Maximal dynamic forces exerted by acrobats on nine circus apparatuses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Circus practice is a very popular activity that has had minimal engineering research published. The purpose of this study was to measure peak cable tension in nine circus disciplines: aerial hoop, rope, aerial silk, flying pole, tightwire, Chinese pole, swinging trapeze, solo and duo fixed trapeze. Cables in these disciplines were instrumented with load cells and tension force was recorded. Thirty-four acrobats, professionals, and students from professional circus schools participated in the study and performed a total of 118 acrobatic movements. An analysis of variance (ANOVA) determined differences in participants. Almost all movements and disciplines showed a statistically significant difference between participants. Maximal forces were found to be 4.8 BW (bodyweight) in aerial hoop, 7.3 BW in aerial rope, 5.6 BW in aerial silk, 4.0 BW in flying pole, 5.6 BW in swinging trapeze, 6.8 BW in solo fixed trapeze, 2.5 BW in duo fixed trapeze, and maximal tension in cable were found to be 15 kN in tightwire and 2.8 kN in Chinese pole. These findings may provide substantial implications for acrobatic design and rigging to improve safety of circus equipment. La pratique du cirque est une activité très populaire pour laquelle peu de recherches en ingénierie ont été publiées. L’objectif de cette étude était de mesurer la tension maximale des câbles dans neuf disciplines de cirque: cerceau aérien, corde lisse, tissu aérien, mât pendulaire, fil de fer, mât chinois, trapèze ballant, trapèze fixe solo et duo. Les câbles de ces disciplines ont été instrumentés avec des cellules de charge et la tension a été enregistrée. Trente-quatre acrobates, professionnels et élèves d'écoles de cirque professionnelles, ont participé à l'étude et ont exécuté un total de 118 mouvements acrobatiques. Une analyse de la variance (ANOVA) a déterminé les différences entre participants. Presque tous les mouvements et disciplines ont montré une différence statistiquement significative entre les participants. Les forces maximales ont été trouvées à 4.8 poids corporel en cerceau aérien, 7.3 fois le poids du corps en corde lisse, 5.6 fois le poids du corps en tissu aérien, 4.0 fois le poids du corps en mât pendulaire, 5.6 fois le poids du corps en trapèze ballant, 6.8 fois le poids du corps en trapèze fixe solo et 2.5 fois le poids du corps en trapèze fixe duo, et la tension maximale dans le câble a été trouvée à 15 kN dans le fil de fer et 2.8 kN dans le mât chinois. Ces résultats peuvent avoir des implications importantes pour la conception et le gréage acrobatique afin d'améliorer la sécurité des équipements de cirque.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".