2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2017.01.034
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A general model for estimating lower extremity inertial properties of individuals with transtibial amputation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The calculation of the inertial parameters of the lower limb of the affected side might be more influential. In the absence of geometrical information and precise center of mass values for the residual limb and prosthesis we chose to modify the inertial properties of the shank segment according to the generic correction presented by Ferris et al [28]. A brief examination into the effect of computationally manipulating inertial values revealed that considerable differences in the range of L could be attributed simply to a difference in the mass and center of mass position values of the lower leg input into the model.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The calculation of the inertial parameters of the lower limb of the affected side might be more influential. In the absence of geometrical information and precise center of mass values for the residual limb and prosthesis we chose to modify the inertial properties of the shank segment according to the generic correction presented by Ferris et al [28]. A brief examination into the effect of computationally manipulating inertial values revealed that considerable differences in the range of L could be attributed simply to a difference in the mass and center of mass position values of the lower leg input into the model.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The center of mass of the body was approximated from segment positions and estimated segment masses of the feet, lower legs, thighs, pelvis and trunk using inertial values from Hanavan et al [27]. Based on the general model of Ferris et al [28], the segment mass of the prosthetic shank was reduced from 4.65 to 3.3% body mass, the center of mass position to 21% of the segment length and the moment of inertia about an axis through the origin parallel to the flexion-extension axis of the limb to 17% of the segment length. Although an approximation, this generalization has been shown to give good approximations of more stringently measured, individualized, inertial parameters [28].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Visual3D was used to model the body segments and calculate joint angles for the ankles, knees, and hips. The model of the prosthesis shank segment was modified following [24], [25]. We imported the synchronized joint data, EMG, and recordings from the Utah Bionic Leg into MATLAB (Mathworks, Natick, MA).…”
Section: Data Processingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Notably, a prosthesis cannot be accurately modeled using the assumptions made for an able-bodied individual 33 . Thus, the kinetics and kinematics were calculated using the assumptions that prosthesis side shank weight is 1/3 of the assumed able-bodied shank weight, and the center of mass is 25% below the top of the shank after previous studies 34,35 . Although the prostheses center of mass and inertial properties can be measured experimentally, this approach requires dedicated, custom equipment 36 and was found not statistically different from assumptions we have used 34,35 .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, the kinetics and kinematics were calculated using the assumptions that prosthesis side shank weight is 1/3 of the assumed able-bodied shank weight, and the center of mass is 25% below the top of the shank after previous studies 34,35 . Although the prostheses center of mass and inertial properties can be measured experimentally, this approach requires dedicated, custom equipment 36 and was found not statistically different from assumptions we have used 34,35 . Starting from the specific prostheses components reported in Table 1, researchers may be able find experimental approximations of the center of mass and inertial properties and apply them to the provided marker trajectory data.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%