Validity and Reliability of the 3D Motion Analyzer in Comparison with the Vicon Device for Biomechanical Pedalling Analysis

Anthony Bouillod, Antony Costes, Georges Soto-Romero, Emmanuel Brunet, Frédéric Grappe

2016

Abstract

The present work aimed to assess the validity and reliability of the 3D motion analyzer (Shimano Dynamics Lab, Sittard, Netherland) during laboratory cycling tests in comparison with the Vicon device (Vicon Motion Systems Ltd. Oxford, UK). Three cyclists were required to complete one laboratory cycling test at three different pedalling cadence and at a constant power output. Kinematic measurements were collected simultaneously from 3D motion analyzer and Vicon devices and performed five times for each pedalling cadence. The two systems showed a high reliability with excellent intraclass correlation coefficients for most kinematic variables. Moreover, this system was considered as valid by considering the error due to the initial markers placement. Experts and scientists should use the Vicon system for the purpose of research whereas the 3D motion analyzer could be used for bike fitting.

References

  1. bini, R. R., Diefenthaeler, F. & Mota, C. B. 2010a. Fatigue effects on the coordinative pattern during cycling: kinetics and kinematics evaluation. J Electromyogr Kinesiol, 20, 102-7.
  2. Bini, R. R., Tamborindeguy, A. C. & Mota, C. B. 2010b. Effects of saddle height, pedaling cadence, and workload on joint kinetics and kinematics during cycling. J Sport Rehabil, 19, 301-14.
  3. Cicchetti, D. V. 1994. Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychological assessment, 6, 284.
  4. Ericson, M. O. 1988. Mechanical muscular power output and work during ergometer cycling at different work loads and speeds. European journal of applied physiology and occupational physiology, 57, 382-387.
  5. Ferrer-Roca, V., Roig, A., Galilea, P. & Garcia-Lopez, J. 2012. Influence of saddle height on lower limb kinematics in well-trained cyclists: static vs. dynamic evaluation in bike fitting. J Strength Cond Res, 26, 3025-9.
  6. Fonda, B., Sarabon, N. & Li, F. X. 2014. Validity and reliability of different kinematics methods used for bike fitting. J Sports Sci, 32, 940-6.
  7. Garcia-Lopez, J., Diez-Leal, S., Ogueta-Alday, A., Larrazabal, J. & Rodriguez-Marroyo, J. A. 2015. Differences in pedalling technique between road cyclists of different competitive levels. J Sports Sci, 1-8.
  8. Heil, D. P., Derrick, T. R. & Whittlesey, S. 1997. The relationship between preferred and optimal positioning during submaximal cycle ergometry. Eur J Appl Physiol, 75, 160-165.
  9. Holmes, J. C., Pruitt, A. L. & Whalen, N. J. 1994. Lower extremity overuse in bicycling. Clin Sports Med, 13, 187-205.
  10. Hoshikawa, H., Takahashi, K., Ohashi, K. & Tamaki, K. 2007. Contribution of the ankle, knee, and hip joints to mechanical energy in cycling. Journal of biomechanics, 40, S750.
  11. Iriberri, J., Muriel, X. & Larrazabal, I. 2008. The bike fit of the road professional cyclist related to anthropometric measurements and the torque of de crank. The Engineering of Sport, 7, 483-488.
  12. Mornieux, G., Guenette, J. A., Sheel, A. W. & Sanderson, D. J. 2007. Influence of cadence, power output and hypoxia on the joint moment distribution during cycling. Eur J Appl Physiol, 102, 11-8.
  13. Nordeen-Snyder, K. S. 1977. The effect of bicycle seat height variation upon oxygen consumption and lower limb kinematics. Medicine and Science in Sports, 9, 113-117.
  14. Peveler, W. W. & Green, M. 2010. The effect of extrinsic factors on simulated 20-km time trial performance. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 24, 3265-3269.
  15. Peveler, W. W., Pounders, J. D. & Bishop, P. A. 2007. Effects of saddle height on anaerobic power production in cycling. J Strength Cond Res, 21, 1023-7.
  16. Umberger, B. R. & Martin, P. E. 2001. Testing the planar assumption during ergometer cycling. Journal of Applied Biomechanics, 17, 55-62.
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Bouillod A., Costes A., Soto-Romero G., Brunet E. and Grappe F. (2016). Validity and Reliability of the 3D Motion Analyzer in Comparison with the Vicon Device for Biomechanical Pedalling Analysis . In Proceedings of the 4th International Congress on Sport Sciences Research and Technology Support - Volume 1: icSPORTS, ISBN 978-989-758-205-9, pages 63-66. DOI: 10.5220/0006088200630066


in Bibtex Style

@conference{icsports16,
author={Anthony Bouillod and Antony Costes and Georges Soto-Romero and Emmanuel Brunet and Frédéric Grappe},
title={Validity and Reliability of the 3D Motion Analyzer in Comparison with the Vicon Device for Biomechanical Pedalling Analysis},
booktitle={Proceedings of the 4th International Congress on Sport Sciences Research and Technology Support - Volume 1: icSPORTS,},
year={2016},
pages={63-66},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0006088200630066},
isbn={978-989-758-205-9},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the 4th International Congress on Sport Sciences Research and Technology Support - Volume 1: icSPORTS,
TI - Validity and Reliability of the 3D Motion Analyzer in Comparison with the Vicon Device for Biomechanical Pedalling Analysis
SN - 978-989-758-205-9
AU - Bouillod A.
AU - Costes A.
AU - Soto-Romero G.
AU - Brunet E.
AU - Grappe F.
PY - 2016
SP - 63
EP - 66
DO - 10.5220/0006088200630066