English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background and  O  bjectives: The aim of this study was to assess and compare the drag and energy cost of three cyclists assessed by computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and analytical procedures. Materials and  m  ethods: A transradial (Tr) and transtibial (Tt) were compared to a full-body cyclist at different speeds. An elite male cyclist with 65 kg of mass and 1.72 m of height volunteered for this research with his competition cloths, helmet and bicycle with 5 kg of mass. A 3D model of the bicycle and cyclist in the upright position was obtained for numerical simulations. Upon that, two more models were created, simulating elbow and knee-disarticulated athletes. Numerical simulations by computational fluid dynamics and analytical procedures were computed to assess drag and energy cost, respectively. Results: One-Way ANOVA presented no significant differences between cyclists for drag ( F = 0.041; p = 0.960; η  2 = 0.002) and energy cost ( F = 0.42; p = 0.908; η  2 = 0.002). Linear regression presented a very high adjustment for absolute drag values between able-bodied and Tr ( R  2 = 1.000; Ra  2 = 1.000; SEE = 0.200) and Tt ( R  2 = 1.00; Ra  2 = 1.000; SEE = 0.160). The linear regression for energy cost presented a very high adjustment for absolute values between able-bodied and Tr ( R  2 = 1.000; Ra  2 = 1.000; SEE = 0.570) and Tt ( R  2 = 1.00; Ra  2 = 1.00; SEE = 0.778). Conclusions: This study suggests that drag and energy cost was lower in the able-bodied, followed by the Tr and Tt cyclists.

The Aerodynamics and Energy Cost Assessment of an Able-Bodied Cyclist and Amputated Models by Computer Fluid Dynamics