Advertisement

Sports Engineering

, Volume 16, Issue 4, pp 297–307 | Cite as

Comparison between the force application point determined by portable force plate system and the center of pressure determined by pressure insole system during alpine skiing

  • Kosuke NakazatoEmail author
  • Peter Scheiber
  • Erich Müller
Original Article

Abstract

The purposes of this study were (1) to compare the force application point (FAP) calculated by a portable force plate system and the center of pressure (COP) calculated by a pressure insole system during alpine skiing, and (2) to assess whether any statistical differences between FAP/COP characteristics were influenced by the skiing modes, skiers’ skill levels, or pitch of the slope. Seven expert and eight intermediate skiers performed 20 double turns with two different skiing techniques. Similarities between the time characteristics of both systems and repeated measures ANOVA were used for the statistical analysis. Time characteristics of both systems in the y direction (anterior–posterior) were highly comparable. The mean FAP and COP in the x direction (medial–lateral) were different in all skiing modes for the outer ski and for the inner ski for the expert skiers. The ranges of the FAP in both directions were greater than the COP in almost all conditions.

Keywords

Ground Reaction Force Force Plate Alpine Skiing Force Application Point Inside Phase 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Yoneyama T, Kagawa H, Okamoto A, Sawada M (2000) Joint motion and reacting forces in the carving ski turn compared with conventional ski turn. Sports Eng 3:161–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Spitzenpfeil P, Huber A, Waibel K (2009) Mechanical load and muscular expenditure in alpine ski racing and implications for safety and material considerations. In: Müller E, Lindinger S, Stöggl T (eds) Science and skiing IV. Meyer & Meyer Sport, Maidenhead, pp 479–486Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Scheiber P, Seifert J, Müller E (2012) Relationships between biomechanics and physiology in older, recreational alpine skiers. Scand J Med Sci Sports 22:49–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Babiel S, Hartmann U, Spitzenpfeil P, Mester J (1997) Ground-reaction forces in alpine skiing, cross-country skiing and ski jumping. In: Müller E, Schwameder H, Kornexl E, Raschner C (eds) Science and Skiing. E & FN Spon, London, pp 200–207Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bergen BV (1997) Different possibilities of measuring force transmission between ski and binding. In: Müller E, Schwameder H, Kornexl E, Raschner C (eds) Science and Skiing. E & FN Spon, London, pp 189–199Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lüthi A, Federolf P, Fauve M, Oberhofer K, Rhyner H, Ammann W, Stricker G, Schiefermüller C, Eitzlmair E, Schwameder H, Müller E (2005) Determination of forces in carving using three independent methods. In: Müller E, Bacharach D, Klika R, Lindinger S, Schwameder H (eds) Science and skiing III. Meyer & Meyer Sport, Oxford, pp 96–106Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Winner MA, Holzner R (1997) Constraint forces may influence the measurement of vertical ground reaction forces during slalom skiing. In: Müller E, Schwameder H, Kornexl E, Raschner C (eds) Science and skiing. E & FN Spon, London, pp 208–215Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Vodickova S, Vaverka F (2009) The method of the time analysis of a carving turn and its phases. In: Müller E, Lindinger S, Stöggl T (eds) Science and skiing IV. Meyer & Meyer Sport, Maidenhead, pp 532–542Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Vaverka F, Vodickova S (2009) The influence of the laterality of the lower limbs on the symmetry of connected carving turns. In: Müller E, Lindinger S, Stöggl T (eds) Science and skiing IV. Meyer & Meyer Sport, Maidenhead, pp 523–531Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Stricker G, Scheiber P, Lindenhofer E, Müller E (2010) Determination of forces in alpine skiing and snowboarding: validation of a mobile data acquisition system. Eur J Sport Sci 10:31–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Federolf P, Scheiber P, Rauscher E, Schwameder H, Lüthi A, Rhyner HU, Müller E (2008) Impact of skier actions on the gliding times in alpine skiing. Scand J Med Sci Sports 18:790–797CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Scheiber P, Schwameder H, Müller E (2006) Characteristics of the force application point—a method to identify learning processes in alpine skiing? In: Proceedings of 24th International Symposium on Biomechanics in Sports. Salzburg, Austria, pp 564–567Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nakazato K, Scheiber P, Müller E (2011) A comparison of ground reaction forces determined by portable force-plate and pressure-insole systems in alpine skiing. J Sports Sci Med 10:754–762Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chesnin KJ, Selby-Silverstein L, Besser MP (2000) Comparison of an in-shoe pressure measurement device to a force plate: concurrent validity of center of pressure measurements. Gait Posture 12:128–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Forner-Cordero A, Koopman HJFM, van der Helm FCT (2004) Use of pressure insoles to calculate the complete ground reaction forces. J Biomech 37:1427–1432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wörndle W, Jenny F, Furtner M (2011) Snowsport Austria, Die Österreichischen Skischlen. Die Österreichischer Skischulverband, Verlag Bünder HollinekGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Winter DA (1980) Overall principle of lower limb support during stance phase of gait. J Biomech 13:923–927CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Charalambous L, Irwin G, Bezodis IN, Kerwin D (2012) Lower limb joint kinetics and ankle joint stiffness in the sprint start push-off. J Sports Sci 30:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Birklbauer J (2006) Azyklische Bewegungen In: Birklbauer J (ed) Modelle der Motorik (Models of motor control and learning), Spektrum Bewegungswissenschaft, Band 5. Meyer & Meyer, Aachen, pp 292–318Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Barnett S, Cunningham JL, West S (2000) A comparison of vertical force and temporal parameters produced by an in-shoe pressure measuring system and a force platform. Clin Biomech 15:781–785CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bobbert MF, Schamhardt HC (1990) Accuracy of determining the point of force application with piezoelectric force plates. J Biomech 23:705–710CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kim H-Y, Sakurai S, Ahn J-H (2007) Errors in the measurement of center of pressure (CoP) computed with force plate affect on 3D lower limb joint moment during gait. Int J Sport Health Sci 5:71–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Scheiber P, Nakazato K, Frühwirth D, Müller E (2010) Determination of shank forces in alpine skiing—improvements for insole measurement? A pilot study. In: Proceedings of 5th International Congress on Science and Skiing. St. Christoph am Arlberg, pp 142Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kersting UG, Kurpiers N, Kiefmann A, Senner V (2009) Comparison of a six degree-of-freedom force sensor and pressure insole measurement in skiing. In: Proceedings of 18th International Society for Skiing Safety Congress. Garmisch Partenkirchen, Germany, p 19Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Sports Engineering Association 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kosuke Nakazato
    • 1
    Email author
  • Peter Scheiber
    • 1
  • Erich Müller
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Sport Science and Kinesiology, and CD-Laboratory “Biomechanics in Skiing”University of SalzburgHalleinAustria

Personalised recommendations