Next Article in Journal
Effective and Efficient Pretreatment of Polyimide Substrates by Capacitively Coupled Plasma for Coating the Composites of Tetracycline-Imprinted Polymers and Quantum Dots: Comparison with Chemical Pretreatment
Next Article in Special Issue
Changes in Muscle Contractile Properties after Cold- or Warm-Water Immersion Using Tensiomyography: A Cross-Over Randomised Trial
Previous Article in Journal
A Distributed Oracle Using Intel SGX for Blockchain-Based IoT Applications
Previous Article in Special Issue
Automatic Registration of Footsteps in Contact Regions for Reactive Agility Training in Sports
Open AccessArticle

A Proposed Method to Assess the Mechanical Properties of Treadmill Surfaces

1
IGOID Research Group, Physical Activity and Sport Sciences Department, University of Castilla-La Mancha, 45071 Toledo, Spain
2
Department of Nutrition and Movement Sciences, NUTRIM School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, Maastricht University, Universiteitssingel 50, 6229 ER Maastricht, The Netherlands
3
School of Sport Sciences, Universidad Europea de Madrid, 28670 Madrid, Spain
4
Research Institute Hospital 12 de Octubre (‘imas12’), 28041 Madrid, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sensors 2020, 20(9), 2724; https://doi.org/10.3390/s20092724
Received: 10 March 2020 / Revised: 28 April 2020 / Accepted: 6 May 2020 / Published: 10 May 2020
The aim of this study was to define a reliable and sensitive test method for assessing Shock Absorption (SA), Vertical Deformation (VD), and Energy Restitution (ER) in treadmill surfaces. A total of 42 treadmills belonging to four different models were included in the study: (a) Technogym Jog700 Excite (n = 10), (b) Technogym Artis Run (n = 12), (c) LifeFitness Integrity Series 97T (n = 11), and (d) LifeFitness Integrity Series DX (n = 9). An advanced artificial athlete (AAA) device was used to assess SA, VD, and ER at three different locations along the longitudinal axis of each treadmill and in the support area of the athletes’ feet. For each location, our results show that the error assumed when performing one impact with the AAA instead of three (SA ≤ |0.1|%, VD ≤ |0.0| mm, and ER ≤ |0.2|%) is lower than the smallest changes that can be detected by the measuring device (SA = 0.4%, VD = 0.2 mm, and ER = 0.9%). Also, our results show the ability of the test method to detect meaningful differences between locations once the one-impact criterium is adopted, since absolute minimum differences between zones (SA: |0.6|%, VD: |0.3| mm, and ER: |1.2|%) were above the uncertainty of the measuring device. Therefore, performing a single impact with the AAA in each of the three locations described in this study can be considered a representative and reliable method for assessing SA, VD, and ER in treadmill surfaces. View Full-Text
Keywords: sport surfaces; running; biomechanics; shock absorption; energy restitution sport surfaces; running; biomechanics; shock absorption; energy restitution
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Colino, E.; Garcia-Unanue, J.; Van Hooren, B.; Gallardo, L.; Meijer, K.; Lucia, A.; Felipe, J.L. A Proposed Method to Assess the Mechanical Properties of Treadmill Surfaces. Sensors 2020, 20, 2724.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Search more from Scilit
 
Search
Back to TopTop