time trial torso angle positions on muscle activation patterns and crank torque coordination. It was hypothesized that small torso angles yield a forward shift of the muscle activation timing and crank torque. Twenty-one trained cyclists performed three exercise bouts at 70% maximal aerobic power in a time trial position at three different torso angles (0°, 8°, and 16°) at a fixed cadence of 85 rpm. Measurements included surface electromyography, crank torques and gas exchange. A significant increase in crank torque range and forward shift in peak torque timing was found at smaller torso angles. This relates closely with the later onset and duration of the muscle activation found in the gluteus maximus muscle. Torso angle effects were only observed in proximal monoarticular muscles. Moreover, all measured physiological variables (oxygen consumption, breathing frequency, minute ventilation) were significantly increased with lowering torso angle and hence decreased the gross efficiency. The findings provide support for the notion that at a cycling intensity of 70% maximal aerobic power, the aerodynamic gains outweigh the physiological/biomechanical disadvantages in trained cyclists.

show abstract

Section: Perspectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of different aerodynamic time trial cycling positions on muscle activation and crank torque

Fintelman

Sterling

Hemida

et al. 2015

Scandinavian Med Sci Sports

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is noted that the sagittal torso angles investigated in this study were discrete angles, and that the absolute optimum torso angle combination for the pilot and stoker may be between these discrete angles. Fintelman et al [31] discussed that adopting extreme low torso angles may not benefit an athlete by compromising power output, and that a balance could be found between aerodynamics and power output. In ablebodied solo cycling, athletes are capable of attaining torso angles lower than the minimum of 20° from the horizontal plane investigated in this study, with torso angles as low as 0° [15,31].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Fintelman et al [31] discussed that adopting extreme low torso angles may not benefit an athlete by compromising power output, and that a balance could be found between aerodynamics and power output. In ablebodied solo cycling, athletes are capable of attaining torso angles lower than the minimum of 20° from the horizontal plane investigated in this study, with torso angles as low as 0° [15,31]. However, that case study was for a time-trial setup with elbow pads and aerobars, and similar low torso angles would be difficult to maintain on dropped handlebars in a road race setup.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of pilot and stoker torso angles in tandem para-cycling aerodynamics

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The torso angle of a cyclist is a key element to consider when attaining aerodynamic postures. For athletes competing in the tandem para-cycling category as the pilot or stoker, the torso angles are similar to those adopted by able-bodied athletes. However, their aerodynamic interaction is not yet fully understood. To date, there has been no study to identify aerodynamically advantageous torso angles for tandem athletes. In this study, numerical simulations with computational fluid dynamics and reduced-scale wind tunnel experiments were used to study the aerodynamics of tandem cyclists considering 23 different torso angle combinations. The sagittal torso angle combination of the pilot and stoker that yielded the lowest overall drag area of 0.308 m 2 (combined pilot, stoker and bicycle) was 25° for the pilot coupled with 20° for the stoker. The results suggest that higher torso angles for the pilot have a lower impact on the overall drag area than equivalent torso angles for the stoker. This study suggests that a slight relaxation of pilot torso angle (which may help increase power output) may not penalise aerodynamics, in low (< 25°) sagittal torso angle ranges.

show abstract

“…It is evident that exerting maximum power in the "Sprint low" position is less straightforward than in the "Sprint regular" position, and that the former will, therefore, require much more dedicated training. In the past, investigations concerning the relation between cyclist drag and power output were performed by Grappe et al [44], Underwood et al [45], and Fintelman et al [46][47][48]. Future studies should definitely address the effects of different cyclist sprint positions on power and on optimizing aerodynamic drag and power output.…”

Section: Limitations and Further Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

CFD analysis of an exceptional cyclist sprint position

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A few riders have adopted a rather exceptional and more aerodynamic sprint position where the torso is held low and nearly horizontal and close to the handle bar to reduce the frontal area. The question arises how much aerodynamic benefit can be gained by such a position. This paper presents an aerodynamic analysis of both the regular and the low sprint position in comparison to three more common cycling positions. Computational fluid dynamics simulations are performed with the 3D RANS simulations and the transition SST k-ω model, validated with wind-tunnel measurements. The results are analyzed in terms of frontal area, drag coefficient, drag area, air speed and static pressure distribution, and static pressure coefficient and skin friction coefficient on the cyclist surfaces. It is shown that the drag area for the low sprint position is 24% lower than for the regular position, which renders the former 15% faster than the latter. This 24% improvement is not only the result of the 19% reduction in frontal area, but also caused by a reduction of 7% in drag coefficient due to the changed body position and the related changes in pressure distribution. Evidently, specific training is required to exert large power in the low sprint position.Publisher's Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

show abstract

Optimal cycling time trial position models: Aerodynamics versus power output and metabolic energy

Cited by 43 publications

References 14 publications

Effect of different aerodynamic time trial cycling positions on muscle activation and crank torque

Effect of different aerodynamic time trial cycling positions on muscle activation and crank torque

Impact of pilot and stoker torso angles in tandem para-cycling aerodynamics

CFD analysis of an exceptional cyclist sprint position

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About