Research > Research Inventory > Biomechanics: Quantifying Forces in Movement
Comparative Biomechanical Characteristics of One-Arm Hang in Climbing for Beginners and Qualified Athletes
Authors: S. Kozin, D. Safronov, Z. Kozina, H. Kniaz, O. Proskurnia, K. Prontenko, O. Lahno, V. Goncharenko, A. Kholodniy | Year: 2020
Summary/Results:
This study analyzed the one-arm hang technique after a jump, comparing 20 beginner and 20 experienced male climbers. Qualified climbers used a more active posture with trunk and leg engagement, a smaller shoulder-clavicle angle, and a more tilted spine. In contrast, beginners maintained a vertical body position and relied heavily on the passive structures of the shoulder. The findings suggest that experienced climbers distribute muscular effort across a larger kinematic chain, reducing joint stress and improving hang control.
From a training perspective, these results highlight the importance of developing not just upper body strength but also trunk and leg coordination. Teaching dynamic hangs should focus on full-body integration to reduce shoulder strain and improve movement readiness after catching a hold.
Reference:
Journal of Physical Education and Sport, 20(Supplement issue 6), 57–66.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340816605_Comparative_biomechanical_characteristics_of_one-arm_hang_in_climbing_for_beginners_and_qualified_athletes
3D Visualization of Body Motion in Speed Climbing
Authors: Lionel Reveret, Sylvain Chapelle, Franck Quaine, Pierre Legreneur | Year: 2020
Summary/Results:
This study used a video-based 3D modeling system to track a female elite climber during a speed climbing ascent. Instead of relying on physical sensors, researchers created a full-body digital model (3D avatar) from lab-based recordings and applied it to real-world drone footage. This allowed them to estimate the climber’s center of mass (COM) based on whole-body shape, rather than a single marker on the harness. The 3D avatar revealed moments where the climber moved away from the wall or slowed down—particularly during dynos and directional changes—and helped visualize how certain movements impacted vertical speed and body control.
Beta-Angel note: The value of this work is in giving coaches and researchers a way to see where climbers lose vertical efficiency and why. It’s especially useful for identifying how off-axis or excess movement—like pushing too far from the wall—may reduce speed without needing a full lab setup.
Reference:
Front. Psychol. 2020 Sep 28;11:2188. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.02188
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.02188/full
Kinematic and EMG analysis of horizontal bimanual climbing in humans.
Authors: MacLean KFE, Dickerson CR. | Year: 2019
Summary/Results: The authors compared the kinematic (geometry or mathematics of motion) and muscular demands during a bimanual horizontal climbing task (i.e. monkey bars) between 15 climbers and 15 non-climbers through motion-capture and electromyography (EMG – measuring electrical activity of the muscle tissue) of the elbow, thoracohumeral, trunk, and 12 shoulder muscles. The 15 climbers presented different joint motions (specifically elbow flexion and internal rotation, and less thoracohumeral elevation) and activated the shoulder musculature at a lower percentage of their maximum, similar to previous studies on chimpanzees and other primates. Compared to the non-climbers, the climbers used slightly more efficient climbing kinematics and reduced muscular activity, which suggests that climbing experience in modern humans can moderately lead to more efficient and evolutionarily relevant kinematics. Beta-Angel note: A study giving more credence to brachiation’s role in climbing. Udo should love this.
Reference: J Biomech. 2019 Jul 19;92:11-18. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2019.05.023. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31176461
TEST-retest reliability of kinetic variables measured on campus board in sport climbers
Authors: Abreu EAC, Araújo SRS, Cançado GHDCP, Andrade AGP, Chagas MH, Menzel HK. | Year: 2018
Results/Summary: The authors put a force plate on the first rung hold(s) of a campus board as a proof of concept. They tested and retested the impulse (change in movement – center of mass displacement) and peak force (highest force tested – ability to maintain force on the holds) of 22 sport climbers (5.11d to 5.13b) on two separate days using both a concentric (fire) upper-body lunge and a plyometric (drop and fire) upper-body lunge. Both impulse and peak force were consistent between the two days of testing, demonstrating the two measures and set-up as a potential testing protocol – however, errors were higher in the “drop-and-fire” protocol, indicating the “fire”-only (concentric) protocol may be better for assessment, if not necessarily training.
Reference: Sports Biomech. 2018 May 16:1-14.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29768095
Biomechanics > Quantifying Forces in Movement
Assessment of climber performance: A multi-centre trial
AUTHORS: N. Draper, D. Gile1 , N. Taylor , I. Solar Altamirano, M. Arias Téllez , J. Baláš , J. Kodejška , V. España-Romero , G. Gallo Cabeza de Vaca , L. Vigouroux , G. Josseron , F. Mally I. Beeretz | Year: 2016
SUMMARY/RESULTS: The International Rock Climbing Research Association presents data from six countries and 114 participants on preliminary findings behind their development of a suite of tests to measure physiological performance. Tests included foot-raise with and without rotation, finger strength, finger hang, power slap, both two-arm and one arm bent-arm hang, pull-ups, plank, and 90 degree leg raise. Results indicate that foot-raise both with and without rotation, as well as the leg raise, did not appear to correlate with climbing performance. However, significant relationships were found with all other tests and climbing performance.
REFERENCE: 3rd Rock Climbing Research Congress, Proceedings, 2016.
https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/441095_76117ef587b34539bc29d428a39b366b.pdf
Body position and technique effects on displacement in the dyno maneuver in rock climbing
AUTHORS: K.C. Phillips, R.L. Jensen | Year: 2014
SUMMARY/RESULTS: 13 recreational climbers were measured for the vertical change in hand position in squat jumps (arms fully extended down) and “counter-movement” (arms parallel with ground with a quick countermove) jumps across three different starting positions for a dynamic move. While the researchers saw no difference in increased height of the hand as a result of different jump techniques in recreational climbers, they suggest that elite climbers probably have developed the skill to use it effectively. Beta-Angel note: this appears to be an article testing a simple dynamic jump vs. a jump executing a ‘plyometric’ muscle contraction. If that’s the case, then it appears to suggest a “learning-oriented” theory behind why a plyometric “drop” may not be particularly helpful in spite of other evidence (such as from other sports) to the contrary.
REFERENCE: 2nd International Rock Climbing Research Conference, Sep 2014
https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/441095_f52f11ccc489434bb70b78ee10563b95.pdf
Surface electromyography measurements of stabilizing ventral muscles in therapeutic climbing
AUTHORS: F. Mally, A. Sabo, F.K. Fuss | Year: 2014
SUMMARY/RESULTS: Researchers measured the muscle activation of four muscles (ab, oblique, chest, and quad) in 2 males and 1 female during two phases on a climbing wall: holding on with both hands, and loosening the left hand. Though there were significant differences where activation occurred and to what extent, researchers found a cross-activation of muscles in the right side of the body from the unweighting of the left hand.
REFERENCE: 2nd International Rock Climbing Research Congress, Sep 2014
https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/441095_f52f11ccc489434bb70b78ee10563b95.pdf
Computer models offer new insights into the mechanics of rock climbing
AUTHORS: Russell, S., Zirker, C., Blemker, S. | Year: 2012
SUMMARY/RESULTS: Researchers built computer models to describe the interplay of kinematics (the motion of the limbs and joints) and kinetics (the effect of forces on that motion). The researchers found that climbing experience mattered for kinematics, that more experienced climbers extended their muscle fibers to a more optimal length, and that experienced climbers minimize fatigue whereas inexperienced climbers minimize the force applied on the joint.
REFERENCE: Sports Technology, Volume 5, 2012, Issue 3-4
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/19346182.2012.749831?journalCode=rtec20
Influence of steep gradient supporting walls in rock climbing: biomechanical analysis
AUTHORS: Noe, Quaine, Martin | Year: 2001
SUMMARY/RESULTS: Researchers looked at reaction forces and variations of rock climbing in vertical and overhanging positions, focusing on a quadrupedal state and a tripedal state. Researchers found that horizontal force on the overhang in the quadrupedal position was less important, suggesting that equilibrium was easier to maintain than on a vertical wall. The tripedal state had less extensive contralateral supporting force transfer in the overhanging position.
REFERENCE: Gait and Posture, Volume 13, Issue 2, April 2001, Pages 86–94
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0966636200000989
The effect of body position and number of supports on wall reaction forces in rock climbing
AUTHORS: Quaine, Martin, Blanchi | Year: 1997
SUMMARY/RESULTS: Researchers measured the effect of releasing the right hand from a quadrupedal posture in two positions: (1) close to the wall, and (2) away from the wall. In the close-to-wall position, the transfer of the force was smaller than when the body was further from the wall and force stayed on the right side of the body.
REFERENCE: Journal of Applied Biomechanics, Volume 13, Issue 1, Feb. 1997
http://journals.humankinetics.com/doi/abs/10.1123/jab.13.1.14