Application of Instrumented Paddles in Measuring On-Water Kinetics of Front and Back Paddlers in K2 Sprint Kayaking Crews of Various Ability Levels
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Kayak Power Meter
2.2. Participants
2.3. Experimental Protocols
2.4. Data Processing
2.4.1. Filtering raw data
2.4.2. Extraction of Key Stroke Variables
- Force variablesThe force variables extracted were peak force, mean force, force ratio, rate of force development, impulse, and impulse rate (Figure 4a). Peak force is the maximum force within a stroke. Mean force is calculated over the water phase, and the aerial phase was excluded. Force ratio is the percentage of mean force to peak force. Rate of force development is peak force divided by the time to peak force. Impulse is the area under the force–time curve as derived from the trapezoid integration rule. Impulse rate is the product of impulse and stroke rate divided by 60 s. Impulse rate has been proposed by Baker [16] as an important stroke parameter for sprint kayaking because it better quantifies the change of momentum over a number of stroke cycles, as stroke impulse and stroke rate were thought to be inversely related.
- Power variablesThe power variables extracted were peak power, mean power, power ratio, and work done (Figure 4a). Peak power is the maximum power within a stroke. Mean power is calculated over the water phase and excluded the aerial phase. Power ratio is the percentage of mean power to peak power. Work done is the area under the power–time curve as derived from the trapezoid integration rule.
- Temporal variablesFor each individual kayaker, the temporal variables extracted were stroke rate, stroke time, water phase duration, time to peak force, and time to peak power (Figure 4a). Stroke time and water phase duration were defined according to the two-phase observational model by McDonnell et al. [17]. Stroke time was the duration from the catch of one stroke to the catch of the next stroke. Stroke rate was calculated by dividing 60 s by stroke time to obtain the number of strokes per min. To provide insights for the coordination strategies between the two crew members, timing offset variables were obtained at four instances of the stroke cycle: at the catch, time to peak force, time to peak power, and release (Figure 4b). An offset was defined as the timing difference of the back paddler with reference to the front paddler [12,13,18]. A zero offset indicates that the two paddlers are in perfect synchronisation.
2.5. Statistical Analyses
3. Results
3.1. Kinetic Profiles
3.2. Seat Position
3.3. Ability Level
3.4. Coordination Strategy
4. Discussion
4.1. Seat Position
4.2. Ability Level
4.3. Coordination Strategy
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Stothart, J.P.; Reardon, F.D.; Thoden, J.S. A system for the evaluation of on-water stroke force development during canoe and kayak events. In Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Biomechanics in Sports, Halifax, Canada; Terauds, J., Gowitzke, B.A., Holt, L.E., Eds.; University of Konstanz: Konstanz, Germany, 1986; pp. 146–152. [Google Scholar]
- Aitken, D.A.; Neal, R.J. An on-water analysis system for quantifying stroke force characteristics during kayak events. Int. J. Sport Biomech. 1992, 8, 165–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gomes, B.B.; Ramos, N.V.; Conceição, F.A.V.; Sanders, R.H.; Vaz, M.A.P.; Vilas-Boas, J.P. Paddling Force Profiles at Different Stroke Rates in Elite Sprint Kayaking. J. Appl. Biomech. 2015, 31, 258–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gomes, B.; Viriato, N.; Sanders, R.; Conceição, F.; Vilas-Boas, J.P.; Vaz, M. Analysis of the on-water paddling force profile of an elite kayaker. In Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Biomechanics in Sports, Porto, Portugal, 27 June–1 July 2011; Vilas-Boas, J.P., Machado, L., Kim, W., Veloso, A.P., Alves, F., Fernandes, R.J., Conceicao, F., Eds.; University of Konstanz: Konstanz, Germany, 2011; Volume 11, pp. 259–262. [Google Scholar]
- Macdermid, P.; Fink, P. The Validation of a Paddle Power Meter for Slalom Kayaking. Sport. Med. Int. Open 2017, 1, E50–E57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Niu, L.; Chen, L.H.; Tou, Z.Q.; Tay, C.S.; Lin, Y.F.; Kong, P.W.; Ong, F.R.; Chan, C.C. Kayaking paddle blade compression load distribution sensing system based on optical fiber with a polydimethylsiloxane membrane. Appl. Opt. 2018, 57, 1387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Niu, L.; Kong, P.W.; Tay, C.S.; Lin, Y.; Wu, B.; Ding, Z.; Chan, C.C. Evaluating on-water kayak paddling performance using optical fiber technology. IEEE Sens. J. 2019, 19, 11918–11925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bonaiuto, V.; Gatta, G.; Romagnoli, C.; Boatto, P.; Lanotte, N.; Annino, G. A New Measurement System for Performance Analysis in Flatwater Sprint Kayaking. Proceedings 2020, 49, 39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bonaiuto, V.; Gatta, G.; Romagnoli, C.; Boatto, P.; Lanotte, N.; Annino, G. A Pilot Study on the e-Kayak System: A Wireless DAQ Suited for Performance Analysis in Flatwater Sprint Kayaks. Sensors 2020, 20, 542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Macdermid, P.W.; Osborne, A.; Stannard, S.R. Mechanical Work and Physiological Responses to Simulated Flat Water Slalom Kayaking. Front. Physiol. 2019, 10, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gomes, B.B. Biomechanical Determinants of Kayak Paddling Performance in Single-Seat and Crew Boats. Ph.D. Thesis, Universidade do Porto (Portugal), Porto, Portugal, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Tay, C.S.; Kong, P.W. A video-based method to quantify stroke synchronisation in crew boat sprint kayaking. J. Hum. Kinet. 2018, 65, 45–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Tay, C.S.; Kong, P.W. Stroke characteristics in sprint kayaking—How does seat order influence synchronization in a k2 crew boat? J. Mech. Med. Biol. 2020, 20, 2050016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Borg, G.A. Psychophysical bases of perceived exertion. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 1982, 14, 377–381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Messias, L.H.D.; Sousa, F.A.d.B.; dos Reis, I.G.M.; Ferrari, H.G.; Gobatto, C.A.; Serra, C.C.S.; Papoti, M.; Manchado-Gobatto, F.B. Novel paddle stroke analysis for elite slalom kayakers: Relationship with force parameters. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0192835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Baker, J. Evaluation of biomechanic performance related factors with on-water tests. In Proceedings of the International Seminar on Kayak-Canoe Coaching and Science, Gent, Belgium; University of Gent Press: Gent, Belgium, November 1998; pp. 50–66. [Google Scholar]
- McDonnell, L.K.; Hume, P.A.; Nolte, V. An observational model for biomechanical assessment of sprint kayaking technique. Sport. Biomech. 2012, 11, 507–523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kong, P.W.; Tay, C.S.; Pan, J.W. The role of vision in maintaining stroke synchronization in k2 crew-boat kayaking. Front. Sport. Act. Living 2020, 2, 136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cohen, J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed.; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Hillsdale, NJ, USA, 1988; ISBN 0-8058-0283-5. [Google Scholar]
- Cohen, J. A power primer. Psychol. Bull. 1992, 112, 155–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zandi, S.; Rajabi, R.; Tavanaei, A.R. Are gender, position in boat and training load associated with the injuries in elite dragon boat paddlers. World J. Sport Sci. 2010, 3, 113–118. [Google Scholar]
- Robinson, M.G.; Holt, L.E.; Pelham, T.W.; Furneaux, K. Accelerometry measurements of sprint kayaks: The coaches’ new tool. Int. J. Coach. Sci. 2011, 5, 45–56. [Google Scholar]
- Gomes, B.B.; Ramos, N.V.; Concericao, F.; Sanders, R.; Vaz, M.; Vilas-Boas, J.P. Paddling time parameters and paddling efficiency with the increase in stroke rate in kayaking. Sports Biomechanics. 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Szanto, C. Chapter 15—Speed. In ICF Coaches Education Programme Canoe Sprint Coaching Manual Level 2 and 3; International Canoe Federation: Lausanne, Switzerland, 2010; pp. 115–128. [Google Scholar]
- McDonnell, L.K.; Hume, P.A.; Nolte, V. A deterministic model based on evidence for the associations between kinematic variables and sprint kayak performance. Sport. Biomech. 2013, 12, 205–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- McDonnell, K.L.; Hume, A.P.; Nolte, V. Place time consistency and stroke rates required for success in K1 200-m sprint kayaking elite competition. Int. J. Perform. Anal. Sport 2013, 13, 38–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Szanto, C. Chapter 10—Technique in crew boats. In ICF Coaches Education Programme Canoe Sprint Coaching Manual Level 2 and 3; International Canoe Federation: Lausanne, Switzerland, 2010; pp. 79–84. [Google Scholar]
- Taborri, J.; Keogh, J.; Kos, A.; Santuz, A.; Umek, A.; Urbanczyk, C.; van der Kruk, E.; Rossi, S. Sport biomechanics applications using inertial, force, and EGM sensors: A literature overview. Appl. Bionics. Biomech. 2020, 2020, 2041549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
National (N, n = 9) | Recreational (R, n = 38) | School (S, n = 27) | p | Post-hoc | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Age [years] | 23.2 [20.1, 26.2] | 24.0 [22.9, 25.2] | 17.9 [15.7, 20.0] | <0.001 * | N > S | R > S |
Height [m] | 1.74 [1.71, 1.78] | 1.73 [1.71, 1.74] | 1.70 [1.68, 1.72] | 0.033 * | ||
Body mass [kg] | 73.4 [71.2, 75.5] | 68.3 [65.9, 70.8] | 61.8 [59.7, 64.0] | <0.001 * | N > S | R > S |
Sitting height [m] | 0.91 [0.88, 0.93] | 0.91 [0.89, 0.92] | 0.87 [0.86, 0.88] | 0.001 * | N > S | R > S |
Sitting reach [m] | 1.26 [1.22, 1.29] | 1.25 [1.23, 1.27] | 1.22 [1.20, 1.24] | 0.061 | ||
Arm span [m] | 1.77 [1.72., 1.82] | 1.76 [1.74, 1.78] | 1.73 [1.71, 1.76] | 0.167 | ||
Experience [years] | 10.0 [6.5, 13.5] | 5.7 [4.4, 7.0] | 2.5 [1.8, 3.2] | <0.001 * | N > S | R > S |
ANOVA | Post-hoc | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Seat | Level | Interaction | |||||||||
Front | Back | p | η2p | p | η2p | p | η2p | ||||
Peak force [N] | N | 344.3 [307.6, 381.0] | 342.4 [252.9, 432.0] | 0.884 | <0.001 | <0.001 * | 0.340 | 0.978 | 0.001 | N > R | N > S |
R | 239.6 [207.0, 272.1] | 241.7 [219.6, 263,9] | |||||||||
S | 216.9 [188.7, 245.1] | 223.3 [182.6, 263.9] | |||||||||
Mean force [N] | N | 205.3 [187.2, 223.4] | 200.6 [149.9, 251.4] | 0.794 | 0.001 | <0.001 * | 0.329 | 0.974 | 0.001 | N > R | N > S |
R | 146.5 [130.0, 163.0] | 146.6 [134.9, 158.3] | |||||||||
S | 137.4 [120.0, 154.9] | 135.3 [111.1, 159.6] | |||||||||
Force ratio [%] | N | 60.1 [57.1, 63.1] | 58.9 [56.0, 61.8] | 0.106 | 0.036 | 0.059 | 0.075 | 0.684 | 0.010 | -- | |
R | 62.1 [60.1, 64.1] | 61.2 [59.4, 63.1] | |||||||||
S | 63.7 [62.1, 65.3] | 61.3 [59.2, 63.4] | |||||||||
RTD [N/s] | N | 1929.8 [1460.3, 2399.2] | 1699.3 [1197.3, 2201.2] | 0.939 | <0.001 | <0.001 * | 0.328 | 0.399 | 0.025 | N > R | N > S |
R | 1118.2 [938.6, 1297.8] | 1233.0 [1016.1, 1449.9] | |||||||||
S | 972.9 [831.1, 1114.7] | 1065.6 [834.8, 1296.4] | |||||||||
Impulse [Ns] | N | 91.1 [84.5, 97.7] | 88.1 [68.3, 107.8] | 0.668 | 0.003 | 0.001 * | 0.189 | 0.981 | 0.001 | N > R | N > S |
R | 71.1 [64.8, 78.6] | 70.6 [64.5, 76.7] | |||||||||
S | 68.8 [59.1, 78.6] | 67.8 [56.4, 79.2] | |||||||||
Impulse rate [Ns/s] | N | 155.9 [133.4, 178.4] | 150.9 [109.7, 192.0] | 0.708 | 0.002 | <0.001 * | 0.372 | 0.967 | 0.001 | N > R | N > S |
R | 106.2 [94.1, 118.3] | 104.3 [94.4, 114.1] | |||||||||
S | 97.1 [84.9, 109.2] | 96.6 [78.3, 115.0] |
ANOVA | Post-hoc | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Seat Order | Level | Interaction | ||||||||||
Front | Back | p | η2p | p | η2p | p | η2p | |||||
Peak power [W] | N | 924.8 [820.4, 1029.3] | 970.3 [727.8, 1212.8] | 0.525 | 0.006 | <0.001 * | 0.493 | 0.784 | 0.007 | N > R | N > S | R > S |
R | 627.9 [527.9, 728.0] | 619.6 [547.1, 692.0] | ||||||||||
S | 480.3 [429.6, 530.9] | 518.8 [458.9, 578.8] | ||||||||||
Mean power [W] | N | 497.5 [440.6, 554.4] | 516.4 [393.1, 639.7] | 0.641 | 0.003 | <0.001 * | 0.513 | 0.924 | 0.002 | N > R | N > S | R > S |
R | 342.8 [300.9, 384.8] | 342.7 [306.2, 379.2] | ||||||||||
S | 280.5 [250.0, 311.0] | 288.2 [257.5, 319.0] | ||||||||||
Power ratio [%] | N | 54.1 [51.7, 56.5] | 53.7 [50.6, 56.7] | 0.335 | 0.013 | 0.037 * | 0.088 | 0.611 | 0.014 | N < S | ||
R | 56.2 [53.7, 58.7] | 55.9 [54.3, 57.5] | ||||||||||
S | 58.7 [57.2, 60.2] | 56.4 [53.4, 59.4] | ||||||||||
Work done [J] | N | 220.2 [199.1, 241.4] | 226.4 [182.2, 270.6] | 0.733 | 0.002 | <0.001 * | 0.499 | 0.794 | 0.006 | N > R | N > S | R > S |
R | 166.1 [150.7, 181.4] | 162.6 [149.9, 175.3] | ||||||||||
S | 139.3 [125.2, 153.3] | 143.9 [130.4, 157.4] |
ANOVA | Post-hoc | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Seat Order | Level | Interaction | |||||||||
Front | Back | p | η2p | p | η2p | p | η2p | ||||
Stroke rate [spm] | N | 102.6 [91.1, 114.0] | 101.7 [91.0, 112.4] | 0.904 | <0.001 | <0.001 * | 0.336 | 0.986 | <0.001 | N > R | N > S |
R | 88.6 [85.3, 91.9] | 88.6 [85.3, 92.0] | |||||||||
S | 85.3 [80.2, 90.4] | 85.3 [80.3, 90.3] | |||||||||
Stroke time [ms] | N | 598.3 [533.8, 662.8] | 596.7 [529.7, 663.6] | 0.977 | <0.001 | <0.001 * | 0.263 | 0.998 | <0.001 | N < R | N < S |
R | 683.7 [657.8, 709.6] | 683.2 [657.5, 708.8] | |||||||||
S | 711.4 [665.0, 757.9] | 712.1 [665.8, 758.5] | |||||||||
Water phase duration [ms] | N | 423.3 [391.7, 454.9] | 425.0 [395.5, 454.5] | 0.800 | 0.001 | <0.001 * | 0.202 | 0.826 | 0.005 | N < R | N < S |
R | 473.7 [453.9, 493.4] | 463.7 [443.0, 484.4] | |||||||||
S | 481.4 [457.6, 505.3] | 482.1 [461.2, 503.0] | |||||||||
Time to peak force [ms] | N | 183.3 [155.4, 211.2] | 205.0 [183.2, 226.8] | 0.914 | <0.001 | 0.061 | 0.075 | 0.230 | 0.040 | ||
R | 221.1 [203.5, 238.6] | 205.3 [188.5, 222.0] | |||||||||
S | 225.7 [210.7, 240.7] | 217.1 [196.2, 238.1] | |||||||||
Time to peak power [ms] | N | 173.3 [143.9, 202.8] | 195.0 [177.8, 212.2] | 0.874 | <0.001 | 0.038 * | 0.087 | 0.143 | 0.053 | N < S | |
R | 202.6 [191.1, 214.2] | 190.5 [179.1, 201.9] | |||||||||
S | 214.3 [196.6, 231.9] | 201.4 [181.6, 221.3] |
National (N, n = 6) | Recreational (R, n = 19) | School (S, n = 14) | p | Post-hoc | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Catch [ms] | 41.7 [26.2, 57.1] | 38.9 [29.6, 48.3] | 31.4 [25.9, 36.9] | 0.196 | -- |
Time to peak force [ms] | 45.0 [25.4, 64.6] | 58.9 [48.2, 69.7] | 67.9 [55.2, 80.5] | 0.108 | -- |
Time to peak power [ms] | 36.7 [17.1, 56.2] | 44.7 [36.6, 52.8] | 52.9 [43.7, 62.0] | 0.131 | -- |
Release [ms] | 38.3 [14.0, 62.6] | 39.5 [29.1, 49.8] | 38.6 [29.8, 47.3] | 0.988 | -- |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Kong, P.W.; Tay, C.S.; Pan, J.W. Application of Instrumented Paddles in Measuring On-Water Kinetics of Front and Back Paddlers in K2 Sprint Kayaking Crews of Various Ability Levels. Sensors 2020, 20, 6317. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20216317
Kong PW, Tay CS, Pan JW. Application of Instrumented Paddles in Measuring On-Water Kinetics of Front and Back Paddlers in K2 Sprint Kayaking Crews of Various Ability Levels. Sensors. 2020; 20(21):6317. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20216317
Chicago/Turabian StyleKong, Pui Wah, Cheryl Sihui Tay, and Jing Wen Pan. 2020. "Application of Instrumented Paddles in Measuring On-Water Kinetics of Front and Back Paddlers in K2 Sprint Kayaking Crews of Various Ability Levels" Sensors 20, no. 21: 6317. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20216317