4.6 Article

Wearable Sensor Network for Biomechanical Overload Assessment in Manual Material Handling

Journal

SENSORS
Volume 20, Issue 14, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/s20143877

Keywords

motion tracking; health monitoring; ergonomic assessment; biomechanical overload risk; inertial measurement units; activity segmentation

Funding

  1. INAIL (National Institute for Insurance against Accidents) [BRIC2016-ID24]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The assessment of risks due to biomechanical overload in manual material handling is nowadays mainly based on observational methods in which an expert rater visually inspects videos of the working activity. Currently available sensing wearable technologies for motion and muscular activity capture enables to advance the risk assessment by providing reliable, repeatable, and objective measures. However, existing solutions do not address either a full body assessment or the inclusion of measures for the evaluation of the effort. This article proposes a novel system for the assessment of biomechanical overload, capable of covering all areas of ISO 11228, that uses a sensor network composed of inertial measurement units (IMU) and electromyography (EMG) sensors. The proposed method is capable of gathering and processing data from three IMU-based motion capture systems and two EMG capture devices. Data are processed to provide both segmentation of the activity and ergonomic risk score according to the methods reported in the ISO 11228 and the TR 12295. The system has been tested on a challenging outdoor scenario such as lift-on/lift-off of containers on a cargo ship. A comparison of the traditional evaluation method and the proposed one shows the consistency of the proposed system, its time effectiveness, and its potential for deeper analyses that include intra-subject and inter-subjects variability as well as a quantitative biomechanical analysis.

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