Comparisons of laboratory‐based methods to calculate jump height and improvements to the field‐based flight‐time method

Abstract

Laboratory methods that are required to calculate highly precise jump heights during experimental research have never been sufficiently compared and examined. Our first aim was to compare jumping outcome measures of the same jump, using four different methods (double integration from force plate data, rigid‐body modeling from motion capture data, marker‐based video tracking, and a hybrid method), separately for countermovement and squat jumps. Additionally, laboratory methods are often unsuitable for field use due to equipment or time restrictions. Therefore, our second aim was to improve an additional field‐based method (flight‐time method), by combining this method with an anthropometrically scaled constant. Motion capture and ground reaction forces were used to calculate jump height of twenty‐four participants who performed five maximal countermovement jumps and five maximal squat jumps. Within‐participant mean and standard deviation of jump height, flight distance, heel‐lift, and take‐off velocity were compared for each of the four methods. All four methods calculated countermovement jump height with low variability and are suitable for research applications. The double integration method had significant errors in squat jump height due to integration drift, and all other methods had low variability and are therefore suitable for research applications. Rigid‐body modeling was unable to determine the position of the center of mass at take‐off in both jumping movements and should not be used to calculate heel‐lift or flight distance. The flight‐time method was greatly improved with the addition of an anthropometrically scaled heel‐lift constant, enabling this method to estimate jump height and subsequently estimate power output in the field.

Force-velocity profiling in athletes: Reliability and agreement across methods

“…The flight time method calculates force and velocity based on jump height [15]. However, flight times are inevitably prone to small errors in technical execution [49], in addition to systematic errors compared to jump height obtained from force data [50,51]. As Jime ´nez-Reyes et al [15] point out, the FV-variables are associated with cumulative extrapolation errors, consecutively decreasing the validity of these variables.…”

Effects of Surface Properties on Gastrocnemius Medialis and Vastus Lateralis Fascicle Mechanics During Maximal Countermovement Jumping

“…This method does not account for the center-of-mass displacement before take-off, and thus underestimates jump height. However, this method remains appropriate to estimate flight distance ( Wade et al, 2020 ), especially outside laboratory conditions, and we observed low variability within-participants. Recent field-based estimates of jump height appear to be an interesting alternative of the use of the flight time method by adding the calculation of an anatomically scaled heel-lift constant to improve jump height estimation ( Wade et al, 2020 ).…”

“…However, this method remains appropriate to estimate flight distance ( Wade et al, 2020 ), especially outside laboratory conditions, and we observed low variability within-participants. Recent field-based estimates of jump height appear to be an interesting alternative of the use of the flight time method by adding the calculation of an anatomically scaled heel-lift constant to improve jump height estimation ( Wade et al, 2020 ). Lastly, considering the unequal samples for fascicle related data ( N = 12) and EMG data ( N = 10 and 8 for GM and VL, respectively), caution should be made when interpreting these variables together.…”

Can IMU Provide an Accurate Vertical Jump Height Estimate?

“…Both the signal acquired from the FP and the signal acquired from IMU were filtered using a low-pass Butterworth filter (order = 5, f cof = 40 Hz). The calculation of the jump height from IMU data was performed using the FT method [13,22,27] by Equation (1).…”

“…The vertical jump (VJ) is a complex task that requires the coordination of multiple joints [1]. It is characterized by a rapid vertical acceleration of the body mass in the shortest possible time interval and was found to be related to common sports activities, such as sprint, acceleration and change of direction speed (CODS) [2][3][4].…”