Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

IAAF Biomechanical Analysis Data

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • IAAF Biomechanical Analysis Data

    It's good to see such info being provided in timely fashion (compared to other majors) and with relatively detailed equipage and instrumentation (LAVEG).
    http://berlin.iaaf.org/news/kind=101/newsid=53084.html

    Individual reports can be viewed with a search such as the following:
    http://berlin.iaaf.org/search/index.htm ... is+project

  • #2
    Thanks. I wasn't aware they were doing this at all.

    Comment


    • #3
      A few things I noticed:

      Bolt's splits are slightly different in the every 20 meter data vs the every 10 meter data.

      In the 10 meter, his time at 20 meters is 2.88
      In the 20 meter, his time at 20 meters is 2.89

      In the 10 meter, his time at 60 meters is 6.29
      In the 20 meter, his time at 60 meters is 6.31

      Also, in the 10 meter analysis, it gives his speed at 70 meters as 12.35 meters per second. Then, it says that his maximum velocity in the race was 12.27 meters per second.

      Comment


      • #4
        As I examine the every 10 meter data and graph more closely, I am guessing that the 12.35 meters/sec is figured by 100 meters divided by .81 seconds (the split between 60 and 70 meters) which could be higher than the "true" maximum velocity, since the .81 is rounded off to the nearest hundredth.

        But, now I notice that his velocity at 100 meters is 12.05 meters/sec in the table. If you look at the graph, though, the red line from 90 to 100 meters is below the 12 meters/sec line for the whole time.

        Comment


        • #5
          Maybe someone can comment on the methodology, though it's probably on their website somewhere, but I believe the blue line is the measured speed of the torso, which is not the same as the true speed. The torso rocks back and forth and this will appear as peaks on the graph (I'm presuming the peaks correspond to each stride). The red line is just an interpretation of the graph and may not necessarily be precise.

          Comment


          • #6
            20m split were found via camera aligned with marks on the track. The cameras are linked with the Seiko equipement so they can have accurate and synchronised time code. Laser (blue line) is placed either behind or in front of a single runner, at about 1m-1m20 height. I would rely more on the camera data because it takes the times from the torso, like the final time on photofinish.
            The 0.01-0.02 diff between the 2 methodology confirms what was found in Athens'97.

            Comment


            • #7
              They have more data than they are publicizing where is the biometric part of the data?
              It seems that bolt is going at 13.5 m/s at one instant.

              Well this graph is very insightful, The blue seems to be a fitted curve, they did it for some reason or the other. After all this data may be used in the future and its best to have it in use full form. It seems they have smooth it out for purposes relating to energy.
              These Germans are cooking up something, might just see new training methods developed from this data. They will find out why bolt is so fast and engineer a bolt of their own.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Pierre-Jean
                20m split were found via camera aligned with marks on the track. The cameras are linked with the Seiko equipement so they can have accurate and synchronised time code. Laser (blue line) is placed either behind or in front of a single runner, at about 1m-1m20 height. I would rely more on the camera data because it takes the times from the torso, like the final time on photofinish.
                The 0.01-0.02 diff between the 2 methodology confirms what was found in Athens'97.
                What is the origin of the oscillations in the LAVEG data? Is this limb movement (arms, legs)?

                Comment


                • #9
                  The squiggly line is Bolt's actual speed.

                  You push off with your legs.. and the air resistance and landing slows you down. So the speed is oscillating as it rises to the 65m mark. That is why his MAX speed is more than the 10m distance divided by the split.

                  The smoothed line is bolts AVERAGED SPEED.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I read the graph wrong. Red (smoothed) line is under 12 meters per second for the last 5 meters, not the last 10 meters.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by RamGoat
                      The squiggly line is Bolt's actual speed.

                      You push off with your legs.. and the air resistance and landing slows you down. So the speed is oscillating as it rises to the 65m mark. That is why his MAX speed is more than the 10m distance divided by the split.

                      The smoothed line is bolts AVERAGED SPEED.
                      Air resistance certainly wouldn't slow anyone down by 2m/s in the space of a stride (cf. 13 to 11m/s at 40m). I'm sure it's 99.9% landing.

                      I still think there must be extra noise to that graph, though. If what you say is true, Bolt's peak instantaneous speed was over 13m/s at about 54m (and was 13m/s at 40m, as mentioned above). Perhaps that's just the reality of the data, though, which in itself is very interesting.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        This perhaps a better link

                        http://berlin.iaaf.org/records/biomechanics/index.html

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Pierre-Jean
                          20m split were found via camera aligned with marks on the track. The cameras are linked with the Seiko equipement so they can have accurate and synchronised time code. Laser (blue line) is placed either behind or in front of a single runner, at about 1m-1m20 height. I would rely more on the camera data because it takes the times from the torso, like the final time on photofinish.
                          The 0.01-0.02 diff between the 2 methodology confirms what was found in Athens'97.
                          Any idea if the 100m splits in the 400s (and 200) are high-speed stuff (usable in 100ths), or interpolations from normal video (only usable in 10ths)?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            thanks a lot for the link.
                            can anybody help to find the jumps-datas.
                            greetings.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Stafanitus
                              thanks a lot for the link.
                              can anybody help to find the jumps-datas.
                              greetings.
                              I don't think a biomechanical analysis of jumps is involved, if I understand you correctly. Otherwise please look at the wonderful results pages of IAAF.

                              But as far as the other data are concerned.

                              Their website www.fgs.uni-halle.de clearly states, that the IAAF website will only provide a part of their plain results. On their website the 4x100m and 4x400m results are not yet linkable, maybe not for a while. The full report will be sent to the IAAF by november.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X