IGOID Research Group, Physical Activity and Sport Sciences Department, University of Castilla-La Mancha, 45071 Toledo, Spain.
Department of Nutrition and Movement Sciences, NUTRIM School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, Maastricht University, Universiteitssingel 50, 6229 ER Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Sensors (Basel). 2020 May 10;20(9):2724. doi: 10.3390/s20092724.
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 ( = 10), (b) Technogym Artis Run ( = 12), (c) LifeFitness Integrity Series 97T ( = 11), and (d) LifeFitness Integrity Series DX ( = 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.
本研究旨在定义一种可靠且敏感的测试方法，以评估跑步机表面的冲击吸收（SA）、垂直变形（VD）和能量恢复（ER）。共有 42 台跑步机属于四个不同的型号，包括：（a）Technogym Jog700 Excite（=10），（b）Technogym Artis Run（=12），（c）LifeFitness Integrity Series 97T（=11）和（d）LifeFitness Integrity Series DX（=9）。使用先进的人工运动员（AAA）设备在每个跑步机的纵向轴的三个不同位置以及运动员脚部的支撑区域评估 SA、VD 和 ER。对于每个位置，我们的结果表明，使用 AAA 进行一次冲击而不是三次冲击时所假设的误差（SA≤|0.1|%，VD≤|0.0|mm，ER≤|0.2|%）低于测量设备可以检测到的最小变化（SA=0.4%，VD=0.2mm，ER=0.9%）。此外，我们的结果表明，一旦采用单次冲击标准，该测试方法能够检测到位置之间有意义的差异，因为区域之间的绝对最小差异（SA：|0.6|%，VD：|0.3|mm，ER：|1.2|%）高于测量设备的不确定性。因此，在本研究中描述的三个位置中的每一个位置使用 AAA 进行单次冲击可以被认为是评估跑步机表面的 SA、VD 和 ER 的代表性和可靠方法。
