Validation of markerless vision-based motion capture for ergonomics risk assessment

IF 2.5 2区 工程技术 Q2 ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL
Armin Bonakdar , Negar Riahi , Maryam Shakourisalim , Linda Miller , Mahdi Tavakoli , Hossein Rouhani , Ali Golabchi
{"title":"Validation of markerless vision-based motion capture for ergonomics risk assessment","authors":"Armin Bonakdar ,&nbsp;Negar Riahi ,&nbsp;Maryam Shakourisalim ,&nbsp;Linda Miller ,&nbsp;Mahdi Tavakoli ,&nbsp;Hossein Rouhani ,&nbsp;Ali Golabchi","doi":"10.1016/j.ergon.2025.103734","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Work-related musculoskeletal disorders impact millions annually, often due to awkward postures and heavy lifting. Vision-based markerless optical motion capture (ML-OMC) systems have gained attention as a possible solution for identifying ergonomic risks in workplace settings. However, their reliability remains unknown compared to marker-based optical motion capture (MB-OMC) and inertial measurement units (IMUs). This study reports on a comparative analysis of an ML-OMC against MB-OMC and IMUs and its suitability for joint reaction force estimation. Eight participants performed lifting, a task considered physically demanding among manual handling activities, while their joint angles were recorded using the three measurement systems, and joint reaction forces were determined using joint angle data and ground reaction forces through biomechanical modeling. Furthermore, postural ergonomic assessment scores were computed for the lifting initiation posture of the activity using data from the three systems and biomechanics experts’ inputs. The back angle obtained by ML-OMC exhibited a strong correlation (0.95) with both MB-OMC and IMUs, along with small RMSE values of 6.5° and 9.9° compared to the readouts from MB-OMC and IMUs, respectively. The L5-S1 joint reaction forces obtained by ML-OMC showed a high correlation (0.91 with MB-OMC and 0.85 with IMUs), and small RMSE and normalized RMSE values. Additionally, postural ergonomic assessment scores obtained from ML-OMC aligned with MB-OMC for 87 % of participants, showing significant consistency compared to the notable variation seen with expert-derived scores. These findings underscore the potential of ML-OMC as a dependable in-field ergonomic risk assessment tool for preventing work-related musculoskeletal disorders.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50317,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics","volume":"107 ","pages":"Article 103734"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016981412500040X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Work-related musculoskeletal disorders impact millions annually, often due to awkward postures and heavy lifting. Vision-based markerless optical motion capture (ML-OMC) systems have gained attention as a possible solution for identifying ergonomic risks in workplace settings. However, their reliability remains unknown compared to marker-based optical motion capture (MB-OMC) and inertial measurement units (IMUs). This study reports on a comparative analysis of an ML-OMC against MB-OMC and IMUs and its suitability for joint reaction force estimation. Eight participants performed lifting, a task considered physically demanding among manual handling activities, while their joint angles were recorded using the three measurement systems, and joint reaction forces were determined using joint angle data and ground reaction forces through biomechanical modeling. Furthermore, postural ergonomic assessment scores were computed for the lifting initiation posture of the activity using data from the three systems and biomechanics experts’ inputs. The back angle obtained by ML-OMC exhibited a strong correlation (0.95) with both MB-OMC and IMUs, along with small RMSE values of 6.5° and 9.9° compared to the readouts from MB-OMC and IMUs, respectively. The L5-S1 joint reaction forces obtained by ML-OMC showed a high correlation (0.91 with MB-OMC and 0.85 with IMUs), and small RMSE and normalized RMSE values. Additionally, postural ergonomic assessment scores obtained from ML-OMC aligned with MB-OMC for 87 % of participants, showing significant consistency compared to the notable variation seen with expert-derived scores. These findings underscore the potential of ML-OMC as a dependable in-field ergonomic risk assessment tool for preventing work-related musculoskeletal disorders.

Abstract Image

基于无标记视觉的人体工程学风险评估的动作捕捉验证
与工作相关的肌肉骨骼疾病每年影响数百万人,通常是由于笨拙的姿势和举重。基于视觉的无标记光学运动捕捉(ML-OMC)系统作为识别工作场所环境中人体工程学风险的可能解决方案受到了关注。然而,与基于标记的光学运动捕捉(MB-OMC)和惯性测量单元(imu)相比,它们的可靠性仍然未知。本研究报告了ML-OMC与MB-OMC和imu的比较分析及其在联合反作用力估计中的适用性。8名参与者进行举重,这是一项体力搬运活动中体力要求很高的任务,同时他们的关节角度使用三种测量系统进行记录,关节反作用力通过生物力学建模通过关节角度数据和地面反作用力来确定。此外,使用来自三个系统的数据和生物力学专家的输入,计算活动的起举姿势的姿势工效学评估分数。ML-OMC测得的背角与MB-OMC和imu均表现出很强的相关性(0.95),与MB-OMC和imu的读数相比,RMSE值分别为6.5°和9.9°。ML-OMC得到的L5-S1联合反作用力与MB-OMC的相关性为0.91,与imu的相关性为0.85,RMSE和归一化RMSE值均较小。此外,从ML-OMC获得的姿势人体工程学评估分数与87%的参与者的MB-OMC一致,与专家衍生分数的显着差异相比,显示出显著的一致性。这些发现强调了ML-OMC作为预防与工作有关的肌肉骨骼疾病的可靠的现场人体工程学风险评估工具的潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics
International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 工程技术-工程:工业
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
12.90%
发文量
110
审稿时长
56 days
期刊介绍: The journal publishes original contributions that add to our understanding of the role of humans in today systems and the interactions thereof with various system components. The journal typically covers the following areas: industrial and occupational ergonomics, design of systems, tools and equipment, human performance measurement and modeling, human productivity, humans in technologically complex systems, and safety. The focus of the articles includes basic theoretical advances, applications, case studies, new methodologies and procedures; and empirical studies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信