Speed Limit to Human Sprinting

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter simpleton
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Limit Running Speed
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the theoretical limits of human sprinting speed, exploring factors that might influence maximum speed, including air resistance, friction, inertia, and muscle physiology. Participants engage in thought experiments and numerical simulations to understand why humans do not run faster.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that if air resistance is neglected and friction is sufficiently high, a person could theoretically increase their speed indefinitely by swinging their foot backwards at a high speed.
  • Another participant counters that the inertia of the legs limits how fast they can be swung, impacting overall speed.
  • Some participants discuss the importance of the stance phase in running, noting that the foot must move at a certain speed relative to the ground to avoid braking effects during heel strike.
  • One participant speculates that a lighter build might allow for higher leg movement rates, potentially affecting top speed, while acknowledging that this intuition may not align with observed performance in elite sprinters.
  • A critique is made regarding the initial assumption about how running mechanics work, emphasizing that running involves pushing against the ground at an angle rather than merely swinging the foot backwards.
  • Another participant highlights physiological limitations, such as oxygen levels and joint stress, that may restrict human sprinting speed despite theoretical considerations of friction and drag.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the mechanics of running and the factors that limit speed. There is no consensus on the primary reasons for the observed limits in human sprinting speed, with multiple competing perspectives presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants note various assumptions, such as neglecting air resistance and the role of inertia, which may not fully capture the complexities of human biomechanics and running dynamics.

simpleton
Messages
56
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

I am doing a project on the speed limit on human sprinting. I was doing a thought experiment and then got myself confused, so I hope you guys can help me out.

I assumed that there is no air resistance, and that the coefficient of friction between the ground and the foot is sufficiently large such that no slipping will occur. Therefore, whenever the foot is on the ground, it will not move.

When one runs, one swings the foot backwards against the floor, and it is the friction that moves the person forward. Since the foot is not moving when it is on the floor, if the person swings the foot backwards at speed v relative to itself, I believe it is reasonable to say that the person will move forward at speed v relative to the ground too. In that case, if we ignore air resistance, doesn't that mean we can keep on increasing the speed and reach extremely extremely high speeds?

Also, I did a numerical simulation using excel, and found out that the drag force is actually not that big and rather insignificant because even Usain Bolt does not run fast enough for drag to become an important factor. Therefore, I would like to ask, why is it that humans run so slowly?

Thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
simpleton said:
Therefore, I would like to ask, why is it that humans run so slowly?
Mainly because the legs have inertia. You cannot swing them as fast as you want.
 
However, I think that if we neglect air resistance, then he is moving at constant velocity in the x-direction when he is off the ground. Therefore, I think we can take that as a inertial frame. And the swing of the leg is relative to yourself, not to the ground, so I think that if you just swing at a constant pace, your speed will keep on increasing.
 
simpleton said:
However, I think that if we neglect air resistance, then he is moving at constant velocity in the x-direction when he is off the ground. Therefore, I think we can take that as a inertial frame. And the swing of the leg is relative to yourself, not to the ground, so I think that if you just swing at a constant pace, your speed will keep on increasing.
No, you have to consider the stance phase too. To prevent breaking on heel strike you have to move your foot at least as fast, as the ground moves in your frame, which is faster and faster. Usually some breaking occurs in the begin of the stance phase, while acceleration occurs at the end of it, when the leg extends. But there is the same limit: you cannot extend your legs as fast as you want. Not only because of inertia but also muscle physiology.
 
Last edited:
Oh right, I never thought of it that way. Thanks :)
 
interesting question, my instincts tell me that a human geared for ultimate top speed will not have as much power or accelerative ability, but due to a lighter build would have the ability to move legs at a higher rate than a bigger built human, and hence eek out a few extra m/s than others with heavier legs. If the air resistance really is not that significant then ultimate power, you would think, is for accelration only and not so much top speed. top speed appears to be governed by maximum leg speed, whereas acceleration appears to be more a force thing.

just instincts, I know this is not true as nealry all sprinters are big builds, and I imagine those at the top end of the 100m or 200m racing have the highest running speeds on the planet too.

so clearly my instincts are wrong, but I like the question :-)
 
simpleton said:
When one runs, one swings the foot backwards against the floor, and it is the friction that moves the person forward. Since the foot is not moving when it is on the floor, if the person swings the foot backwards at speed v relative to itself, I believe it is reasonable to say that the person will move forward at speed v relative to the ground too.

This is not Scooby Doo, people do not run like this, that's your first mistake.

People run by pushing into the floor at an angle. Friction is required to prevent slipping but past that, adding friction will not improve speed.Before you bother going any further, try to develop a scenario that you can test that models someone running in a realisitc way.
 
simpleton said:
Hi all,

I am doing a project on the speed limit on human sprinting. I was doing a thought experiment and then got myself confused, so I hope you guys can help me out.

I assumed that there is no air resistance, and that the coefficient of friction between the ground and the foot is sufficiently large such that no slipping will occur. Therefore, whenever the foot is on the ground, it will not move.

When one runs, one swings the foot backwards against the floor, and it is the friction that moves the person forward. Since the foot is not moving when it is on the floor, if the person swings the foot backwards at speed v relative to itself, I believe it is reasonable to say that the person will move forward at speed v relative to the ground too. In that case, if we ignore air resistance, doesn't that mean we can keep on increasing the speed and reach extremely extremely high speeds?

Also, I did a numerical simulation using excel, and found out that the drag force is actually not that big and rather insignificant because even Usain Bolt does not run fast enough for drag to become an important factor. Therefore, I would like to ask, why is it that humans run so slowly?

Thanks in advance.

Because [tex]F = ma[/tex]. In other words, because humans have to accelerate. By the time one accelerates to a certain speed, the blood O2 levels crash and heart can't keep up, that and it is stressful for the joints and leg muscles...also running means bouncing up and down. It's kind of like jumping up and down (think of what happens on a treadmill, where wind resistance is significantly less), and it becomes very exhausting.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K