Upload
stephen-lenz
View
6
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Limitations to this study could include:
• the Keiser equipment is a dynamic resistance machine and
the subject may achieve the desired (display) force output
at some random point within the ROM, thus for outcomes
average power may be more suitable than peak power
• such that the display value on the machine does not
accurately measure the peak power or force during the
movement this can alter the goals of % 1-RM
• caution must be used in interpreting power measures at
low forces due to ambient air pressure (14.7 psi)
Subjects: 18 men (age 24.2 ± 3.8 yr; body fat 15.5 ± 8.0 %) and 18 women
(age 22.4 ± 2.3 yr; body fat 26.5 ± 8.3 %) participated
Strength: upper- and lower-body one repetition maximal (1-RM) strength
was determined using a pneumatic bi-lateral chest press and leg press
device (Keiser Sport, Fresno, CA)
Force/Velocity: 6 repetitions at 5 different percentages of the subjects 1-RM
(30, 40, 50, 60, & 70% 1-RM) were completed in random order for both
exercises while the A420 electronics package measured speed and ROM
•A.V. Hill first described the curvilinear force-velocity relationship where
during concentric-isotonic contractions the muscle will contract at different
velocities depending upon the load applied
•Recent investigations have suggested that this relationship may be linear
due to neural or dampening effects of the non-contractile elements of whole
muscle during dynamic exercises
•The purpose of this experiment was to test this relationship during dynamic
whole body movements such as the leg and chest press.
Methods
T. Marcell, D. Mahler, & S. Lenz Department of Kinesiology
Background
Results
Limitations
Conclusions
1
2
3
4
5
The force-velocity relationship is
not curvilinear for the leg press or
chest press exercise
Funding Source:
CSU Stanislaus Research Fund
Figure 1. Force-velocity values (mean ± SD) for the young male and female subjects;
(A) upper-body and (B) lower-body (B) exercise.
The most important findings from this study were:
•force measures increased with increasing percentages of the
one-repetition maximum (% 1-RM) while velocity decreased
•these values for both the dynamic isotonic chest and leg
press were described by a both a linear and/or quadratic
relationship
•Peak force is inversely related to peak velocity for both the chest and leg press; see Figure 1
•Peak force and velocity were greater in men than women and were greater for the leg press than for the chest press
•One-way ANOVA (post-hoc) demonstrated that due to large SD significant differences for force measures varied; e.g., 30% was not
different than 40% but was different from 50% - 100%, 40% was not different than 30% or 50% but was different than 60% - 100%
•Nonlinear regression curve-fitting analysis demonstrated that a quadratic equation (r2 = 0.997-0.999) was only slightly better at
describing the relationship between force and velocity than a linear equation (r2 = 0.989-0.997)
A
B
Velocity (m/s)
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
Forc
e (N
)
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
Velocity (m/s)
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
Forc
e (
N)
0
500
1000
1500
Men
Women