Next Article in Journal
Real-Time Ozone Sensor Based on Selective Oxidation of Methylene Blue in Mesoporous Silica Films
Previous Article in Journal
A Force-Sensor-Based Method to Eliminate Deformation of Large Crankshafts during Measurements of Their Geometric Condition
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Use of Data from the Parkinson’s KinetiGraph to Identify Potential Candidates for Device Assisted Therapies
Article Menu

Export Article

Open AccessArticle

Closing the Wearable Gap—Part II: Sensor Orientation and Placement for Foot and Ankle Joint Kinematic Measurements

1
Electrical and Computer Engineering, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS 39762, USA
2
Industrial and Systems Engineering, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS 39762, USA
3
Kinesiology, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS 39762, USA
4
Agricultural and Biological Engineering, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS 39762, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sensors 2019, 19(16), 3509; https://doi.org/10.3390/s19163509
Received: 9 July 2019 / Revised: 4 August 2019 / Accepted: 5 August 2019 / Published: 10 August 2019
  |  
PDF [3005 KB, uploaded 10 August 2019]
  |  

Abstract

The linearity of soft robotic sensors (SRS) was recently validated for movement angle assessment using a rigid body structure that accurately depicted critical movements of the foot–ankle complex. The purpose of this study was to continue the validation of SRS for joint angle movement capture on 10 participants (five male and five female) performing ankle movements in a non-weight bearing, high-seated, sitting position. The four basic ankle movements—plantar flexion (PF), dorsiflexion (DF), inversion (INV), and eversion (EVR)—were assessed individually in order to select good placement and orientation configurations (POCs) for four SRS positioned to capture each movement type. PF, INV, and EVR each had three POCs identified based on bony landmarks of the foot and ankle while the DF location was only tested for one POC. Each participant wore a specialized compression sock where the SRS could be consistently tested from all POCs for each participant. The movement data collected from each sensor was then compared against 3D motion capture data. R-squared and root-mean-squared error averages were used to assess relative and absolute measures of fit to motion capture output. Participant robustness, opposing movements, and gender were also used to identify good SRS POC placement for foot–ankle movement capture. View Full-Text
Keywords: soft robotic sensors; wearables; athletic training; ankle complex; plantar flexion; dorsiflexion; inversion; eversion; sensor placement; kinematic soft robotic sensors; wearables; athletic training; ankle complex; plantar flexion; dorsiflexion; inversion; eversion; sensor placement; kinematic
Figures

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited (CC BY 4.0).
SciFeed

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Saucier, D.; Luczak, T.; Nguyen, P.; Davarzani, S.; Peranich, P.; Ball, J.E.; Burch, R.F., V; Smith, B.K.; Chander, H.; Knight, A.; Prabhu, R.K. Closing the Wearable Gap—Part II: Sensor Orientation and Placement for Foot and Ankle Joint Kinematic Measurements. Sensors 2019, 19, 3509.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Sensors EISSN 1424-8220 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top