IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/gcmbxx/v16y2013i9p987-992.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Skiing efficiency versus performance in double-poling ergometry

Author

Listed:
  • L. Joakim Holmberg
  • Marie Lund Ohlsson
  • Matej Supej
  • Hans-Christer Holmberg

Abstract

This study is on how leg utilisation may affect skiing efficiency and performance in double-poling ergometry. Three experiments were conducted, each with a different style of the double-poling technique: traditional with small knee range-of-motion and fixed heels (TRAD); modern with large knee range-of-motion and fixed heels (MOD1) and modern with large knee range-of-motion and free heels (MOD2). For each style, motion data were extracted with automatic marker recognition of reflective markers and applied to a 3D full-body musculoskeletal simulation model. Skiing efficiency (skiing work divided by metabolic muscle work) and performance (forward impulse) were computed from the simulation output. Skiing efficiency was 4.5%, 4.1% and 4.1% for TRAD, MOD1 and MOD2, respectively. Performance was 111, 143 and 149 Ns for TRAD, MOD1 and MOD2, respectively. Thus, higher lower body utilisation increased the performance but decreased the skiing efficiency. These results demonstrate the potential of musculoskeletal simulations for skiing efficiency estimations.

Suggested Citation

  • L. Joakim Holmberg & Marie Lund Ohlsson & Matej Supej & Hans-Christer Holmberg, 2013. "Skiing efficiency versus performance in double-poling ergometry," Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(9), pages 987-992, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:gcmbxx:v:16:y:2013:i:9:p:987-992
    DOI: 10.1080/10255842.2011.648376
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/10255842.2011.648376
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/10255842.2011.648376?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:gcmbxx:v:16:y:2013:i:9:p:987-992. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/gcmb .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.