Next Article in Journal
Transient Contact Opening Forces in a MEMS Switch Using Au/MWCNT Composite
Previous Article in Journal
Evaluation of Wirelessly Transmitted Video Quality Using a Modular Fuzzy Logic System
Open AccessArticle

Validation of Different Filters for Center of Pressure Measurements by a Cross-Section Study

1
University Center for Orthopedic and Trauma Surgery, Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, 01307 Dresden, Germany
2
Institute of Electrical Systems and Energy Logistics, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Electrical and Energy Systems, Brandenburg University of Technology Cottbus-Senftenberg, 01968 Senftenberg, Germany
3
SLG Prüf- und Zertifizierungs GmbH, Medical Devices and Laser Safety, 09232 Hartmannsdorf, Germany
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Technologies 2019, 7(4), 68; https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies7040068
Received: 26 July 2019 / Revised: 17 September 2019 / Accepted: 17 September 2019 / Published: 20 September 2019
The measurement of the center of pressure (CoP) is one of the most frequently used quantitative methods for quantifying postural performance. Due to the complexity and the high biological variability of the postural control loop, a large number of different methods and parameters have been established to describe the CoP process. Furthermore, the methodological conditions such as the foot position, visual condition, sampling duration, and the data processing also have a relevant influence on the measurement results. In addition, there are various methods for recording the pressure curve, which differ in particular with regard to the filters used, the frequencies, and measurement times. The aim of the present study was the methodical comparison between different digital filters, measurement frequencies and times, and their effects on the CoP process based on a healthy reference group. The data acquisition was done with LabVIEW and the data storage was organized in a subject oriented data structure. Based on the presented results it could be seen that with a different dominant frequency in the spectrum of the group of test persons, certain filter types are required for the processing of CoP data. In the sampling range from 300 Hz to 1 kHz in the bipedal stand and 600 Hz to 1 kHz in the monopedal stand, the choice of measurement frequency had no influence on the filter result. View Full-Text
Keywords: CoP; force plate; AMTI; Kistler; center of pressure; postural control; balance; filter; Butterworth; sampling duration effect CoP; force plate; AMTI; Kistler; center of pressure; postural control; balance; filter; Butterworth; sampling duration effect
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Koltermann, J.J.; Gerber, M.; Beck, H.; Beck, M. Validation of Different Filters for Center of Pressure Measurements by a Cross-Section Study. Technologies 2019, 7, 68.

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.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop