Abstract
INTRODUCTION
Two dimensional (2D) low cost, augmented video-based portable systems (AVPS) are commonly used for coaching in various sporting events to enhance performance as well as scientific or medical studies. Earlier works by Ugbolue et al,2013 have evaluated and validated the AVPS against the gold standard 3D Vicon Motion Analysis System using the 2D ProTrainer System software. This pilot study will compare the outputs of three popular AVPS software, SiliconCoachPro, SiliconCoach Live and Kinovea. To date, there have been no studies performed to evaluate and compare the lower limb parameters during a golf swing using these three AVPS software.
METHODS
Twelve healthy subjects participated in this study (Male: 6,Female: 6, Age: 22.5 ± 3.2 years, Weight: 76.7 ± 16.9kg).Participants were required to perform three golf swings whilst being recorded on the sagittal plane by a single, high speed video camera (240Hz). Wright (2008) describes past studies, which have used single cameras running at 200 frames per second, while monitoring golf motion captured in the sagittal plane. In this plane much movement of the club and arm swing technique are seen. Six main variables were captured during this study namely, the golf swing phase speed and golf club inclination angle (°) at each of the five golf phases, which are: Address, Top of Backswing, Start of Acceleration, Impact and Follow Through. Four retro reflective markers were positioned on the golf club to ensure that the club points were visible on the video screen, in order for each motion system to track the participants’ movement. All captured video was transferred to a Windows PC for later analysis of spatio-temporal parameters and kinematic data using the three AVPS software. All data was then imported into Microsoft Excel 2016 where the Mean, Standard Deviation, Standard Error of Means were calculated. A One Way ANOVA was also carried out to compare the differences between all AVPS software (Kinovea, SiliconCoach Pro, SiliconCoach Live). Significance was set to P= 0.05.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
There were no significant differences (P>0.05) shown between Kinovea, SiliconCoach Live and SiliconCoach Prosoftware (Swing Time: p=0.966, F=0.035; Vertical Angle at Address: P=0.732, F=0.314; Top of Backswing: P=0.994,F=0.006; Start of Acceleration: P=0.289, F=1.287; Impact: P=0.797, F=0.229; and Follow Through: P=0.809, F=0.214).
One insignificant difference was highlighted whilst comparing Kinovea against SiliconCoach Pro software at the vertical angle at the start of the acceleration phase. Kinovea (Mean: 75.4 ± 3.0o) and SiliconCoach Pro (Mean: 74.0 ± 3.6o) showed little comparative difference. This may have occurred as a result of a mild differentiation when calculating the start of the acceleration phase. McHardy and Pollard (2005) point out that the acceleration phase starts from the horizontal club to the impact of the ball (late part of down swing).
Accurate identification of the start of this phase may prove to be problematic as the club is moving at speed and there are no physical objects or movements to calibrate against except the horizontal position of the club. This accuracy may be enhanced by using a horizontal linear backdrop to simplify the identification process.
CONCLUSIONS
The results of this study have clearly shown that there is no significant difference in output between Kinovea, SiliconCoach Pro and SiliconCoach Live when measuring the swing time and vertical angles during the five phases of a golf swing. Further studies should be carried out with a linear backdrop for marking ease. Studies are underway to evaluate clinical gait using the three AVPS software packages.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to thank staff at the University for their support throughout the study and the participants for their patience and professionalism. The staff at Myon are also acknowledged.
Two dimensional (2D) low cost, augmented video-based portable systems (AVPS) are commonly used for coaching in various sporting events to enhance performance as well as scientific or medical studies. Earlier works by Ugbolue et al,2013 have evaluated and validated the AVPS against the gold standard 3D Vicon Motion Analysis System using the 2D ProTrainer System software. This pilot study will compare the outputs of three popular AVPS software, SiliconCoachPro, SiliconCoach Live and Kinovea. To date, there have been no studies performed to evaluate and compare the lower limb parameters during a golf swing using these three AVPS software.
METHODS
Twelve healthy subjects participated in this study (Male: 6,Female: 6, Age: 22.5 ± 3.2 years, Weight: 76.7 ± 16.9kg).Participants were required to perform three golf swings whilst being recorded on the sagittal plane by a single, high speed video camera (240Hz). Wright (2008) describes past studies, which have used single cameras running at 200 frames per second, while monitoring golf motion captured in the sagittal plane. In this plane much movement of the club and arm swing technique are seen. Six main variables were captured during this study namely, the golf swing phase speed and golf club inclination angle (°) at each of the five golf phases, which are: Address, Top of Backswing, Start of Acceleration, Impact and Follow Through. Four retro reflective markers were positioned on the golf club to ensure that the club points were visible on the video screen, in order for each motion system to track the participants’ movement. All captured video was transferred to a Windows PC for later analysis of spatio-temporal parameters and kinematic data using the three AVPS software. All data was then imported into Microsoft Excel 2016 where the Mean, Standard Deviation, Standard Error of Means were calculated. A One Way ANOVA was also carried out to compare the differences between all AVPS software (Kinovea, SiliconCoach Pro, SiliconCoach Live). Significance was set to P= 0.05.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
There were no significant differences (P>0.05) shown between Kinovea, SiliconCoach Live and SiliconCoach Prosoftware (Swing Time: p=0.966, F=0.035; Vertical Angle at Address: P=0.732, F=0.314; Top of Backswing: P=0.994,F=0.006; Start of Acceleration: P=0.289, F=1.287; Impact: P=0.797, F=0.229; and Follow Through: P=0.809, F=0.214).
One insignificant difference was highlighted whilst comparing Kinovea against SiliconCoach Pro software at the vertical angle at the start of the acceleration phase. Kinovea (Mean: 75.4 ± 3.0o) and SiliconCoach Pro (Mean: 74.0 ± 3.6o) showed little comparative difference. This may have occurred as a result of a mild differentiation when calculating the start of the acceleration phase. McHardy and Pollard (2005) point out that the acceleration phase starts from the horizontal club to the impact of the ball (late part of down swing).
Accurate identification of the start of this phase may prove to be problematic as the club is moving at speed and there are no physical objects or movements to calibrate against except the horizontal position of the club. This accuracy may be enhanced by using a horizontal linear backdrop to simplify the identification process.
CONCLUSIONS
The results of this study have clearly shown that there is no significant difference in output between Kinovea, SiliconCoach Pro and SiliconCoach Live when measuring the swing time and vertical angles during the five phases of a golf swing. Further studies should be carried out with a linear backdrop for marking ease. Studies are underway to evaluate clinical gait using the three AVPS software packages.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to thank staff at the University for their support throughout the study and the participants for their patience and professionalism. The staff at Myon are also acknowledged.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Title of host publication | Proceedings of the Sixth Asian Society of Sport Biomechanics Conference (ASSB 2016) |
| Subtitle of host publication | Asian Sport Biomechanics Research Trend, Ningbo, China, October. 13-16, 2016 |
| Editors | Jianshe Li, Yaodong Gu |
| Publisher | IACSIT Press |
| Pages | 191 |
| Number of pages | 1 |
| ISBN (Print) | 9789810995843 |
| Publication status | Published - Oct 2016 |