Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Sources of Error in Determining Countermovement Jump Height with the Impulse Method

2001; International Society of Biomechanics; Volume: 17; Issue: 1 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1123/jab.17.1.43

1543-2688

Glenn M. Street, Scott McMillan, Wayne Board, Mike Rasmussen, J. Michael Heneghan,

Scientific Measurement and Uncertainty Evaluation

A comprehensive error analysis was performed on the impulse method. To evaluate the potential errors, jump height was recalculated after altering one of the measurement or calculation techniquaes while leaving the others unchanged, and then comparing it to the reference jump height (best estimate of true jump height). Measurement techniques introduced the greatest error. Low-pass filters with cutoff frequencies < 580 Hz led to systematic underestimations of jump height, ≤26%. Low sampling frequencies (<1,080 Hz) caused jump height to be underestimated by ≤4.4%. Computational methods introduced less error. Selecting takeoff too early by using an elevated threshold caused jump height to be overestimated by ≤1.5%. Other potential sources of computational error: (a) duration of body weight averaging period; (b) method of integration; (c) gravity constant; (d) start of integration; (e) duration of offset averaging period; and (f) sample duration, introduced < 1% error to the calculated jump height. Employing the recommended guidelines presented in this study reduces total error to ≤ ±0.76%. Failing to follow the guidelines can lead to average errors as large as 26%.