女子 跳馬運動에서 Yurtchenko動作의 力學的 分析 = A Kinematic Analysis of YURTCHENKO Vault Perform by Female Gymnast

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This study was carried out to analysis Yurtchenko motion in a view of kinemetic method with 3 national female gymnast.
The purpose of this study was giving basical information to improve performance for coach and athletes.
We used 16mm High Speed Camera (100frame/sec) and analysis program(KSNU3D) for this study.
The result was as follows:
1. Phase time and valuting time (second)
1) In BC phase, among the subject of this study, subject C emerged shortest with 0.060sec., and it emerged that the subject of this study were doing short BC in comparison with 0.157 sec. of Seoul Olympic players and 0.150 sec. of Nelson.
2) In Pre. F phase, it emerged that subject C spent longest with 0.180 sec.
3) In HC phase, the subject of this study and Seoul Olympic players emerged similar.
4) In Po.F phase, the subject of this study emerged identically with 0.820 se. and it emerged that they spent long Po.F phase by 0.764 sec. of Seoul Olympic players and 0.780 sec. of Nelson study.
5) In the time required for vaulting, the subject of this study and Seoul Olympic players and Nelson study emerged similar.
2. COG displacement during post-flight (meters)
1) In the forizontal displacement , subject C emerged shortest with 1.79m, in comparison with 1.98 sec of Seoul Olympic players and 2.10m of Nelson.
2) In the Subphase 1 of vertical displacement , subject C emerged shortest with 0.18m, in comparison with 1.90m of Seoul Olympic players.
3) It emerged that subphase 2 was landing in the position that COG ea lower, since subject C emerged with -1.70m, in comparison with -1.46m of Seoul Olympic players.
3. Horizontal and vertical velocities of body COG at events (m/s)
1) As for the horizontal velocities of BC phase, it emerged that subject C was doing slowest BT, with 3.92m/s, in comparison with 5.03m/s of Seoul olympic players and 5.33㎧ fo study of Nelson.
2) In BTO/HT phase, it emerged that subject B was doing slowest BTO/HT with 3.11m/s, in comparison with 3.71m/s of Seoul Olympic players and 3.98m/s of Nelson.
3) In HTO/LD phase, subject B emerged fastest with 2.17m/s among the subject of this study, but it emerged slowest in comparison with 2.79m/s and 3.00m/s of Nelson.
4) As for the vertical velocities of Bt phase, it emerged that subject B was doing fastest Bt with -1.54m/s, in comparison with -0.17m/s of Seoul Olympic players and -0.23m/s of Nelson.
5) In BTO phase, it emerged that subject C was doing slowest BTO with 2.75m/s, in comparison with 3.45m/s of Seoul Olympic players and Nelson.
6) In HT phase, subject B emerged with 2.16m/s, in comparison with 2.55m/s of Seoul Olympic players, so it emerged that it was doing slowest HT, and it emerged that subject A was doing fastest HT, and it emerged that subject A was doing fastest HT with 2.62m/s.
7) It emerged that subject A was doing fastest HTO with 2.16m/s, among the subject of jthis study, but it emerged that the subject of this study was slow in comparison with 2.53m/s of Nelson.
8) In LD phase, subject A emerged fastest with -3.31m/s, but it emerged that the subject of this study were landing in the position that the COG was lower, in comparison with -5.34m/s of Seoul Olympic players.

4. Velocity change during contact (m/s)
1) As for horizontal velocity in the BC phase, subject B emerged fastest with -0.70m/s, among the subject of this study, butthe subject of this study emerged slowest, in comparison with -1.32m/s of Seoul Olympic players.
2) As for the horizontal velocity in HC phase, it emerged that subject A was doing fastest HT -1.03m/s, in comparison with -0.88m/s of Seoul Olympic players.
3) As for the vertical velocity in BC phase, subject A emerged fastest with 2.27m/s, among the subject of this study, but it emerged that the subject of this study was doing slow BC, in comparison with 3.62m/s of Seoul Olympic players.
4) As for the vertical velocity in phase, subject A emerged fastest with -0.46m/s among the subject of this study, but it ememerged that the subject of this study were doing slow HC, in comparison with -0.53m/s of Seoul Olympic players.
5. Angle of body COG at phase
1) As for the angle by COG in BC phase, subject A emerged largest with 61??, among 3 subject.
2) In Pre.F phase, subject C emerged largest with 52??, among 3 subject.
3) In HC phase, subject B emerged largest with 51??, among 3 subject.
4) In Pos.F phase, subject B emerged smallest, among 3 subject.