Download PDF
Int J Sports Med 2022; 43(07): 577-585
DOI: 10.1055/a-1231-5268
Review

Rowing Biomechanics, Physiology and Hydrodynamic: A Systematic Review

Ab Aziz Mohd Yusof 
1   Faculty of Mechanical engineering, Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM) Cawangan Johor, Masai, Malaysia
,
Muhamad Noor Harun
2   School of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Skudai, Malaysia
3   Sport Innovation and Technology Center (SITC), Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Skudai, Malaysia
,
Fakhrizal Azmi Nasruddin
4   School of Biomedical and Health Science, Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Skudai, Malaysia
,
Ardiyansyah Syahrom
2   School of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Skudai, Malaysia
5   Medical Device Technology Center (MEDiTEC), Institute Human Centred Engineering (iHumEn), Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Johor, Malaysia
› Author Affiliations Funding: This project was sponsored by the Universiti Teknologi Malaysia under the Research University Grant (Q.J130000.2424.04G14).
› Further Information
Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

According to numerous studies, rowing performance is influenced by several factors including rower’s biomechanics, rower’s physiology, the force generated and stroke style. However, there is a missing gap linking such factors with rowing performance in the available literature. This paper aims to investigate the rowing mechanism in terms of rower anthropometry and physiology, which can impact its biomechanics and performance. The corresponding hydrodynamic force generated by the oar blade to accelerate the boat is also considered in the current study. To test the objectives, systematical online searching was conducted in search of the inclusion literature criteria. All included studies used Preferred Reporting item for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines to obtain the final collection of articles for this review. In order to rate the quality of the articles, risk bias assessment was performed. A total of 35 studies were included in the assessment. The studies discussed the aspects of anthropometry and physiological of the rower, the biomechanics of the rower, corresponding hydrodynamic force on the oar blade and the rowing mechanism concerning boat performance. Based on the information obtained, an understanding of the important aspects of the rowing mechanism was achieved to provide an update for comprehensive improvement.

Key words

rowing mechanism - anthropometric - biomechanics - physiological hydrodynamic - rowing performance


Publication History

Received: 20 February 2020

Accepted: 22 July 2020

Article published online:
25 August 2020

© 2020. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Kleshnev V. Stroke rate vs. distance in rowing during the Sydney Olympics. Australian Institute of Sport Australian Rowing 2001; 25: 18-22
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Hernández CM. History of Olympic Rowing in Cuba. In, Proceedings: International Symposium for Olympic Research: International Centre for Olympic Studies. 2006: 100-106
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Barrett RS, Manning JM. Relationships between rigging set-up, anthropometry, physical capacity, rowing kinematics and rowing performance. Sports Biomech 2004; 3: 221-235
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Caplan N, Coppel A, Gardner T. A review of propulsive mechanisms in rowing. Proc Inst Mech Eng P J Sport Eng Technol 2010; 224: 1-8
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Kleshnev V. Moving the Rowers: biomechanical background. Aust Rowing 2002; 25: 16-19
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Umar MA, Zainuddin FL, Razman RM. et al. Changes of drive to recovery ratio during 2000m ergometer rowing among junior national rowers. Malaysian Journal of Movement, Health & Exercise 2019; 8: 33-43
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Ottenhoff E. Modelling the Rowing Stroke [Master dissertation]. Department of Mathematic: University of Groninge. 2003
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Caplan N, Gardner TN. Optimization of oar blade design for improved performance in rowing. J Sports Sci 2007; 25: 1471-1478
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Sliasas A, Tullis S. Numerical modelling of rowing blade hydrodynamics. Sports Eng 2009; 12: 31-40
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Baudouin A, Hawkins D. Investigation of biomechanical factors affecting rowing performance. J Biomech 2004; 37: 969-976
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Kleshnev V. Segments contribution to the stroke length and rower power. Higher percentage of the trunk power helps to achieve higher boat speed. Rowing Biomechanics Newsletters 2002; 2: 2
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Nolte V. Introduction to the biomechanics of rowing. FISA coach 1991; 2: 1-6
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Kleshnev V. Vertical seat force; Lift force and the height of the handle and foot-stretcher. Optimal height of the handle; Push foot-stretcher with toes at catch; Horizontal drive. Rowing Biomechanics Newsletters 2002; 2: 5
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Baudouin A, Hawkins D. A biomechanical review of factors affecting rowing performance. Br J Sports Med 2002; 36: 396-402
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Doyle MM, Lyttle A, Elliott B. Comparison of force-related performance indicators between heavyweight and lightweight rowers. Sports Biomech 2010; 9: 178-192
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Tober M. PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus or Google Scholar – Which is the best search engine for an effective literature research in laser medicine?. Med Laser Appl 2011; 26: 139-144
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Elvik R. Introductory guide to systematic reviews and meta-analysis. Transp Res Rec 2005; 1908: 230-235
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC. et al. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 2011; 343: 1-9
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Harriss D, MacSween A, Atkinson G. Ethical standards in sport and exercise science research: 2020 update. Int J Sports Med 2019; 40: 813-817
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Jürimäe J, Jürimäe T. Differences in anthropometric and physical performance characteristics between lightweight and open class rowers. Papers on Anthropology XI 2002; 11: 71-80
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Palm R, Jürimäe J, Mäestu J. et al. Relationship between body composition and aerobic capacity values in well-trained male rowers. Acta Kinesiol Universitatis Tartu 2005; 10: 125-132
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Elliott B, Lyttle A, Birkett O. Rowing: The RowPerfect Ergometer: a training aid for on-water single scull rowing. Sports Biomech 2002; 1: 123-134
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Perić D, Ilić N, Ahmetovićvić Z. Kinematic and dynamic stroke variables of elite and sub-elite rowers. Int J Perform Anal Sport 2019; 19: 65-75
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Kleshnev V. Estimation of biomechanical parameters and propulsive efficiency of rowing. Australian Institute of Sport 1998; 1-17
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Yoshiga C, Higuchi M. Rowing performance of female and male rowers. Scand J Med Sci Sports 2003; 13: 317-321
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Mikulic P. Anthropometric and metabolic determinants of 6,000-m rowing ergometer performance in internationally competitive rowers. J Strength Cond Res 2009; 23: 1851-1857
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Majumdar P, Das A, Mandal M. Physical and strength variables as a predictor of 2000m rowing ergometer performance in elite rowers. J Phys Educ Sport 2017; 17: 2502-2507
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Forjasz J. Anthropometric typology of male and female rowers using k-means clustering. J Hum Kinet 2011; 28: 155-164
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Slater GJ, Rice AJ, Mujika I. et al. Physique traits of lightweight rowers and their relationship to competitive success. Br J Sports Med 2005; 39: 736-741
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Arazi H, Faraji H, Mohammadi S. Anthropometric and physiological profiles of elite Iranian junior rowers. Middle East. J Sci Res 2011; 9: 162-166
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Hofmijster MJ, Van Soest A, De Koning JJ. Rowing skill affects power loss on a modified rowing ergometer. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2008; 40: 1101-1110
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Steinacker JM. Physiological aspects of training in rowing 1993; 14: 3-10
    PubMed
  • 33 Shephard RJ. Science and medicine of rowing: A review. J Sports Sci 1998; 16: 603-620
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Fiskerstrand Å, Seiler K. Training and performance characteristics among Norwegian international rowers 1970–2001. Scand J Med Sci Sports 2004; 14: 303-310
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Hofmijster M. Mechanics and Energetics of Rowing [Ph.D. dissertation]. Faculty of Human Movement. Sciences: Vrije Universiteit. 2010
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Benson A, Abendroth J, King D. et al. Comparison of rowing on a Concept 2 stationary and dynamic ergometer. J Sports Sci Med 2011; 10: 267-273
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Lamb DH. A kinematic comparison of ergometer and on-water rowing. Am J Sports Med 1989; 17: 367-373
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Kleshnev V. Experimental data on comparison of rowing on-water with Concept-II and RowPerfect ergometers. Rowing Biomechanics Newsletters 2005; 5: 130-133
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 McGregor A, Bull A, Byng-Maddick R. A comparison of rowing technique at different stroke rates: A description of sequencing, force production and kinematics. Int J Sports Med 2004; 25: 465-470
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Dal Monte A, Komor A. Rowing and sculling mechanics. Biomechanics of sport 1989; 3: 53-119
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Tachibana K, Yashiro K, Miyazaki J. et al. Muscle cross-sectional areas and performance power of limbs and trunk in the rowing motion. Sports Biomech 2007; 6: 44-58
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Kleshnev V. Boat acceleration, temporal structure of the stroke cycle, and effectiveness in rowing. Proc Inst Mech Eng P J Sport Eng Technol 2010; 224: 63-74
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Mackenzie HA, Bull AM, McGregor AH. Changes in rowing technique over a routine one hour low intensity high volume training session. J Sports Sci Med 2008; 7: 486-491
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Yusof AAM, Hj Omar AH, Syahrom A. et al. Analysis of oar blade hydrodynamics for rowing propulsive mechanism: Experiment and computational fluid dynamics simulation. International Review of Mechanical Engineering 2018; 12: 920-927
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Warmenhoven J, Cobley S, Draper C. et al. Assessment of propulsive pin force and oar angle time-series using functional data analysis in on-water rowing. Scand J Med Sci Sports 2017; 27: 1688-1696
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Hartmann U, Mader A, Wasser K. et al. Peak force, velocity, and power during five and ten maximal rowing ergometer strokes by world class female and male rowers. Int J Sports Med 1993; 14: 42-45
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Kleshnev V. Comparison of on-water rowing with its simulation on Concept 2 and RowPerfect machines. In, Proceedings of XXIII international symposium on biomechanics in sports. 2005: 130-133
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Labbé R, Boucher J-P, Clanet C. et al. Physics of rowing oars. New J Phys 2019; 21: 1-12
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Hofmijster MJ, Landman EH, Smith RM. et al. Effect of stroke rate on the distribution of net mechanical power in rowing. J Sports Sci 2007; 25: 403-411
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Smith RM, Loschner C. Biomechanics feedback for rowing. J Sports Sci 2002; 20: 783-791
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Hofmijster M, De Koning J, Van Soest A. Estimation of the energy loss at the blades in rowing: Common assumptions revisited. J Sports Sci 2010; 28: 1093-1102
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Jensen RL, Freedson PS, Hamill J. The prediction of power and efficiency during near-maximal rowing. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 1996; 73: 98-104
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Grift E, Vijayaragavan N, Tummers M. et al. Drag force on an accelerating submerged plate. J Fluid Mech 2019; 866: 369-398
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Edwards AM, Guy JH, Hettinga FJ. Oxford and Cambridge boat race: performance, pacing and tactics between 1890 and 2014. Sports medicine 2016; 46: 1553-1562
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Sliasas A, Tullis S. A hydrodynamics-based model of a rowing stroke simulating effects of drag and lift on oar blade efficiency for various cant angles. Procedia Eng 2010; 2: 2857-2862
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Affeld K, Schichl K, Ziemann A. Assessment of rowing efficiency. Int J Sports Med 1993; 14: 39-41
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar