Abstract

The performance of individuals jumping tabletop features in terrain parks has not been widely studied. A field study was conducted to measure the takeoff speed and horizontal distance achieved by jumpers at two tabletop style jump features: A smaller jump at Snow Summit, CA and a larger jump at Mammoth Mountain, CA, USA. Analyses were also conducted to determine the effects of equipment type (skis versus snowboard) on jumper kinematics. Before each data collection session, the physical dimensions of the jump were measured and recorded. For consecutive jumpers, the speed parallel to the ramp was measured at the end of the takeoff by using a laser speed trap accurate to 0.11 m/s. The landing zone was marked at 3.0 m intervals with colored dye, beginning just past the flat deck portion of the jump. A high-definition video camera was used to record the landing of each jumper, and the landing point of the projected center of mass was determined by using photogrammetry, accurate to within 5 cm. The actual landing distances measured in the field were compared to predicted landing distances by using ordinary ballistic equations. A total of 280 jumps was observed on the two features: 105 on skis and 175 on snowboards. The correlation coefficients between the square of the takeoff speed and the landing distance for the smaller and larger jumps were 0.75 (R2=0.56) and 0.41 (R2=0.16), respectively. The measured landing distances differed significantly from those predicted by models using the ballistic equations of motion. The average landing distance beyond the knuckle was 2.4 m on the smaller jump and 2.1 m on the larger jump. For both features, skier and snowboarder jumpers did not differ in average landing distance.

References

1.
Rice
,
J.
, personal communication, Jan. 12,
2010
.
2.
National Ski Areas Association
, Smart Style Terrain Park Guide,
2008
.
3.
Willick
,
S. E.
,
Porucznik
,
C. A.
,
Plante
,
D. M.
,
Thiese
,
M. S.
, and
Joy
,
E. A.
, “
Mechanisms and External Causes of Injuries Among Patients at a Ski and Snowboard Resort Clinic
,”
Med. Sci. Sports Exercise
 0195-9131, Vol.
41
(
5
),
2009
, pp.
521
522
.
4.
Ackery
,
A.
, “
Snowboarding
,”
Catastrophic Injuries in Sport and Recreation: Causes and Prevention—A Canadian Study
,
C.
Tator
, Ed.,
University of Toronto Press
,
Toronto, Canada
,
2008
, Chap. 24, pp.
333
341
.
5.
Hubbard
,
M.
, “
Safer Ski Jump Landing Surface Design Limits Normal Velocity at Impact
,”
Skiing Trauma and Safety, 17th Volume, ASTM STP 1510
,
R. J.
Johnson
,
J. E.
Shealy
, and
M.
Langren
, Eds.,
ASTM International
,
West Conshohocken, PA
,
2009
, Vol.
17
.
6.
McNeil
,
J. A.
and
McNeil
,
J. B.
, “
Dynamical Analysis of Winter Terrain Park Jumps
,”
Sports Eng.
 1369-7072, Vol.
11
(
3
),
2009
, pp.
159
164
. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12283-009-0013-8
7.
Shealy
,
J. E.
and
Stone
,
F.
, “
Tabletop Jumping: Engineering Analysis of Trajectory and Landing Impact
,”
J. ASTM Int.
 1546-962X, Vol.
5
(
6
),
2008
. https://doi.org/10.1520/JAI101551
8.
Böhm
,
H.
and
Senner
,
V.
, “
Safety in Big Jumps: Relationship Between Landing Shape and Impact Energy Determined by Computer Simulation
,”
Skiing Trauma and Safety, 17th Volume, ASTM STP 1510
,
R. J.
Johnson
,
J. E.
Shealy
, and
M.
Langren
, Eds.,
ASTM International
,
West Conshohocken, PA
,
2009
. https://doi.org/10.1520/STP47479S
This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.