Advertisement

Comparative Study and Analysis of Human Knee Angle Measurement System

  • S. BoobalanEmail author
  • K. Lakshmi
  • K. N. Thirukkuralkani
Conference paper
  • 25 Downloads
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 626)

Abstract

Human gait analysis is one of the most important tools to drive the actuator of the bionic leg, which is designed and acts on the command received from the gait system. In this article, we implemented the inertial measurement unit (IMU) and image processing system using Kinovea software to measure the human knee angle. A traditional tool called goniometer was used to measure the human knee angle. An updated new modified goniometer is introduced in this project to analyze the human gait system. IMU sensors are interfaced with Arduino, and the data was acquired and stored in the PC for the purpose of further analysis. The Kinovea is one the powerful sports analysis software, which was introduced here to measure the human knee angle measuring in different lightening condition. The comparative human knee angle measurement was studied, in that the acquired data was compared with each other system.

Keywords

Human gait system Goniometer Inertial measurement unit Kinovea sports software Image processing system Arduino 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Ethical approval—The authors express their sincere thanks to the Management and the Principal of Sri Krishna College of Engineering and Technology, Coimbatore, for providing the necessary facilities for the completion of this paper. This study was approved by the ethics committee of Institutional Human Ethics Committee (IHEC), PSGIMS&R Coimbatore, India. The authors state that this study conforms to the ethical standards contribute to human welfare by ensuring a research process that combines the highest integrity and safety of human research participants.

References

  1. 1.
    C.N. Teague et al., Novel methods for sensing acoustical emissions from the knee for wearable joint health assessment. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 63(8), 1581–1590 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    U.-J. Yang, J.-Y. Kim, Mechanical design of powered prosthetic leg and walking pattern generation based on motion capture data. Adv. Robot. 29(16), 1061–1079 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    J.J. Castañeda, et al. Knee joint angle monitoring system based on inertial measurement units for human gait analysis, in VII Latin American Congress on Biomedical Engineering CLAIB 2016, Bucaramanga, Santander, Colombia, October 26th-28th (Springer, Singapore, 2017)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    P.J. Rowe et al., Knee joint kinematics in gait and other functional activities measured using flexible electrogoniometry: how much knee motion is sufficient for normal daily life? Gait & posture 12(2), 143–155 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ehsan Sobhani Tehrani, Kian Jalaleddini, Robert E. Kearney, Ankle joint intrinsic dynamics is more complex than a mass-spring-damper model. IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng. 25(9), 1568–1580 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    B. Koopman, E.H. van Asseldonk, H. van der Kooij, Estimation of human hip and knee multi-joint dynamics using the lopes gait trainer. IEEE Trans. Rob. 32(4), 920–932 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    L.L. Flynn et al., VUB-CYBERLEGs CYBATHLON 2016 Beta-Prosthesis: case study in control of an active two degree of freedom transfemoral prosthesis. J. Neuro Eng. Rehabil. 15(1), 3 (2018)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    B. Hwang, D. Jeon, A method to accurately estimate the muscular torques of human wearing exoskeletons by torque sensors. Sensors 15(4), 8337–8357 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    N. Shaari, I. Md Isa, T. Jun, Torque analysis of the lower limb exoskeleton robot design. ARPN J. Eng. Appl. Sci. 10, 19 (2015)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    A. Pagel et al., Bio-inspired adaptive control for active knee exoprosthetics. IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng. 25(12), 2355–2364 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    M.F. Eilenberg, Hartmut Geyer, Hugh Herr, Control of a powered ankle–foot prosthesis based on a neuromuscular model. IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng. 18(2), 164–173 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    S. Pfeifer et al., Model-based estimation of knee stiffness. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 59(9), 2604–2612 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    S. Pfeifer et al., Actuator with angle-dependent elasticity for biomimetic transfemoral prostheses. IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron. 20(3), 1384–1394 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    V. Rajťúková et al., Biomechanics of lower limb prostheses. Procedia Eng. 96, 382–391 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    E.J. Rouse et al., Design and testing of a bionic dancing prosthesis. PLoS ONE 10(8), e0135148 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    H. Vallery et al., Complementary limb motion estimation for the control of active knee prostheses. Biomedizinische Technik/Biomedical Engineering 56(1), 45–51 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    A.N. Amirudin et al., Biomechanics of hip, knee and ankle joint loading during ascent and descent walking. Procedia Comput. Sci. 42, 336–344 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. Boobalan
    • 1
    Email author
  • K. Lakshmi
    • 1
  • K. N. Thirukkuralkani
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Electrical and ElectronicsSri Krishna College of Engineering and TechnologyCoimbatoreIndia
  2. 2.Department of Electronics and InstrumentationSri Ramakrishna Engineering CollegeCoimbatoreIndia

Personalised recommendations