This study sought to determine the effect of inaccuracies in body segment parameters and modeling assumptions on the estimate of antero-posterior center of mass (COM) trajectory. Four different methods, one based on segmental kinematics, and three methods based on kinetic recordings were compared via simulation. Kinematic patterns (quiet stance, ankle-related sway, hip-ankle-related sway, sit-up and sit-up-sit-down) were tested with a 2D four-link model of the body and the ground reaction force vector was obtained by inverse dynamics. Errors in the estimation of body segment parameters were simulated by applying a ±10% variation to one or more parameters at a time. These errors propagated differently to the COM estimated location between methods, between parameters within the same method, and between tasks. The kinematics-based method was the most sensitive to body segment parameters, with special regards to segment lengths and head-arms-trunk parameters. Root mean square error between estimated and simulated COM location reached 19mm in balance-related tasks and 38.3mm in sit-up-sit-down. The kinetics-based methods were largely less sensitive to inaccuracies in body segment parameters. In particular, the technique proposed by Zatsiorsky and King (J. Biomech. 31 (1998) 161), was completely insensitive to segment parameters. On the other hand the kinetics-based methods showed an intrinsic estimation error, due to the underlying model assumptions. The methods based on the double integration of horizontal force had better outcomes with tasks challenging such assumptions, with a maximal error in COM location of 15mm in the sit-up-sit-down. The method proposed by Shimba (J. Biomech. 17 (1984) 53) showed the best trade-off between sensitivity to body segment parameters and estimation performances given the ideal test conditions. © 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Influence of body segment parameters and modeling assumptions on the estimate of center of mass trajectory

Lenzi D.;Cappello A.;Chiari L.
2003

Abstract

This study sought to determine the effect of inaccuracies in body segment parameters and modeling assumptions on the estimate of antero-posterior center of mass (COM) trajectory. Four different methods, one based on segmental kinematics, and three methods based on kinetic recordings were compared via simulation. Kinematic patterns (quiet stance, ankle-related sway, hip-ankle-related sway, sit-up and sit-up-sit-down) were tested with a 2D four-link model of the body and the ground reaction force vector was obtained by inverse dynamics. Errors in the estimation of body segment parameters were simulated by applying a ±10% variation to one or more parameters at a time. These errors propagated differently to the COM estimated location between methods, between parameters within the same method, and between tasks. The kinematics-based method was the most sensitive to body segment parameters, with special regards to segment lengths and head-arms-trunk parameters. Root mean square error between estimated and simulated COM location reached 19mm in balance-related tasks and 38.3mm in sit-up-sit-down. The kinetics-based methods were largely less sensitive to inaccuracies in body segment parameters. In particular, the technique proposed by Zatsiorsky and King (J. Biomech. 31 (1998) 161), was completely insensitive to segment parameters. On the other hand the kinetics-based methods showed an intrinsic estimation error, due to the underlying model assumptions. The methods based on the double integration of horizontal force had better outcomes with tasks challenging such assumptions, with a maximal error in COM location of 15mm in the sit-up-sit-down. The method proposed by Shimba (J. Biomech. 17 (1984) 53) showed the best trade-off between sensitivity to body segment parameters and estimation performances given the ideal test conditions. © 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Lenzi D.; Cappello A.; Chiari L.
File in questo prodotto:
Eventuali allegati, non sono esposti

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/11585/875105
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 5
  • Scopus 39
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 36
social impact