Help to minimize resting!

99-Switch back on Mt. Whitney Trail

Better to avoid resting in some sections

During hiking, there might be some sections where we'd better to avoid resting.  It might be hard to find out a good safe place to take some rest during hiking.   One of example is 99-switch back on Mt. Whitney Trail.  This section is steep and it might be hard to find out wide enough safe place.  In this case, one of options is to avoid resting such section.

I think to manage the pace with heart rate helps to minimize resting time.

Total Time from Trail Camp ~ the summit

This is chart shows walking time and resting time in a section from Trail Camp to the summit.  This section includes 99-switch back I mentioned above.
In 2011, I walked as fast as I can and I really exhausted.  In 2012, I walked very slowly to wait a friend who did not have much experience of hiking.  So it took the longest from Trail Camp to the summit.  In 2014, I also walked slowly since a friends got some symptoms of a mild high altitude sickness.  In 2015 and 2016, I intentionally walked very slowly to minimize the resting.  However the total time is probably similar or smaller than 2011.  Even I walked slowly, the total time could be the same or shorter.  That is one of interesting data from my hiking.

In 2012 and 2014, since the pace was very slow for me, I did not feel it was hard at all.  However, in 2011, I was really exhausted.   Unfortunately, I do not have heart rate data in 2011.  But I have heart rate data for other years.

Distribution of Heart rate zone

(From Trail Camp to Trail Crest) 

This data is a distribution of heart rate zone from Trail Camp to Trail Crest where is the most steep portion between Trail Camp and the summit.  As you can see, in 2012, I walked in zone 1 for the most of time.  In 2014, zone 1 is more time than zone 2.  In 2016, my condition was not very good and I walked in zone 2 for the most of time.  Even though, I took more time than 2015.  But the time difference is very small (about 10 minutes).   Also, I did not feel it was hard.
So as long as I can maintain the heart rate zone less than zone 2 (or zone 1).  I did not feel it was hard.  So the key is keep the heart rate less than zone 2, then I might not need resting much.

The actual walking pace was very slow.  I felt I could walk much faster, but I watched my heart rate and I kept the pace based on the heart rate.  I guess I might walk much faster if I had not monitored the heart rate.  So it is probably beneficial to monitor and manage the pace.  Just using "feeling", it might be hard to keep a good pace for hiking.

This is another good example to use heart rate to manage the pace.

Smart Hiking (9) ~ Target heart rate

What is the target HR?

Based on the past data from my hiking, it is possible to manage walking pace by heart rate.  However, the question is what heart rate would be a good target to manage the pace.   That was a big question when I apply this method to hiking.

It is slightly different from running.  Because many runner has a goal or target time for a specific distance.  So many people probably look for a pace to maximize the performance.  However, hiking is not competition and it does not have to be maximize someone's performance.  Probably 30 minutes difference might not be a big deal.  So I stared "try & error" approach.

Try & Error!

I started to pick an average HR during a running activities.   I think I mentioned this before.  A typical average during running activities, my average HR is somewhere around 160 bpm.  So I picked 160 bpm as a threshold to slow down the working pace.  Since I can continue to run with this HR up to 3 hours.  Therefore, I think I can walk to manage HR below 160 bpm.  The answer was, yes, I could do it.  But it was really tough.  It was probably possible to continue, but it was not easy.  I did not have much room to enjoy the hiking.

Then, the next year, I set the target as 155 bpm.  It was a little bit lower than I can maintain.  It was much easier than the previous year and I had some time to enjoy the hiking.  But it was getting harder in the end of a day.  So I found out it might be better to set a little more lower.  Then, I picked 150 bpm the next hiking.  It seems to be an optimized pace for hiking.  It was not really hard and not too easy.  Also, the total time which included the resting time was very similar as using 160bpm or 155bpm.   Slower pace helped to reduce the resting time and the total time to the same destination is almost the same.

This was how I found out my target heart rate for hiking.  It works well for me.  However, this number could change especially my age (around 50 years old).  The fitness level is probably getting worse year by year.  So I was looking for a better method.

(To be continue)

Smart Hiking (8) ~ Strength of activity for hiking

Example of heart rate trend

(Whitney Portal ~ Trail Camp in 2015) 

Impact of elevation

The above chart is an example of heart rate trend in higher elevation.   As you can see, the heart rate except resting above 9,000 feet (3,000 m) is more than 150 bpm.  This is a sort of high side.  Here is another data as a reference.

 Heart Rate during long run

This is a data when I ran for 3 hours.  The pace is not very fast, but the average heart rate is somewhere around 150 bpm.  To compare those two activity is not really easy.  During hiking, I had a backpack with all camping gears, however, the walking pace was really slow.  The strength is probably higher than the long run.   The heart rate is close to 160 bpm in some part.

What I try to say here is the impact of elevation, or lower oxygen environment, is probably much higher than people think.  The key is we need to understand this impact of elevation and manage the heart rate (pace) is really helping for better experience during hiking.

Also, the running example shows that I can run longer if I can maintain the heart rate somewhere around 150 bpm.

(To be continue)

Smart Hiking (7) ~ Pace and resting time

Total time from Trail Camp to the summit of Mt. Whitney

This is another interesting data from my experience.  This is break down for walking time (moving time) and resting time (time not to move).  Again, in 2012, I hiked there with a friend who did not have much hiking experience and I need to stop and wait the friend often.  Therefore the total time is taking more time.  In terms of walking pace, in 2011, it was fastest.  In 2014, it is probably moderate.  In 2015 and 2016 were slower than the other years.

Especially in 2015 and 2016, I tried to maintain the heart rate less than 145 bpm.  Then, I did not have to take a rest or stop so often.  Then the total time to the summit is much less than the other years.

This section is above 3,700m.  The summit is close to 4,500m.  Therefore even if just a little faster pace is a cause of increasing the heart rate.  To lower the heart rate, I needed to stop or slow down the pace.  If I can maintain the heart rate lower than 145 bpm.  I did not have to do that.

In 2011, I felt really exhausted.  However, in 2012, since the pace is so slow and I felt it was really easy.   I had a similar feeling in 2015 and 2016.  Probably around 140~145bpm is probably my optimized pace.   The pace in 2015 and 2016, I thought it was really slow.  But it was a right pace in the elevation.  However it might be a little difficult to maintain such slow pace without knowing the heart rate.  I probably tend to walk faster if I do not have such indication.

This is one of good example of pace management with heart rate in higher elevation.

(To be continue)

APRS coverage in Butano State Park (California/USA)

APRS Stations near Butano SP (California)

It was 2 weeks ago, I went camping to Butano State Park in Memorial Day weekend.
Butano State Park is located a little south of Half Moon Bay near San Francisco Bay area.  It is a small state park and it is really nice and quiet place.   It was little chilly early in the morning and late in the evening.   However the camp sites were full and there were many people there.

Camping Site

Camping sites are nice.  Most of them have nice shade with big Redwood trees.  This time we could not get a regular sites that we can park our cars next to the campsite.  Our site was a part of "walk-in" site.   Even it's called "walk-in" site, the campsites are not so far from the parking lot.  It is probably a few hundred feet away from the parking lot.  Only problem is there is only one designated parking space near the camp site.  A group who has more than one cars, they have to park a little far on the load.  That is only bad thing we found out.   The regular site typically have two parking space for each site.

Also, there is only one bath room and it is not flash-able.  However it is reasonably clean and I do not see a big problem at all.

Hiking Trail

There are a several hiking trail.  People can arrange a short hiking to a full day hike depending on their demand.   I tried to test APRS with my Baofeng.  It does not seems to be a good coverage at all.   I did not get any packet and all packets I sent out were not recognized.   So it is not good area to use APRS.  (I just using Baofang hand-held radio and a better antenna other than the standard antenna.)

Mobile service is partially available near bathroom of a regular camping site, not the one in the walk-in site.

There is no issue to use simplex channels on 2m band during hiking.   The distance between two groups might be less than a few miles.   I have not tried any repeater from the park.

Smart Hiking (6) ~ Total Time with different pace

Total time from Whitney Porta (Trailhead) to Trail Camp

I went hiking to Mt. Whitney a several times in the past years.  I hiked some different pace on Mt. Whitney Trail.  Trail Camp is one of major camp sites on the trail.  From the trail head, the distance to Trail Camp is about 6+ miles.   The total duration in this section is 264 ~ 346 minutes.  Actual walking time which excludes the resting time is from 202~243 minutes.

In 2012, I went there with a friend who did not have much experience for hiking.  Therefore the overall pace is very slow and we took longer resting.  The other years, the actual walking time is probably very similar 202 ~ 229 minutes.   However, the feeling was very different.  In 2011, it was obviously over pace and I felt very exhausted.  However, the rest of years, I did not feel exhausted at all.  I felt something much easier than 2011.  Primary difference between 2011 and the other years was walking pace.

In 2011, I tried to maintain the original pace as well as I can.  However, I could not keep the same pace due to high altitude sickness and I was slowing down significantly and it was very very slow near Trail Camp and I was really exhausted.   However in 2015, the total time was almost the same as 2011, but this year I did not feel exhausted at all.  After 2014, I tried to set a target heart rate and tried to maintain my heart rate below the target.   In 2014, the target was somewhere around 160 bpm, in 2015 somewhere around 155 and in 2016 somewhere around 150.

This is very interesting data I found from my records.   Yes, it is much easy to slow down the pace.  However, it does not seem that there is not much difference for the total time and the feeling is very different.   So, I realized there is a way to "optimize" the pace.

(To be continue)

Smart Hiking (5) ~ Heart rate base training

Running Watch (device) with GPS and Heart Rate Monitor

I wrote about relationship between elevation and heart rate in the previous post.   Today, I am talking about heart rate base training in running world.  This is slightly different topic from hiking, but it is better to know the concept of heart rate training.

Running device

Many runners use a running device which has GPS, heart rate monitor and other nice function nowadays.  It is really convenient to track all activities with a lot of data during the activities such as where they ran, distance of running, pace, heart rate and etc.  It also help to tell actual pace when they run in real time.

Since such device is getting very popular in running world, many people using the device to manage running pace and training.  There are so many training menu using heart rate since depending on what performance people try to improve, the intensity of the training is different.   For example to burn fat in the body, the intensity should not be high.  Low intensity with longer time of running would be much more efficient to burn body fat.  However to improve speed and lactate threshold, it usually require high intensity like interval training.  To set a target, "pace" was used in old days, something like 6 minutes per mile x 5.  However, it is hard to set a right pace for many people who is not really serious athletes.  Then the strength / intensity might be too high and it is due to an injury.  Or it is too easy to improve the performance old days.
Now many training many using "target heart rate" instead of "target pace".   It is much easier for many people to set a reasonable goal based on heart rate.

Heart rate zone
To set a target heart rate, there is a definition called "heart rate zone" which is a range of heart rates based on the maximum heart rate, sometime maximum heart rate with the resting (minimum) heart rate.  As long as people knows the maximum (and resting ) heart rate, it is easy to tell which heart rate range people need to maintain for each training.

One of simple example is based on ratio of the maximum heart rate:
- Zone 5 - 90% of the maximum heart rate ~ maximum heart rate
- Zone 4 - 80% ~ 70%
- Zone 3 - 70% ~ 60%
- Zone 2 - 60% ~ 50%
- Zone 1 - 50% ~ or less

Then to burn the body fat, zone 2 would be a good zone.  Typical marathon pace for many people is probably zone 3 or zone 2.   Many interval training can be zone 4 something like that.

The maximum heart rate can be find in a real high intensity activities or using an equation to estimate the maximum heart rate by age.  (A popular formula is "220 - age" [bpm])

Based on such heart rate zone definition, it is hard to maintain zone 4 for a long time.   Even zone 3, it is probably possible to maintain the range longer than zone 4.  But it is probably not easy to maintain zone 3 very long time.  To continue to maintain for very long time, it is probably better to stay in zone 2.   That is the idea.

Based on my experience, it is similar in hiking.  If the heart rate reaches zone 4, it is obviously impossible to maintain such high heart rate for long time.  Therefore, if we can maintain a pace in hiking based on this heart rate zone.  I think we can find a better pace for hiking.

This is the concept for "smart hiking" in higher elevation with heart rate.

(To be continue)

Smart Hiking (4) ~ Example Heart Rate data on Mt. Whitney Trail

Heart Rate trend in 2015

(Whitney Portal ~ Trail Camp)

Here is one of examples for heart rate and elevation.
The chart above shows heart rate trend from Trail Head (Whitney Portal) to Trail Camp.  Since I took some rests on the way to Trail Camp, there are some drips.  However the overall trend is increasing the heart rate significantly.

Walking Speed trend in 2015

(Whitney Portal ~ Trail Camp)

This is a trend for walking speed.  Since resting, there are drops as well.  However, the overall trend is decreasing the speed.

Slope (Elevation / Distance)

Slope of the trail is close to linear.  It is probably okay to assume the slope is almost constant in the section.  The weight in the backpack is also almost the same from trail head to Trail Camp.
Those three chart shows that the heart rate is increasing even if the walking pace is slowing down.  The rest of factor might impact, which are slope of trail and weight of the backpack would be very similar.   The only factor would be elevation.

Elevation of trail head is around 2,500m and Trail Camp is about 3,657m.   The biggest depth on the heart rate and the speed is Outpost Camp where is about 3,170m.  Roughly, below Outpost Camp, the peaks are reached a similar speed.  However after Outpost Camp, the peak speed is clearly much slower than the lower parts.  Also, I did not feel any clear symptom I can recognize below Outpost Camp.  Based on the data above, here is what I found:

• Blew Outpost Camp, I did not feel any clear symptoms for high altitude sickness
• Blew Outpost Camp, I was able to maintain a similar speed as I hike lower elevation.
• Blew Outpost Camp, heart rate is getting higher even if the speed is a similar.
• Above Outpost Camp, I cannot maintain the same speed as lower portion
• Above Outpost Camp, the speed is getting lower

This experience shows even I was not aware of any impact of high altitude sickness, the heart rate stats getting higher somewhere near 3,000 m (or 9,000 feet).  Also, above 3,000m (or 9,000 feet), the heart rate gets higher even if the speed is dropped.  Clearly, heart rate could be a good factor to see an impact of elevation.

Heart rate in running

When I am running, the heart rate I can run for longer distance / time would be below somewhere around 150~160 [bpm].  If the heart rate beyond the point, it is hard to continue or maintain the pace for longer.   That is typical maximum marathon pace I am usually targeting.   The chart clearly shows, the heart rate after Outpost Camp (or 3,000m / 9,000 feet) is higher than this.  Therefore it is considered as "over pace" in running world.

Apply to hiking for pace management

From the running experience, I think we can apply a similar concept to hiking.  That is where the idea is coming from.

(Continue)

Smart Hiking (3) ~ How to recognize "sign"

Difference between casual hiking in high elevation and Himalaya expedition?

One thing I can tell is that there is some difference between a casual hiking in high elevation, which is somewhere around 9,000 ~ 15,000 feet and mountains in Himalaya.
A major factor is "duration".   In general, those expeditions can be long enough to acclimatize the altitude up to some elevation.   However most of casual hiking could be done within a few days.   I think it is probably not long enough to acclimatize the elevation.   This means some symptoms for high altitude sickness is probably given and I think the key is probably to minimize the impact of the elevation.  That is a big difference.

On the other hand, most of strategy people believe is a similar way as those expeditions.  Something like staying higher altitude in a previous night....   However, I personally do not believe it helps a lot.  Based on my experience, I did not really realized that I was getting some symptoms until I really have obvious symptoms.  I think that is difficulty of such hiking.

Need some clear factor to quantify the impact to human body

Especially in early stage or the elevation is probably not high enough to see very clear symptom of high altitude sickness, most of people think "I am good".  Then people tend to walk a regular pace as lower elevation based on their experience.   People who has a lot of experience in that elevation, they might have a better idea how they can manage the pace with the elevation.  In this case, it is probably less problem.  The problem is many people do not have a lot of experience above 10,000 feet.   Therefore, they might walk over pace and exhausted.

If people can have a good factor to recognize the impact, it might help to adjust the pace.

One of popular factor for high altitude hiking / climbing is probably SPO2 (Peripheral Oxygen Saturation).   The value can be measured by pulse oximeter and many expedition might use it as a reference for altitude acclimatization.   If people measure SPO2 in lower elevation like lower than 1000 feet, then the value is typically more than 95%.  However if people is getting higher elevation, this value is getting lower.  Based on my experience, SPO2 valur in 14,000 feet was sometimes less than 80% which is really low value.   It is probably a good factor to show some impact to human body in higher elevation.  This value could be lower once people acclimatize the elevation and it is a good factor for acclimatization.   It is probably very useful for the expeditions.  But it is probably a little hard to use for hiking in a short period.

Another one is probably heart rate.  I am also runner and using a running device (watch) with GPS to track all race and training data.  Many devices nowadays can capture heart rate during the activities.  I also collect heart rate data during hiking to Mt. Whitney which is more than 14,000 feet.  I realize that the heart rate is getting higher if I am in higher altitude even waling pace is slower.
Also, heart rate is one of very good factor to manage the strength of a training and manage running pace in running world.   Therefore, I believe a similar idea can be applied to hiking.   That is the idea to manage walking pace in higher altitude during hiking.

I will show some examples which indicates some impact of higher elevation.

(To be continue)

Smart hiking (2) ~ Hiking over 9,000 feet

Hiking over 9,000 feet

When people hike over 9,000 feet, they might start feel some symptoms for high altitude sickness.  There are some popular destinations over 9,000 feet, such as Mt. Fuji in Japan, Mt. Whitney in California / USA, Mont-Blanc and etc.   Depending on seasons, but it is probably not so difficult in summer time and many hikers are there.  The symptom is typically not really serious in many cases for those destinations, I guess it is something wrong / different for many people and they might be able to reach the summit and come back without major problems.

However, many people feel this is different from hiking in lower elevation.  Therefore there might be some tips such as stay higher elevation in the previous night, walking slowly and etc.  They might be coming from strategy from expedition to mountains in Himalaya.   Basic idea is taking more time to acclimatize the elevation.

My experience on Mt. Whitney trail

I had a several experiences to hike to Mt. Whitney in past years.  I also tried to stay higher elevation in a previous night like many articles suggested.   However, I did not feel any clear difference.  On the other hand, I had very different feeling in a few different hiking.  I felt really exhausted once, but I felt really easy in other.  The major difference is probably walking pace.   It seems to be common sense if people walk slowly, it must be easy.   However, after I collect heart rate data during hiking, I think there is a better way to manage the walking pace.  Obviously, it might be impossible to avoid any symptoms for high altitude sickness, but I believe there might be a way to optimize the pace to minimize the impact of high altitude sickness.

This is the topic I will post as a series to this blog.  I wrote a book about this experience in Japanese and I plan to publish English edition after this series.  After publish the Japanese Edition, I got some extra data / thought, therefore I will reorganize the contents and post in this blog.

(To be continue)