Article Sidebar
Published:
Oct 2, 2013Article Details
Issue
Section
Articles
Copyright on articles is owned by the journal.
All articles published in the South African Journal of Sports Medicine can be re-used under the following CC license:
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) International
Material submitted for publication in the South African Journal of Sports Medicine is accepted provided it has not been published elsewhere. The South African Journal of Sports Medicine does not hold itself responsible for statements made by the authors.
Main Article Content
Three-dimensional musculoskeletal modelling of the seated row resistance-training exercise
Abstract
Objective. To evaluate whether three-dimensional (3D) musculoskeletal modelling could be effective in assessing the safety and efficacy of exercising on a seated row resistance-training machine. The focus of the evaluation was on biomechanical and anthropometric considerations of the end user.
Methods. Three anthropometric cases were created; these represented a 5th percentile female as well as a 50th and a 95th percentile male based on body mass index. Two repetitions, with a resistance equal to 50% of the functional strength of one repetition maximum (1RM) for each anthropometric case, were performed.
Results. Results indicate that the default model of the LifeModeler software has important limitations that should be taken into consideration when used to evaluate exercise equipment. Adjustments had to be made to the model to solve the forward dynamics simulations; as a result, no muscle forces or contraction values were obtained. This negatively influenced the value of the results as these parameters are important when analysing an exercise. The seated row resistance-training machine’s engineered or manufactured adjustability was sufficient, as it appeared to accommodate the three anthropometric cases adequately during execution of this exercise.
Conclusion. It appears that 3D musculoskeletal modelling can be used to evaluate resistance-training exercises such as the seated row; however, the limitations indicated by this study must be taken into consideration, especially when using the default LifeModeler model
Methods. Three anthropometric cases were created; these represented a 5th percentile female as well as a 50th and a 95th percentile male based on body mass index. Two repetitions, with a resistance equal to 50% of the functional strength of one repetition maximum (1RM) for each anthropometric case, were performed.
Results. Results indicate that the default model of the LifeModeler software has important limitations that should be taken into consideration when used to evaluate exercise equipment. Adjustments had to be made to the model to solve the forward dynamics simulations; as a result, no muscle forces or contraction values were obtained. This negatively influenced the value of the results as these parameters are important when analysing an exercise. The seated row resistance-training machine’s engineered or manufactured adjustability was sufficient, as it appeared to accommodate the three anthropometric cases adequately during execution of this exercise.
Conclusion. It appears that 3D musculoskeletal modelling can be used to evaluate resistance-training exercises such as the seated row; however, the limitations indicated by this study must be taken into consideration, especially when using the default LifeModeler model
