Route choice in mountain navigation: Naismith's rule, and the equivalence of distance and climb
Scarf, PA 2007, 'Route choice in mountain navigation: Naismith's rule, and the equivalence of distance and climb' , Journal of Sports Sciences, 25 (6) , pp. 719-726.
|PDF - Published Version |
Restricted to Repository staff only
Download (1709kB) | Request a copy
In this paper, I consider decision making about routes in mountain navigation. In particular, I discuss Naismith's rule, a method of calculating journey times in mountainous terrain, and its use for route choice. The rule is essentially concerned with the equivalence, in terms of time duration, between climb or ascent and distance travelled. Naismith himself described a rule that is purported to be based on trigonometry and simple assumptions about rate of ascent; his rule with regard to hill-walking implies that 1 m of ascent is equivalent to 7.92 m of horizontal travel (1:7.92). The analysis of data on fell running records presented here supports Naismith's rule and it is recommended that male runners and walkers use a 1:8 equivalence ratio and females a 1:10 ratio. The present findings are contrasted with those based on the analysis of data relating to treadmill running experiments (1:3.3), and with those based on the analysis of times for a mountain road-relay (1:4.4). Analysis of cycling data suggests a similar rule (1:8.2) for cycling on mountainous roads and tracks.
|Uncontrolled Keywords:||Naismith's rule, regression analysis, extreme values|
|Themes:||Health and Wellbeing|
|Schools:||Colleges and Schools > College of Business & Law > Salford Business School > Centre for Sports Business|
|Journal or Publication Title:||Journal of Sports Sciences|
|Publisher:||Taylor & Francis|
|Depositing User:||Dr Philip Scarf|
|Date Deposited:||06 Oct 2011 11:31|
|Last Modified:||17 Apr 2013 13:09|
Document DownloadsMore statistics for this item...
Actions (login required)
|Edit record (repository staff only)|