Literature DB >> 26043178

Comparison between low-cost marker-less and high-end marker-based motion capture systems for the computer-aided assessment of working ergonomics.

Alfredo Patrizi1, Ettore Pennestrì1, Pier Paolo Valentini1.   

Abstract

The paper deals with the comparison between a high-end marker-based acquisition system and a low-cost marker-less methodology for the assessment of the human posture during working tasks. The low-cost methodology is based on the use of a single Microsoft Kinect V1 device. The high-end acquisition system is the BTS SMART that requires the use of reflective markers to be placed on the subject's body. Three practical working activities involving object lifting and displacement have been investigated. The operational risk has been evaluated according to the lifting equation proposed by the American National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. The results of the study show that the risk multipliers computed from the two acquisition methodologies are very close for all the analysed activities. In agreement to this outcome, the marker-less methodology based on the Microsoft Kinect V1 device seems very promising to promote the dissemination of computer-aided assessment of ergonomics while maintaining good accuracy and affordable costs. PRACTITIONER’S
SUMMARY: The study is motivated by the increasing interest for on-site working ergonomics assessment. We compared a low-cost marker-less methodology with a high-end marker-based system. We tested them on three different working tasks, assessing the working risk of lifting loads. The two methodologies showed comparable precision in all the investigations.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Microsoft Kinect; ergonomics; marker-less; motion capture; working posture

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26043178     DOI: 10.1080/00140139.2015.1057238

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ergonomics        ISSN: 0014-0139            Impact factor:   2.778


  7 in total

1.  Load Asymmetry Angle Estimation Using Multiple view Videos.

Authors:  Xuan Wang; Yu Hen Hu; Ming-Lun Lu; Robert G Radwin
Journal:  IEEE Trans Hum Mach Syst       Date:  2021-12       Impact factor: 4.124

Review 2.  Technology-Based Compensation Assessment and Detection of Upper Extremity Activities of Stroke Survivors: Systematic Review.

Authors:  Xiaoyi Wang; Yan Fu; Bing Ye; Jessica Babineau; Yong Ding; Alex Mihailidis
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2022-06-13       Impact factor: 7.076

3.  Usefulness of the Rapid Office Strain Assessment (ROSA) tool in detecting differences before and after an ergonomics intervention.

Authors:  Fernanda Cabegi de Barros; Cristiane Shinohara Moriguchi; Thaís Cristina Chaves; David M Andrews; Michael Sonne; Tatiana de Oliveira Sato
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2022-06-02       Impact factor: 2.562

4.  Dual Kinect v2 system can capture lower limb kinematics reasonably well in a clinical setting: concurrent validity of a dual camera markerless motion capture system in professional football players.

Authors:  Argyro Kotsifaki; Rodney Whiteley; Clint Hansen
Journal:  BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med       Date:  2018-12-17

5.  Comparison of Motion Analysis Systems in Tracking Upper Body Movement of Myoelectric Bypass Prosthesis Users.

Authors:  Sophie L Wang; Gene Civillico; Wesley Niswander; Kimberly L Kontson
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2022-04-12       Impact factor: 3.847

6.  A Wearable Sensor System for Physical Ergonomics Interventions Using Haptic Feedback.

Authors:  Carl Mikael Lind; Jose Antonio Diaz-Olivares; Kaj Lindecrantz; Jörgen Eklund
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2020-10-23       Impact factor: 3.576

Review 7.  AI Approaches Towards Prechtl's Assessment of General Movements: A Systematic Literature Review.

Authors:  Muhammad Tausif Irshad; Muhammad Adeel Nisar; Philip Gouverneur; Marion Rapp; Marcin Grzegorzek
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2020-09-17       Impact factor: 3.576

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.