Mechanically braked Wingate powers: agreement between SRM, corrected and conventional methods of measurement

被引:20
作者
Balmer, J
Bird, SR
Davison, RCR
Doherty, M
Smith, PM
机构
[1] Univ Luton, Dept Sport Exercise & Biomed Sci, Luton LU1 3JU, Beds, England
[2] Liverpool Hope Univ Coll, Deanery Sci & Social Sci, Liverpool, Merseyside, England
[3] Victoria Univ Technol, Ctr Rehabil Exercise & Sport Sci, Melbourne, Vic 3000, Australia
[4] Univ Portsmouth, Dept Exercise & Sport Sci, Portsmouth, Hants, England
关键词
arm cranking; maximal intensity exercise;
D O I
10.1080/02640410310001655831
中图分类号
G8 [体育];
学科分类号
04 ; 0403 ;
摘要
In this study, we assessed the agreement between the powers recorded during a 30 s upper-body Wingate test using three different methods. Fifty-six men completed a single test on a Monark 814E mechanically braked ergometer fitted with a Schoberer Rad Messtechnik (SRM) powermeter. A commercial software package (Wingate test kit version 2.21, Cranlea, UK) was used to calculate conventional and corrected (with accelerative forces) values of power based on a resistive load (5% body mass) and flywheel velocity. The SRM calculated powers based on torque (measured at the crank arm) and crank rate. Values for peak 1 and 5 s power and mean 30 s power were measured. No significant differences (P >0.05) were found between the three methods for 30 s power values. However, the corrected values for peak 1 and 5 s power were 36 and 23% higher (P <0.05) respectively than those for the conventional method, and 27 and 16% higher (P <0.05) respectively than those for the SRM method. The conventional and SRM values for peak 1 and 5 s power were similar (P >0.05). Power values recorded using each method were influenced by sample time (P <0.05). Our results suggest that these three measures of power are similar when sampled over 30 s, but discrepancies occur when the sample time is reduced to either 1 or 5 s.
引用
收藏
页码:661 / 667
页数:7
相关论文
共 30 条
[21]   ANAEROBIC AND AEROBIC COMPONENTS DURING ARM-CRANK EXERCISE IN SPRINT AND MIDDLE-DISTANCE SWIMMERS [J].
MERCIER, B ;
GRANIER, P ;
MERCIER, J ;
TROUQUET, J ;
PREFAUT, C .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSIOLOGY AND OCCUPATIONAL PHYSIOLOGY, 1993, 66 (05) :461-466
[22]  
NINDL BC, 1995, MED SCI SPORT EXER, V27, P235
[23]   UPPER AND LOWER-BODY ANAEROBIC POWER - COMPARISON BETWEEN BIATHLETES AND CONTROL SUBJECTS [J].
PATTON, JF ;
DUGGAN, A .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 1987, 8 (02) :94-98
[24]  
Reiser RF, 2000, MED SCI SPORT EXER, V32, P1660
[25]   Prediction of 2000 m indoor rowing performance using a 30 s sprint and maximal oxygen uptake [J].
Riechman, SE ;
Zoeller, RF ;
Balasekaran, G ;
Goss, FL ;
Robertson, RJ .
JOURNAL OF SPORTS SCIENCES, 2002, 20 (09) :681-687
[26]  
THOMAS SG, 1989, CAN J SPORT SCI, V14, P142
[27]   STANDARD ANAEROBIC EXERCISE TESTS [J].
VANDEWALLE, H ;
PERES, G ;
MONOD, H .
SPORTS MEDICINE, 1987, 4 (04) :268-289
[28]   A SIMPLE CALIBRATION METHOD FOR MECHANICALLY BRAKED CYCLE ERGOMETERS [J].
VANPRAAGH, E ;
BEDU, M ;
RODDIER, P ;
COUDERT, J .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 1992, 13 (01) :27-30
[29]   CYCLE ERGOMETRY AND MAXIMAL INTENSITY EXERCISE [J].
WINTER, EM .
SPORTS MEDICINE, 1991, 11 (06) :351-357
[30]   Optimized and corrected peak power output during friction-braked cycle ergometry [J].
Winter, EM ;
Brown, D ;
Roberts, NKA ;
Brookes, FBC ;
Swaine, IL .
JOURNAL OF SPORTS SCIENCES, 1996, 14 (06) :513-521