Indirect Calculation of Mechanical and Propelling Efficiency During Freestyle Svihhing

INDIRECT CALCULATION OF MECHANICAL AND PROPELLING EFFICIENCY DURING
FREESTYLE SVIHHING
J.M. CAPPAERT, P.Q. FRANCIOSI, G.V. LANGHANS and J.P. TROUP

U.S. Swimming, International Center for Aquatic Research, Colorado
Springs, CO, USA
Abstract
Mechanical and propelling efficiencies during swimming have been
defined and calculated using the direct method of modified under-
water force pads (MAD-system, Toussaint, 1988). The limitation of
this approach is that the whole stroke cycle is not taken into
consideration in the calculations of propelling and mechanical
efficiencies. The purpose of this study was to calculate propelling
and mechanical efficiencies by phases of the stroke using three-
dimensional cinematography. The results indicate that by taking the
whole stroke into consideration, propelling efficiencies might be
less than previously reported data.
Keywords: Biomechanical Analysis, Propelling Efficiency, Mechanical
Efficiency, Three-dimensional Cinematography.
1 Introduction
1.1 Mechanical efficiency

As related to the freestyle stroke and creating propulsion, power
output can be considered the sum of the forces made by the limbs
(Toussaint, 1988):
po = Ffeet*Vfeet + Fhand*Vhand (1)
where Ff is the force made by the feet, V{ t is the velocity of

the feet~eph d is the force made by the hanaseand vhand is the
velocity of tge hands.
Hollander et al. (1988) estimated the contribution by the feet as
minimal during freestyle swimming and that the addition of the legs
did not affect the power output from the arms. Additionally they
suggest that the addition of the legs in distance events might
actually hinder performance. Therefore, it can be assumed that the
power output by the feet is zero.
Concentrating on the arms for propulsion, mechanical efficiency
for freestyle has been measured during a submaximal swim by Toussaint
(1988) and others using the following theoretical equation (2):
ME Power output (2)

Power input Power input
53
where power input is the steady state oxygen value from a submaximal
swim converted into watts, Pd is the power used to overcome drag and
p is the power used to give water kinetic energy.
k Using three-dimensional cinematography and a hydrodynamic analysis
method of Schleihauf (1979), the resultant or total force produced by
the hand can be calculated during swimming. This total force is
calculated based on the velocity and orientation of the hand. The
projection of the resultant force onto the forward direction, called
effective force, is used to determine the propulsive component of the
resultant force. Hand force data calculated from film analysis can
be used to calculate the power output making the following
assumptions:
(a) Pd is equal to the effective forces of the hand (RE)
multiplied by the velocity of the swim.
(b) Pk is "wasted" energy and is the difference between the total
force and the effective force from the hands (R-RE).
Using these assumptions, we can calculate ME using the hand force
data described above and presented in equation (3).
((RE*Vbody) + ((R - RE)*HV)
ME (3}
Physiological power input
where ME is the mechanical efficiency, RE is the effective component
of the resultant force, V 0 is the velocity of the body or swim, R
is the resultant force, ~ 91§ the hand velocity and physiological
power input is an on-line steady state oxygen uptake value from a
sub-maximal swim converted into watts.
1.2 Propelling efficiency
Propelling efficiency can be defined as in equation (4):
pd pd
PE= p = (4)
0 pd + pk
where PE is propelling efficiency, P is power output, P is the
power used to overcome drag and P is the power used to give water
kinetic energy. Using the above ~ssumptions for mechanical
efficiency, calculated hand forces can be used to calculate propel-
ling efficiency (equation (5)):
p _ RE*Vbody
(5}
E - ((RE*Vbody) + ((R - RE)*HV))
The availability of high resolution cameras along with the
computer capabilities that provide the opportunity to examine under-
water technique make it possible to determine overall stroke
efficiency. Of greater significa~ce is the ability to analyze each
phase of the stroke. This is an advantage since the freestyle
swimming pull involves sweeping actions that can be divided into the
catch, insweep and outsweep/finish. Yhile the outsweep/finish
segment is known to be the more propulsive phase (Schleihauf et al.,
1983), all phases will affect the efficiency of the stroke. The
purpose of the study therefore, was to determine propelling and
mechanical efficiencies of the whole stroke as well as for each
54
stroke phase.
2 Method
2.1 Physiological data collection

Six female college swimmers participated in this study. Each subject
swam at a constant velocity (1.3 m/s) in a swimming treadmill for
5 min. Expired air samples were collected during the swim and
accumulated 0 2 uptake values expressed at 10 s increments. The
values recorded at steady state (i.e. 5 min) were used to describe
the energy demand of the workout. These energy demand values (1)
were converted into watts and used as the power input value for the
mechanical efficiency. For purposes of estimating mechanical
efficiency per stroke phase, it was assumed that at steady state
oxygen consumption, no difference existed at each stroke phase.
Therefore, power input was expressed based on the time for each
segment of the pull.
2.2 Biomechanical data collection

During the last minute of the test swimmers were filmed using two
underwater video cameras (60 Hz}. One arm cycle was chosen for
analysis. Both views of the arm cycle were digitized and three-
dimensional coordinates of one arm were calculated using the direct
linear transformation method (Abdel-Aziz and Karara, 1971).
Resultant hand forces were calculated instantaneously (Schleihauf,
1979). The resultant hand force was projected onto the forward
direction and defined as effective or propulsive force.
Propelling and mechanical efficiencies were calculated as
described above (equations (3) and (5)) using the instantaneous hand
forces, instantaneous hand velocities and the velocity of the swim.
3 Results
The results of propelling and mechanical efficiencies of the stroke
and its phases are presented in Table 1.
Table 1. Propelling and mechanical efficiencies during the free-
style stroke
PE (%) ME (%)
Vhole stroke 25.1 ± 12.4 4.5 ± 1.8
Catch -9.7 ± 6.4 3.3 ± 1.3
Insweep 57.2 ± 7.3 4.3 ± 2.0
Finish 58.9 ± 27.3 8.7 ± 4.6
4 Discussion
Previous studies reported propelling efficiency from 46-77% and
mechanical efficiency 8-12% (Toussaint, 1988) using the MAD-system.
By virtue of the MAD-system's design, the forces generated appear to
55
correspond to the insweep and outsweep phases denoted in this study.
These data show similar propelling and mechanical efficiencies when
examining the insweep and outsweep.
Total efficiency for the whole stroke, the product of PE and ME
ranged from 1.1-2.7%. These values were lower than the range of 5-8%
reported by Toussaint (1988). They were in closer agreement to
Pendergast et al. (1974) who reported total efficiency values
2.7-9.4%.
The resultant vector from the hand during the catch is usually
pointed towards the swimmer's head as the hand enters the water.
This causes the effective force during the catch phase of freestyle
to be negative. Therefore, when the catch is taken into
consideration our propelling and mechanical efficiencies measured for
the whole stroke are approximately 50% less than those calculated
using the MAD-system.
This study shows that propelling and mechanical efficiencies might
actually be lower and power output might be greater than previously
thought. It also emphasizes the importance of examining the whole
stroke cycle.
5 References
Abdel-Aziz, Y.I. and Karara, H.M. (1971) Direct linear transforma-

tion: from comparator coordinates into object coordinates in
close-range photogrammetry. Proceedings ASPUI Symposium on Close-
Range Photogrammetry, American Society of Photogrammetry, Church
Falls, Va., pp. 1-19.
Hollander, A.P., de Groot, G. van Ingen Schenau, G.J., Kahman,. R.
and Toussaint, H.M. (1988) Contribuition of the legs to propulsion
in front crawl swimming, in Swimming Science V (eds B.E.
Ungerechts, K. Vilke and R. Reischle), Human Kinetics Books,
Champaign, Ill., pp. 39-44.
Pendergast, D.R., di Prampero, P.E., Craig, A.B., Vilson, D.R. and
Rennie, D.V. (1974) Quantitative analysis of the front crawl in
men and women. J. Appl. Physiol., 475-479.
Schleihauf, R.E. (1979) A hydrodynamic analysis of swimming
propulsion, in Swimming III (eds J. Terauds and V. Bedingfield),
University Park Press, Baltimore, pp. 70-109.
Schleihauf, R.E., Gray, L. and DeRose, J. (1983) Three-dimensional
analysis of hand propulsion in the sprint freestyle front crawl
stroke, in Biomechanics and Medicine and Swimming (eds A.P.
Hollander, P.A. Huijing and G. de Groot), Human Kinetics
Publishers Inc., Champaign, Ill., pp. 173-183.
Toussaint, H.M. (1988) Mechanics and Energetics of Swimming. Rodopi,
Amsterdam.
56

Indirect Calculation of Mechanical and Propelling Efficiency During Freestyle Svihhing

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Indirect Calculation of Mechanical and Propelling Efficiency During Freestyle Svihhing

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Indirect Calculation of Mechanical and Propelling Efficiency During Freestyle Svihhing

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

INDIRECT CALCULATION OF MECHANICAL AND PROPELLING EFFICIENCY DURING

J.M. CAPPAERT, P.Q. FRANCIOSI, G.V. LANGHANS and J.P. TROUP

1.1 Mechanical efficiency

po = FfeetVfeet + FhandVhand (1)

where Ff is the force made by the feet, V{ t is the velocity of

ME Power output (2)

2.1 Physiological data collection

2.2 Biomechanical data collection

Abdel-Aziz, Y.I. and Karara, H.M. (1971) Direct linear transforma-

You might also like