Treadmill gradient

MalcolmJLaw

TLDR : activity VO2max estimation both ignores elevation and reports implausible figures

I did 5.9km on a treadmill set to 4% gradient. My Garmin watch had no method of entering the treadmill gradient so it initially came through the system as flat and runanalyze gave the activity a VO2max estimate of 50.51.

So I manually edited the activity to put in 5.9km * 0.04 = 236m of elevation. (I initially did this in Garmin Connect, but this did not appear to update through to Runanalyze so I also edited the activity in Runanalze)

To my surprise the estimated VO2max did not change!

Here is your sheet giving the calculations - it correctly contains the reported elevation but doesn't change the estimate as a result.

I additionally suggest that the influence "+0.47km" at the bottom of the page greatly underestimates the influence of 236m of elevation. The ACSM running equation is 0.2S + 0.9SG + 3.5 where S is speed and G is grade. So each vertical metre is equivalent in the calculation to 4.5 horizontal metres. I think your influence should be more like 4.5*236m = 1.062km.

Laufhannes

You can adjust the effect of each vertical meter in your settings at https://runalyze.com/settings?fieldset=vo2max

You'll need to recalculate activity values afterwards. It's also possible that a manual change of ascent/descent does not trigger this recalculation automatically. Please try to recalculate activity values for that single activity first.

MalcolmJLaw

Recalculating activity values did the trick thanks.
On the matter of the effect of vertical metres - the setting field doesn't accept 4.5, it requires integer values. That small issue apart, what is your justification for defaulting to the value of 2 up, -1 down?
You are normally very good at evidencing your parameter choices (and giving us references) and this field should be no exception - the correct value is not a matter of opinion where it makes sense for it to be user configurable but of human running physiology.