[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
You seem to have javascript disabled. Please note that many of the page functionalities won't work as expected without javascript enabled.
 
 
sensors-logo

Journal Browser

Journal Browser

Sensor Technology for Sports Monitoring

A special issue of Sensors (ISSN 1424-8220). This special issue belongs to the section "Physical Sensors".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (30 June 2022) | Viewed by 36055

Printed Edition Available!
A printed edition of this Special Issue is available here.

Special Issue Editor


E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Vuokatti Sports Technology Unit, Faculty of Sport and Health Sciences, P.O.Box 35, University of Jyväskylä, FI-40014 Jyväskylä, Finland
Interests: motor control and neuromuscular adaptation; sports biomechanics; Nordic winter sports

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

In order to be able to analyze and give proper advice on sport techniques, it is important to understand the biomechanical and physiological demands of different sports. In a coaching situation, feedback to the athlete should be given without too much delay. Over the past decades, sensor technology-related to sports monitoring has developed with huge steps. Senors are lighter, data transmission is mostly wireless, and software applications are more user-friendly.

This Special Issue is addressed to all kinds of sensors that are currently being used for monitoring different sports. Both review articles and original research papers relating to the topic are solicited.

Prof. Vesa Linnamo
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Sensors is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2600 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • sports
  • technology
  • wireless
  • monitoring
  • feedback
  • performance

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • e-Book format: Special Issues with more than 10 articles can be published as dedicated e-books, ensuring wide and rapid dissemination.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue polices can be found here.

Published Papers (11 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Editorial

Jump to: Research

3 pages, 170 KiB  
Editorial
Sensor Technology for Sports Monitoring
by Vesa Linnamo
Sensors 2023, 23(2), 572; https://doi.org/10.3390/s23020572 - 4 Jan 2023
Cited by 6 | Viewed by 2898
Abstract
Over the past decades, huge steps have been made in the development of sensor technology related to sports monitoring [...] Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sensor Technology for Sports Monitoring)

Research

Jump to: Editorial

17 pages, 5586 KiB  
Article
Validation of a Sensor-Based Dynamic Ski Deflection Measurement in the Lab and Proof-of-Concept Field Investigation
by Christoph Thorwartl, Josef Kröll, Andreas Tschepp, Helmut Holzer, Wolfgang Teufl and Thomas Stöggl
Sensors 2022, 22(15), 5768; https://doi.org/10.3390/s22155768 - 2 Aug 2022
Cited by 6 | Viewed by 2383
Abstract
Introduction: Ski deflection is a performance-relevant factor in alpine skiing and the segmental and temporal curvature characteristics (m−1) along the ski have lately received particular attention. Recently, we introduced a PyzoFlex® ski deflection measurement prototype that demonstrated high reliability and [...] Read more.
Introduction: Ski deflection is a performance-relevant factor in alpine skiing and the segmental and temporal curvature characteristics (m−1) along the ski have lately received particular attention. Recently, we introduced a PyzoFlex® ski deflection measurement prototype that demonstrated high reliability and validity in a quasi-static setting. The aim of the present work is to test the performance of an enhanced version of the prototype in a dynamic setting both in a skiing-like bending simulation as well as in a field proof-of-concept measurement. Material and methods: A total of twelve sensor foils were implemented on the upper surface of the ski. The ski sensors were calibrated with an empirical curvature model and then deformed on a programmable bending robot with the following program: 20 times at three different deformation velocities (vslow, vmedium, vfast) with (1) central bending, (2) front bending, (3) back bending, (4) edging left, and (5) edging right. For reliability assessment, pairs of bending cycles (cycle 1 vs. cycle 10 and cycle 10 vs. cycle 20) at vslow, vmedium, and vfast and between pairs of velocity (vslow vs. vmedium and vslow vs. vfast) were evaluated by calculating the change in the mean (CIM), coefficient of variation (CV) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC 3.1) with a 95% confidence interval. For validity assessment, the calculated segment-wise mean signals were compared with the values that were determined by 36 infrared markers that were attached to the ski using an optoelectrical measuring system (Qualisys). Results: High reliability was found for pairs of bending cycles (CIM −0.69–0.24%, max CV 0.28%, ICC 3.1 > 0.999) and pairs of velocities (max CIM = 3.03%, max CV = 3.05%, ICC 3.1 = 0.997). The criterion validity based on the Pearson correlation coefficient was r = 0.98. The accuracy (systematic bias) and precision (standard deviation), were −0.003 m−1 and 0.047 m−1, respectively. Conclusions: The proof-of-concept field measurement has shown that the prototype is stable, robust, and waterproof and provides characteristic curvature progressions with plausible values. Combined with the high laboratory-based reliability and validity of the PyzoFlex® prototype, this is a potential candidate for smart ski equipment. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sensor Technology for Sports Monitoring)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Ski prototype (<b>a</b>) after laminating the sensor foils and (<b>b</b>) after complete assimilation of all components. 1: Encased contact point that was sealed with silicone; 2: measurement data acquisition device (DAQ); 3: synchronization unit; 4: waterproof ski after system check.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Experimental setup consisting of bending robot with the reference coordinate system (x<sub>R</sub>, y<sub>R</sub>, z<sub>R</sub>) and the PyzoFlex<sup>®</sup> ski prototype that was equipped with the instrumented 3D markers. Deformation sequence of the ski on the bending robot: NP: neutral position; CB: central bending; FB: front bending; BB: back bending; EL: edging left; ER: edging right.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>The PyzoFlex<sup>®</sup> ski prototype with the corresponding left (L<sub>1</sub>, …, L<sub>6</sub>) and right (R<sub>1</sub>, …, R<sub>6</sub>) sensor row. There were three infrared markers (black dots) that were instrumented per sensor, resulting in a total of 36 markers. The segments were grouped into posterior (LBS: left back segment, RBS: right back segment) and anterior deflection segments (LFS: left front segment, RFS: right front segment).</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Experimental field setup. TSPs: Turn switch points.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>The PyzoFlex<sup>®</sup> sensor signals (mean +/− standard deviation (SD)) over 20 cycles during dynamic loading with v<sub>fast</sub>. The rear sensors (R<sub>1</sub>, R<sub>2</sub>, R<sub>3</sub>, L<sub>1</sub>, L<sub>2</sub>, and L<sub>3</sub>) are shown in blue and the front sensors (R<sub>4</sub>, R<sub>5</sub>, R<sub>6</sub>, L<sub>4</sub>, L<sub>5</sub>, and L<sub>6</sub>) in green. The ski was deformed with a bending robot through five deformation modes (CB: central bend; FB: front bend; BB: rear bend; EL: edge left; ER: edge right).</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>PyzoFlex<sup>®</sup> signal in red and Qualisys (QTM) signal in blue over three cycles during dynamic loading at v<sub>medium</sub>. A differentiation is made between the posterior (LBS: left posterior segment, RBS: right posterior segment) and the anterior deflection segments (LFS: left anterior segment, RFS: right anterior segment).</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>(<b>a</b>): Correlation between the curvature (m<sup>−1</sup>) that was measured by Qualisys system (criterion instrument) and PyzoFlex<sup>®</sup> sensor system. (<b>b</b>): Bland–Altman plot showing the difference against the average of Qualisys system and PyzoFlex<sup>®</sup> sensor system with limits of agreement (LoA) (dotted lines). SD: Standard deviation.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Result of the proof-of-concept field measurement with carving long radii (12 left and 12 right turns). The plot differentiates between the left and right turns. The rear sensors (L<sub>1</sub>, L<sub>2</sub>, L<sub>3</sub>) are shown in blue and the front sensors (L<sub>4</sub>, L<sub>5</sub> and L<sub>6</sub>) in green tones. SE: standard error.</p>
Full article ">Figure A1
<p>Construction drawing of the 3D printing template for standardized marker bases instrumentation on the ski. The material that was used was PLA NX2.</p>
Full article ">Figure A2
<p>(<b>a</b>): The ski was deformed on a bending machine at 13 different load levels (100 N, 120 N, …, 320 N, 340 N). (<b>b</b>): Correlation of the Qualisys system with a high precision laser measurement system (LK-H157, Keyence AG, Japan). The calibration was performed using the corresponding compensation lines in the form <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mover accent="true"> <msup> <msub> <mi>w</mi> <mrow> <mi>b</mi> <mi>o</mi> <mi>t</mi> <mi>t</mi> <mi>o</mi> <mi>m</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mo>″</mo> </msup> <mo stretchy="true">¯</mo> </mover> <mo>=</mo> <msub> <mi>k</mi> <mrow> <mi>l</mi> <mi>a</mi> <mi>s</mi> <mi>e</mi> <mi>r</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mo>⋅</mo> <mover accent="true"> <msup> <mi>w</mi> <mo>″</mo> </msup> <mo stretchy="true">¯</mo> </mover> <mo>+</mo> <msub> <mi>d</mi> <mrow> <mi>l</mi> <mi>a</mi> <mi>s</mi> <mi>e</mi> <mi>r</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>. LFS: left front segment; RFS: right front segment; SD: standard deviation.</p>
Full article ">Figure A3
<p>Temporal change of the signal from sensor L<sub>4</sub> and L<sub>5</sub> during the quasi-static deformation on the bending machine. At the end of the deflection, the relaxation process of the sensor signals due to the viscoelastic behavior of the tape is visible.</p>
Full article ">
16 pages, 32986 KiB  
Article
Detecting and Visualizing Stops in Dance Training by Neural Network Based on Velocity and Acceleration
by Yuuki Jin, Genki Suzuki and Hiroyuki Shioya
Sensors 2022, 22(14), 5402; https://doi.org/10.3390/s22145402 - 20 Jul 2022
Cited by 4 | Viewed by 2278
Abstract
Various genres of dance, such as Yosakoi Soran, have contributed to the health of many people and contributed to their sense of belonging to a community. However, due to the effects of COVID-19, various face-to-face activities have been restricted and group dance practice [...] Read more.
Various genres of dance, such as Yosakoi Soran, have contributed to the health of many people and contributed to their sense of belonging to a community. However, due to the effects of COVID-19, various face-to-face activities have been restricted and group dance practice has become difficult. Hence, there is a need to facilitate remote dance practice. In this paper, we propose a system for detecting and visualizing the very important dance motions known as stops. We measure dance movements by motion capture and calculate the features of each movement based on velocity and acceleration. Using a neural network to learn motion features, the system detects stops and visualizes them using a human-like 3D model. In an experiment using dance data, the proposed method obtained highly accurate stop detection results and demonstrated its effectiveness as an information and communication technology support for remote group dance practice. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sensor Technology for Sports Monitoring)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Demonstration of flow of motion in Yosakoi Soran dance. From left to right in the first line: no stop, stops, no stop. The stops factor is incorporated into the continuous dance process as a mid-period.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Overview of the proposed system. The dance motion data are recorded by MoCap (<a href="#sec2-sensors-22-05402" class="html-sec">Section 2</a>). The proposed system consists of three phases (<a href="#sec3-sensors-22-05402" class="html-sec">Section 3</a>). First, the motion features based on velocity and acceleration are calculated (<a href="#sec3dot1-sensors-22-05402" class="html-sec">Section 3.1</a>). Stops are detected by a neural network model (<a href="#sec3dot2-sensors-22-05402" class="html-sec">Section 3.2</a>). Stops are visualized using a humanoid 3D model via virtual reality spaces (<a href="#sec3dot3-sensors-22-05402" class="html-sec">Section 3.3</a>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Attachment of PN to the performer is presented with 18 small sensors at hand, arm, shoulder, leg, head, and waist that measure inertia, such as a gyroscope and an accelerometer. The relative positions among the sensors are measured, and the 3D positions of the sensors are obtained.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Example of velocity transition.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Example of acceleration transition.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>3D model for stop visualization system.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Motion data playback.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Transition of loss function.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Comparative example of visualization timing of stops.</p>
Full article ">
15 pages, 24308 KiB  
Article
Proposal of an Alpine Skiing Kinematic Analysis with the Aid of Miniaturized Monitoring Sensors, a Pilot Study
by Caterina Russo, Elena Puppo, Stefania Roati and Aurelio Somà
Sensors 2022, 22(11), 4286; https://doi.org/10.3390/s22114286 - 4 Jun 2022
Cited by 7 | Viewed by 3312
Abstract
The recent growth and spread of smart sensor technologies make these connected devices suitable for diagnostic and monitoring in different fields. In particular, these sensors are useful in diagnostics for control of diseases or during rehabilitation. They are also extensively used in the [...] Read more.
The recent growth and spread of smart sensor technologies make these connected devices suitable for diagnostic and monitoring in different fields. In particular, these sensors are useful in diagnostics for control of diseases or during rehabilitation. They are also extensively used in the monitoring field, both by non-expert and expert users, to monitor health status and progress during a sports activity. For athletes, these devices could be used to control and enhance their performance. This development has led to the realization of miniaturized sensors that are wearable during different sporting activities without interfering with the movements of the athlete. The use of these sensors, during training or racing, opens new frontiers for the understanding of motions and causes of injuries. This pilot study introduced a motion analysis system to monitor Alpine ski activities during training sessions. Through five inertial measurement units (IMUs), placed on five points of the athletes, it is possible to compute the angle of each joint and evaluate the ski run. Comparing the IMU data, firstly, with a video and then proposing them to an expert coach, it is possible to observe from the data the same mistakes visible in the camera. The aim of this work is to find a tool to support ski coaches during training sessions. Since the evaluation of athletes is now mainly developed with the support of video, we evaluate the use of IMUs to support the evaluation of the coach with more precise data. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sensor Technology for Sports Monitoring)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Sensors reference system.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Local reference frame for each monitored part: boot cuff, lower trunk and poles.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Lateral inclination for boot cuff and lower trunk.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Pole roll, yaw and pitch angles.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Followed algorithm for the data analysis.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Pole acceleration along x axis.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Highlight of one turn in the roll angle graph.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Number of turns in video and roll angle.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Roll angle for the ski boots and for the back.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Yaw angle for the ski boots and for the back.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Roll, yaw and pitch angles for poles.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Pitch angle for right and left pole for Testers 1 and 2.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Slope inclination measures.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Comparing the video roll angles with the roll angles computed with the IMU.</p>
Full article ">
9 pages, 549 KiB  
Article
Physical Demands during the Game and Compensatory Training Session (MD + 1) in Elite Football Players Using Global Positioning System Device
by Gabriel Calderón-Pellegrino, Leonor Gallardo, Jorge Garcia-Unanue, Jose Luis Felipe, Antonio Hernandez-Martin, Víctor Paredes-Hernández and Javier Sánchez-Sánchez
Sensors 2022, 22(10), 3872; https://doi.org/10.3390/s22103872 - 19 May 2022
Cited by 8 | Viewed by 3140
Abstract
The aims of this study were to analyze the differences of physical demands of non-starter players regarding the playing time during the competition and to evaluate the physical demands of the compensatory training (MD + 1C) for substitute players in elite football. The [...] Read more.
The aims of this study were to analyze the differences of physical demands of non-starter players regarding the playing time during the competition and to evaluate the physical demands of the compensatory training (MD + 1C) for substitute players in elite football. The match statistics and MD + 1C of substitute players from a professional Spanish LaLiga football club were analyzed using a 10-Hz global positioning system (GPS) Apex GPS system device, which has been validated as a reliable and valid method to analyze performance in team sports, during all games of the 2016/2017, 2017/2018 and 2018/2019 seasons. The starting players showed both lower total distances covered and high-intensity actions compared to the substitutes. Regarding the minutes played by the substitutes, greater physical performance was found for the players with fewer minutes (5–15 min). Furthermore, no differences were found between first and second divisions regarding physical performance of substitutes (p > 0.05). This study highlights the importance of individualizing the workload of training sessions for substitutes and starters. Furthermore, the complementary session should be individualized according to the minutes played by the substitutes. These players are potentially under-loaded compared to starters, especially in terms of high-intensity actions, therefore additional session-specific training for each substitute would be useful to reach the optimal training load according to the minutes played during the game. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sensor Technology for Sports Monitoring)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Distances covered and high-intensity actions by substitutes who play 5–15 min, 15–30 min, 30–45 min. Differences between the 1st and 2nd divisions.</p>
Full article ">
14 pages, 17736 KiB  
Article
Propulsion Calculated by Force and Displacement of Center of Mass in Treadmill Cross-Country Skiing
by Shuang Zhao, Olli Ohtonen, Keijo Ruotsalainen, Lauri Kettunen, Stefan Lindinger, Caroline Göpfert and Vesa Linnamo
Sensors 2022, 22(7), 2777; https://doi.org/10.3390/s22072777 - 5 Apr 2022
Cited by 4 | Viewed by 2979
Abstract
This study evaluated two approaches for estimating the total propulsive force on a skier’s center of mass (COM) with double-poling (DP) and V2-skating (V2) skiing techniques. We also assessed the accuracy and the stability of each approach by changing the speed and the [...] Read more.
This study evaluated two approaches for estimating the total propulsive force on a skier’s center of mass (COM) with double-poling (DP) and V2-skating (V2) skiing techniques. We also assessed the accuracy and the stability of each approach by changing the speed and the incline of the treadmill. A total of 10 cross-country skiers participated in this study. Force measurement bindings, pole force sensors, and an eight-camera Vicon system were used for data collection. The coefficient of multiple correlation (CMC) was calculated to evaluate the similarity between the force curves. Mean absolute force differences between the estimated values and the reference value were computed to evaluate the accuracy of each approach. In both DP and V2 techniques, the force–time curves of the forward component of the translational force were similar to the reference value (CMC: 0.832–0.936). The similarity between the force and time curves of the forward component of the ground reaction force (GRF) and the reference value was, however, greater (CMC: 0.879–0.955). Both approaches can estimate the trend of the force–time curve of the propulsive force properly. An approach by calculating the forward component of GRF is a more appropriate method due to a better accuracy. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sensor Technology for Sports Monitoring)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Equipment used in this study: (<b>a</b>) Pole force measurement sensor. (<b>b</b>) Force measurement binding.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Marker placement on the subject and geometric model for segments in the XC model. The numbers 1–49 represent the placement of reflective markers on subjects and poles. The displacement of reflective markers on roller skis is shown in <a href="#sensors-22-02777-f003" class="html-fig">Figure 3</a>. The numbers 1–39 are the markers used in the plug-in-gait (PIG) model. 1–43 are the markers used in the XC model [<a href="#B6-sensors-22-02777" class="html-bibr">6</a>] on one subject. The numbers 44–49 are the markers on the poles. ①–⑪ represent the head, thorax, abdomen and pelvis, upper arm, forearm, hand, thigh, shank, foot, pole, and roller ski, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Displacement of markers, PFAs, and the definition of FCS (<math display="inline"><semantics> <mover> <mi mathvariant="normal">i</mi> <mo>→</mo> </mover> </semantics></math>, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mover> <mi mathvariant="normal">j</mi> <mo>→</mo> </mover> </semantics></math>, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mover> <mi mathvariant="normal">k</mi> <mo>→</mo> </mover> </semantics></math>). Three markers (Ski_1, Ski_2, and Ski_3) were attached to the side of the node. The node for power supply and data transmission was attached to the front part of the roller ski. The surface defined by the markers was parallel to the roller ski surface. <math display="inline"><semantics> <mover> <mi mathvariant="normal">i</mi> <mo>→</mo> </mover> </semantics></math> was defined by Ski_3 and Ski_2. Another unit vector (<math display="inline"><semantics> <mover> <mi mathvariant="normal">r</mi> <mo>→</mo> </mover> </semantics></math>) located on the surface of the roller ski was defined by Ski_1 and Ski_2. The surface norm, which was the <math display="inline"><semantics> <mover> <mi mathvariant="normal">k</mi> <mo>→</mo> </mover> </semantics></math> of FCS, was the cross product of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mover> <mi mathvariant="normal">i</mi> <mo>→</mo> </mover> </semantics></math> and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mover> <mi mathvariant="normal">r</mi> <mo>→</mo> </mover> </semantics></math>. The last unit vector <math display="inline"><semantics> <mover> <mi mathvariant="normal">j</mi> <mo>→</mo> </mover> </semantics></math> was computed by using the right-hand rule with <math display="inline"><semantics> <mover> <mi mathvariant="normal">k</mi> <mo>→</mo> </mover> </semantics></math> and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mover> <mi mathvariant="normal">i</mi> <mo>→</mo> </mover> </semantics></math>. The PFA<sub>f</sub> and PFA<sub>r</sub> were the points of force application of the front and rear sensors, respectively. The distance between Ski_2 and PFA<sub>f</sub> was <math display="inline"><semantics> <mi>m</mi> </semantics></math>, and the distance between PFA<sub>f</sub> and PFA<sub>r</sub> was <math display="inline"><semantics> <mi>n</mi> </semantics></math>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Diagram of force decomposition from skis. <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi mathvariant="normal">F</mi> <mi mathvariant="normal">r</mi> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> is the resultant force generated from legs. <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi mathvariant="normal">F</mi> <mrow> <mi>tS</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> is the translational component, which went through the COM. <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi mathvariant="normal">F</mi> <mrow> <mi>pS</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> represents the propulsion generated from legs in the forward direction.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Definition of the force producing phase of DP and V2 techniques: (<b>a</b>) GRFs from skis and poles in the DP technique and the definition of the poling phase. (<b>b</b>) GRFs from skis and poles in the V2 technique and the definition of the kicking phase.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Force-time curves of F, F<sub>net</sub>, and F<sub>pro</sub>: (<b>a</b>) DP technique, (<b>b</b>) V2 technique. Values are averaged over 10 force-producing phases of one subject from each technique (speed of the treadmill was 19 km/h; incline of the treadmill was 2°).</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Mean force difference over force producing phases in DP and V2 techniques (%BW). <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi mathvariant="normal">M</mi> <mrow> <msub> <mi mathvariant="normal">F</mi> <mrow> <mi>net</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mo>−</mo> <mi mathvariant="normal">F</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> represents the difference between F and F<sub>net</sub> and is calculated by F–F<sub>net</sub>. <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi mathvariant="normal">M</mi> <mrow> <msub> <mi mathvariant="normal">F</mi> <mrow> <mi>net</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mo>−</mo> <mi mathvariant="normal">F</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> lower than zero indicates that F<sub>net</sub> is greater than F. <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi mathvariant="normal">M</mi> <mrow> <msub> <mi mathvariant="normal">F</mi> <mrow> <mi>pro</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mo>−</mo> <mi mathvariant="normal">F</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> represents the difference between F and F<sub>pro</sub> and is calculated by F–F<sub>pro</sub>. <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi mathvariant="normal">M</mi> <mrow> <msub> <mi mathvariant="normal">F</mi> <mrow> <mi>pro</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mo>−</mo> <mi mathvariant="normal">F</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> greater than zero indicates that F<sub>pro</sub> is lower than F.</p>
Full article ">Figure A1
<p>Custom-made friction measurement device.</p>
Full article ">
22 pages, 3914 KiB  
Article
A Wearable System for Jump Detection in Inline Figure Skating
by Antonio Panfili, Alvise Spanò and Agostino Cortesi
Sensors 2022, 22(4), 1650; https://doi.org/10.3390/s22041650 - 20 Feb 2022
Cited by 4 | Viewed by 3845
Abstract
This article presents the design and experimental evaluation of a non-invasive wearable sensor system that can be used to acquire crucial information about athletes’ performance during inline figure skating training. By combining distance and time-of-flight sensors and gyroscopes, the system is able to [...] Read more.
This article presents the design and experimental evaluation of a non-invasive wearable sensor system that can be used to acquire crucial information about athletes’ performance during inline figure skating training. By combining distance and time-of-flight sensors and gyroscopes, the system is able to detect when jumps are performed and provides a live view of the data (e.g., the number and height of jumps) through a graphical user interface. The main novelty of our approach lies in the way in which the optical sensors are orientated. Typically, the sensors are orientated horizontally and positioned in pairs on the ground, where they measure the time interval between the moment the athlete leaves the ground and the moment they land. In our system, an optical sensor is placed under each foot and is vertically orientated so as to constantly measure the distance from the ground. In addition, a gyroscope sensor is placed on the athlete’s back, which provides information on the direction and angular momentum of the movement. By combining this data, the system provides the accurate detection of various jumps and technical elements without any constraints on the training ground. In this paper, the system is also compared to similar platforms in the literature, although there are no other specific systems that are available for inline figure skating. The results of the experimental evaluation, which was performed by high profile athletes, confirm its effectiveness in correctly detecting jumps, especially considering its compromise between precision and the overall cost of the equipment. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sensor Technology for Sports Monitoring)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>An overview of the system’s software and hardware components.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>The positioning of the VL53L0X sensor on the boot.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>The positioning of the control unit on the athlete.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>The web-based GUI. The graph shows jump heights sampled in real time by the sensors.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>A box plot of the deviations between the sensor data and the belt reference measurement for each athlete. Empty dots represent the mean and black segments are the median. Despite the different physical characteristics of the athletes, the deviations were quite stable, with an overall mean of around 1.61 cm and a relatively low variance.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Double Salchow. Max height detected: 28.8 cm.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Flying camel spin. Max height detected: 23.6 cm. The element was discarded by the algorithm as it detected a fast spin after landing.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>A sample calculation of vertical height <math display="inline"><semantics> <mover> <mrow> <mi>O</mi> <mi>B</mi> </mrow> <mo>¯</mo> </mover> </semantics></math> given the tilt angle <math display="inline"><semantics> <mover accent="true"> <mrow> <mi>A</mi> <mi>O</mi> <mi>B</mi> </mrow> <mo>^</mo> </mover> </semantics></math> and the distance from the ground <math display="inline"><semantics> <mover> <mrow> <mi>O</mi> <mi>A</mi> </mrow> <mo>¯</mo> </mover> </semantics></math>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>The statistics box plot of the 40 tilt angles measured from the video frames. The empty dot represents the mean and the black segment represents the median.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Inferential statistics on the population of tilt angles: the estimated density function in the range 0–90 degrees (<b>left</b>) and the cumulative distribution function (<b>right</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>A comparison between a double Lutz (<b>upper chart</b>) and a flying sit spin with foot change (<b>lower chart</b>). The gyroscope hard limit was reached while jumping (the cyan line in the B area above) rather than after landing (the cyan line in the D area below).</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>The green and blue lines relate to the left and right foot, respectively. The red dots highlight when both feet surpassed the threshold, with three red dots indicating that a valid jump was detected. This chart shows three successful detections of three technical elements (double Lutz).</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>A zoom-in of the third (rightmost) double Lutz of the series of three in <a href="#sensors-22-01650-f012" class="html-fig">Figure 12</a>. After the flying phase, marked by the three red dots and regularly detected as a valid jump, the left foot went parallel to the ground, hence the high green peak reaching the hard limit of the laser sensor, whereas the right foot (blue line) remained on the ground. This scenario corresponded to the exit phase of the element and was not detected as a jump.</p>
Full article ">
14 pages, 4239 KiB  
Article
Magnitude and Shape of the Forces Applied on the Foot Rest and Paddle by Elite Kayakers
by Pedro Bonito, Miguel Sousa, Fernando José Ferreira, Jorge Fonseca Justo and Beatriz Branquinho Gomes
Sensors 2022, 22(4), 1612; https://doi.org/10.3390/s22041612 - 18 Feb 2022
Cited by 4 | Viewed by 3013
Abstract
The study aimed to investigate the magnitude and shape of the forces applied on the foot rest, foot strap, and paddle. Thirteen elite male kayakers participated in this study and performed a 2-min test simulating 500 m race pace in a kayak ergometer. [...] Read more.
The study aimed to investigate the magnitude and shape of the forces applied on the foot rest, foot strap, and paddle. Thirteen elite male kayakers participated in this study and performed a 2-min test simulating 500 m race pace in a kayak ergometer. Forces applied by the kayakers on the paddle, foot rest, and foot strap were measured with load cells and recorded by an electronic measuring system. The magnitude of the peak forces applied on the foot rest (left: 543.27 ± 85.93; right: 524.39 ± 88.36) approximately doubled the ones applied on the paddle (left: 236.37 ± 19.32; right: 243.92 ± 28.89). The forces on the foot strap were similar in magnitude to the paddle forces (left: 240.09 ± 74.92; right: 231.05 ± 52.01). A positive correlation was found between the peak forces applied on the foot rest and paddle on the same side (p < 0.001). When comparing the best and worst kayakers’ performance, the best showed greater forces magnitudes and synchronization of the peak forces. Analyses of the force–time curves, including not only the forces applied by the kayaker on the paddle but also the ones applied on the foot rest and strap, should be considered relevant in terms of technique analyses. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sensor Technology for Sports Monitoring)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Kayaker/kayak/paddle free body diagram.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Kayaker/kayak interaction diagram.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Custom-built foot rest, that measure push and pull forces over the foot rest and foot strap, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>(<b>A</b>) View of the foot rest’s interior with four load cells on each side, (<b>B</b>) the detail of one load cell.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Foot rest calibration procedure.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>(<b>A</b>) Kayak ergometer with instrumented foot rest and paddle ropes, (<b>B</b>) custom design load cells built for measuring kayak ergometer paddle ropes forces.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Example of two complete paddle strokes (left and right) presenting the paddle, foot rest, and foot strap force curves synchronized, and the main kinetic variables considered for analysis.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>The correlation matrix with correlation coefficients between power and force variables of the paddle, foot rest and foot strap, combining left and right of 13 kayakers. Red correlation coefficients indicate strong correlation, the tendency line shows if its positive or negative. SR—stroke rate; CPF—compression peak force; TPF—tension peak force; CMF—compression mean force; TMF—Tension mean force; CI—compression impulse; TI—Tension impulse; CFD—compression force duration; TFD—tension force duration; PPF—paddle peak force; PMF—paddle mean force; PI—paddle impulse.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Mean force–time curves of the forces applied on the foot rest/strap and paddle of the kayaker with the best performance of the sample group. Data was time normalized and represents N = 238 strokes (119 complete stroke cycles).</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Mean force–time curves of the forces applied on the foot rest/strap and paddle of the kayaker with the worst performance of the sample group. Data was time normalized and represents N = 252 strokes (126 complete stroke cycles).</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Raw data of the force–time curves of the forces applied on the foot rest/foot strap and paddle, showing the values close to zero before entry and after exit in water no the paddle force curve, identified with grey ellipses.</p>
Full article ">
12 pages, 1392 KiB  
Article
The Effect of Paddle Stroke Variables Measured by Trainesense SmartPaddle® on the Velocity of the Kayak
by Antti Löppönen, Tomi Vänttinen, Marko Haverinen and Vesa Linnamo
Sensors 2022, 22(3), 938; https://doi.org/10.3390/s22030938 - 26 Jan 2022
Cited by 8 | Viewed by 5186
Abstract
(1) Background: This study aimed to compare key variables of paddle stroke measured by a commercial Trainesense SmartPaddle® against the strain-gauge shaft and investigate how these variables are associated with the velocity of the boat among national-level canoe polo players. (2) Methods: [...] Read more.
(1) Background: This study aimed to compare key variables of paddle stroke measured by a commercial Trainesense SmartPaddle® against the strain-gauge shaft and investigate how these variables are associated with the velocity of the boat among national-level canoe polo players. (2) Methods: This study involved 14 Finnish national-level canoe polo players. The measurement protocol consisted of three different paddling velocities, which were performed in indoor swimming pools. The velocity of the boat was calculated based on the performance time measured with the laser photocell gate. Canoe polo equipment was used in the study and a SmartPaddle sensor was attached to the paddle blade. A strain-gauge paddle shaft was used as a reference method to examine the validity of SmartPaddle. (3) Results: The stroke rate, force production time, mean and maximal force measured with the strain-gauge paddle shaft correlated strongly (r = 0.84–0.95, p < 0.01) with SmartPaddle. However, the SmartPaddle overestimated the maximum force compared to the strain-gauge shaft. Stroke rate (r = 0.86, p < 0.01), mean force (r = 0.79, p < 0.01), maximal force (r = 0.78, p < 0.01) and total absolute impulse (r = 0.70, p < 0.01) correlated positively and force production time negatively (r = −0.76, p < 0.01) with the velocity of the boat. (4) Conclusions: We conclude that the SmartPaddle provides promising information on stroke key variables when compared to the strain-gauge paddle shaft. The SmartPaddle is a new and interesting tool for biomechanical research and daily kayaking coaching in real open water conditions. However, more research and algorithm development are needed before the SmartPaddle can be used in everyday coaching sessions in kayaking. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sensor Technology for Sports Monitoring)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>(<b>A</b>) SmartPaddle place on the blade, (<b>B</b>) Strain-gauge shaft in calibration board (without IMU attached), (<b>C</b>) SmartPaddle attached to the blade, (<b>D</b>) structure of the strain-gauge sensors.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Scatter plots and R<sup>2</sup> values between SmartPaddle and strain-gauge shaft in key paddle stroke variables (<span class="html-italic">n</span> = 6) (R<sup>2</sup> = coefficient of determination showing how close the data are to the fitted regression line).</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Bland–Altman analysis between SmartPaddle and strain-gauge shaft in key paddle stroke variables (<span class="html-italic">n</span> = 6).</p>
Full article ">
12 pages, 2654 KiB  
Article
Framework for In-Field Analyses of Performance and Sub-Technique Selection in Standing Para Cross-Country Skiers
by Camilla H. Carlsen, Julia Kathrin Baumgart, Jan Kocbach, Pål Haugnes, Evy M. B. Paulussen and Øyvind Sandbakk
Sensors 2021, 21(14), 4876; https://doi.org/10.3390/s21144876 - 17 Jul 2021
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 2269
Abstract
Our aims were to evaluate the feasibility of a framework based on micro-sensor technology for in-field analyses of performance and sub-technique selection in Para cross-country (XC) skiing by using it to compare these parameters between elite standing Para (two men; one woman) and [...] Read more.
Our aims were to evaluate the feasibility of a framework based on micro-sensor technology for in-field analyses of performance and sub-technique selection in Para cross-country (XC) skiing by using it to compare these parameters between elite standing Para (two men; one woman) and able-bodied (AB) (three men; four women) XC skiers during a classical skiing race. The data from a global navigation satellite system and inertial measurement unit were integrated to compare time loss and selected sub-techniques as a function of speed. Compared to male/female AB skiers, male/female Para skiers displayed 19/14% slower average speed with the largest time loss (65 ± 36/35 ± 6 s/lap) found in uphill terrain. Female Para/AB skiers utilized DP, DK, and DIA, 61/43%, 15/10%, and 25/47% of the distance at low speeds, respectively, while the corresponding numbers for male Para/AB skiers were 58/18%, 1/13%, and 40/69%. At higher speeds, female Para/AB skiers utilized DP and OTHER, 26/52% and 74/48% of the distance, respectively, while corresponding numbers for male Para/AB skiers were 29/66% and 71/34%. This indicates different speed thresholds of the classical sub-techniques for Para than AB skiers. The framework provides a point of departure for large-scale international investigations of performance and related factors in Para XC skiing. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sensor Technology for Sports Monitoring)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>The 2.5 km XC skiing race course divided into the 10 segments according to the elevation difference, including three uphill, three flat, and four downhill segments. Six turns were distributed over the 2.5 km lap (red arrow). With different placement of the start and finish, there is a gap in the 2.5 km course, which was removed from the analyses. (S) Segment (length (meter), incline range (%)); S1: 131 m, −2.6–1.6%; S2: 543 m, 1.7–12.4%; S3: 509 m, −11.7–0.2%; S4 100 m, 0.7–2.8%; S5: 156 m, −6.0–0.0%; S6: 166 m, 1.3–12.7%; S7: 339 m, −8.5–−0.4%; S8: 200 m, 1.2–16%; S9: 183 m, −10.1–−1.0%; S10: 138 m, 0.0–1.6%.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Comparison of average male AB XC skiers (dark red; standard deviation light pink), male B3a XC skier (yellow), and male B3b XC skier (blue) for the six laps during the race with respect to average speed, absolute speed difference, relative speed difference, accumulated time difference, and tuck. Course details are visualized in the lower part of the figure; turns (red dashes) and altitude profile of the 2.5 km race course, with uphill (black), flat (dark gray), and downhill (light gray) segments.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Comparison of average female AB XC skiers (dark red; standard deviation light pink) and female LW4 XC skier (green) for the four laps during the race with respect to average speed, absolute speed difference, relative speed difference, accumulated time difference, and tuck. Course details are visualized in the lower part of the figure; turns (red dashes) and altitude profile of the 2.5 km race course, with uphill (black), flat (dark gray), and downhill (light gray) segments.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Distribution of sub-techniques over different speed-intervals for male AB, the B3a, and the B3b XC skiers per distance and time. Diagonal stride (DIA; red); Kick double poling (DK; green); Double poling (DP; blue); Tuck position and turn technique (OTHER; gray); White sections illustrate that the skier did not use these speeds.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Distribution of sub-techniques over different speed-intervals for female AB and the LW4 XC skiers per distance and time. Diagonal stride (DIA; red); Kick double poling (DK; green); Double poling (DP; blue); Tuck position and turn technique (OTHER; gray). Blank sections for AB XC skiers and the LW4 XC skier illustrate that one of the skiers didn’t used these speeds.</p>
Full article ">
15 pages, 3324 KiB  
Article
A Novel Sensor Foil to Measure Ski Deflections: Development and Validation of a Curvature Model
by Christoph Thorwartl, Josef Kröll, Andreas Tschepp, Philipp Schäffner, Helmut Holzer and Thomas Stöggl
Sensors 2021, 21(14), 4848; https://doi.org/10.3390/s21144848 - 16 Jul 2021
Cited by 8 | Viewed by 3188
Abstract
The ski deflection with the associated temporal and segmental curvature variation can be considered as a performance-relevant factor in alpine skiing. Although some work on recording ski deflection is available, the segmental curvature among the ski and temporal aspects have not yet been [...] Read more.
The ski deflection with the associated temporal and segmental curvature variation can be considered as a performance-relevant factor in alpine skiing. Although some work on recording ski deflection is available, the segmental curvature among the ski and temporal aspects have not yet been made an object of observation. Therefore, the goal of this study was to develop a novel ski demonstrator and to conceptualize and validate an empirical curvature model. Twenty-four PyzoFlex® technology-based sensor foils were attached to the upper surface of an alpine ski. A self-developed instrument simultaneously measuring sixteen sensors was used as a data acquisition device. After calibration with a standardized bending test, using an empirical curvature model, the sensors were applied to analyze the segmental curvature characteristic (m−1) of the ski in a quasi-static bending situation at five different load levels between 100 N and 230 N. The derived curvature data were compared with values obtained from a high-precision laser measurement system. For the reliability assessment, successive pairs of trials were evaluated at different load levels by calculating the change in mean (CIM), the coefficient of variation (CV) and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC 3.1) with a 95% confidence interval. A high reliability of CIM −1.41–0.50%, max CV 1.45%, and ICC 3.1 > 0.961 was found for the different load levels. Additionally, the criterion validity based on the Pearson correlation coefficient was R2 = 0.993 and the limits of agreement, expressed by the accuracy (systematic bias) and the precision (SD), was between +9.45 × 10−3 m−1 and −6.78 × 10−3 m−1 for all load levels. The new measuring system offers both good accuracy (1.33 × 10−3 m−1) and high precision (4.14 × 10−3 m−1). However, the results are based on quasi-static ski deformations, which means that a transfer into the field is only allowed to a limited extent since the scope of the curvature model has not yet been definitely determined. The high laboratory-related reliability and validity of our novel ski prototype featuring PyzoFlex® technology make it a potential candidate for on-snow application such as smart skiing equipment. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sensor Technology for Sports Monitoring)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>(<b>a</b>) Ski prototype with 24 single connected sensors. One foil element was implemented at the rear (nine sensors) and two foil elements at the front (fifteen sensors). (<b>b</b>) Detailed view of the sensors in the front ski segment. The sensors were laminated to the ski with a black high-performance adhesive tape (very temperature and UV stable).</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>(<b>a</b>) The bending scheme of a PyzoFlex<b><sup>®</sup></b> sensor film mounted on top of the ski at the bending radius <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="normal">R</mi> <mo>=</mo> <mn>1</mn> <mo>/</mo> <mrow> <msup> <mi mathvariant="normal">w</mi> <mo>″</mo> </msup> </mrow> <mrow> <mo>(</mo> <mi mathvariant="normal">x</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </mrow> </semantics></math> (see main text) in cross-section view (left) and top view (right). The bending of the sensor causes a lateral, in-plane strain <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>s</mi> <mrow> <mn>11</mn> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> in the piezoelectric layer. The sensor element has length L, width b and thickness t, and the sensitive, piezoelectric layer is located at a radial distance <math display="inline"><semantics> <mi>ζ</mi> </semantics></math> off the neutral axis. (<b>b</b>) The sensor generates a charge <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>Q</mi> <mrow> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </mrow> </semantics></math>, which is converted into a proportional output voltage <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>u</mi> <mi>a</mi> </msub> <mrow> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> <mo>.</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>C</mi> <mi>f</mi> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> corresponds to the capacitance in the feedback loop.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Three-point bending test with an integrated laser measurement system (Atomic GmbH); (<b>a</b>) picture with the corresponding experimental components; (<b>b</b>) schematic drawing of the experimental setup. N = 83 data points were captured over a length of 1650 mm (78 points directly by the laser measurement system (<math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>P</mi> <mn>4</mn> </msub> <mrow> <mo>(</mo> <mrow> <msub> <mi>x</mi> <mn>4</mn> </msub> <mo>,</mo> <msub> <mi>z</mi> <mn>4</mn> </msub> </mrow> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </mrow> </semantics></math> to <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>P</mi> <mrow> <mn>81</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mrow> <mo>(</mo> <mrow> <msub> <mi>z</mi> <mrow> <mn>81</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>,</mo> <msub> <mi>z</mi> <mrow> <mn>81</mn> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </mrow> </semantics></math> ) and 5 points extrapolated).</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>The ski instrumented with PyzoFlex<b><sup>®</sup></b> technology-based sensors.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Raw data from the laser measurement system. Vertical displacement (mean ±1.96 SD) vs. horizontal position (mean ±1.96 SD) over three repetitions at different load levels (100 N, 110 N, 160 N, 220 N and 230 N). (<b>a</b>) All 83 measuring points; (<b>b</b>) Detailed view over 10 measuring points.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5 Cont.
<p>Raw data from the laser measurement system. Vertical displacement (mean ±1.96 SD) vs. horizontal position (mean ±1.96 SD) over three repetitions at different load levels (100 N, 110 N, 160 N, 220 N and 230 N). (<b>a</b>) All 83 measuring points; (<b>b</b>) Detailed view over 10 measuring points.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>The orange and blue data points represent the calculated mean curvature from the PyzoFlex<sup>®</sup> data (mean ± SD) of the middle sensor row for the corresponding segments (S<sub>1</sub> to S<sub>7</sub>). The large gray data points represent the curvature progression calculated from the laser data at different load levels (100 N, 110 N, 160 N, 220 N and 230 N). The interpolated points (small gray data dots) were used for the numerical calculation of the mean segmental curvature. Note: There are no sensors in the binding area, and for the sake of completeness, the data from the laser measurement system are displayed.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Left (<b>a</b>): The correlation between curvature (m<sup>−1</sup>) measured by laser measurement system (criterion instrument) and PyzoFlex<sup>®</sup> sensor system. Right (<b>b</b>): Bland–Altman plot showing the difference against the average of the laser measurement system and PyzoFlex<sup>®</sup> sensor system with limits of agreement (LoA) (dotted lines). SD: Standard deviation.</p>
Full article ">
Back to TopTop