222177 Bullies, 3815 online  
  • Register
Our Sponsors:

Results 1 to 10 of 15
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Sponsored Links Spacer Image
  1. Moenstah is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    728

    Posted On:
    7/20/2011 5:25am


     Style: 空手 / &#2147

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!

    Old news: oxygen and energy use in medieval armour

    I believe this hadn't been posted yet, so here it goes:

    source
    But with the added protection came extra weight and cumbersomeness - and while researchers have always realised that this would have impaired a soldier's performance, nobody until now has quantified by how much.


    To study this, researchers asked four participants, who regularly re-enact battles for the Royal Armouries in Leeds, to don their exact-replica armour from England, Gothic Germany and Italy and get onto a treadmill.


    By recording how much oxygen they took in and carbon dioxide they produced, the team was able to calculate how much energy they were using. High-speed cameras also helped the researchers to study how the volunteers were using their limbs.
    (...)


    The team found that walking and running with the armour used up twice as much energy as doing the same thing without any armour.
    The breast and back plates of the medieval armour also affected breathing: instead of being able to take long, deep breaths while they worked up a sweat, the volunteers were forced to take frequent, shallow breaths, and this too used up more energy.


    leg pains
    The scientists also looked at how the volunteers performed while wearing armour compared with carrying the equivalent load on their backs, which is similar to the weight a modern soldier might carry in their backpack.


    Dr Askew said: "We found there was a big difference: it is much more 'expensive' to carry the load as a suit of armour than it is to carry the load in a backpack.

    The scientists also looked at how the volunteers performed while wearing armour compared with carrying the equivalent load on their backs, which is similar to the weight a modern soldier might carry in their backpack.


    Dr Askew said: "We found there was a big difference: it is much more 'expensive' to carry the load as a suit of armour than it is to carry the load in a backpack.
    I knew about the dangers of overheating (knights dying because they refused during tournaments to open their visors (a sign of defeat), but the weight distribution and respiratory issues were new to me.
  2. Styygens is offline
    Styygens's Avatar

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Baltimore, Maryland
    Posts
    2,168

    Posted On:
    7/20/2011 6:52pm


     Style: BBT/BJJ/CJKD

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Video at the link:
    http://io9.com/5823132/how-many-calo...walking-around

    Text of the io9 blog's article:
    Knights in shining armor were the worst idea in military history



    Cyriaque Lamar To determine how much energy knights in the Middle Ages burnt merely strolling around, British researchers recruited volunteers to dress up in mock-ups of real knightly armor and — in a hilarious twist — gallivant on treadmills. Sure enough, the study found that shielding the entire body was a heavy proposition. Watch the volunteers get medieval on sedentary lifestyles.

    Donning these replica suits — which were modeled on the armor of a 15th century London sheriff named William Martyn — forced the volunteers to expend approximately twice the amount of energy when engaging in cardiovascular activity.

    After physiologist Graham Askew of the University of Leeds monitored the mail-bedecked volunteers trudging and jogging on treadmills, the researchers discovered that wearing the armor resulted in volunteers using 1.9 times more energy while running and 2.3 times more while walking.

    Despite the protection and surprising mobility afforded by the armor — the volunteers could do cartwheels while wearing it — the distribution of plated weight across the volunteers' arms, feet, and legs caused them to burn energy at a greater rate than someone carrying the same amount of weight solely on their back. Additionally, the chest plate restricted the running volunteers' torsos, which limited the volume of the volunteers' oxygen intake.

    Professor Askew knows that not all armors are built the same and would like to conduct similar tests with other kinds of historical body armor. Sadly, Askew has already nixed a similar test using an armored warhorse running on a treadmill, as the potential for this experiment to devolve into a Yakety Sax-scored chase scene is too great.

    We'd also like to point out that the University of Leeds' team did not factor in any possible +1 speed buffs cast by friendly warlocks, the physiological affects of the Tincture of Heartiness, or the outside chance that Sheriff Martyn was the proprietor of the fabled Loafers of Alacrity.
    [Proceedings of the Royal Society B (article locked) via Science. Photo and video via Graham Askew of the University of Leeds.]
    Yes, the article turns a bit snarky at the end, but the link does have a cool video clip, and the comments section might be worth a read too. Plus, it looks like the hyperlink at "article locked" will take you to the full journal paper.

    Edit: Ah. Yes, the link will take you to the paper, but you have to pay for access.
  3. Moenstah is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    728

    Posted On:
    7/31/2011 3:54am


     Style: 空手 / &#2147

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Styygens, thanks for the contribution, I had meant to post this a week earlier, but didn't, because of the server problems of the site.

    I think I have a way of getting around the paper if you're also interested. Will take around a week.
  4. keyoz is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    156

    Posted On:
    8/01/2011 5:53am


     Style: No-Gi BJJ/MMA/MT noob

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    This part of the Sword episode of Mike Loades show Weapons that Made Britain seems relevant to the topic.
    (it starts around 3:44)

    (and continues here)

    The whole series is worth watching.

    Additionally, the chest plate restricted the running volunteers' torsos, which limited the volume of the volunteers' oxygen intake.
    Armour’s were custom made to fit the person wearing it- unless the volunteers were the exact same build as the 15th century sheriff this conclusion is bullshit.

    Also:
    How often would a knight actually walk/run in full armour? That’s what horses were for. Knights were heavy cavalry. In French and German even the name indicates they rode horses in battle. Knights would even ride their horses into churches for masses. Warhorse was the most important and most expensive part of knights equipment. While knights sometimes dismounted and fought on foot I would imagine they removed parts of their armour for that.
    Last edited by keyoz; 8/01/2011 6:00am at .
  5. Moenstah is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    728

    Posted On:
    8/01/2011 6:38am


     Style: 空手 / &#2147

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    thx for your post.

    as regards your critique on the use of someone else's armour during the experiment: you're correct. On the other hand, I can imagine that armour for the torso impedes breath to some extent.

    as regards walking/running knights: every time their horses got shot/killed during the battle, happened often enough. Or when their horses died from malnutrition and exhaustion during the march.
  6. keyoz is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    156

    Posted On:
    8/01/2011 6:54am


     Style: No-Gi BJJ/MMA/MT noob

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Moenstah View Post
    as regards walking/running knights: every time their horses got shot/killed during the battle, happened often enough.
    Many of the wealthier knights had spare horses, and one of squires jobs was replacing the knight's horse with a new one or even giving him his own horse. Also squires work well with Mike Loades theory that on foot knights fought in pairs- its possible that while the knight was catching a breath his squire did the fighting and vice versa.
  7. Moenstah is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    728

    Posted On:
    8/01/2011 7:13am


     Style: 空手 / &#2147

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    I wrote 'every time': this implies horses got killed several time. Squires were heavily armed too, not as heavy as their lords though. Dismounted knights fighting as heavy infantry also occurred with a certain regularity. Sure, the main role for knights is on horseback, but this wasn't always te case (Battle of the Standard, Scottish Wars, Hundred Years' War (e.g.: Crécy), Brémule, and in the Holy Land e.g. Richard Lionheart at Jaffa)
  8. keyoz is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    156

    Posted On:
    8/01/2011 8:02am


     Style: No-Gi BJJ/MMA/MT noob

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Yeah I got that- as I wrote knights fighting on foot did happened but I think they fought in pairs with their squires and wore a little less armour than when fighting from horseback. Also when I'm speaking about armour I think about the late medieval plate mail like the one form the experiment.
  9. Super8astard is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Bhudda Indiana
    Posts
    903

    Posted On:
    8/02/2011 1:37pm


     Style: Issh"i"nryu fixed....

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Moenstah View Post
    thx for your post.

    as regards your critique on the use of someone else's armour during the experiment: you're correct. On the other hand, I can imagine that armour for the torso impedes breath to some extent.

    as regards walking/running knights: every time their horses got shot/killed during the battle, happened often enough. Or when their horses died from malnutrition and exhaustion during the march.
    Knights had a separate horse for travel than the horse they rode into war. They also took good care of their war horses since it took time and money to train a horse for war. Many of them also, as keyoz said, had replacements they traveled with. Any given knight fought on foot in tournaments for sport far more than an entire group of them ever had to in battle.

    However, I'd imagine even fighting from horseback in armor would be exhausting...
  10. Permalost is offline
    Permalost's Avatar

    pro nonsense self defense

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    12,476

    Posted On:
    8/02/2011 1:54pm

    supporting member
     Style: FMA, dumbek, Indian clubs

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Cool article, except for this:
    Knights in shining armor were the worst idea in military history

    That kind of ignores the benefits and circumstances of wearing armor. It's like pointing out how space suits are the worst tracksuits ever made. Especially considering that a fully armored knight would likely go into battle on top of a galloping horse.
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Powered by vBulletin™© contact@vbulletin.com vBulletin Solutions, Inc. 2011 All rights reserved.