4.6 Review

Indirect Measurement of Ground Reaction Forces and Moments by Means of Wearable Inertial Sensors: A Systematic Review

Journal

SENSORS
Volume 18, Issue 8, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/s18082564

Keywords

biomechanical modelling; ground reaction forces; inertial measurements; inertial measurement units (IMU); kinetics; machine learning; wearable sensors

Funding

  1. Enterprise Ireland (EI)
  2. Setanta College Ltd. [IP 2017 0606]
  3. Science Foundation Ireland (SFI)
  4. European Regional Development Fund [13/RC/2077]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In the last few years, estimating ground reaction forces by means of wearable sensors has come to be a challenging research topic paving the way to kinetic analysis and sport performance testing outside of labs. One possible approach involves estimating the ground reaction forces from kinematic data obtained by inertial measurement units (IMUs) worn by the subject. As estimating kinetic quantities from kinematic data is not an easy task, several models and protocols have been developed over the years. Non-wearable sensors, such as optoelectronic systems along with force platforms, remain the most accurate systems to record motion. In this review, we identified, selected and categorized the methodologies for estimating the ground reaction forces from IMUs as proposed across the years. Scopus, Google Scholar, IEEE Xplore, and PubMed databases were interrogated on the topic of Ground Reaction Forces estimation based on kinematic data obtained by IMUs. The identified papers were classified according to the methodology proposed: (i) methods based on direct modelling; (ii) methods based on machine learning. The methods based on direct modelling were further classified according to the task studied (walking, running, jumping, etc.). Finally, we comparatively examined the methods in order to identify the most reliable approaches for the implementation of a ground reaction force estimator based on IMU data.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available