警用手槍不同射擊姿勢之生物力學分析
47
0
0
全文
(2)
(3) . 106. 6. 4 90 10. VICON. AMTI. 3. (COP) α = .05. 30. iii. 3.
(4) . Dynamical Analysis of Police Pistol Shooting in Different Stances. June, 2017 Yeh, Chih-Chun Advisor: Tsai, Chien-Lu Abstract Good shooting technique is important for police no matter on training or on duty. From the previous researches we found the official police shooting training focused on the pistol shooting. In the past which emphasized to dictation of experience and repeated training. The researches of performance characteristics among different shooting stances were the new orientation. The purposes of this study were to compare the performance characteristics among three different police pistol shooting stances in the biomechanics approach. Four male police officers who were the pistol shooting instructor and had gained the special class shooter in perennial training test were recruited. The participants were shooting 10 times single shots in three shooting stances randomly (Weaver, Isosceles Stance & One Hand Shoot). The distribution of bullet holes and the biomechanical data were recording by the VICON Image Capture System and AMTI Force Plate in the period of 3 seconds before and after firing. The data were assessed using the nonparametric Friedman’s 2-way analysis of variance by ranks, the level of significance was set as α = .05. The results showed that there were no significant differences in the score among the three different pistol shooting stances. The distribution of the bullets on the target papers of One Hand Shoot were deflected downward and have greater deviation. The pistol swing motion of One Hand Shooting stance before and after firing was the greatest and there was no significant difference between Weaver and Isosceles stance. We found the stabilities of body after firing was the most in the Isosceles Stance shooting. In this study, we concluded that within 30 seconds of shooting time, there was no significant difference in shooting scores among different shooting stances. There were less pistol swing and more stable by using two hands shot like Weaver and Isosceles Stances. Key words: Kinetics, Isosceles Stance, Weaver Stance, One Hand Shoot, Hold Gun. iv.
(5) . v.
(6) ………….….……………………………………i …………….……………………………………….…..…………………………ii …………………………………..…………………….……………………………iii ……………………………………………………………..………………………..iv ………………………………………………………………………….…………………v ………………………………………………………………….…………...……………vi …………………………………………………………………………………..………ix …………………………………………………………………................……….………x. …...………………………………………………………………1 …...……………………………………….………………………………1 …...…………………………………………………………………1 …...…………………………………………………………………2 ................…...…..…………………………………………………3 ....…………………………………………………………3 ....…………………………………………………………3 ....…………………………………………………………8. …...…………………………………..……………………9 ….........………...……………………………………………9 …...………………………………………………..……11 ….........………...………………………………………11. vi.
(7) ………...........................………………..…..…………12. …………………………………..……………………13 ………………………………...……………..…………..………13 …………………………...……………..…………..………13 …………………………...……………..…………..………13 ……………………...……………..…………..………16 …………………………...……………..…………..………17 …………………………...……………..…………..………20. …………………………………..……………………21 …………………………...……………..…………..………21 3. …………………………...…………..………23. 3. ……………………………..…………..………26. …………………………………..……………………29 …………………………...……………..…………..………29 ………………………………..………29 ……………………………..…………..………30 ……………………………….……33 ...……………………………...………..………33. ………………………..……………………35. vii.
(8) ……………………………………..………………………36. viii.
(9) 3-1. ………………….…………...……………..…………..………13. 4-1. ………..…..……………21. 4-2. ………..…..…………22. 4-3. 3. …….…23. 4-4. 3. ……………….…………...……………..…………..………………………………24 4-5 4-6 4-7 4-8. 3. ….25. 3. ……………25 3. ..……26. 3. ………………………………………………………………………………………...27 4-9 5-1 5-2. 3. …28 3. ………………….……33 ……..………………………………..………34. ix.
(10) 1-1. ..………...……………………….………………………………4. 1-2. ……..……………………………………………………………5. 1-3. …..........………………………………………………………6. 1-4. …….........…...…..…………………………………………………7. 1-5. ……………..…………………………………………………………8. 3-1. …...……………………………………….………………..14. 3-2 GLOCK 19. …………………………………………………………………15. 3-3 9. …………………………………………………………………15. 3-4 AMTI MSA-6. ......…...…..………………………………………………15. 3-5. ………………......…………………………………………15. 3-6. …...…………………………..…….……………………………16. 3-7. …...…………………………...………………………18. 3-8 GLOCK 19. …...……………………………………18. 3-9 GLOCK 19. …...……………………………………18. 3-10 5-1. ………………......…………………..……………………………19 .…………………………...……………..…………..………32. x.
(11) 3. 3. Weaver Stance One Hand Shoot 1. 1. 1. Isosceles Stance.
(12) 1. 3. 1 2001. 1. 3 2. 8 -. 1. 1. 1. 2.
(13) AMTI. VICON T20. 3. 3. Center of Pressure, COP. 3. 3. 1. 1 3. GLOCK 19 G19. GLOCK. 9 2015. 1 1. -. 1 3.
(14) 1 x, y. -. x. y. 10. Weaver Stance. 1-1. 1950. Jack Weaver 1. 45 4.
(15) Isosceles Stance. 1-2. 3. 3. 5. 1.
(16) 1-3. 3 3 3. 1. 3. 6.
(17) 1 45. -. 擊發瞬間 預備. 瞄準. 1-4. 加壓扳機. 1. 7. 擊發後.
(18) P 3. 0. 3. C 1. O. C C. 1-5. 8.
(19) W.E. Fairbairn. E.A. Sykes. 1920. 1943. 1944. Military Intelligence Training Center. U.S. Army Col. Rex Applegate. 3. 1950. Jack Weaver. Jeff Cooper 3. FBI 45. 1. 1. 1. 2.. 1. 3. 4.. 180. 5. 6. 9. 3.
(20) 7.. 1.. -. 2. 3. 4. 5.. 3. 3. 1. 2.. -. 3. 4. 5.. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.. 1 3. 10.
(21) 1. 2010. 2005. 3 3. 1. Richard N. Hawkins & Joellen M. Sefton. 2011. 3. NOPTEL K. Mononen. N.Konttinen. 2007. 3. NOPTEL. 3 COP. 2006. 8 3. 2007. RIKA. 11.
(22) 10. 3. 1. VICON. -. -. 12.
(23) 90. 4 3-1. (. ). 4. 173.05±3.62. 68.75±7.23. 38.25±7.41. 105. VICON T20. 8. VICON. 1 8 20 10. 3-1 25. 7. 10 13. 200. 0.2.
(24) 0.5. 550. 520. 550 10. 10. 1. 3-2. 10. 50±0.2. 5. 300±1.0. 9. 100±0.4. 4. 350±1.0. 8. 150±0.5. 3. 400±2.0. 7. 200±1.0. 2. 450±2.0. 6. 250±1.0. 1. 500±2.0. 3-1 25. GLOCK 19 9mmÍ19mm Luger. 1 200. 3-2 3-3 14. 1. 9.
(25) AMTI MSA 6. 1 1. 3-4 3-5. 1. 3-2. GLOCK G19. 3-4. 3-3. AMTI. 3-5. 15. 9.
(26) VICON. 1.2m. 3-6. 16.
(27) 3-6 Placement. VICON 3-7. Plug-In-Gate Marker 3-8. -. AMTI. 1 COP. Center of Pressure. 1. 3. 30 3. 90 10 3. 30 3. 5 5. 17. 3-9. 1.
(28) 3-7. LGF. -. LGD. RGB. RGF. GD 3-8. GLOCK 19. 3-9. -. 18. GLOCK 19. -.
(29) 3-10. 19.
(30) Nexus 1.82. Microsoft Excel for. Mac 2011. RGF. GD 3. 3. GD. COP. 1. 3. 10. 3-11. 4-. 3. Excel for Mac. 3. 10. Microsoft Office. IBM SPSS 22 for Mac. COP α = .05. 20.
(31) 4-1. 4-2. 4-1 N. *p < .05. p. WV. 40. 9.03. .95. 2.21. IS. 40. 8.90. .98. 2.04. OH. 40. 8.55. 1.15. 1.75. WV. 40. 5.50. 38.60. 2.23. IS. 40. -8.30. 32.91. 1.86. OH. 40. -9.15. 39.74. 1.91. WV IS OH. 40 40 40. -2.75 -4.25 -27.85. 26.75 35.83 32.61. 2.26 2.16 1.58. WV:. IS:. OH:. 21. 5.817. .055. 3.107. .212. 11.107. .004*. WV IS OH. * * *. *.
(32) 4-2 N. p WV IS OH. *p < .05. WV. 4. 41.51. 21.84. 1.70. IS. 4. 43.73. 22.24. 1.98. OH. 4. 52.21. 27.00. 2.33. WV. 4. 7062.30 1814.50. 1.75. IS. 4. 6853.18 2604.72. 1.75. OH. 4. 8580.87 2452.20. 2.50. WV:. IS:. OH:. 22. 7.850. .020*. * *. 1.500. 0.472.
(33) 3. 3 4-3. 4-3. 3 N. *p < .05. p. WV IS OH. WV. 40. 102.68. 87.88. 1.75. IS. 40. 223.81. 601.39. 2.33. *. OH. 40. 123.42. 100.04. 2.93. *. WV. 40. 147.66. 103.16. 2.10. IS. 40. 135.92. 103.80. 2.18. OH. 40. 109.05. 58.99. 1.73. WV. 40. 91.31. 60.65. 2.23. IS. 40. 91.03. 139.80. 1.83. OH. 40. 75.43. 41.49. 1.95. WV:. IS:. OH:. 23. 6.950 .031*. 4.650. .098. 3.350. .187. *. * *. *.
(34) 3 4-4. 4-4. 3 N. *p < .05. p. WV. 40. 2.57. 1.27. 1.88. IS. 40. 3.31. 1.89. 2.25. OH. 40. 2.70. 1.31. 1.88. WV. 40. 4.20. 2.08. 1.88. IS. 40. 5.61. 3.88. 2.38. OH. 40. 4.33. 2.01. 1.75. WV. 40. 3.15. 0.96. 2.43. IS. 40. 2.29. 0.89. 1.83. *. OH. 40. 2.40. 0.85. 1.75. *. WV. 40. 3.46. 1.46. 2.43. IS. 40. 2.44. 1.05. 1.70. *. OH. 40. 2.54. 1.10. 1.88. *. WV. 40. 2.73. 1.58. 1.93. IS. 40. 3.67. 6.01. 1.85. OH. 40. 3.26. 2.07. 2.23. WV. 40. 1.62. 0.78. 2.23. IS. 40. 1.91. 0.76. 1.90. OH. 40. 1.83. 0.79. 1.88. WV:. IS:. OH:. 24. 3.750. .153. 8.750. .013*. WV IS OH. * * 10.950. 11.450. .004*. .003*. 3.150. .207. 3.050. .218. *. *. *. *.
(35) 4-5. 4-5. 3 N. WV IS OH. p. 40. 135.71. 83.93. 2.10. 40. 235.33. 399.81. 2.23. 40. 137.04. 186.64. 1.68. *p < .05. WV:. IS:. 6.650. WV IS OH. .036* * *. OH:. 4-6. 4-6. 3 COP 0.025 0.006 -0.047 0.29. 0.043 0.005 -0.008 0.212. .217* -.245* 0.082 -.358*. *p<.05. 25. .191* -.200* -0.103 -.457*. -0.107 0.128 0.016 -0.123.
(36) 3. 4-7. 4-7. 3 N. *p < .05. p. WV. 40. 13744.64. 4329.42. 1.63. IS. 40. 12206.32. 8515.75. 1.40. OH. 40. 31142.59. 3178.82. 2.98. WV. 40. 3989.38. 1643.90. 1.75. IS. 40. 3281.71. 1275.05. 1.25. OH. 40. 15294.19. 5332.52. 3.00. WV. 40. 5518.31. 1641.33. 1.65. IS. 40. 4910.28. 1547.16. 1.35. OH. 40. 25498.48. 9724.34. 3.00. WV:. IS:. OH:. 26. 58.050. WV. IS. .000*. OH * *. * 65.000. *. .000*. * * *. 61.800. *. .000*. * * *. *.
(37) 4-8. 4-8. 3 N. *p < .05. p. WV. 40. 6.70. 2.57. 1.95. IS. 40. 7.57. 3.61. 2.10. OH. 40. 6.48. 2.95. 1.95. WV. 40. 61.54. 10.55. 1.73. IS. 40. 57.85. 8.88. 1.30. OH. 40. 82.80. 12.23. 2.98. WV. 40. 12.04. 5.25. 1.63. IS. 40. 10.65. 6.25. 1.38. OH. 40. 55.99. 16.50. 3.00. WV. 40. 10.84. 3.90. 2.40. IS. 40. 9.80. 2.42. 2.18. OH. 40. 6.35. 4.31. 1.43. WV. 40. 70.50. 11.12. 1.48. IS. 40. 70.24. 6.09. 1.53. OH. 40. 121.21. 17.98. 3.00. WV. 40. 7.60. 3.43. 2.30. IS. 40. 6.03. 3.51. 1.88. OH. 40. 6.51. 6.24. 1.83. WV:. IS:. OH:. 27. .600. .741. 60.650. .000*. WV IS. OH. * * *. 61.250. *. .000*. * * *. 20.850. *. .000*. * * *. 60.050. *. .000*. * * *. 5.450. .066. *.
(38) 4-9. COP COP. 4-9. 3 N. WV IS OH *p < .05. 40 40 40 WV:. p 10576.78 8603.84 9905.29 IS:. 7743.91 10649.69 5438.95 OH:. 28. 2.10 1.55 2.35. 13.400. WV IS OH. .001*. * *. * *.
(39) 4-1. 25. 3 11. 3. 2005. 4-1. 4-2. 3. 29. 2007.
(40) 4-3 1. 2006. GLOCK 19 4.66. 4-6. 4-8. 4-6. 4-8. 30. 7 6.66. 3.
(41) 5-1 3. 3. 3. 3 3. 31. 3.
(42) 5-1. 32.
(43) 4-4. 4-1. Era,1996. 4-5 2.23. 4-6 3. 2.10. 1.68. 4-8 3 1. 5-1. 3 3. 4-4. 3. /. 135.71. 10576.78. 10441.07. 77.93662958. 235.33. 8603.84. 8368.51. 36.56074449. 137.04. 9905.29. 9768.25. 72.28028313. 4-7 5-1 77.94. COP 35.56 33. 72.28.
(44) 30 10. 3 COP 5-1 3. 8369. 10441. 3. 5-2 1. 2.. 1.. 1.. 1.. 2.. 2.. 2.. 3.. 1.. 1.. 1.. 2.. 2.. 2.. 3.. 34. COP.
(45) VICON. AMTI. 3. 3. 3. 30 3. 35.
(46) (. 2010. 29(1). 115-. 117 2005. 8. (1). 1. 115-117 2005. 20. 6. 199-. 200 S. 2013 。 2003. 18(5. 1. 200 ). 2006. 1. 1 0. 2005. P. 2007. 102 1. 22(1). -. 1. 1 0. ). 2014 2007. 29. 1. 1. 20-21. 1 0 36. 12. 351.
(47) Era P, Konttinen N, Mehto P, Saarela P, Lyyeinen H.. 1996. .Postural stability and. skilled performance – a study on top-level and naïve rifle shooters. Journal Biomechanics, 29, 301-306. Jeremy D. Clough(2008). The Real Weaver Stance, https://americanhandgunner.com/video-the-real-weaver-shooting-stance/ K.Mononen, N.Konttinen, J. Viitasalo, P.Era. 2007. . Relationships between. postural balance, rifle stability and shooting accuracy among novice rifle shooters. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, 17, 180-185. Richard N. Hawkins & Joellen M. Sefton. 2011 . Effect of stance width on. performance and postural stability in national-standard pistol shooters. Journal of Sports Science, 29(13), 1381-1387. Richard Nelson Hawkins. 2013. . Effects of stance angle on postural stability and. performance with national-standard air pistol competitors. European Journal of Sport Science, 13(5), 483-489. Wen-Tzu Tang, Wen-Yu Zhang, Chien-Chun Huang, Ming-Shing Young & Ing-Shiou Hwang 2008. . Postural tremor and control of the upper limb in air pistol. shooters. Journal of Sports Science, l26(14), 1579-1587.. 37.
(48)
相關文件
Although there was not much significant difference in the performance of students in relation to their durations of computer usage per day in the secondary
S3: And the products were the lipase fatty acid…no, no, fatty acid and glycerol and the enzyme remained unchanged. S1: Our enzyme was amylase and our substrate
Speakers on a team must work together effectively to present arguments and examples that support the team’s stance, and rebut the opposing team’s arguments to the greatest
Wang, Solving pseudomonotone variational inequalities and pseudocon- vex optimization problems using the projection neural network, IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks 17
Define instead the imaginary.. potential, magnetic field, lattice…) Dirac-BdG Hamiltonian:. with small, and matrix
* School Survey 2017.. 1) Separate examination papers for the compulsory part of the two strands, with common questions set in Papers 1A & 1B for the common topics in
The closing inventory value calculated under the Absorption Costing method is higher than Marginal Costing, as fixed production costs are treated as product and costs will be carried
Microphone and 600 ohm line conduits shall be mechanically and electrically connected to receptacle boxes and electrically grounded to the audio system ground point.. Lines in
