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 , Negar Riahi , Maryam Shakourisalim , Linda Miller , Mahdi Tavakoli , Hossein Rouhani , 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.
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.