Validity and Within-Session Reliability of the Exerfly System: A Comparison of Motorised and Non-Motorised Flywheel Squats
Loading...
Files
Size: 2.73 MB, File format: Adobe PDF
Date
Authors
Bakici, Dogus
Cross, Matt R
Brughelli, Matt
Jukic, Ivan
Supervisor
Item type
Degree name
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Abstract
This study examined the concurrent validity and within-session reliability of the Exerfly flywheel application. Twelve resistance-trained men completed repeated flywheel back-squat sessions across six inertial loads (0.025–0.15 kg·m²) using motorised and non-motorised modes. Mean and peak concentric and eccentric force and velocity were recorded simultaneously using the Exerfly rotary encoder system and a MuscleLab unit. Concurrent validity was assessed using Bland-Altman limits of agreement (LoA) and concordance correlation coefficients (CCC) while accounting for repeated measures. Proportional bias was examined where present. Within-session inter-set reliability was evaluated using ICC(2,1), CV, and SEM. Mean concentric velocity demonstrated the highest agreement between systems, with small, non-significant bias and very large concordance in both non-motorised (0.04 m/s [95% CI: −0.01, 0.08], CCC = 0.80) and motorised (0.01 m/s [95% CI: −0.02, 0.04], CCC = 0.86) conditions. Motorised mean eccentric force also showed trivial bias and nearly perfect concordance (−5 N [95% CI: −23, 13], CCC = 0.94), although with wide LoA. In contrast, mean eccentric velocity and all peak variables exhibited systematic bias and lower concordance, with proportional bias evident particularly at higher forces and velocities. Despite this, both systems demonstrated good-to-excellent inter-set reliability across variables (ICC range: 0.64–0.99; CV%: 1.13–10.16). Agreement between systems was limited for interchangeable use across most mechanical outputs. Mean concentric velocity and motorised mean eccentric force showed the most acceptable agreement, whereas the remaining force and velocity measures demonstrated substantial bias. Nonetheless, both systems exhibited strong reliability, supporting their independent use for monitoring flywheel training performance.
Description
Keywords
11 Medical and Health Sciences, 17 Psychology and Cognitive Sciences, 32 Biomedical and clinical sciences, 42 Health sciences, 52 Psychology, Concentric velocity, eccentric overload, inertial load, resistance training, rotary encoder
Source
International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, ISSN: 1747-9541 (Print); 2048-397X (Online), SAGE Publications. doi: 10.1177/17479541261489248
Publisher's version
Rights statement
© The Author(s) 2026. Open access.
Permanent link
Endorsement
Review
Supplemented By
Referenced By
Creative Commons license
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Creative Commons License (CC BY 4.0)