Refinement of the upper limb joint kinematics and dynamics using a subject-specific closed-loop forearm model

Laitenberger, Maria; Raison, Maxime; Périé, Delphine; Begon, Mickaël

doi:10.1007/s11044-014-9421-z

Cited by 61 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Blache et al 8 explanation comes from (i) the full personalisation of their model with optimally located joint centres versus a scaled model; (ii) limited range of motion at the shoulder, the most difficult part to track and (iii) a highly refined upper-limb model with 23 dof versus 19 dof for our model (22 dof less 3 dof for the joint between the box and the hand). Such residual values are larger than other upper limb kinematic chain models in which average residual values for dynamic movements were less than 8 mm (Laitenberger et al 2014). Nevertheless, the latter model was composed of 23 dof without counting the 3 dof between the hand and the handle against 19 dof þ 3 dof between the handle and the hand for our model.…”

Section: Validation Of the Musculoskeletal Modelmentioning

confidence: 71%

“…Indeed, according to OpenSim 3.1 Simtk recommendations, the inverse kinematic procedure enabled to accurately track the positions of the experimental markers since the average RMS error was close to 20 mm. In comparison to the model implemented by Laitenberger et al (2014), the error was twice larger. Partial (H1 and H2).…”

Section: Validation Of the Musculoskeletal Modelmentioning

confidence: 81%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of height and load weight on shoulder muscle work during overhead lifting task

Blache¹,

Desmoulins²,

Allard³

et al. 2014

Ergonomics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Few musculoskeletal models are available to assess shoulder deeper muscle demand during overhead lifting tasks. Our objective was to implement a musculoskeletal model to assess the effect of lifting height and load on shoulder muscle work. A musculoskeletal model scaled from 15 male subjects was used to calculate shoulder muscle work during six lifting tasks. Boxes containing three different loads (6, 12 and 18 kg) were lifted by the subjects from the waist to shoulder or eye level. After optimisation of the maximal isometric force of the model's muscles, the bio-fidelity of the model was improved by 19%. The latter was able to reproduce the subjects' lifting movements. Mechanical work of the rotator cuff muscles, upper trapezius and anterior deltoid was increased with lifting load and height augmentation. In conclusion, the use of a musculoskeletal model validated by electromyography enabled to evaluate the muscle demand of deep muscles during lifting tasks.

show abstract

Section: Validation Of the Musculoskeletal Modelmentioning

confidence: 71%

Section: Validation Of the Musculoskeletal Modelmentioning

confidence: 81%

Effects of height and load weight on shoulder muscle work during overhead lifting task

Blache¹,

Desmoulins²,

Allard³

et al. 2014

Ergonomics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Aerts and Verraes, 1984;Westneat, 1990;Alfaro et al, 2004;Van Wassenbergh et al, 2005;Patek et al, 2007;Roos et al, 2009). Although other studies have evaluated the fit of 3D multijoint models against in vivo or passive kinematics, including models with more than one DoF, none of the models has taken the form of a 3D four-bar linkage (Reinbolt et al, 2005;Di Gregorio et al, 2007;Chang and Pollard, 2008;Franci et al, 2009;Cerveri et al, 2010;Fohanno et al, 2014;Laitenberger et al, 2015). Thus, this study expands the versatility of four-bar models in simulating biomechanical systems and demonstrates that their utility is not limited to planar or single-DoF systems.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

The opercular mouth-opening mechanism of largemouth bass functions as a 3D four-bar linkage with three degrees of freedom

Olsen

Camp

Brainerd

2017

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The planar, one degree of freedom (1-DoF) four-bar linkage is an important model for understanding the function, performance and evolution of numerous biomechanical systems. One such system is the opercular mechanism in fishes, which is thought to function like a four-bar linkage to depress the lower jaw. While anatomical and behavioral observations suggest some form of mechanical coupling, previous attempts to model the opercular mechanism as a planar four-bar have consistently produced poor model fits relative to observed kinematics. Using newly developed, open source mechanism fitting software, we fitted multiple three-dimensional (3D) four-bar models with varying DoF to kinematics in largemouth bass to test whether the opercular mechanism functions instead as a 3D four-bar with one or more DoF. We examined link position error, link rotation error and the ratio of output to input link rotation to identify a best-fit model at two different levels of variation: for each feeding strike and across all strikes from the same individual. A 3D, 3-DoF four-bar linkage was the best-fit model for the opercular mechanism, achieving link rotational errors of less than 5%. We also found that the opercular mechanism moves with multiple degrees of freedom at the level of each strike and across multiple strikes. These results suggest that active motor control may be needed to direct the force input to the mechanism by the axial muscles and achieve a particular mouth-opening trajectory. Our results also expand the versatility of four-bar models in simulating biomechanical systems and extend their utility beyond planar or single-DoF systems.

show abstract

“…This indicator corresponds to the average distance between real and model markers over the whole recording period, defined as the global reconstruction error in [32]. Finally, the average error for all markers is computed by Equation (3).…”

Section: Inversementioning

confidence: 99%

Uncertainty propagation in multibody human model dynamics

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In biomechanics, calibration of body segment inertial parameters (BSIP) is crucial to take into account subject morphological specificities. To avoid strenuous protocols, identification methods based on rigid body dynamics laws have been proposed. Thanks to a motion capture system and force platforms, these methods optimize BSIP by minimizing errors in the equations of motion. These errors can be defined as the dynamic residuals reflecting inaccuracies arising from estimated BSIP, as well as from kinematics and force plate measurements. The current study aims at evaluating the part of uncertainty on the dynamic residuals directly related to kinematics and force plate measurements. To answer this question, we captured the movements of 10 participants performing a standardized motion. We then applied a Monte Carlo-based approach to introduce variations in the kinematics and force plate measurements, and evaluated the reconstructed difference on the dynamic residuals. Results show that, first, the BSIP evaluation using a regression method seemed to be an acceptable estimate for the studied subjects. Second, the part of uncertainty in the dynamic residuals was significantly higher than the dynamic residuals obtained. In conclusion, a subject-specific calibration of the BSIP based on dynamic residuals, for this model and protocol, seems irrelevant and prone to overfitting of BSIP.

show abstract

Refinement of the upper limb joint kinematics and dynamics using a subject-specific closed-loop forearm model

Cited by 61 publications

References 60 publications

Effects of height and load weight on shoulder muscle work during overhead lifting task

Effects of height and load weight on shoulder muscle work during overhead lifting task

The opercular mouth-opening mechanism of largemouth bass functions as a 3D four-bar linkage with three degrees of freedom

Uncertainty propagation in multibody human model dynamics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About