Loading...
4 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
- Anaerobic Threshold Biophysical Characterisation of the Four Swimming TechniquesPublication . Carvalho, Diogo Duarte; Soares, Susana; Zacca, R; Sousa, João; Marinho, Daniel; Silva, António; Vilas Boas, J. Paulo; Fernandes, Ricardo J.The anaerobic threshold (AnT) seems to be not only a physiologic boundary but also a transition after which swimmers technique changes, modifying their biomechanical behaviour. We expanded the AnT concept to a biophysical construct in the four conventional swimming techniques. Seventy-two elite swimmers performed a 5×200 m incremental protocol in their preferred swimming technique (with a 0.05 m·s-1 increase and a 30 s interval between steps). A capillary blood samples were collected from the fingertip and stroke rate (SR) and length (SL) determined for the assessment of [La], SR and SL vs. velocity inflexion points (using the interception of a pair of linear and exponential regression curves). The [La] values at the AnT were 3.3±1.0, 3.9±1.1, 2.9±1 .34 and 4.5±1.4 mmol·l-1 (mean±SD) for front crawl, backstroke, breaststroke and butterfly, and its corresponding velocity correlated highly with those at SR and SL inflection points (r=0.91-0.99, p<0.001). The agreement analyses confirmed that AnT represents a biophysical boundary in the four competitive swimming techniques and can be determined individually using [La] and/or SR/SL. Blood lactate increase speed can help characterise swimmers' anaerobic behaviour after AnT and between competitive swimming techniques.
- Computational fluid dynamics vs. inverse dynamics methods to determine passive drag in two breaststroke glide positionsPublication . Costa, L.; Mantha, V R; Silva, António; Fernandes, Ricardo J.; Marinho, Daniel; Vilas Boas, J. Paulo; Machado, Leandro; Rouboa, AComputational fluid dynamics (CFD) plays an important role to quantify, understand and "observe" the water movements around the human body and its effects on drag (D). We aimed to investigate the flow effects around the swimmer and to compare the drag and drag coefficient (CD) values obtained from experiments (using cable velocimetry in a swimming pool) with those of CFD simulations for the two ventral gliding positions assumed during the breaststroke underwater cycle (with shoulders flexed and upper limbs extended above the head-GP1; with shoulders in neutral position and upper limbs extended along the trunk-GP2). Six well-trained breaststroke male swimmers (with reasonable homogeneity of body characteristics) participated in the experimental tests; afterwards a 3D swimmer model was created to fit within the limits of the sample body size profile. The standard k-ε turbulent model was used to simulate the fluid flow around the swimmer model. Velocity ranged from 1.30 to 1.70 m/s for GP1 and 1.10 to 1.50 m/s for GP2. Values found for GP1 and GP2 were lower for CFD than experimental ones. Nevertheless, both CFD and experimental drag/drag coefficient values displayed a tendency to jointly increase/decrease with velocity, except for GP2 CD where CFD and experimental values display opposite tendencies. Results suggest that CFD values obtained by single model approaches should be considered with caution due to small body shape and dimension differences to real swimmers. For better accuracy of CFD studies, realistic individual 3D models of swimmers are required, and specific kinematics respected.
- Hydrodynamic analysis of different finger positions in swimming: a computational fluid dynamics approachPublication . Vilas Boas, J. Paulo; Ramos, Rui J.; Fernandes, Ricardo J.; Silva, António; Rouboa, Abel I; Machado, Leandro; Barbosa, Tiago M.; Marinho, DanielThe aim of this research was to numerically clarify the effect of finger spreading and thumb abduction on the hydrodynamic force generated by the hand and forearm during swimming. A computational fluid dynamics (CFD) analysis of a realistic hand and forearm model obtained using a computer tomography scanner was conducted. A mean flow speed of 2 m · s(-1) was used to analyze the possible combinations of three finger positions (grouped, partially spread, totally spread), three thumb positions (adducted, partially abducted, totally abducted), three angles of attack (a = 0°, 45°, 90°), and four sweepback angles (y = 0°, 90°, 180°, 270°) to yield a total of 108 simulated situations. The values of the drag coefficient were observed to increase with the angle of attack for all sweepback angles and finger and thumb positions. For y = 0° and 180°, the model with the thumb adducted and with the little finger spread presented higher drag coefficient values for a = 45° and 90°. Lift coefficient values were observed to be very low at a = 0° and 90° for all of the sweepback angles and finger and thumb positions studied, although very similar values are obtained at a = 45°. For y = 0° and 180°, the effect of finger and thumb positions appears to be much most distinct, indicating that having the thumb slightly abducted and the fingers grouped is a preferable position at y = 180°, whereas at y = 0°, having the thumb adducted and fingers slightly spread yielded higher lift values. Results show that finger and thumb positioning in swimming is a determinant of the propulsive force produced during swimming; indeed, this force is dependent on the direction of the flow over the hand and forearm, which changes across the arm's stroke.
- In-Water and On-Land Swimmers’ Symmetry and Force ProductionPublication . Carvalho, Diogo Duarte; Soares, Susana; Zacca, Rodrigo; Marinho, Daniel; Silva, António; Pyne, David; Vilas Boas, J. Paulo; Fernandes, Ricardo J.Although performance and biomechanical evaluations are becoming more swimming-specific, dryland testing permits monitoring of a larger number of performance-related variables. However, as the degree of comparability of measurements conducted in-water and on land conditions is unclear, we aimed to assess the differences between force production in these two different conditions. Twelve elite swimmers performed a 30 s tethered swimming test and four isokinetic tests (shoulder and knee extension at 90 and 300°/s) to assess peak force, peak and average torque, and power symmetry index. We observed contralateral symmetry in all the tests performed, e.g., for 30 s tethered swimming and peak torque shoulder extension at 90°/s: 178 ± 50 vs. 183 ± 56 N (p = 0.38) and 95 ± 37 vs. 94 ± 35 N × m (p = 0.52). Moderate to very large direct relationships were evident between dryland testing and swimming force production (r = 0.62 to 0.96; p < 0.05). Swimmers maintained similar symmetry index values independently of the testing conditions (r = -0.06 to -0.41 and 0.04 to 0.44; p = 0.18-0.88). Asymmetries in water seems to be more related to technical constraints than muscular imbalances, but swimmers that displayed higher propulsive forces were the ones with greater force values on land. Thus, tethered swimming and isokinetic evaluations are useful for assessing muscular imbalances regarding propulsive force production and technical asymmetries.