• Korean Journal of Applied Biomechanics
• /
• v.12 no.2
• /
• pp.259-278
• /
• 2002

This study divided straight success, pade success and failure with 7male golfers who have experiences more than 3 years, analyzed kinematic factors of golf swing to suggest scientifically. The conclusions were follows. 1) The wrist angle has significant difference in straight success, pade success and failure when swing of every pattern. There is no significant difference in pade success and failure. 2) The body twist angle has no significant difference in straight success, pade success and failure when swing of every pattern. There is no significant difference in pade success and failure. 3) The shoulder joint rotation angle has no significant difference in success, pade success and failure when swing of every pattern. There is no significant difference in pade success and failure. 4) The left hip joint vertical angle has no significant difference in straight success, pade success and failure when swing of every pattern. There is no significant difference in pade success and failure. 5) The hip joint rotation angle has no significant difference in straight success, pade success and failure when swing of every pattern. There is no significant difference in pade success and failure. 6) The trunk angle has no significant difference in straight success, pade success and failure when swing of every pattern. There is no significant difference in pade success and failure. 7 )The left knee joint angle has no significant difference in straight success, pade success and failure when swing of every pattern. There is no significant difference in pade success and failure. This study divided golf swing motion of pattern change in straight success, pade success and failure and analyzed the kinematic factors by 3-dimension cinematography to improve performance. In the future, many researchers have to study kinematic analysis to improve performance in every events.

• Korean Journal of Applied Biomechanics
• /
• v.15 no.3
• /
• pp.95-104
• /
• 2005

To know the proper setup posture for the various clubs, changes of setup variables according to the change of golf club length was investigated. Swing motions of three male low handicappers including a professional were taken using two high-speed videocameras. Four clubs iron 7, iron 5, iron 3 and driver (wood 1) were selected for this experiment. Three dimensional motion analysis techniques were used to get the kinematical variables. Mathcad and Kwon3D motion analysis program were used to analyze the position, distance and angle data in three dimensions. The variables divided into three categories 1) position and width of anterior-posterior direction 2) position and width of lateral direction 3) angles and evaluated based on the theories of many good golf teachers. Major findings of this study were as follows. 1.The stance (distance between ankle joints) was increased as the length of the club increased but the increasing width was not large. It ranges from 5cm to 10cm and professional player showed small changes. 2. Forward lean angle of trunk was decreased (more erected) as the length of the club increased. It ranges from 30 degrees for iron7 to 25 degrees for driver. 3. Angle between horizontal and right shoulder were increased as the length of the club increased. It ranges from 10 degrees to 20 degrees and professional player showed small changes. 4. Anterior-posterior position of the shoulders were located in front of the foot for all clubs and the difference between the shoulder and knee position was decreased as the length of the club increased. 5. Anterior-posterior position of grip (hand) was located almost beneath the shoulders (2.5cm front) for iron7, but it increased to 10cm for the driver. This grip adjustment makes the height of the posture increased only 5cm from iron7 to driver. 6. Lateral position of grip located at 5cm left for the face of iron7, but it located at the right side (behind) for the face of driver. 7. Lateral position of the ball located at the 40%(15cm) of stance from left ankle for iron7 and located at the 10% (5cm) of stance for driver. 8. Head always located at the right side of the stance and the midpoint of the eyes located at the 37% of stance from the right ankle for all clubs. This means that the axis of swing always maintained consistently for all clubs. 9. Left foot opened to the target for all subject and clubs. The maximum open angle was 25 degrees. Overall result shows that the changes of the setup variables vary only small ranges from iron7 to driver. Paradoxically it could be concluded that the failure of swing result from the excessive changes of setup not from the incorrect changes. These findings will be useful for evaluating the setup motion of golf swing and helpful to most golfers.

• Korean Journal of Applied Biomechanics
• /
• v.12 no.2
• /
• pp.17-32
• /
• 2002

The purpose of this study was to find the rational method to analyze golf swing with specific property of club shaft. Three subjects were filmed by two high speed digital cameras with 500 fps. The phase analyzed was downswing of each subject. The three-dimensional coordinates of the anatomical landmarks were obtained with motion analysis system Kwon3d 3.0 version and smoothed by lowpass digital filter with cutoff frequency 6Hz. From these data, kinematic and kinetic variables were calculated using Matlab(ver 5.0) The variables for this study were angular velocity and accelerations, which were calculated and following conclusions have been made : 1) Golf swing time of stiff club is faster than that of regular club. 2) In shoulder joint motion of swing with the stiff club, x-stiff showed mort rapid negative acceleration than that of regular club. 3) In regular club, the velocity of club head would be more effective velocity, which was increasing, than those of other clubs before impact. 4) In wrist joint motion of swing with stiff club, x-stiff club showed faster than regular club in the downswing and impact more rapid negative acceleration.

• Korean Journal of Applied Biomechanics
• /
• v.20 no.1
• /
• pp.83-90
• /
• 2010

The purpose of this study is to validate that change of impact by the Early Extension in during a golf driver swing. 13 golf players who were diagnosed with symptoms of Early Extension participated in a proactive corrective training programs that took place 3 times a week for a 4 month period. Data was collected by recording 5 pre and 5 post training driver swings and analyzing the data to calculate the change in velocity and its effect in the shot used the TRACK MAN. After the training, the changes of early extension were -0.21 cm in backswing section E2(take away), -0.64 cm in E3(halfway backswing), and -0.94 cm in E4(backswing top). The downswing section changes were -1.34 cm in event E5(halfway downswing), -1.74 cm in E6(impact). Impact force increased and thus club speed increased by 6.32 km/h, ball speed increased by 10.94 km/h, max height decreased by -6.22 m, carry increased by 10.85 m, carry side(left deviation) decreased by 4.84 m, flight time by increased by 0.4 sec, and total length increased by 17.96 m while landing angle decreased by -7.74 deg.

• Journal of the Korean Applied Science and Technology
• /
• v.38 no.2
• /
• pp.532-542
• /
• 2021

The purpose of this study was to investigate the body's strategy through kinematic variables of the lower extremities and ground reaction forces to maintain the club-head speed and ball accuracy despite the three stances during the golf swing. Ten male golfers who official handicap two were participate in the experiment. All subjects performed swing after maintaining the address posture according to stance conditions(square; SS, open: OS, closed: CS). Using a 3D motion analysis system and force plateform, the results were calculated with the 7-iron full swing each stance. In result, there was no difference in center of displacement, and left and right hip and knee joint angle displacement. Left ankle joint was largely plantar-flexed in OS, and right ankle joint was largely performed in CS from the address to the downswing. From address to take-back, right foot had a large left direction and the left foot had a right direction were greater in OS than in CS. Therefore, despite various stances, maintaining the same posture at impact is thought to have a positive effect on club head speed and ball direction.

• Korean Journal of Applied Biomechanics
• /
• v.17 no.2
• /
• pp.227-237
• /
• 2007

The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of precision that kinematics had when short approach shots were taken. In this study, the subjects chosen were 5 skilled and 5 unskilled subjects, who were allowed to shoot 10 rounds of shots at target distances of 1m, 2m, 4m, and 8m. Three dimensional analysis was used as methods to obtain kinematics of each shots. In order to verify the statistical significance of the kinematic factors followed by the results of different skills and target distances, we used the two-way repeated ANOVA. The study was experimented within the level of p<.05. The results obtained were as follows: 1) the difference of shots of the forward and backward variations were larger than those of the left and right variations, the unskilled subjects' shot distances greatly got larger than that of the skilled subjects as the distance of the target increased, 2) not being affected by the target distance variations, the skilled subjects' rate of down-swing was shorter than the back-swing on short approach shots, 3) the skilled subjects' center of body weight tended to move more naturally towards the target when doing the down-swing to finish than that of the unskilled subjects on short approach shots, 4) the skilled subjects' right hand angle of cocking were narrower and tended to be kept much more consistent than that of the unskilled subjects on short approach shots, 5) the unskilled subjects when doing their back-swings, their right hips swayed towards the back, their trunk-flexion angles were shown to be lower than that of the skilled subjects on short approach shots, 6) the skilled subjects`body weight tended to move more naturally towards the left foot when doing the down-swing to finish than that of the unskilled subjects on short approach shots.

• Korean Journal of Applied Biomechanics
• /
• v.16 no.4
• /
• pp.105-113
• /
• 2006

The purpose of this study was to analyze the joint torque of triple segmental system in golf driver swing. For this purpose, joint torque were calculated. In order to determine the load on the lumbar region, a triple segmental system was set for wrist, left shoulder and lumbar, torque working on the lumbar region were estimated. For this study, a total of 7 professional golfers were sampled, and then, their driver swings were recorded with two high-speed digital video cameras (180 frames/sec.) to be synthesized into 3-dimensional images and coordinated. Then, Eular's equation was used to produce some kinematic data, which were used to calculate joint torque with Newton's function. All data were calculated using LabVIEW 6.1 graphic program. The results of this study can be summarized as follows; It was found that the joint torque was generated in the direction opposite the target on wrist and shoulder during down swing, while in the direction towards the target on the lumbar region. During impact and release, the torque on the wrist joint was converted from the direction opposite the target to the direction towards the target, while the torque on the lumbar region was generated vice versa. The joints on the club-arm-shoulder were generated in the opposite direction at the beginning of down swing when the torque on the thorax-pelvis began to be generated, and then, the torque on the thorax-pelvis began to lower, while that on the club-arm-shoulder began to increase. Thus, a rapid decrease of the torque on the lumbar region linked to the low trunk acted to increase moment and joint torque on the arm-club region.

• Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
• /
• v.52 no.6
• /
• pp.570-573
• /
• 2012

Avulsion of spinous process, also called Clay-shoveler's fracture, is most prevalent among those engaged in hard physical labor. To the best of the author's knowledge, only one case of multiple spinous process fractures of the upper thoracic spine in a novice golfer has been reported. A 45-year-old female presented with intractable posterior neck pain. The patient experienced a sharp, sudden pain on the neck while swinging a golf club, immediately after the club head struck the ground. Dynamic cervical radiographic findings were C6 and C7 spinous process fractures. Magnetic resonance imaging revealed C6 and C7 spinous process fractures without spinal cord pathology. The patient was treated with pain medications and cervical bracing. The patient's pain gradually improved. The injury mechanism was speculated to be similar to Clay-shoveler's fracture. Lower cervical spinous process fractures can be associated with a golf swing. If the patient complains of long lasting neck pain and has a history of golf activity, further study should be conducted to rule out lower cervical spinous fracture.

• Korean Journal of Applied Biomechanics
• /
• v.12 no.2
• /
• pp.279-293
• /
• 2002

In the study the subjects who 10 university golfers act, and the kinetic factors were analyzed by the ground reaction system. the conclusion are as follows. 1) In the golf putting swing, the ground reaction factors of sagital plane in aspect are showen that the left and right foot sufficient difference, in the level of p <.05. 2) In the golf putting swing, the ground reaction factors of frontal plane in aspect is showen that the left foot has no significant difference in AD BS in the level of p < .05. In success, IP, FS. It can show significant difference. In addition, the right foot is shown the success, There is significant difference. 3) In the golf putting swing, the ground reaction factors of the vertical plane in aspect are shown that the left foot has no significant difference in BS, FS in the level p < .05. In success, AD, IP. It can show significant difference. In addition, the right foot is shown the success, There is significant difference. 4) In the golf putting swing, the ground reaction factors of torque in aspect are shown that the left foot had no significant difference in BS in the level p < .05. In success, AD, IP, FS. It can show significant difference. In addition, the right foot has no significant difference in IP in the level p < .05. AD, BS, FS. There is significant difference. The summarized conclusions are as follows. The first that the power of sagital plane needs the motion which can get the good power change in the stabilized pose. The second is that the small motion can make good putting in stabilized pose. The third is that the body weight move to the direction of the ball. The fourth is that the putting which looks perfect oscillation is good motion.

• Korean Journal of Applied Biomechanics
• /
• v.16 no.2
• /
• pp.165-174
• /
• 2006

The purpose of this study was to review the relevant literature about coaching and thereupon, survey the coaching methods used for golfer lesson to reinterpret them and thereby, describe in view of kinetics the swing errors committed frequently by amateur golfers and suggest more scientific golfer coaching methods. For this purpose, kinetic elements were divided into precision and power ones and therewith, the variables affecting such elements were identified. On the other hand, swings were divided into address, take-back, back-swing, back-swing top, down-swing, impact and follow-through to determine 20 variables for each form and thereby, define their errors to determine the relations between their frequency and errors. For this study, a total of 60 amateur golfer were sampled, and their swing forms were photographed with two high-speed digital cameras, and the resultant images were analyzed to determine the errors of each form kinetically, which would be analyzed again with the program V1-5000. The results of this study can be summarized as follows; The kinetic elements could be identified as precision, power and precise power. Thus, setup and trajectory were classified into precision elements, while differences of inter-joint angles, cocking and delayed hitting. Lastly, timing and axial movement were classified into precise power elements. Three errors were identified in association with setup. The errors related with trajectory elements accounted for most (7) of the 20 errors. Three errors were determined for inter-joint angle differences, and one error was associated with cocking and delayed hitting. Lastly, one error was classified into timing error, while five errors were associated with axial movement. Finally, as a result of arranging the errors into a cross table, it was found that the errors were associated with each other between take-back and back-swing, take-back and follow-through, back-swing and back-swing top, and between back-swing and down-swing. Namely, an error would lead to other error repeatedly. So, it is more effective to identify all the errors for every form and correct them comprehensively rather than single out the errors and correct them one by one.