不同动作捕捉技术在跑步分析中的有效性研究

Frank J. Wouda, M. Giuberti, G. Bellusci, Erik Maartens, J. Reenalda, B. Beijnum, P. Veltink
{"title":"不同动作捕捉技术在跑步分析中的有效性研究","authors":"Frank J. Wouda, M. Giuberti, G. Bellusci, Erik Maartens, J. Reenalda, B. Beijnum, P. Veltink","doi":"10.1109/BIOROB.2018.8487210","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"An increasing diversity of available motion capture technologies allows for measurement of human kinematics in various environments. However, little is known about the differences in quality of measured kinematics by such technologies. Therefore, this work presents a comparison between three motion capture approaches, based on inertial-magnetic measurement units (processed with Xsens MVN Analyze) and optical markers (processed using Plug-In Gait and OpenSim Gait2392). It was chosen to evaluate the different motion capture approaches in running, as such kinematics are preferably measured in the natural running environment and involve challenging dynamics. An evaluation was done using data of 8 subjects running on a treadmill at three different speeds, namely 10, 12 and 14 kmlh. The sagittal plane results show excellent correlation $(\\rho > \\pmb{0.96})$ and RMSDs are smaller than 5 degrees for 6 out of the 8 subjects. However, results in the frontal and transversal planes were less correlated between the different motion capture approaches. This shows that sagittal kinematics can be measured consistently using any of the three analyzed motion capture approaches, but ambiguities exist in the analysis of frontal and transversal planes.","PeriodicalId":382522,"journal":{"name":"2018 7th IEEE International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics (Biorob)","volume":"110 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On the Validity of Different Motion Capture Technologies for the Analysis of Running\",\"authors\":\"Frank J. Wouda, M. Giuberti, G. Bellusci, Erik Maartens, J. Reenalda, B. Beijnum, P. Veltink\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/BIOROB.2018.8487210\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"An increasing diversity of available motion capture technologies allows for measurement of human kinematics in various environments. However, little is known about the differences in quality of measured kinematics by such technologies. Therefore, this work presents a comparison between three motion capture approaches, based on inertial-magnetic measurement units (processed with Xsens MVN Analyze) and optical markers (processed using Plug-In Gait and OpenSim Gait2392). It was chosen to evaluate the different motion capture approaches in running, as such kinematics are preferably measured in the natural running environment and involve challenging dynamics. An evaluation was done using data of 8 subjects running on a treadmill at three different speeds, namely 10, 12 and 14 kmlh. The sagittal plane results show excellent correlation $(\\\\rho > \\\\pmb{0.96})$ and RMSDs are smaller than 5 degrees for 6 out of the 8 subjects. However, results in the frontal and transversal planes were less correlated between the different motion capture approaches. This shows that sagittal kinematics can be measured consistently using any of the three analyzed motion capture approaches, but ambiguities exist in the analysis of frontal and transversal planes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":382522,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2018 7th IEEE International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics (Biorob)\",\"volume\":\"110 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"11\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2018 7th IEEE International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics (Biorob)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/BIOROB.2018.8487210\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2018 7th IEEE International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics (Biorob)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/BIOROB.2018.8487210","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

摘要

越来越多的可用动作捕捉技术允许在各种环境中测量人体运动学。然而,人们对这些技术在测量运动学质量上的差异知之甚少。因此,这项工作提出了三种运动捕捉方法的比较,基于惯性磁测量单元(用Xsens MVN Analyze处理)和光学标记(使用Plug-In步态和OpenSim Gait2392处理)。选择它是为了评估不同的运动捕捉方法在运行中,因为这样的运动学最好是在自然运行环境中测量,并涉及具有挑战性的动力学。对8名受试者在跑步机上以10、12、14 km / h三种不同速度跑步的数据进行评估。矢状面结果显示良好的相关性$(\rho > \pmb{0.96})$和rmsd小于5度的8名受试者中有6名。然而,在不同的动作捕捉方法之间,正面和横向平面的结果相关性较小。这表明,矢状面运动学可以使用三种分析的运动捕捉方法中的任何一种一致地测量,但在正面和横断面的分析中存在歧义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
On the Validity of Different Motion Capture Technologies for the Analysis of Running
An increasing diversity of available motion capture technologies allows for measurement of human kinematics in various environments. However, little is known about the differences in quality of measured kinematics by such technologies. Therefore, this work presents a comparison between three motion capture approaches, based on inertial-magnetic measurement units (processed with Xsens MVN Analyze) and optical markers (processed using Plug-In Gait and OpenSim Gait2392). It was chosen to evaluate the different motion capture approaches in running, as such kinematics are preferably measured in the natural running environment and involve challenging dynamics. An evaluation was done using data of 8 subjects running on a treadmill at three different speeds, namely 10, 12 and 14 kmlh. The sagittal plane results show excellent correlation $(\rho > \pmb{0.96})$ and RMSDs are smaller than 5 degrees for 6 out of the 8 subjects. However, results in the frontal and transversal planes were less correlated between the different motion capture approaches. This shows that sagittal kinematics can be measured consistently using any of the three analyzed motion capture approaches, but ambiguities exist in the analysis of frontal and transversal planes.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Insect-Inspired Body Size Learning Model on a Humanoid Robot Yaw Postural Perturbation Through Robotic Platform: Aging Effects on Muscle Synergies Optimization-Based Analysis of a Cartwheel Quantifying Human Autonomy Recovery During Ankle Robot-Assisted Reversal of Foot Drop After Stroke ExoBoot, a Soft Inflatable Robotic Boot to Assist Ankle During Walking: Design, Characterization and Preliminary Tests
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1