Cargando…

Initial Evaluation of the Concept-2 Rowing Ergometer's Accuracy Using a Motorized Test Rig

INTRODUCTION: The Concept 2 (C2) rowing ergometer is used worldwide for home-based training, official competitions, and performance assessment in sports and science. Previous studies reported a disparate underestimation of mechanical power output positively related to an unclearly defined stroke var...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Treff, Gunnar, Mentz, Lennart, Mayer, Benjamin, Winkert, Kay, Engleder, Thomas, Steinacker, Jürgen M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8821892/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35146423
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2021.801617
_version_ 1784646494402379776
author Treff, Gunnar
Mentz, Lennart
Mayer, Benjamin
Winkert, Kay
Engleder, Thomas
Steinacker, Jürgen M.
author_facet Treff, Gunnar
Mentz, Lennart
Mayer, Benjamin
Winkert, Kay
Engleder, Thomas
Steinacker, Jürgen M.
author_sort Treff, Gunnar
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: The Concept 2 (C2) rowing ergometer is used worldwide for home-based training, official competitions, and performance assessment in sports and science. Previous studies reported a disparate underestimation of mechanical power output positively related to an unclearly defined stroke variability. The aim of this study was to quantify the accuracy of the C2 while controlling for the potentially influencing variables of the rowing stroke by using a test rig for air-braked rowing ergometers and thus excluding biological variability. METHODS: A unique motorized test rig for rowing ergometers was employed. Accuracy was assessed as the difference in mechanical power output between C2 and a reference system during steady (i.e., minimal variations of stroke power within a series of 50 spacemark, no -strokes) and unsteady simulated rowing (i.e., persistent variations during measurement series) while manipulating the stroke variables shape, force, or rate. RESULTS: During steady simulated rowing, differences between C2 and the reference system ranged 2.9–4.3%. Differences were not significantly affected by stroke shapes (P = 0.153), but by stroke rates ranging 22–28 min(−1) (P < 0.001). During unsteady simulated rowing with alterations of stroke force and rate, mean differences of 2.5–3.9% were similar as during steady simulated rowing, but the random error increased up to 18-fold. C2 underestimated mechanical power output of the first five strokes by 10–70%. Their exclusion reduced mean differences to 0.2–1.9%. CONCLUSION: Due to the enormous underestimation of the start strokes, the nominal accuracy of the C2 depends on the total number of strokes considered. It ranges 0.2–1.9%, once the flywheel has been sufficiently accelerated. Inaccuracy increases with uneven rowing, but the stroke shape has a marginal impact. Hence, rowers should row as even as possible and prefer higher stroke rates to optimize C2 readings. We recommend external reference systems for scientific and high-performance assessments, especially for short tests designs where the start strokes will have a major impact.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8821892
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88218922022-02-09 Initial Evaluation of the Concept-2 Rowing Ergometer's Accuracy Using a Motorized Test Rig Treff, Gunnar Mentz, Lennart Mayer, Benjamin Winkert, Kay Engleder, Thomas Steinacker, Jürgen M. Front Sports Act Living Sports and Active Living INTRODUCTION: The Concept 2 (C2) rowing ergometer is used worldwide for home-based training, official competitions, and performance assessment in sports and science. Previous studies reported a disparate underestimation of mechanical power output positively related to an unclearly defined stroke variability. The aim of this study was to quantify the accuracy of the C2 while controlling for the potentially influencing variables of the rowing stroke by using a test rig for air-braked rowing ergometers and thus excluding biological variability. METHODS: A unique motorized test rig for rowing ergometers was employed. Accuracy was assessed as the difference in mechanical power output between C2 and a reference system during steady (i.e., minimal variations of stroke power within a series of 50 spacemark, no -strokes) and unsteady simulated rowing (i.e., persistent variations during measurement series) while manipulating the stroke variables shape, force, or rate. RESULTS: During steady simulated rowing, differences between C2 and the reference system ranged 2.9–4.3%. Differences were not significantly affected by stroke shapes (P = 0.153), but by stroke rates ranging 22–28 min(−1) (P < 0.001). During unsteady simulated rowing with alterations of stroke force and rate, mean differences of 2.5–3.9% were similar as during steady simulated rowing, but the random error increased up to 18-fold. C2 underestimated mechanical power output of the first five strokes by 10–70%. Their exclusion reduced mean differences to 0.2–1.9%. CONCLUSION: Due to the enormous underestimation of the start strokes, the nominal accuracy of the C2 depends on the total number of strokes considered. It ranges 0.2–1.9%, once the flywheel has been sufficiently accelerated. Inaccuracy increases with uneven rowing, but the stroke shape has a marginal impact. Hence, rowers should row as even as possible and prefer higher stroke rates to optimize C2 readings. We recommend external reference systems for scientific and high-performance assessments, especially for short tests designs where the start strokes will have a major impact. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-01-25 /pmc/articles/PMC8821892/ /pubmed/35146423 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2021.801617 Text en Copyright © 2022 Treff, Mentz, Mayer, Winkert, Engleder and Steinacker. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Sports and Active Living
Treff, Gunnar
Mentz, Lennart
Mayer, Benjamin
Winkert, Kay
Engleder, Thomas
Steinacker, Jürgen M.
Initial Evaluation of the Concept-2 Rowing Ergometer's Accuracy Using a Motorized Test Rig
title Initial Evaluation of the Concept-2 Rowing Ergometer's Accuracy Using a Motorized Test Rig
title_full Initial Evaluation of the Concept-2 Rowing Ergometer's Accuracy Using a Motorized Test Rig
title_fullStr Initial Evaluation of the Concept-2 Rowing Ergometer's Accuracy Using a Motorized Test Rig
title_full_unstemmed Initial Evaluation of the Concept-2 Rowing Ergometer's Accuracy Using a Motorized Test Rig
title_short Initial Evaluation of the Concept-2 Rowing Ergometer's Accuracy Using a Motorized Test Rig
title_sort initial evaluation of the concept-2 rowing ergometer's accuracy using a motorized test rig
topic Sports and Active Living
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8821892/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35146423
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2021.801617
work_keys_str_mv AT treffgunnar initialevaluationoftheconcept2rowingergometersaccuracyusingamotorizedtestrig
AT mentzlennart initialevaluationoftheconcept2rowingergometersaccuracyusingamotorizedtestrig
AT mayerbenjamin initialevaluationoftheconcept2rowingergometersaccuracyusingamotorizedtestrig
AT winkertkay initialevaluationoftheconcept2rowingergometersaccuracyusingamotorizedtestrig
AT englederthomas initialevaluationoftheconcept2rowingergometersaccuracyusingamotorizedtestrig
AT steinackerjurgenm initialevaluationoftheconcept2rowingergometersaccuracyusingamotorizedtestrig