Features Observed Using Multiple Inertial Sensors for Running Track and Hard-Soft Sand Running: A Comparison Study

View/ Open
File version
Version of Record (VoR)
Author(s)
Worsey, Matthew TO
Espinosa, Hugo G
Shepherd, Jonathan B
Lewerenz, Julian
Klodzinski, Florian SM
Thiel, David V
Year published
2020
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
Variability in the running surface can cause an athlete to alter their gait. Most literature report running on grass, a treadmill or athletics running tracks using inertial sensors. This study compares the signals obtained by 9 degrees of freedom (DOF) inertial-magnetic sensors incorporating an accelerometer (±16 g), gyroscope (±2000°/s) and magnetometer (±8 gauss). The sensors were placed on the participant’s shank, knee, lower spine and upper spine, and the participants were asked to run on three different surfaces (running track, hard sand and soft sand). The calculated player loads for a 400 m run on each surface type ...
View more >Variability in the running surface can cause an athlete to alter their gait. Most literature report running on grass, a treadmill or athletics running tracks using inertial sensors. This study compares the signals obtained by 9 degrees of freedom (DOF) inertial-magnetic sensors incorporating an accelerometer (±16 g), gyroscope (±2000°/s) and magnetometer (±8 gauss). The sensors were placed on the participant’s shank, knee, lower spine and upper spine, and the participants were asked to run on three different surfaces (running track, hard sand and soft sand). The calculated player loads for a 400 m run on each surface type was very similar. The mean and standard deviation values were 577 ± 130, 581 ± 128, 568 ± 124 for soft sand, hard sand and the running track, respectively. This did not correlate with the participant’s self-assessment RPE (Rate of perceived exertion), which demonstrated running on soft sand to be significantly more challenging, yielding a mean and standard deviation of 5.3 ± 2.5 (Hard to Very Hard). Soft sand running had a decreased swing time duration but increased variability (0.44 ± 0.02 s—Swing Time, 6.5 ± 1.1%—CV), hard sand running had the longest swing and intermediate variability duration (0.46 ± 0.02 s—Swing Time, 3.30 ± 2.58 %—CV) and running track running had the medium swing time but lowest variability (0.45 ± 0.02 s, 2.7 ± 0.9%—CV). Gait dominance was not consistent across the surfaces for each participant and remained below a ratio of 0.4. These results provide an insight into how athletes modify their gait mechanics to accommodate different running surfaces.
View less >
View more >Variability in the running surface can cause an athlete to alter their gait. Most literature report running on grass, a treadmill or athletics running tracks using inertial sensors. This study compares the signals obtained by 9 degrees of freedom (DOF) inertial-magnetic sensors incorporating an accelerometer (±16 g), gyroscope (±2000°/s) and magnetometer (±8 gauss). The sensors were placed on the participant’s shank, knee, lower spine and upper spine, and the participants were asked to run on three different surfaces (running track, hard sand and soft sand). The calculated player loads for a 400 m run on each surface type was very similar. The mean and standard deviation values were 577 ± 130, 581 ± 128, 568 ± 124 for soft sand, hard sand and the running track, respectively. This did not correlate with the participant’s self-assessment RPE (Rate of perceived exertion), which demonstrated running on soft sand to be significantly more challenging, yielding a mean and standard deviation of 5.3 ± 2.5 (Hard to Very Hard). Soft sand running had a decreased swing time duration but increased variability (0.44 ± 0.02 s—Swing Time, 6.5 ± 1.1%—CV), hard sand running had the longest swing and intermediate variability duration (0.46 ± 0.02 s—Swing Time, 3.30 ± 2.58 %—CV) and running track running had the medium swing time but lowest variability (0.45 ± 0.02 s, 2.7 ± 0.9%—CV). Gait dominance was not consistent across the surfaces for each participant and remained below a ratio of 0.4. These results provide an insight into how athletes modify their gait mechanics to accommodate different running surfaces.
View less >
Journal Title
Proceedings
Conference Title
Proceedings
Volume
49
Issue
1
Copyright Statement
© 2020 The Authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited
Subject
Engineering practice and education not elsewhere classified
Sports science and exercise