• Korean Journal of Applied Biomechanics
• /
• v.18 no.4
• /
• pp.31-39
• /
• 2008

The purposes of this study were to compare and analyze the world elite hurdler and the domestic hurdler 3-D kinematic and kinetic techniques about hurdling motion in the 110m hurdles. After analyzing variables in the 110m hurdle run the following conclusions were obtained; In a preparation phase, the domestic hurdler came out running more 0.13m then world elite hurdler from grounding to taking off in the height of center of gravity and the distance by 1.04m. In a flight phase, the domestic hurdler came out taking off 0.33m less then world elite hurdler from taking off to flight peak in the height of center of gravity and the distance by 1.63m. In a flight peak phase, domestic hurdler came out landing more 0.37m then world elite hurdler by 159m. More over, during the hurdling, the horizontal velocity of center of gravity came out decreasing from taking off to landing with domestic hurdler by 0.75m/s. the take off percentage and the landing percentage is 53:47. In a acceleration phase, domestic hurdler came out going slower 0.54m/s than world elite hurdler from landing in the horizontal velocity of center of gravity by 8.78m/s.

• Korean Journal of Applied Biomechanics
• /
• v.21 no.5
• /
• pp.529-540
• /
• 2011

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the kinematic characteristics of $5^{th}$ and $6^{th}$ hurdle clearances during the final of the 110-m hurdles at the IAAF World Championships, Daegu 2011. To this end, the hurdling motions of the top 4 ranked male hurdlers in the competition were analyzed. A total of 12 cameras were used to record their motions, with a sampling frequency of 120 Hz. The cameras were calibrated using $11{\times}2{\times}1\;m$ control objects that covered all of the lanes (1st~8th lanes). After analyzing all the data, we arrived at the following results. In the take-off phase, all athletes revealed similar take-off times (CT), and similar distances from the take-off to hurdleto (L1) and hurdle to landing (L2). In particular, Turner, ranked $3^{rd}$, had an inconsistent L2 and may need further training to correct it. In the flight phase, Richardson, ranked $1^{st}$, showed the longest flight distance, whereas Xiang, who was ranked $2^{nd}$, showed the highest CG height from the hurdle. For the step patterns, to increase the pitch frequency, Richardson and Xiang used shorter 3-step lengths than Turner and Oliver.

• Korean Journal of Applied Biomechanics
• /
• v.23 no.1
• /
• pp.11-17
• /
• 2013

The purpose of this study was to provide a fundamental information for enhancing 110m hurdlers' performance through conducting comparative biomechanical analysis between Skilled Group(SG) and Less-Skilled Group(LSG) those who are not in the first section of 110m hurdles. To persue the purpose of this study, total of 10 hurdlers participated. Then they were divided into two groups; SG: five hurdlers who have won awards with 14-second range at 2010 national track and field event, and LSG: five hudlers who did not win any awards with 15-second range. Three-dimensional motion analysis with 12 infrared cameras(Oqus 300, Qualisys) and 1 force plate(Type 9286AA, Kistler) was performed. From this study following conclusions were obtained. 1) For the overall runtime, SG revealed faster elapsed time than that of LSG. 2) At E4, LSG showed greater trunk angle than that of SG. 3) At E3 LSG revealed higher angular velocities than that of SG. 4) No significant differences was found for AP GRF between groups but LSG showed greater VGRF than that of SG.

• Korean Journal of Applied Biomechanics
• /
• v.19 no.4
• /
• pp.761-770
• /
• 2009

The purpose of this study was to observe the kinematic patterns of hurdling by domestic hurdlers and elite hurdlers from other countries in particular, we studied the hurdling motion and joint angles at the third hurdle in 110-m hurdle races. There were slight differences in the following variables at takeoff and landing: angle of the center of gravity(elite hurdler, $34.14^{\circ}$ domestic hurdler, $24.89^{\circ}$), angle variables the body angle(elite hurdler, $4.27^{\circ}$ domestic hurdler, $6.37^{\circ}$), the angle of trunk inclination(elite hurdler, $3.18^{\circ}$ domestic hurdler, $11.58^{\circ}$), and the hip angle(elite hurdler, $40.1^{\circ}$ domestic hurdler, $43.2^{\circ}$).

• Korean Journal of Applied Biomechanics
• /
• v.28 no.2
• /
• pp.79-85
• /
• 2018

Objective: This study aimed to create a strategic training method to enhance optimal athletic ability using information from 1H to 10H rhythmic units. Method: Top three world class athletes and three national winners of 110-m hurdle finals from the 2010 Daegu International Athletics Competition and 2017 National Athletics Championship, respectively, were selected. To analyze the kinematic variables, Dartfish 9.0 was used for two-dimensional analysis. Results: Regarding the interval time from the start to the finish line, the national athletes took less time during the pure acceleration phase (start to 1H) than the foreign athletes. The horizontal velocity increase was slower after 1H; the national athletes showed a lack of ability to accelerate at the interval phases. Moreover, the hurdle clearance time between phases was longer in the national athletes than in the foreign athletes and lacked consistency. Conclusion: The national athletes lacked the ability to accelerate at the transition, maximum rhythm, rhythm maintenance, and re-acceleration phases and showed a longer hurdle clearance time. If technical improvements and strategic training methods using rhythmic units are applied for hurdling motions, the national athlete's hurdling abilities, performance, and consistency could improve.

• Korean Journal of Applied Biomechanics
• /
• v.14 no.1
• /
• pp.83-98
• /
• 2004

The purpose of this study was to determine the kinematic variables of the hurdling for a korea record holder (A) and a national hurdle representative (B). after the kinematic variables such the distance and the distance and height of C.G, the velocity and the angle were analyzed about the hurdling. The results were summarized as follows; 1. In terms of the distance and the height of C.G, subject A showed long in horizontal distance from C.G to the take-off phase, but showed short in the landing phase. Subject B showed short in horizontal distance from C.G to the take-off phase, and showed long in the landing phase. 2. In terms of the velocity of C.G, Subject A showed fast C.G velocity in horizontal direction to the braking phase, Subject A and B showed slower C.G velority in the landing phase, but Subject A showed height C.G velocity in vertical direction to the to the take-off, the landing, and propulsion phase 3. In terms of the angle of C.G and lean of C.G to front at the braking and the take-off phase. Subject A kept the less angle in the maximum trunk lean to front at the flight phase as comparison with Subject B. 4. In terms of the velocity of the knee and the ankle joint. Subject A showed fast in the resultant velocity of the left ankle joint the take-off phase, but showed slow in the left knee joint. Subject B showed fast in the resultant velocity of the left knee joint the take-off phase, but showed slow in the right knee and the right ankle joint.