Countercurrent swimming machines made their appearance in the 1970s, initially in the form of pump-driven jetted streams, which caused a certain amount of turbulence and an un-natural swimming environment. They were followed up in the 1980s by propeller- and paddle-wheel driven machines. These provided a smoother stream of water. Many users find them relatively easy to swim in, though some are bothered by the considerable chop – inherent to these small pools, especially when performing symmetrical strokes such as the breaststroke or the butterfly. These machines are also criticized for being expensive, noisy, and wasteful of energy (needing special power connections delivering 3 to 4 kW for the pressure-driven machines, and 6.5 to 11 kW for the volume-driven machines, aside from any power needed to heat and filter the water–usually an additional 5 kW for an electric heater and around 1.5 kW for a pool pump and filter).
Two types of exercise machines make up the second group. Hybrid systems - self-contained micropools similar to the counter-current type but using a flexible tether to keep the swimmer in place are one type. These systems, being human powered, need neither machinery or electricity but have to be carefully designed to suppress wave formation. The second type allows a person to remain on dry land while simulating certain swimming strokes. Machines of the latter type however can not compensate for the weight of the body and the limbs and thus deprive the user of the benefits of exercise in an aquatic environment. However, the higher effort required by such machines, in the absence of the metabolic effects of immersing the body in water, makes these devices more effective than true swimming if one's purpose is to achieve weight reduction. Similar in purpose, but not qualifying as swimming machines since they require access to a swimming pool, are various tether systems.
Also in this category are a number of swim spas, usually fiberglass shells equipped with several pool pumps to set the water in motion. Seen as more convenient since they come pre-assembled, the quality of the swim has been criticized as being somewhat turbulent, as the strength of the current comes from the speed and pressure of the discharged water, rather than its volume.
In the 1980s a new type of machine made its appearance. In an attempt to correct problems of turbulence and resulting discomfort from swimming against a jet of water, systems were devised to set the water in motion in a smoother fashion. The first, in 1984, was the SwimEx, developed by Stan Charren together with two MIT-trained engineers. This machine, consisting of a fiberglass pool with the machinery housed in an adjacent compartment, sets the water in motion by means of a paddle-wheel, thus generating a steady stream of water as wide as the swimming pool itself.
In the late 1980s the Endless Pool® was developed by James Murdock, in an attempt to build a less-expensive alternative to the SwimEx. This machine places the water-moving equipment - a large propeller encased in a stainless steel box and powered by a remote hydraulic pump, and its stainless steel water circulation tunnels - inside the body of a vinyl-lined metal pool. Its stream of water is narrower than that of the SwimEx, though the swimming experience is comparable. A couple of copy-cat systems have sprung up since its introduction.
Around the same time, the Swim Gym, a propeller-driven propulsion system developed by engineer Peter Davidson became available commercially. This machine is encased within a large (10" diameter) PVC tee which is then incorporated into the concrete wall of a swimming pool. It delivers a current equivalent to that produced by the Endless Pool.
A number of "still-water" mini-pools have been built over the years, designed to be used in conjunction with various resistance-swimming tether systems. These human-powered devices combine the self-contained aspect of counter-current swimming machines with the low cost and simplicity and freedom of movement of tether systems used in athletic training. They have major cost and energy-use advantages over mechanical swimming machines. They are valuable for aerobic exercise, endurance and strength training, and for stroke practice. However, they cannot replicate open water conditions, in which the water courses at speed past the swimmer, so that for competition training their use has to be combined with open-water practice. One example of such a device is the Swimergy Swim System, which also makes use of wave-reduction technology.
This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.
It uses material from the
"Swimming machine".
Home Page • arts • business • computers • games • health • hospitals • home • kids & teens • news • physicians • recreation• reference • regional • science • shopping • society • sports • world