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

Effect of incremental intensities on the spinal morphology and core muscle activation in competitive cyclists

Cycling is a sport where cyclists predominantly adopt a sitting posture, with the trunk tilted forward. This posture requires a high volume of training and duration in several intensities of effort. This study aims to: 1) evaluate the behaviour of the thoracic and lumbar spine flexion and sacral inclination in the sagittal plane, the thoracic and lumbar spine flexion in the frontal plane, and the trunk torsion in the transverse plane; 2) compare the activation of the core muscles as the intensity of effort increases during an incremental test in cycling, and 3) identify which core muscle has a greater activation in each intensity zone. The spinal posture and the activation of the eight core muscles were evaluated in twelve competitive cyclists during incremental cycling intensities. Thoracic and lumbar spine flexion and sacral inclination statistically increased as the intensity of effort increased (Start < VT1 < VT2 < VO2max). A significant increase in muscle activation was observed in all core muscles evaluated as the intensity increased. The rectus abdominis showed statistically significant greater muscle activation than the other core muscles evaluated. In conclusion, as the intensity of effort in cycling increases, cyclists significantly increase the thoracic and lumbar spine flexion, the sacral inclination in the sagittal plane, the thoracic and lumbar spine flexion in the frontal plane, trunk rotation in the transverse plane, as well as the activation of the core muscles.

Effects of Different Pedaling Positions on Muscle Usage and Energy Expenditure in Amateur Cyclists

BACKGROUND

Inappropriate cycling positions may affect muscle usage strategy and raise the level of fatigue or risk of sport injury. Dynamic bike fitting is a growing trend meant to help cyclists select proper bikes and adjust them to fit their ergometry. The purpose of this study is to investigate how the "knee forward of foot" (KFOF) distance, an important dynamic bike fitting variable, influences the muscle activation, muscle usage strategy, and rate of energy expenditure during cycling.

METHODS

Six amateur cyclists were recruited to perform the short-distance ride test (SRT) and the graded exercise tests (GXT) with pedaling positions at four different KFOF distances (+20, 0, -20, and -40 mm). The surface electromyographic (EMG) and portable energy metabolism systems were used to monitor the muscle activation and energy expenditure. The outcome measures included the EMG root-mean-square (RMS) amplitudes of eight muscles in the lower extremity during the SRT, the regression line of the changes in the EMG RMS amplitude and median frequency (MF), and the heart rate and oxygen consumption during the GXT.

RESULTS

Our results revealed significant differences in the muscle activation of vastus lateralis, vastus medialis, and semitendinosus among four different pedaling positions during the SRT. During GXT, no statistically significant differences in muscle usage strategy and energy expenditure were found among different KFOF. However, most cyclists had the highest rate of energy expenditure with either KFOF at -40 mm or 20 mm.

CONCLUSIONS

The KFOF distance altered muscle activation in the SRT; however, no significant influence on the muscle usage strategy was found in the GXT. A higher rate of energy expenditure in the extreme pedaling positions of KFOF was observed in most amateur cyclists, so professional assistance for proper bike fitting was recommended.

Validation of a 3D Camera System for Cycling Analysis

BACKGROUND

Kinematic analysis aimed toward scientific investigation or professional purposes is commonly unaffordable and complex to use.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to verify concurrent validation between a cycling-specific 3D camera and the gold-standard 3D general camera systems.

METHODS

Overall, 11 healthy amateur male triathletes were filmed riding their bicycles with Vicon 3D cameras and the Retul 3D cameras for bike fitting analysis simultaneously. All 18 kinematic measurements given by the bike fitting system were compared with the same data given by Vicon cameras through Pearson correlation (r), intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), standard error measurements (SEM), and Bland-Altman (BA) analysis. Confidence intervals of 95% are given.

RESULTS

A very high correlation between cameras was found on six of 18 measurements. All other presented a high correlation between cameras (between 0.7 and 0.9). In total, six variables indicate a SEM of less than one degree between systems. Only two variables indicate a SEM higher than two degrees between camera systems. Overall, four measures indicate bias tendency according to BA.

CONCLUSIONS

The cycling-specific led-emitting 3D camera system tested revealed a high or very high degree of correlation with the gold-standard 3D camera system used in laboratory motion capture. In total, 14 measurements of this equipment could be used in sports medicine clinical practice and even by researchers of cycling studies.

Changes in the Trunk and Lower Extremity Kinematics Due to Fatigue Can Predispose to Chronic Injuries in Cycling

Kinematic analysis of the cycling position is a determining factor in injury prevention and optimal performance. Fatigue caused by high volume training can alter the kinematics of the lower body and spinal structures, thus increasing the risk of chronic injury. However, very few studies have established relationships between fatigue and postural change, being these in 2D analysis or incremental intensity protocols. Therefore, this study aimed to perform a 3D kinematic analysis of pedaling technique in a stable power fatigue protocol 23 amateur cyclists (28.3 ± 8.4 years) participated in this study. For this purpose, 3D kinematics in hip, knee, ankle, and lumbar joints, and thorax and pelvis were collected at three separate times during the protocol. Kinematic differences at the beginning, middle, and end of the protocol were analyzed for all joints using one-dimensional statistical parametric mapping. Significant differences (p < 0.05) were found in all the joints studied, but not all of them occur in the same planes or the same phase of the cycle. Some of the changes produced, such as greater lumbar and thoracic flexion, greater thoracic and pelvic tilt, or greater hip adduction, could lead to chronic knee and lumbar injuries. Therefore, bike fitting protocols should be carried out in fatigue situations to detect risk factor situations.

The Effect of Upper-Body Positioning on the Aerodynamic–Physiological Economy of Time-Trial Cycling

Purpose: Cycling time trials (TTs) are characterized by riders’ adopting aerodynamic positions to lessen the impact of aerodynamic drag on velocity. The optimal performance requirements for TTs likely exist on a continuum of rider aerodynamics versus physiological optimization, yet there is little empirical evidence to inform riders and coaches. The aim of the present study was to investigate the relationship between aerodynamic optimization, energy expenditure, heat production, and performance. Methods: Eleven trained cyclists completed 5 submaximal exercise tests followed by a TT. Trials were completed at hip angles of 12° (more horizontal), 16°, 20°, 24° (more vertical), and their self-selected control position. Results: The largest decrease in power output at anaerobic threshold compared with control occurred at 12° (−16 [20] W, P = .03; effect size [ES] = 0.8). There was a linear relationship between upper-body position and heat production (R2 = .414, P = .04) but no change in mean body temperature, suggesting that, as upper-body position and hip angle increase, convective and evaporative cooling also rise. The highest aerodynamic–physiological economy occurred at 12° (384 [53] W·CdA−1·L−1·min−1, ES = 0.4), and the lowest occurred at 24° (338 [28] W·CdA−1·L−1·min−1, ES = 0.7), versus control (367 [41] W·CdA−1·L−1·min−1). Conclusion: These data suggest that the physiological cost of reducing hip angle is outweighed by the aerodynamic benefit and that riders should favor aerodynamic optimization for shorter TT events. The impact on thermoregulation and performance in the field requires further investigation.

On the effect of changing handgrip position on joint specific power and cycling kinematics in recreational and professional cyclists

Introduction

In cycling, the utilization of the drops position (i.e. the lowest handlebar position relative to the ground) allows for reduced frontal area, likely improved aerodynamics and thus performance compared to the tops (i.e. the position producing the most upright trunk). The reduced trunk angle during seated submaximal cycling has been shown to influence cardiorespiratory factors but the effects on pedalling forces and joint specific power are unclear. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of changing handgrip position on joint specific power and cycling kinematics at different external work rates in recreational and professional cyclists.

Method

Nine professional and nine recreational cyclists performed cycling bouts using three different handgrip positions and three external work rates (i.e. 100W, 200W and external work rate corresponding to the lactate threshold (WR_lt)). Joint specific power was calculated from kinematic measurements and pedal forces using 2D inverse dynamics.

Results

We found increased hip joint power, decreased knee joint power and increased peak crank torque for the professional cyclist compared to the recreational cyclists, but only at WR_lt where the professional cyclists were working at a higher external work rate. There was no main effect of changing handgrip position on any joint, but there was a small interaction effect of external work rate and handgrip position on hip joint power contribution (Generalized eta squared (η_g²) = 0.012). At 100W, changing handgrip position from the tops to the drops decreased the hip joint contribution (-2.0 ± 3.9 percentage points (pct)) and at the WR_lt, changing handgrip position increased the hip joint power (1.6 ± 3.1 pct). There was a small effect of handgrip position with the drops leading to increased peak crank torque (η_g² = 0.02), increased mean dorsiflexion (η_g² = 0.05) and increased hip flexion (η_g² = 0.31) compared to the tops.

Discussion

The present study demonstrates that there is no main effect of changing handgrip position on joint power. Although there seems to be a small effect on hip joint power when comparing across large ranges in external work rate, any potential negative performance effect would be outweighed by the aerodynamic benefit of the drops position.

Cycling Biomechanics and Its Relationship to Performance

State-of-the-art biomechanical laboratories provide a range of tools that allow precise measurements of kinematic, kinetic, motor and physiologic characteristics. Force sensors, motion capture devices and electromyographic recording measure the forces exerted at the pedal, saddle, and handlebar and the joint torques created by muscle activity. These techniques make it possible to obtain a detailed biomechanical analysis of cycling movements. However, despite the reasonable accuracy of such measures, cycling performance remains difficult to fully explain. There is an increasing demand by professionals and amateurs for various biomechanical assessment services. Most of the difficulties in understanding the link between biomechanics and performance arise because of the constraints imposed by the bicycle, human physiology and musculo-skeletal system. Recent studies have also pointed out the importance of evaluating not only output parameters, such as power output, but also intrinsic factors, such as the cyclist coordination. In this narrative review, we present various techniques allowing the assessment of a cyclist at a biomechanical level, together with elements of interpretation, and we show that it is not easy to determine whether a certain technique is optimal or not.

Gross and delta efficiencies during uphill running and cycling among elite triathletes

PURPOSE

To investigate the gross efficiency (GE) and delta efficiency (DE) during cycling and running in elite triathletes.

METHODS

Five male and five female elite triathletes completed two incremental treadmill tests with an inclination of 2.5° to determine their GE and DE during cycling and running. The speed increments between the 5-min stages were 2.4 and 0.6 km h^-1 during the cycling and running tests, respectively. For each test, GE was calculated as the ratio between the mechanical work rate (MWR) and the metabolic rate (MR) at an intensity corresponding to a net increase in blood-lactate concentration of 1 mmol l^-1. DE was calculated by dividing the delta increase in MWR by the delta increase in MR for each test. Pearson correlations and paired-sample t tests were used to investigate the relationships and differences, respectively.

RESULTS

There was a correlation between GE_cycle and GE_run (r = 0.66; P = 0.038; R² = 0.44), but the correlation between DE_cycle and DE_run was not statistically significant (r = - 0.045; P = 0.90; R² = 0.0020). There were differences between GE_cycle and GE_run (t = 80.8; P < 0.001) as well as between DE_cycle and DE_run (t = 27.8; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Elite triathletes with high GE during running also have high GE during cycling, when exercising at a treadmill inclination of 2.5°. For a moderate uphill incline, elite triathletes are more energy efficient during cycling than during running, independent of work rate.

THE ROLE of a BIKE FIT in CYCLISTS with HIP PAIN. A CLINICAL COMMENTARY

Hip pathology is common amongst athletes and the general population. The mechanics of cycling have the potential to exacerbate symptomatic hip pathology and progress articular pathology in patients with morphologic risk factors such as femoroacetabular impingement. A professional fit of the bicycle to the individual which aims to optimize hip joint function can allow patients with hip pathology to exercise in comfort when alternative high impact exercise such as running may not be possible. Conversely improper fit of the bicycle can lead to hip symptoms in otherwise healthy individuals who present with risk factors for hip pain. Accordingly a bike fit can form part of the overall management strategy in a cyclist with hip symptoms. The purpose of this clinical commentary is to discuss hip pathomechanics with respect to cycling, bicycle fitting methodology and the options available to a physical therapist to optimize hip mechanics during the pedaling action.

The Rise of Elite Short-Course Triathlon Re-Emphasises the Necessity to Transition Efficiently from Cycling to Running

Transitioning efficiently between cycling and running is considered an indication of overall performance, and as a result the cycle–run (C–R) transition is one of the most researched areas of triathlon. Previous studies have thoroughly investigated the impact of prior cycling on running performance. However, with the increasing number of short-course events and the inclusion of the mixed relay at the 2020 Tokyo Olympics, efficiently transitioning from cycle–run has been re-emphasised and with it, any potential limitations to running performance among elite triathletes. This short communication provides coaches and sports scientists a review of the literature detailing the negative effects of prior variable-cycling on running performance experienced among elite, short-course and Olympic distance triathletes; as well as discussing practical methods to minimise any negative impact of cycling on running performance. The current literature suggests that variable-cycling negatively effects running ability in at least some elite triathletes and that improving swimming performance, drafting during cycling and C–R training at race intensity could improve an athlete’s triathlon running performance. It is recommended that future research clearly define the performance level, competitive format of the experimental population and use protocols that are specific to the experimental population in order to improve the training and practical application of the research findings.

Influence of upright versus time trial cycling position on determination of critical power and W' in trained cyclists

Body position is known to alter power production and affect cycling performance. The aim of this study was to compare mechanical power output in two riding positions, and to calculate the effects on critical power (CP) and W' estimates. Seven trained cyclists completed three peak power output efforts and three fixed-duration trial (3-, 5- and 12-min) riding with their hands on the brake lever hoods (BLH), or in a time trial position (TTP). A repeated-measures analysis of variance showed that mean power output during the 5-min trial was significantly different between BLH and TTP positions, resulting in a significantly lower estimate of CP, but not W', for the TTP trial. In addition, TTP decreased the performance during each trial and increased the percentage difference between BLH and TTP with greater trial duration. There were no differences in pedal cadence or heart rate during the 3-min trial; however, TTP results for the 12-min trial showed a significant fall in pedal cadence and a significant rise in heart rate. The findings suggest that cycling position affects power output and influences consequent CP values. Therefore, cyclists and coaches should consider the cycling position used when calculating CP.

Respiratory Mechanical and Cardiorespiratory Consequences of Cycling with Aerobars

PURPOSE

Aerobars place a cyclist in a position where the trunk is flexed forward and the elbows are close to the midline of the body. This position is known to improve cycling aerodynamics and time trial race performance compared with upright cycling positions. However, the aggressive nature of this position may have important cardiorespiratory and metabolic consequences. The purpose of this investigation was to examine the respiratory mechanical, ventilatory, metabolic, and sensory consequences of cycling while using aerobars during laboratory-based cycling.

METHODS

Eleven endurance-trained male cyclists (age, 26 ± 9 yr; V˙O2peak, 55 ± 5 mL·kg·min) were recruited. Visit 1 consisted of an incremental cycling test to determine peak power output. Visit 2 consisted of 6-min bouts of constant load cycling at 70% of peak incremental power output in the aerobar position, drop position, and upright position while grasping the brake hoods. Metabolic and ventilatory responses were measured using a commercially available metabolic cart, and respiratory pressures were measured using an esophageal catheter.

RESULTS

Cycling in the aerobar position significantly increased the work of breathing (Wb), power of breathing (Pb), minute ventilation, ventilatory equivalent for oxygen and carbon dioxide, and transdiaphragmatic pressure compared with the upright position. Increases in the Wb and Pb in the aerobars relative to the upright position were strongly correlated with the degree of thoracic restriction, measured as the shoulder-to-aerobar width ratio (Wb: r = 0.80, P = 0.01; Pb: r = 0.69, P = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Aerobars significantly increase the mechanical cost of breathing and leads to greater ventilatory inefficiency compared with upright cycling. Future work is needed to optimize aerobar width to minimize the respiratory mechanical consequences while optimizing aerodynamics.

Positive Pacing Strategies Are Utilized by Elite Male and Female Para-cyclists in Short Time Trials in the Velodrome

In para-cycling, competitors are classed based on functional impairment resulting in cyclists with neurological and locomotor impairments competing against each other. In Paralympic competition, classes are combined by using a factoring adjustment to race times to produce the overall medallists. Pacing in short-duration track cycling events is proposed to utilize an “all-out” strategy in able-bodied competition. However, pacing in para-cycling may vary depending on the level of impairment. Analysis of the pacing strategies employed by different classification groups may offer scope for optimal performance; therefore, this study investigated the pacing strategy adopted during the 1-km time trial (TT) and 500-m TT in elite C1 to C3 para-cyclists and able-bodied cyclists. Total times and intermediate split times (125-m intervals; measured to 0.001 s) were obtained from the C1-C3 men's 1-km TT (n = 28) and women's 500-m TT (n = 9) from the 2012 Paralympic Games and the men's 1-km TT (n = 19) and women's 500-m TT (n = 12) from the 2013 UCI World Track Championships from publically available video. Split times were expressed as actual time, factored time (for the para-cyclists) and as a percentage of total time. A two-way analysis of variance was used to investigate differences in split times between the different classifications and the able-bodied cyclists in the men's 1-km TT and between the para-cyclists and able-bodied cyclists in the women's 500-m TT. The importance of position at the first split was investigated with Kendall's Tau-b correlation. The first 125-m split time was the slowest for all cyclists, representing the acceleration phase from a standing start. C2 cyclists were slowest at this 125-m split, probably due to a combination of remaining seated in this acceleration phase and a high proportion of cyclists in this group being trans-femoral amputees. Not all cyclists used aero-bars, preferring to use drop, flat or bullhorn handlebars. Split times increased in the later stages of the race, demonstrating a positive pacing strategy. In the shorter women's 500-m TT, rank at the first split was more strongly correlated with final position than in the longer men's 1-km TT. In conclusion, a positive pacing strategy was adopted by the different para-cycling classes.