Center of mass velocity comparison using a whole body magnetic inertial measurement unit system and force platforms in well trained sprinters in straight-line and curve sprinting.
Acceleration
Curve sprinting
Force platforms
Magneto-Inertial Measurement Units
Sprint running
Journal
Gait & posture
ISSN: 1879-2219
Titre abrégé: Gait Posture
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9416830
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 2023
01 2023
Historique:
received:
20
07
2022
revised:
24
10
2022
accepted:
02
11
2022
pubmed:
12
11
2022
medline:
17
12
2022
entrez:
11
11
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Sprint performance can be characterized through the centre of mass (COM) velocity over time. In-field computation of the COM is key in sprint training. To compare the stance-averaged COM velocity computation from a Magneto-Inertial Measurement Units (MIMU) to a reference system: force platforms (FP), over the early acceleration phase in both straight and curve sprinting. Nineteen experienced-to-elite track sprinters performed 1 maximal sprint on both the straight and the curve (radius = 41.58 m) in a randomized order. Utilizing a MIMU-based system (Xsens MVN Link) and compared to FP (Kistler), COM velocity was computed with both systems. Averaged stance-by-stance COM velocity over straight-line and curve sprinting following the vertical axis (respectively V 148 stances were analyzed. V
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Sprint performance can be characterized through the centre of mass (COM) velocity over time. In-field computation of the COM is key in sprint training.
RESEARCH QUESTION
To compare the stance-averaged COM velocity computation from a Magneto-Inertial Measurement Units (MIMU) to a reference system: force platforms (FP), over the early acceleration phase in both straight and curve sprinting.
METHODS
Nineteen experienced-to-elite track sprinters performed 1 maximal sprint on both the straight and the curve (radius = 41.58 m) in a randomized order. Utilizing a MIMU-based system (Xsens MVN Link) and compared to FP (Kistler), COM velocity was computed with both systems. Averaged stance-by-stance COM velocity over straight-line and curve sprinting following the vertical axis (respectively V
RESULTS
148 stances were analyzed. V
Identifiants
pubmed: 36368241
pii: S0966-6362(22)00633-6
doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2022.11.002
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
90-97Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflict of interest statement None.