field-measured drag area is a key correlate of level cycling time trial performance

Clicks: 6
ID: 227383
2015
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #580 of 581 articles by views in pediatrics

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 581 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Drag area (Ad) is a primary factor determining aerodynamic resistance during level cycling and is therefore a key determinant of level time trial performance. However, Ad has traditionally been difficult to measure. Our purpose was to determine the value of adding field-measured Ad as a correlate of level cycling time trial performance. In the field, 19 male cyclists performed a level (22.1 km) time trial. Separately, field-determined Ad and rolling resistance were calculated for subjects along with projected frontal area assessed directly (AP) and indirectly (Est AP). Also, a graded exercise test was performed to determine $\dot {V}{O}_{2}$V̇O2 peak, lactate threshold (LT), and economy. $\dot {V}{O}_{2}$V̇O2 peak ($\mathrm{l}~\min ^{-1}$lmin−1) and power at LT were significantly correlated to power measured during the time trial (r = 0.83 and 0.69, respectively) but were not significantly correlated to performance time (r = − 0.42 and −0.45). The correlation with performance time improved significantly (p < 0.05) when these variables were normalized to Ad. Of note, Ad alone was better correlated to performance time (r = 0.85, p < 0.001) than any combination of non-normalized physiological measure. The best correlate with performance time was field-measured power output during the time trial normalized to Ad (r = − 0.92). AP only accounted for 54% of the variability in Ad. Accordingly, the correlation to performance time was significantly lower using power normalized to AP (r = − 0.75) or Est AP (r = − 0.71). In conclusion, unless normalized to Ad, level time trial performance in the field was not highly correlated to common laboratory measures. Furthermore, our field-measured Ad is easy to determine and was the single best predictor of level time trial performance.
Reference Key
peterman2015peerjfield-measured Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors ;James E. Peterman;Allen C. Lim;Ryan I. Ignatz;Andrew G. Edwards;William C. Byrnes
Journal pediatrics
Year 2015
DOI
10.7717/peerj.1144
URL
https://peerj.com/articles/1144/
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.