Agreement between LeMond Revolution cycle ergometer and SRM power meter during power profile and ramp protocol assessments
Keywords:training, testing, performance, cycling, validity, power
This study aimed to evaluate the agreement in cycling power output measurements between the LeMond Revolution cycle ergometer and SRM power meter. The LeMond Revolution measures power output via removal of the rear bicycle wheel and attaching it using a quick-release system, estimating power output through a head-unit that processes drive-train resistance and atmospheric conditions. Fourteen well-trained cyclists completed incremental protocols and power profile assessments on a bicycle fitted with SRM scientific power meter and attached to a LeMond Revolution cycle ergometer. Power output was measured by both devices at 1 Hz. Data from each device were compared using Pearson’s correlations, paired t-tests, assessments of heteroscedasticity, Bland-Altman plots and 95% limits of agreement. During incremental tests, errors in power measurement of the LeMond Revolution progressively increased at greater power outputs when compared with SRM (bias: 2-34 W; CV 1.5-6.7%). During power profile assessments, errors in mean power measurement of the LeMond Revolution were also slightly overestimated for all efforts from a rolling start (+3 ± 8%; CV = 5.1%). Conversely, the LeMond Revolution underestimated peak power output during five second sprint efforts and the greatest error was observed between measurements for mean power output during a five second sprint from a stationary start (-7 ± 24%; CV = 10.6%). Overall, the LeMond Revolution is a practical, cost-effective alternative to more expensive ergometers for detecting large changes in mean power output. However, high level of error during high-intensity sprint efforts from a stationary start is a limitation for well-trained sprint cyclists.
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2015 Journal of Science and Cycling
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors contributing to Journal of Science and Cycling agree to publish their articles under a Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0 license, allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format, and to remix, transform, and build upon the material, for any purpose, even commercially, under the condition that appropriate credit is given, that a link to the license is provided, and that you indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
Authors retain copyright of their work, with first publication rights granted to Cycling Research Center
Authors reatin copyright of their work. The Effect of Open Access