Cristian Osgnach, Katja Koren, Boštjan Šimunič, Anton Ušaj, Pietro Enrico di Prampero
{"title":"Energy cost of running uphill as compared to running on the level with impeding horizontal forces.","authors":"Cristian Osgnach, Katja Koren, Boštjan Šimunič, Anton Ušaj, Pietro Enrico di Prampero","doi":"10.1007/s00421-024-05587-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We have previously shown that accelerated running on flat terrain is biomechanically equivalent to running uphill at a constant speed. This hypothesis was further investigated comparing the energy cost of running at a constant speed either uphill, or on flat terrain against an equivalent horizontal impeding force, mimicking acceleration.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Steady-state O<sub>2</sub> consumption and the corresponding energy cost (per unit body mass and distance) were determined on 12 male subjects during treadmill running at speeds between 2.11 and 2.89 m/s: (i) on the level, (ii) uphill at 10 or 20% incline ( <math><mi>I</mi></math> ), or (iii) on the level against a horizontal traction force of 10 or 20% of the subject's body weight ( <math><mrow><mi>TF</mi></mrow> </math> ). This allowed us to estimate the net efficiency ( <math><mrow><mi>n</mi> <mi>e</mi> <mi>t</mi> <mi>η</mi></mrow> </math> ) of running against horizontal or vertical forces, as given by the ratio between the additional mechanical work output under <math><mrow><mi>TF</mi></mrow> </math> , or the corresponding <math><mi>I</mi></math> condition, and the difference between the appropriate energy cost above that for running at constant speed on flat terrain.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The <math><mrow><mi>n</mi> <mi>e</mi> <mi>t</mi> <mi>η</mi></mrow> </math> values when running uphill ( <math><mi>I</mi></math> ) amount to 0.35-0.40, whereas those for running against an equivalent impeding force ( <math><mrow><mi>TF</mi></mrow> </math> ) are about 10% greater (0.45-0.50), a fact that may be due to a greater recovery of elastic energy in the <math><mrow><mi>TF</mi></mrow> </math> as compared to the <math><mi>I</mi></math> condition.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Making allowance for these small differences, these data support the view of considering accelerated running on flat terrain biomechanically equivalent to running at a constant speed, up an equivalent slope.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00421-024-05587-z","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: We have previously shown that accelerated running on flat terrain is biomechanically equivalent to running uphill at a constant speed. This hypothesis was further investigated comparing the energy cost of running at a constant speed either uphill, or on flat terrain against an equivalent horizontal impeding force, mimicking acceleration.
Methods: Steady-state O2 consumption and the corresponding energy cost (per unit body mass and distance) were determined on 12 male subjects during treadmill running at speeds between 2.11 and 2.89 m/s: (i) on the level, (ii) uphill at 10 or 20% incline ( ), or (iii) on the level against a horizontal traction force of 10 or 20% of the subject's body weight ( ). This allowed us to estimate the net efficiency ( ) of running against horizontal or vertical forces, as given by the ratio between the additional mechanical work output under , or the corresponding condition, and the difference between the appropriate energy cost above that for running at constant speed on flat terrain.
Results: The values when running uphill ( ) amount to 0.35-0.40, whereas those for running against an equivalent impeding force ( ) are about 10% greater (0.45-0.50), a fact that may be due to a greater recovery of elastic energy in the as compared to the condition.
Conclusion: Making allowance for these small differences, these data support the view of considering accelerated running on flat terrain biomechanically equivalent to running at a constant speed, up an equivalent slope.
目的:我们之前已经证明,在平坦地形上加速跑在生物力学上等同于匀速上坡跑。我们对这一假设进行了进一步研究,比较了匀速上坡跑或平地跑的能量成本与模拟加速度的等效水平阻碍力:测定了 12 名男性受试者在跑步机上以 2.11 至 2.89 米/秒的速度跑步时的稳态氧气消耗量和相应的能量成本(单位体重和距离):(i) 在平地上,(ii) 以 10 或 20% 的坡度上坡(I),或 (iii) 在平地上对抗受试者体重 10 或 20% 的水平牵引力(TF)。这样,我们就可以估算出对抗水平或垂直力跑步的净效率(n e t η),即在 TF 或相应的 I 条件下额外输出的机械功与在平坦地形上匀速跑步的相应能量成本之差的比值:上坡跑(I)时的 n e t η 值为 0.35-0.40,而对抗等效阻力(TF)时的 n e t η 值要高出约 10%(0.45-0.50),这可能是由于 TF 比 I 条件下弹性能量的恢复能力更强:考虑到这些微小的差异,这些数据支持这样一种观点,即在平坦地形上加速跑在生物力学上等同于在等效斜坡上匀速跑。