The influence of sub-technique and skiing velocity on air drag in skating style cross-country skiing

Abstract

In cross-country skiing, velocities range from 2 m s-1\\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \\usepackage{amsmath} \\usepackage{wasysym} \\usepackage{amsfonts} \\usepackage{amssymb} \\usepackage{amsbsy} \\usepackage{mathrsfs} \\usepackage{upgreek} \\setlength{\\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \\begin{document}$${\ extrm{s}}^{-1}$$\\end{document} up to more than 20 m s-1\\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \\usepackage{amsmath} \\usepackage{wasysym} \\usepackage{amsfonts} \\usepackage{amssymb} \\usepackage{amsbsy} \\usepackage{mathrsfs} \\usepackage{upgreek} \\setlength{\\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \\begin{document}$${\ extrm{s}}^{-1}$$\\end{document} across undulating terrain, and aerodynamics can, therefore, make a large impact on performance. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of skiing velocity on air drag for skating sub-techniques and downhill postures (tuck). Dynamic and static drag measurements for two athletes were performed in a wind tunnel in relevant velocity ranges for each sub-technique. The drag area decreased with velocity from 2 m s-1\\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \\usepackage{amsmath} \\usepackage{wasysym} \\usepackage{amsfonts} \\usepackage{amssymb} \\usepackage{amsbsy} \\usepackage{mathrsfs} \\usepackage{upgreek} \\setlength{\\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \\begin{document}$${\ extrm{s}}^{-1}$$\\end{document} to around 10–12 m s-1\\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \\usepackage{amsmath} \\usepackage{wasysym} \\usepackage{amsfonts} \\usepackage{amssymb} \\usepackage{amsbsy} \\usepackage{mathrsfs} \\usepackage{upgreek} \\setlength{\\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \\begin{document}$${\ extrm{s}}^{-1}$$\\end{document}, where it plateaued. No difference in air drag was found between the sub-techniques performed in upright postures (G2–G4) and thereby relatively similar frontal areas. In the G5 sub-technique performed without poling action in a lower posture, the reduced air drag was approximately 28% lower than for G2–G4 at similar velocities, and could even be reduced by an additional 21.7% by keeping the arms tucked in front of the body. In the downhill tucked postures, athletes could reduce air drag by 23% by keeping a low tuck, compared to a high tuck with straight legs. The sub-techniques were tested both dynamically and by averaging the static positions throughout the movements. The air drag was on average 6.1% lower for dynamic movements, indicating that dynamical movements like in cross-country skiing should be tested dynamically when evaluating air drag. Finally, the chosen cycle rate had minimal influence on air drag.