See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/328252741

The Future of Pole Vaulting

Technical Report · November 2017

CITATIONS READS
0 901

4 authors, including:

Brandon Winn
Georgia Gwinnett College
6 PUBLICATIONS   0 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Brandon Winn on 12 October 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

The Future of Pole Vaulting
A brief overview of materials used in pole vault poles through history,
current material selection, and a future material design proposal for pole
vault poles.

Gloria Bowen, Emma Blume, Katie Killeen, Brandon Winn

Introduction

Pole vaulting has long been recognized as a dangerous sport, citing 32 catastrophic

injuries in a 16 year period [1]. A catastrophic injury is one in which the athlete either became

severely disabled or died as a result of an accident in pole vaulting. While this incidence may

seem low, the lack of popularity for the sport must also be considered. While some safety

measures have been taken in securing the field of play, regulations and safety feature in regards

to the pole itself are virtually nonexistent. A focus on safety indications on the pole vault pole

could decrease the incidence of catastrophic injuries sustained by athletes as a result of

mechanical failure of the pole. For this reason, the future oriented design proposal focuses on

indicating mechanical damage of the pole.

History

The concept of pole vaulting has existed for thousands of years. Some of the first

speculations of documented pole vaulting can be found in the hieroglyphics of Ancient Egypt

dating back to 2686 BCE [2]. Images on vases depict men with long shafts surmounting small

obstacles. Past this speculation, the first officially documented record of a pole vaulting

competition was established in 1820 BCE at the Tailteann Games in Ireland. The technique of

vaulting was used in Ireland at the time by farmers attempting to cross rivers without getting wet.

This technique evolved into a sport just prior to this first recorded competition.

Crossing the threshold into the anno Domini, pole vaulting finds it way into a classic

piece of literature in 8 AD. Ovid’s Metamorphoses, book 2, lines 785-786 describe the Greek

goddess, Minerva, pole vaulting into the heavens

1
 “Minerva said no more, but with the spear as lever,

Spurning the loathsome ground, took off for the heavens”

Ovid, Metamorphoses [2]

From the collapse of the Roman Empire to the sixteenth century, history recedes on the

development of pole vaulting. This is unsurprising given the rise of the Dark Ages. Riddled with

plague and religious oppression, records of most recreational activities disappeared for centuries.

Pole vaulting launches itself back into liturgical relevance in the 1792 with the publishing of

GutsMuths’ book of pole vault regulations and records. GutsMuths, commonly recognized as the

father of modern pole vaulting, described the evolved sport in astounding detail. It can be seen

that during the Dark Ages in Germany, the sport revolutionized to have a vertical objective. The

goal now was to climb an unfixed, upright pole as high as possible, giving rise to the athletes

being called “climbers”. Climbers of this period were recorded at reaching up 8 feet on wooden

poles.

This vertical transition did not take hold until the 1860s in England when the sport was

added to field competitions. The British added the standards holding a bar in place as a goal to

cross over when climbing the pole. This addition required more skilled athletes and more

advanced techniques. Wooden poles, however, were still in use as the sport found its way to

America in the late 1800s. Notably, the maximum height ever attained on a wooden pole was

3.62 meters [3]. This height was met by an American pole vaulter in 1896, the year men’s pole

vaulting was established as an Olympic sport [3].

2
 The arrival of the sport in Eastern Asia in the early 1900s brought the first material

revolution to the sport. Given its abundance in the area and flexibility, bamboo became a popular

material choice for poles [4]. The maximum height on a bamboo pole was recorded at 4.77

meters in 1904 [3]. Aluminum saw a brief moment of fame in the 1950s when it was selected to

be used in a more modern pole design. Due to its rigidity however, aluminum was a failed

material experiment which died out quickly. The maximum height achieved on a aluminum pole

was 4.56 meters, which was less than the record for bamboo [5].

Bamboo maintained its crown as the optimal pole material until the introduction of glass

fiber in the 1960s. Fiber glass poles are still used and in production today and have changed

sparsely since this transition period. Olympic pole vaulting for men has seen this full evolution

from wood to glass fiber poles, however the women’s perspective of the sport is much narrower.

Women’s pole vaulting did not join the Olympic stage until the 2000 Olympic in Sydney,

Australia [3]. This was over 100 years after the men’s event was added.

The current pole vault world record of 6.16 meters was achieved on a glass fiber pole by

Renaud Lavillenie in 2014 [5, 6]. From these height evolutions, a distinct trend can be seen; the

material of the pole greatly impacts the ability of the athlete to surmount greater heights. With

the evolution of the pole materials came far greater heights.

Rules & Regulations

Of all the field events, pole vault is often considered one of the most technically

challenging [7]. The aim of pole vaulting is to clear the highest possible height using the pole as

a tool. The technique involves running at a high speed down a runway and planting the pole in a

3
metal planting box located centrally at the base of the uprights. This is known as the take-off

phase. The athlete bends the pole backwards, and by allowing it to recoil it then ‘vaults’ the

athlete into the air. The athlete must clear the crossbar, which is supported by two rigid uprights,

without knocking it. An example of the set-up for the pole vault event can be seen in Figure 1.

Figure 1. The setup of the pole vault event, with the bar, standards, pit, and box (runway not shown here) [12].

The vaulters have a maximum of three trials at each height. Vaulters are disqualified after

three consecutive failures, regardless of the height. A vaulter an also opt to ‘pass’ a given height

at any stage, allowing them to continue to the next height. However, when it comes to placing in

the competition, only their cleared heights will count. It should also be noted that if a vaulter

fails their first attempt at a height and they decide to pass, they will only have two attempts at the

subsequent height [8].

A foul is committed if the crossbar is displaced, either by the athlete themselves or by a

falling pole, or if the vaulter fails to clear the crossbar. Failing to complete a trial within the

allotted time is counted as a foul. This time is usually two minutes, but can be longer or shorter

depending on the stage of the competition and the number of athletes competing. A foul is also

committed if the vaulters bottom hand crosses over their top hand, or if their top hand moves up

4
the pole during the vault. This is a technique known as ‘climbing the pole’, which was banned

from competition in 1889 [2].

The materials used in a pole vault pole are surprisingly not regulated. Poles range in

length depending on the user. This range is generally from 10 feet up to 17 feet in length.

However, the most important property of a pole and the most tightly regulated, is the weight

rating. The weight rating of a pole indicates what weight an athlete must be at or, preferably,

below to use the pole. A stiffer pole will have a higher weight rating than a more flexible pole.

To determine a pole’s weight rating, the manufacturer must first measure its flex number [7].

The standardised method of measuring flex is to support the pole at both ends and hang a 50lb

weight from the centre. The displacement of the of the centre of the pole is measured, flex is

calculated, and then the weight rating [7]. The test setup can be seen in Figure 2.

Figure 2. The setup for the flex test for weight rating for pole vault poles [7].

The athlete’s grip while vaulting is significant too. If they place their top hand lower

down the pole, this will increase the pole’s stiffness, therefore increasing its weight rating. This

change can be difficult to calculate as poles are hollow and tapered, meaning the moment of

inertia changes along its length. However, a general rule followed by many vaulters is that for

every 6 inches the grip is lowered, add 10 lbs to the weight rating [9].

The athlete’s success is based on many factors, including their skill and choice of pole,

but ultimately, on the energy transferred into the pole by the vaulter, which depends on their

5
 1
mass and weight. This can be related by the equation 𝐸 = 2 𝑚𝑣 2 . This kinetic energy is then

transferred as potential energy in the pole, which causes the pole to recoil [7]. As the velocity

component is squared, it is the most important element of the equation. Having a lighter pole

allows the vaulter to run faster, therefore the materials the pole is made from should ideally be

low density. This is why safety is a major factor, as vaulters want to use lighter poles to increase

running speed, however this can often compromise strength and stiffness, leading to failure. The

nature of the sport means pole failure is very dangerous, so this is what we are striving to

prevent.

Modern Design and Manufacturing

Materials science and engineering has allowed for the modern pole vault pole to be

designed with both performance and safety in mind. Because there are no rules governing the

material that the pole is made of, engineers and manufacturers have been able to be creative in

the design of the pole to allow vaulters to reach greater heights. There are several considerations

that need to be taken into account when designing the pole. These include elastic strength,

stiffness, weight, cost and fatigue resistance. The main function of a pole vaulter’s pole is to

store kinetic energy when bent and return that energy when straightened in order to allow the

vaulter to clear a certain height. The ability of the pole to store energy and return it is called

strain energy storage capacity, and this value should be as high as possible [10]. Care must be

taken when designing the pole because when it bends to such a high degree, the center is

simultaneously experiencing a great amount of tension on one side and a great amount of

compression on the other [11]. Elastic strength is important because it allows the pole to deform

and go through this tension and compression without plastically deforming, which could lead to

6
cracking and eventually failure [10]. Stiffness is also an important consideration because if the

material does not have some rigidity, it will flap around while the vaulter is running, which could

prevent the pole from planting well when it is time for the vaulter to perform the vault [9]. The

weight of the pole could affect the ability of the vaulter to run with it, and the one of the design

goals is to reduce weight to allow for faster sprinting with the pole [12]. Cost is another factor

that should be taken into consideration because many programs do not have enough funding to

spend thousands of dollars on new pole vault poles every season. Finally, fatigue resistance

should be taken into account since the pole is constantly being bent [7]. The pole should be able

to withstand numerous bends without breaking or deforming [7]. When designing a pole

vaulter’s pole, the weight and size of the pole vaulter should be taken into account because if the

pole is too light, the pole could break under the weight of the pole vaulter and if the pole is too

small in diameter, the pole vaulter will not be able to properly grip the pole [12]. Conversely, if

the pole is too heavy the pole vaulter will have trouble sprinting with the pole and if the pole is

too large in diameter, the pole vaulter will not be able to grip the pole properly [12]. Thus a wide

variety of pole vaulting poles are available on the market in order to fit the needs of the wide

variety of pole vaulters out there.

Of the materials on the market, the one class that best fits the performance requirements

of having high elastic strength/stiffness as well as being lightweight is a class of materials called

fiber-reinforced polymers. The fibers, which in the case of pole vaulting poles are often made of

glass or carbon, give the material its strength and stiffness, while the resin, often a thermoset like

an epoxy, transfers the load to the fibers and allows for the material to be more flexible and

lightweight. A summary of the properties of these materials can be seen in Figure 3.

7
 Figure 3a. Ashby plot comparing major classes of materials in terms of flexural strength and flexural modulus
(stiffness). As stated before, the material the pole is made of should be high strength with moderate stiffness.

Figure 3b. Ashby plot comparing major classes of materials in terms of flexural strength and density (also known as
specific strength). As stated before, the material the pole is made of should have a high strength to weight ratio,
meaning a high strength with a low to moderate density.

8
 Figure 3c. Ashby plot comparing major classes of materials in terms of flexural strength and fatigue strength. As
stated before, the material the pole is made of should have a high strength, as well as be fatigue resistant.

The current structure of pole vaulting poles involves a hollow tube made of various layers of

wrapped fiber-glass/epoxy composite material, as seen in Figure 4 [12]. Some pole

manufacturers opt to add a carbon fiber/epoxy outer layer to increase the pole’s stiffness;

however, some manufacturers choose to leave out the carbon fiber/epoxy composite because

carbon fibers have a high stiffness, but can be very brittle and prone to fracture [10, 12]. This is

the reason that there are very few poles on the market that are made entirely of carbon

fiber/epoxy composite [10].

Figure 4. An example of the layered structure of modern pole vault poles [12].

9
 In order to create the pole vaulter’s pole, a process similar to filament winding is used.

Glass fibers are pre-impregnated with epoxy resin and formed into flat sheets. Several sheets are

cut into rectangular and trapezoidal pieces and set aside, while the rest of the sheets are cut into

strips and wound around a roll. The rolled strips are then wound around a mandrel with one layer

wound in one direction and the second layer wound in the other direction to form a crisscross

pattern. After the strips have been wound, the mandrel is placed on a table and the rectangular

piece is heated and wrapped around the mandrel. Finally, the trapezoidal piece is added in a

similar way, in order to allow for the preferential bending of the pole in the middle. Additionally

some poles have a carbon fiber/epoxy sheet wrapped around the outside to provide additional

stiffness to the pole. After all the layers have been wound or wrapped around the mandrel, the

mandrel is placed in an oven to cure the epoxy resin. After curing, the mandrel is removed,

leaving behind a hollow pole, which is then stress-tested to make sure that there are no cracks or

defects. If a pole passes the stress test, it is then wrapped with tape, capped at the top, a rubber

foot is added to the bottom, and the manufacturer’s logo is placed on the pole. After all these

steps are completed, the pole is ready for packaging and shipping to the retailer [13].

Problem

Mechanical failure of pole vault poles is common [14]. Breaking of a pole at any point

during a vault can result in injuries; minor or serious. Recent examples of injuries on the main

stage of professional pole vaulting include Cuban athlete Lazaro Borges in the 2012 Olympics

and Sandi Morris on the 2016 Women’s Pole Vault Finals [15, 16]. While both these athletes

walked away with minor injuries, not all athletes are so lucky.

10
 Take for example, Joe Silvers, a former pole vaulter for Idaho State University. Silvers

was warming up for a competition in 2008 when his pole snapped into 3 pieces [7, 17, 18]. The

middle section of the break was launched towards his head. Silvers was knocked unconscious as

the section of pole cracked his skull resulting in massive brain hemorrhaging. Silvers spent

nearly a week in the intensive care and spent months rehabilitating from his injuries. The injury

Silvers sustained speaks magnitudes to the importance of preventing pole breaks.

Several factors lead to the commonality of pole breaks in pole vaulting. The most

common is fatigue failure of the material [19]. When a pole is overloaded, meaning the athletes

is above the recommended weight for the pole, or when a pole is overused, cracks begin to form

in the resin layer of the material. If the pole continues to be used, these cracks begin to propagate

until they reach a critical point. At this point, the remaining material fails under the weight of the

vaulter and the pole breaks. Other scenarios that can lead to pole breaks include poles being run

over during transport, athletes stepping on poles with spiked shoes, and poles flying out of

vaulters hands and striking objects environment. Consideration should be taken that many of

these accidents can happen unbeknownst to an athlete or coach.

Measures are taken by both athletes and coaches in preventing pole breaks and associated

injuries [18]. Currently, coaches rely on visual inspection of poles heavily. Beyond this, coaches

attempt to keep track of how many cycles a pole has endured. They keep different sets of

practice poles and competition poles if their program can afford it. Finally, coaches and athletes

try to adhere to the weight recommendations for a pole to avoid overloading.

Each of these methods of pole break prevention has its own challenges. First, the small

propagating cracks in the resin layer are hardly ever visible [14]. If a crack has propagated to the

point of being visible on the pole, the vaulter is fortunate that it has not already broken. Second,

11
it is tedious and challenging to track the cycle usage of a pole [18]. Beyond this fact, there is no

set threshold on how many cycles is too many cycles. Most coaches rely on their intuition from

years of experience to decide when to retire a pole. Finally, some athletes willingly risk

overloading a pole by selecting a pole outside their weight range. Else, some athletes don’t track

their weight gain well enough to know if they have outgrown a pole they are using [19]. In either

case, the athlete is risking breaking a pole.

The conclusion of this is that there is no clear indication of when a pole vault pole is

structurally damaged and at risk to break.

Future Design

In order to give a clear indication of when a pole has sustained structural damage and is

at risk to break, the invisible cracks in the material must be made visible. The concept is that by

highlighting the small cracks in the pole, athletes and coaches will be able to clearly see the

extent of damage the pole has acquired. Once this is known, poles can be retired before they

break during use. It is believed that this will reduce minor and major injuries sustained by

vaulters of any level of the sport.

The conceptual design features a solution of ethyl phenyl acetate (EPA) containing 2’,7’-

dichlorofluorescein (DCF) indicator filled microcapsules. This solution is referred to here

forward as DCF/EPA. The DCF indicator reacts with epoxy to turn bright red [20]. Li has

demonstrated that DCF/EPA is the best known method of autonomous damage detection in

materials.

The way the conceptual design works is that as a small crack forms in the pole, is splits

open the microcapsules in its path releasing DCF/EPA. The EPA solution carries the DCF out of

12
the microcapsule and into the surrounding epoxy material of the pole. Once DCF has contacted

the epoxy, a reaction occurs and the area appears red. An illustration of this process is shown in

Figure 5. At a 15 wt% of DCF/EPA, the red crack is clearly visible to the eye within the

surrounding material as is shown in Figure 6.

Figure 5. Li illustration of DCF/EPA for autonomous damage detection [20].

Figure 6. Li demonstration of DCF/EPA for autonomous damage detection [20].

13
 The 15 wt% DCF/EPA solution would be coated over the traditional pole vault pole

during manufacturing. Before the mandrel is placed in an oven to cure the epoxy resin, one

additional layer of DCF/EPA would be applied. The curing process would then continue as

normal and the finished product would appear identical. Less research has been provided on the

effects the DCF/EPA layer might have on material properties, but from Li’s study, we can

predict that minimal changes in the properties of the pole would take place [20].

The use of DCF/EPA has been heavily researched by others in the field of autonomous

damage detection and self-healing polymers. Current self-healing polymer technology is

inadequate to be used in this design. This is mainly due to the conditions at which the polymer

will heal. Healing of the most applicable agent glycidyl methacrylate (GMA) with a modified

aliphatic polyamine latent curing agent (EH-4360S) in an epoxy matrix, would require the 20

pole to be heated to 120oC for 48 hours to return to 90% material integrity [21-23]. While this is

not feasible today, self-healing polymers could be on the horizon for pole vault.

Consumer Feedback

While the design is still purely conceptual due to restraints in prototyping, feedback was

gathered from a collection of coaches and athletes. If you recall Joe Silvers from the earlier story

of his massive injuries resulting from a pole break, Silvers is now the men’s and women’s pole

vault coach at the University of North Dakota. Silvers was interviewed both about the problem of

pole breaking in the sport and about the value of the conceptual design proposed [18]. Silvers

stated that the design concept is “genius” and that he would be excited to see it come to fruition.

Based on his own history, Silvers takes pole breaking very seriously and spend hours every

season inspecting his athletes’ poles for cracks. He said this concept would greatly reduce this

14
time and would moreover increase his confidence in the pole performing its job in keeping his

athletes safe.

Matt Harris, a former pole vaulter at the University of North Dakota and the university's

new assistant pole vault coach also offered some thoughts on the design [24]. Harris recalled

breaking a few poles in his pole vaulting career and said that while his injuries were minor,

breaking poles caused him substantial psychological stress. Harris stated that “feeling a pole snap

under you when you’re several feet in the air is terrifying regardless of landing safely. It

becomes difficult to vault with confidence the next time”. Harris said that having our design in

place of the traditional poles would boost his confidence by making him feel safer on the pole.

Conclusion

Pole breaks in the sport of pole vaulting are common and terrifying for athletes, coaches,

and spectators alike. Current break prevention methods are not adequate to reduce the instances

of their occurrences. A new method of crack detection would allow for a reduce in the number of

pole breaks suffered by vaulters. Using a DCF/EPA solution in microcapsules has been

demonstrated as a reliable autonomous damage detection method. A 15 wt% DCF/EPA coating

over the traditional pole vault pole will highlight cracks bright red allowing coaches to retire

poles when appropriate. Thus, the number of pole breaks is expected to be greatly reduced

because of this future design in the field of pole vaulting.

15
Citations

1. Boden BP. Catastrophic pole vaulting injuries increased during past decade. Am J
Sports Med. 2012;40:1488-1494.
2. Johnson, J., VerSteeg, R., & Kring, R. (2007). Illustrated history of the pole vault.
Norwich, CT: S.n.
3. Quercetani, R. (1964). A world history of track and field athletics, 1864-1964. London:
Oxford University Press.
4. Ancient Pole Vaulting. (2012, August 12). Vaulter Magazine.
5. Lawson, G. (1997). World record breakers in track & field athletics. Human Kinetics.
6. Jacoby, E. (2009). Winning jumps and pole vault. Human Kinetics.
7. Watry, J.P. The Pole Vaulter’s Pole: An Engineer’s Perspective. Retrieved from
http://www.decamouse.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/engviewpvpole.pdf
8. Blackburn, J. C. (2016). USATF 2016 Competition Rules. Indianapolis, IN: USA Track &
Field.
9. M. Mesnard et al.,(2007). An Essential Performance Factor in Pole Vaulting. C. R.
Mecanique 335.
10. Mallick, P.K. (2008) Fiber-Reinforced Composites: Materials, Manufacturing, and
Design. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis Group.
11. Strong, A.B. (2008) Fundamentals of Composites Manufacturing: Materials, Methods,
and Applications. Dearborn, MI: Society of Manufacturing Engineers.
12. McCormick, M. (2010, September). Soaring to New Heights: The Evolution of Pole
Vaulting and Pole Materials. Illumin (USC). Retrieved from
http://illumin.usc.edu/143/soaring-to-new-heights-the-evolution-of-pole-vaulting-and-
pole-materials/fullView/.
13. [TRR56]. (2010, September 29). How It's Made Vaulting Poles. [Video File]. Retrieved
from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dTkG3EDgzvU.
14. Hubbard, M (1980) Dynamics of the Pole Vault. Journal of Biomechanics
15. Watson, L. (2012, August 09). Cuban pole vaulter who had a cracking time at the
Olympics - and left crowd gasping in horror as he plunged to earth. Retrieved April 13,
2017, from http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2185879/Crowd-gasps-horror-
Cuban-pole-vaulters-pole-snaps-Olympic-Stadium.html
16. Spikes: Sandi Morris' Pole Vault Dream | Spikes. (2016, September 09). Retrieved April
23, 2017, from https://spikes.iaaf.org/post/sandi-morris-pole-vault-dream-spikes
17. Scott, K. (2008, February 20). Pole break led to serious injury for Joe Silvers last year.
Retrieved March 31, 2017, from
http://www.polevaultpower.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=14063
18. Silvers, J (2017, March 26) Phone interview.
19. Colling, T (2017, March 26) Interview.
20. Li, W., Matthews, C. C., Yang, K., Odarczenko, M. T., White, S. R., & Sottos, N. R.

16
 (2016). Autonomous indication of mechanical damage in polymeric coatings. Advanced
Materials.
21. Guo, Y. K., Chen, L., Xu, D. G., Zhong, J. R., Yue, G. Z., Astruc, D., ... & Zhao, P. X.
(2016). A dual functional epoxy material with autonomous damage indication and self-
healing. RSC Advances, 6(69), 65067-65071.
22. Guo, Y., Zhao, P., Wang, X., Xu, D., Zhong, J., Yue, G., & Shuai, M. (2017). Damage
indication of 2′, 7′-dichlorofluorescein for epoxy polymer and the effect of water on its
damage indicating ability. e-Polymers, 17(1), 57-64.
23. Stoddart, A. (2016). Polymers: colour in the cracks. Nature Reviews Materials, 1, 16004.
24. Harris, M (2017, April 6) Phone interview.

17

View publication stats