0
Research Papers

Experimentally Derived Kinetic Model for Sensor-Based Gait Monitoring

[+] Author and Article Information
Yohannes Ketema, Demoz Gebre-Egziabher

Department of Aerospace
Engineering and Mechanics,
University of Minnesota,
Minneapolis, MN 55455

Manuscript received July 18, 2015; final manuscript received November 15, 2015; published online December 8, 2015. Assoc. Editor: Guy M. Genin.

J Biomech Eng 138(1), 011006 (Dec 08, 2015) (8 pages) Paper No: BIO-15-1356; doi: 10.1115/1.4032047 History: Received July 18, 2015; Revised November 15, 2015

A method for estimating gait parameters (shank, thigh, and stance leg angles) from a single, in situ, scalar acceleration measurement is presented. A method for minimizing the impact of errors due to unpredictable variations in muscle actuation and acceleration measurement biases is developed. This is done by determining the most probable gait progression by minimization of a cost function that reflects the size of errors in the gait parameters. In addition, a model for gait patterns that takes into account their variations due to walking speed is introduced and used. The approach is tested on data collected from subjects in a gait study. The approach can estimate limb angles with errors less than 6 deg (one standard deviation) and, thus, is suitable for many envisioned gait monitoring applications in nonlaboratory settings.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

A simple rigid body model for estimating gait parameters in the sagittal plane

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Definition of measured accelerations in the sagittal plane

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Polynomial coefficients versus step time for the stance leg–shank angle relationship gl(θs;τ) along with respective curve fits

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Polynomial coefficients versus step time for the thigh–shank angle relationship gt(θs;τ) along with respective curve fits

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Stance angle θl versus shank angle θs during the swing phase of steps for subject 1 (a) and for subject 2 (b). The thick line represents least squares fit to the data.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Actual (solid) and calculated (dashed) steps: shank, thigh, and stance leg angles are shown for the swing phase of three steps from set 3

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Thigh angle θt versus shank angle θs during the swing phase of steps for subject 1 (a) and for subject 2 (b). The thick line represents least squares fit to the data.

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In