The biomechanical effects of crank arm length on cycling mechanics

The hypothesis of the current investigation was that there existed a relationship between anthropometry (total leg length, thigh length and shank length) and the crank length permitting the lowest heart rate at a given work rate (optimum crank length). In order to understand the mechanisms govern...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Sprules, Erica Booth
Format: Others
Language:English
Published: 2009
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/2429/10970
id ndltd-UBC-oai-circle.library.ubc.ca-2429-10970
record_format oai_dc
spelling ndltd-UBC-oai-circle.library.ubc.ca-2429-109702018-01-05T17:35:36Z The biomechanical effects of crank arm length on cycling mechanics Sprules, Erica Booth The hypothesis of the current investigation was that there existed a relationship between anthropometry (total leg length, thigh length and shank length) and the crank length permitting the lowest heart rate at a given work rate (optimum crank length). In order to understand the mechanisms governing this relationship, segmental energies, average effective forces and average linear velocities of the foot were calculated. Sixteen avid cyclists completed one ride at each of 6 randomly presented crank lengths (120 mm, 140 mm, 160 mm, 180 mm, 200 mm and 220 mm). Subjects rode at a power output that elicited a heart rate response of approximately 155 bpm while riding with 160 mm cranks and were required to maintain a constant cadence of 90 rpm. During each crank length condition, pedal forces and heart rate were measured and videotape was collected. A multiple regression revealed that neither the average effective force, nor the average resultant linear velocity of the foot predicted the heart rates elicited across all crank lengths. A repeated measures ANOVA showed that the lowest segmental energies occurred at the shortest crank length. Optimum crank length was calculated for each subject and a multiple regression revealed that 51% of the variance in optimum crank length could be predicted by the following equation: optimum crank length (mm) = (18.971 *shank length) - (7.438*total leg length) + 90.679. However, almost all subjects' optimum crank lengths were in the range of 120 mm to 160 mm; a grouping of cranks that elicited statistically similar physiological responses and that includes crank lengths very close to the industry standard of 170 mm. It was therefore the recommendation of the investigator that crank lengths need not be changed from the industry standard of 170 mm for individuals of various leg lengths as optimum crank lengths predicted from leg length measures do not differ significantly in terms of physiological responses from crank lengths very close to the current industry standard. Education, Faculty of Kinesiology, School of Graduate 2009-07-20T19:32:34Z 2009-07-20T19:32:34Z 2000 2000-11 Text Thesis/Dissertation http://hdl.handle.net/2429/10970 eng For non-commercial purposes only, such as research, private study and education. Additional conditions apply, see Terms of Use https://open.library.ubc.ca/terms_of_use. 4828531 bytes application/pdf
collection NDLTD
language English
format Others
sources NDLTD
description The hypothesis of the current investigation was that there existed a relationship between anthropometry (total leg length, thigh length and shank length) and the crank length permitting the lowest heart rate at a given work rate (optimum crank length). In order to understand the mechanisms governing this relationship, segmental energies, average effective forces and average linear velocities of the foot were calculated. Sixteen avid cyclists completed one ride at each of 6 randomly presented crank lengths (120 mm, 140 mm, 160 mm, 180 mm, 200 mm and 220 mm). Subjects rode at a power output that elicited a heart rate response of approximately 155 bpm while riding with 160 mm cranks and were required to maintain a constant cadence of 90 rpm. During each crank length condition, pedal forces and heart rate were measured and videotape was collected. A multiple regression revealed that neither the average effective force, nor the average resultant linear velocity of the foot predicted the heart rates elicited across all crank lengths. A repeated measures ANOVA showed that the lowest segmental energies occurred at the shortest crank length. Optimum crank length was calculated for each subject and a multiple regression revealed that 51% of the variance in optimum crank length could be predicted by the following equation: optimum crank length (mm) = (18.971 *shank length) - (7.438*total leg length) + 90.679. However, almost all subjects' optimum crank lengths were in the range of 120 mm to 160 mm; a grouping of cranks that elicited statistically similar physiological responses and that includes crank lengths very close to the industry standard of 170 mm. It was therefore the recommendation of the investigator that crank lengths need not be changed from the industry standard of 170 mm for individuals of various leg lengths as optimum crank lengths predicted from leg length measures do not differ significantly in terms of physiological responses from crank lengths very close to the current industry standard. === Education, Faculty of === Kinesiology, School of === Graduate
author Sprules, Erica Booth
spellingShingle Sprules, Erica Booth
The biomechanical effects of crank arm length on cycling mechanics
author_facet Sprules, Erica Booth
author_sort Sprules, Erica Booth
title The biomechanical effects of crank arm length on cycling mechanics
title_short The biomechanical effects of crank arm length on cycling mechanics
title_full The biomechanical effects of crank arm length on cycling mechanics
title_fullStr The biomechanical effects of crank arm length on cycling mechanics
title_full_unstemmed The biomechanical effects of crank arm length on cycling mechanics
title_sort biomechanical effects of crank arm length on cycling mechanics
publishDate 2009
url http://hdl.handle.net/2429/10970
work_keys_str_mv AT sprulesericabooth thebiomechanicaleffectsofcrankarmlengthoncyclingmechanics
AT sprulesericabooth biomechanicaleffectsofcrankarmlengthoncyclingmechanics
_version_ 1718588714709417984