The invention relates to the field of exercise equipment and more specifically to improvements to rowing machines.
All state-of-the-art rowing machines, including static and dynamic, have been known to facilitate the simulation of an oarsmen's motions, similar to ones found in moving rowing shells. An example of a static rowing machine can be found in U.S. Pat. No. 4,396,188, and an example of a dynamic machine can be found in U.S. Pat. No. 5,382,210. Both static and dynamic rowing devices commonly used by serious rowers deploy a mechanical resistance device comprising a flywheel and an adjustable fluid pump. The flywheel's inertia simulates a boat's linear inertia, whereas the resistance imparted largely by the fluid pump simulates an oar blade being dragged through the water.
The comparable and beneficial effect related to deploying flywheels on rowing machines and other exercise devices occurs as a result of the user's net energy, which is absorbed by the flywheels on any one of these devices. The resulting flywheel motion provides the user with feedback from a moving system. For example, on a rowing machine, the feedback felt by the rower simulates boat motion. On a stationary bicycle, the feedback simulates motion felt while on a non stationary bicycle, etc.
The problem associated with using flywheels on rowing machines is related to their one directional motion. On most other exercise devices, the combined forces involved in producing exercise motion tend to be predominantly aligned with the moving flywheel. For example, peddling an exercise bicycle involves moving the feet in a circular motion in one direction. This motion is synchronous and aligned to the moving flywheel. On rowing machines, a rowing stroke comprises two parts; the idling and the power portion. The rower's combined motion during the idling phase is counter to the motion of the moving flywheel, whereas the combined motion during the power phase is synchronous and aligned to it.
In order for a user to disengage or decouple from the flywheel, both rowing machines and other exercise devices deploy one way clutches or ratchets. To re-engage the flywheel, a cyclist may only have to synchronize to it once during a practice. In contrast, a rower has to catch up to the moving flywheel at the beginning of the power phase of every stroke during a practice. Furthermore, in order to catch up to the flywheel, a cyclist may use her legs only, whereas a rower must use the entire body. Moving one's legs is certainly a less difficult task than moving one's entire body.
On state of the art rowing machines, reconnecting with the moving flywheel becomes more difficult as the flywheel moves faster during more intensive exercise. In an effort to catch up to the flywheel, rowers tend to jerk their shoulders and forearms. The additional shoulder and forearm movement is not ideal since this motion is contrary to what should be used when rowing real boats. Ultimately, the tendency to use the shoulders and the forearms during the initial portion of the power phase of a rowing stroke results in an ineffective rowing form and can cause injury.
To eliminate the drawbacks of a flywheel, it is imperative that it is completely eliminated from rowing machines. In order to retain the flywheel's benefits however, it is best to replace its useful effects with those produced by alternative devices and methods. To that end, this invention focuses on replacing not just the flywheel, but the combination of the flywheel and a fluid pump with an electric motor and its control means.
The result of replacing the flywheel and the adjustable pump mechanism with this invention completely eliminates the need for rowers to catch up to the moving flywheel at the beginning of the power phase of every stroke. This will eliminate the need for rowers to over compensate their motion with the unnecessary and ineffective shoulder and forearm movement. Consequently, by implementing this invention on current and new rowing machines, coaches and rowers will significantly diminish the risk of any motion related injuries.
The primary goal of this invention is to eliminate the backlash that exists when exercising on state of the art rowing machines. This backlash is present between the idling and the pulling phases of a rowing stroke and occurs on any common rowing machine that comprises a flywheel. It is hoped that this invention is used to substitute the flywheel and a mechanical resistance means with a device comprising an electric motor and a programmable control means.
This invention simulates the behavior of a mechanical resistance device comprising a flywheel and a fluid pump. The major benefits of the currently used mechanical devices are retained by reproducing their valuable responses. Importantly, the ability to program the responses from the new system allows for the removal of the drawbacks inherent in the state of the art technology. The substitution of a purely mechanical device with a microprocessor controlled device also provides additional benefits, such as programmable workout modes.
By eliminating the backlash occurring on commonly used rowing machines, this invention allows the rowers to execute stress free rowing strokes. Stress free rowing leads to achieving better rowing technique which then translates to faster moving boats. More importantly, better rowing technique contributes to significantly reducing the potential for rowers to sustain motion related injuries.
This invention is intended to replace a common mechanical resistance device that comprises a flywheel. An example of such device is shown in
An embodiment of this invention is shown in
For the purpose of this discussion, the subsequent paragraphs will refer to a common state of the art system, (similar to the system illustrated in
The ND's general function is to simulate the power responses to those of the OD. However, the simulation of said responses is omitted for the initial piece of a rowing stroke's power phase, in order to avoid the adverse effect of backlash. Said backlash is present between the idling and the pulling phases of a rowing stroke and occurs on any OD that comprises a flywheel.
Generally, in order to simulate the power response of an OD, it is imperative to include all of its power response components. In examining prior art, it is known that the power response of an OD can be written as the sum of the power response related to drag and the power response related to inertia (PcombinedOld=PdragOld+PinertiaOld). If a ND is to simulate the OD's power responses, the ND shall have identical power responses to that of the OD, where PdragOld=PdragNew and PinertiaOld=PinertiaNew.
A ND shall be sized such that when drivingly coupling either the ND or the OD via their respective transmission means to the user's handle, the torque response of the ND shall be identical to that of the OD. More precisely, the torque response of the ND shall be equal to that of the OD multiplied by a torque multiplier (Tmultiplier), where Tmultiplier represents the ratio between the gear ratios of the ND's and the OD's transmission means. If the gear ratio of the ND's transmission means is identical to that of the OD, Tmultiplier is equal to 1. Otherwise, Tmultiplier is either greater than or a fraction of 1. The details of sizing the ND are omitted, as a similar procedure can be accomplished by those skilled in the art of mechanical or electrical engineering.
Similar to the relationship between the torque responses of the two devices, the relationship between the angular velocities of the two devices' rotating components is also related to the same torque multiplier (Tmultiplier.) The angular velocity of the ND's rotating parts (ωnew) shall be determined from the angular velocity of the OD's rotating parts (ωold) divided by Tmultiplier. Or, the angular velocity of the OD's rotating parts (ωold) shall be determined by the angular velocity of the ND's rotating parts (ωnew) multiplied by Tmultiplier.
The power response of the OD related to drag (PdragOld) can be obtained by determining the OD's drag coefficient (Kn) and the angular velocity of its rotating parts (ωold), where the equation for obtaining said power response is PdragOld=Kn*ωold3. The details of establishing said equation are known from examining prior art. Since ωold is also equal to the product of said torque multiplier (Tmultiplier) and the angular velocity of the ND's rotating parts (ωnew), ωold can be determined by obtaining ωnew via measurements. Unlike obtaining ωold, which can be accomplished by known means, obtaining the drag coefficient factor Kn is not obvious. Hence, a similar procedure is discussed hereafter.
A drag coefficient Kn is related to the air intake valve 4 (
To measure PdragOldK10, the OD (
From examining prior art, the power response of the OD related to inertial effect of its rotating parts is given by PinertiaOld=ωold*Jold*(dωold/dt), where Jold is the angular moment of inertia, dωold/dt is the angular acceleration and ωold is the angular velocity of the OD's rotating parts. Similarly, the equation representing the power response of the ND related to inertial effect of its rotating parts is given by PinertiaNew=ωnew*Jnew*(dωnew/dt). By merging both equations, the power response of the OD related to inertial effect of its rotating parts is given by PinertiaOld=PinertiaNew+ωold* (Jold−Jnew/Tmultiplier2)*(dωold/dt), where ωnew=ωold/Tmultiplier (shown above). In said equation, Jnew represents the angular moment of inertia of the ND's rotating parts, which comprises the motor's rotor. This equation also shows that the power response of an OD related to inertial effect of its rotating parts (PinertiaOld) comprises the physically existing component (PinertiaNew) and the virtual component ωold*(Jold−Jnew/Tmultiplier2)*(dωold/dt). When simulating the inertia related power response of the OD, PinertiaNew should be omitted from calculations (because it represents a physically existing component). It is also important to observe that the real inertial effect related to the ND (PinertiaNew) should only be considered when a rower is drivingly engaged to the ND, during the power phase of a stroke. Calculating the above listed equation requires obtaining Jold and Jnew, which can be accomplished by known means. The angular velocity ωold and also the angular acceleration dωold/dt of the OD's rotating parts, as discussed in previous paragraphs of this section can be calculated from the angular velocity of the ND's motor rotor (ωnew) and torque multiplier Tmultiplier.
A rower's overall power response while drivingly engaged to the ND, during the power phase of a rowing stroke, can be summarized by Prower=PcombinedNew=PcombinedOld. According to shown equations, the combined calculated power of the ND is PcombinedNew=Prower=PdragOld+PinertiaOld=Kn*ωold3+PinertiaNew+ωold*(Jold−Jnew/Tmultiplier2)*(dωold/dt). As stated in the previous paragraph, the simulated combined power response of the OD during the power phase of a rowing stroke is calculated after discounting the real inertial power effect of the ND. The resulting equation is PcombinedOldSimulatedPower=Kn*ωold3+ωold*(Jold−Jnew/Tmultiplier2)*(dωold/dt). In the claims section, as well as in
When considering the idling portion of a rowing stroke, it is important to discuss relevant observations before introducing any mathematical representation of a simulated power response of the OD. As is the case during said portion of a stroke when rowing on a prior art device, a rower is completely decoupled from the OD. This decoupling is usually accomplished via the use of a one way clutch and the total power input of a rower to the OD due to said decoupling is zero (Prower=0). Therefore, if a ND is to simulate the OD, the assumption of Prower=0 should also exist for the ND. This assumption is made whether or not a rower is drivingly engaged to the ND (during the idle phase of a stroke.) If the ND's transmission means 10 (
In light of the information presented above, the combined simulated power of the OD during the idling phase of a rowing stroke can be summarized with PcombinedOldSimulatedIdle=Kn*ωold3+ωold*Jold*(dωold/dt)=Prower=0. The equation is used to derive the simulated instantaneous rotational velocity of the OD's rotating parts (ωold). It is transformed to ωold=Kn*ωold2*dt/Jold, where dt represents the duration of the ND's calculating algorithm and dωold represents the negative change of the simulated OD's rotating components' angular velocity (ωold), over said interval (dt). Coincidentally, obtaining dωold and ωold from the same equation applies in any other case where a rower is not drivingly engaged to the ND. For example, during the final portion of the power phase of a rowing stroke, a rower may decide to stop pulling half way through the stroke, for whatever reason. To determine if a rower is engaged drivingly, during this portion of a stroke, ωold shall be tracked not only by using said ωnew*Tmultiplier, but also using said dωold=Kn*ωold2* dt/Jold. For a given interval dt, if (ωnew*Tmultiplier)>=(ωold−dωold), a rower is engaged drivingly. Similarly, if (ωnew*Tmultiplier)<(ωold−dωold), a rower is not engaged drivingly to the ND. When a rower is not drivingly engaged, the power response of the ND shall be zero. This condition is shown as PstrokePower=0 in both
In addition to the idle and the final portion of the power phase of a rowing stroke, it is also important to consider the initial portion of the power phase of a stroke. To avoid the major drawback inherent in the ODs, where rowers have to work to “chase” the moving flywheel, the ND shall completely stop said motor 8 (
Halting the ND's motor at the dead stop between the idle and the power phases of a rowing stroke also causes the ND to lose any motion feedback. Regardless, the algorithm should still maintain a simulated angular velocity ωold of the OD's rotating parts by calculating said equation dωold=Kn*ωold2*dt/Jold, every said interval dt.
As a rower becomes drivingly engaged to the ND (immediately following the instance of the dead stop between the end of the idling and the beginning of the power phase of a rowing stroke), the simulated power response algorithm should be said PstrokePower=Kn*ωold3+ωold*(Jold−Jnew/Tmultiplier2)*(dωold/dt). However, since at that stop, the ND's real ωnew is purposely set to 0 and ωold=ωnew*Tmultiplier, using PstrokePower=Kn*ωold3+ωold*(Jold−Jnew/Tmultiplier2)*(dωold/dt) would result in the simulated power response of 0. Instead, as indicated above, the power response of the ND is set to produce a substantial torque response. To help resynchronize the ND's ωnew*Tmultiplier with that of the simulated ωold of the OD, the algorithm shall decrease the power responses of the ND over a few intervals dt. As long as the calculated ωold remains less than ωnew*Tmultiplier (obtained via measurements), the power response values of the ND should keep diminishing from a maximum set at said dead stop.
The following equation is introduced to smoothly transition between a maximum power setting at said dead stop and the point where ωold obtained from dωold=Kn*ωold2*dt/Jold is equal to ωold obtained from measurements, (ωold−dωold)==(ωnew*Tmultiplier):
P
beginStroke=C*(Pmax*((ωold−dωold)−ωnew*Tmultiplier)/(ωold−dωold)+PstrokePower*(1−((ωold−dωold)−ωnew*Tmultiplier)/(ωold−dωold))).
In said equation, PbeginStroke is the power response of the ND during the initial portion of the power phase of a rowing stroke. Pmax is the maximum power response of the ND and PstrokePower is the calculated power obtained from PstrokePower=Kn*ωold3+ωold*(Jold−Jnew/Tmultipher2)*(dωold/dt) (equation mentioned above). Term ((ωold−dωold)−ωnew*Tmultiplier)/(ωold−dωold) is used for percent biasing, where if for example ωnew is equal to zero, this term yields 1 (100%). If (ωold−dωold) ==(ωnew*Tmultiplier), the term yields 0 (0%), etc. At said dead stop, since ωnew is equal to 0, PbeginStroke=C*Pmax, and at the point where (ωold−dωold)==(ωnew*Tmultiplier), PbeginStroke=C* PstrokePower. The value C represents a catch factor and should range between 0.1 and 1. Higher C values translate to harder power/torque responses of the ND and vice versa. The catch factor should help simulate different oar riggings and as such, it should be selectable by the rowers. Selecting smaller C values will provide rowers a sensation of rowing with a lighter rigged oar and vice versa.
From the point of the power phase of a rowing stroke where the simulated angular velocity of the OD's rotating parts (ωold) becomes first equal and then less than the product ωnew*Tmultiplier, and toward the end of the power phase of a stroke, the algorithm to provide the power responses to rowers is PstrokePower=Kn*ωold3+ωold*(Jold−Jnew/multiplier2)*(dωold/dt) (equation shown above). This equation is valid as long as the condition (ωnew*Tmultiplier)>=(ωold−dωold) is satisfied, where dωold=Kn*ωold2*dt/Jold(shown above). If (ωnew*Tmultiplier)<(ωold−dωold), the response of the ND should be set to 0 (PstrokePower=0). The PstrokePower=0 case is relevant if the ND's transmission means does not comprise a one way clutch, in which case it becomes necessary to simulate the condition where the rower disengages from the system drivingly ((ωnew*Tmultiplier)<(ωold−dωold)). However, if the ND comprises a one way clutch, setting PstrokePower=0 would not be necessary, as said clutch would provide the torque disengagement to the rower.
The motor control means 9 (
Finally, said motor control means 9 (
The harnessed energy obtained from the motor windings 8a (