Developing A novel system to evaluate jump height

Objective: Jumping height is one of test to evaluate the anaerobic power in sports. There are some limitations in available jumping height measurements methods such as expensive equipment demands or nonsensitive measurements. The aim of this study is developing a novel system to evaluate jumping height. Video Motion Capture Analyses (CAM), Laser Imaging Detection and Ranging (LIDAR, LID) system, force sensor (FSR), ultrasonic sensors (US), Infra red (IR) and Inertial movement units (IMU) methods were compared to reference method Photoelectronic sensors (PES). Method: Fifty-one healthy male volunteer (23.61±4.62 year, 178.46±7.16 cm, 78.55±12.39 kg) participated in this study. They wore a vest included sensors systems and record units. FSR sensor was mounted to their shoes using a velcro band. IMU and active marker were placed to the center of mass. After the control of sensors working, they performed three CMJ (arms were stabilized to the body) with 90s recovery. All jumps were recorded as 2s periods by the high-frequency camera using buffer triggering and data was processed in Matlab. Different assessments of jumping height were compared with repeated measurements of ANOVA. The ICC was used to examine the relationships of methods. The SEM and 95% limit of agreement (LOA) method were calculated and showed as Bland Altman plots graphed. Relationships of new methods with reference jumping height assessment were evaulated by intraclass correlation (ICC), 2-tailed. Results: Jumping data, which obtained from the US sensor, corrupted because of the Doppler effect. So these data could not be evaluated. Some artifacts, which are caused by laser beams sent by LIDAR sensor at ~500hz velocity, had seen at the IR data and these data did not process. FSR, CAM, IMU, LID and PES measurements were similar (F(3,303)= 2.338, p=.074). ICC between PES, the reference measurement, and other measurement methods (FSR, CAM, IMU, LID) found statistically significant (p<0.0001; respectively r=0.99, 0.95, 0.68, 0.99). Conclusion: SEM values of the CAM and IMU measurements found greater than FSR and LID measurements. FSR and LID methods, which have a low standard error of measurement, come into prominence. Especially shoe sole entegrated wearable products, which are developable with FSR, can be used for the evaluation of complicated movements with the inclusion of jumping component, not only singular jumps. When comparing the other methods with the reference method (PES) in terms of standard error of measurement, the FSR measurement method has the lowest value (SEM=5.38). In terms of SEM values, another method which is close to the reference method (SEM=6.8695) is LIDAR. As our knowledge, there is no published article in this topic of evaluating sport performance, which is using LIDAR method. This research is the first research which evaluates sport preformance with LIDAR. Furthermore, this method is cheap and has a high sampling rate. In this context, this method can be used in the fields such as a detailed investigation of short distance runs not only jumping high measurements. Key Words: Sensors, Wearable technology, Jumping height