Cargando…

Evaluating the Dynamic Performance of Interfacial Pressure Sensors at a Simulated Body-Device Interface

BACKGROUND: Pressure sensing at the body-device interface can help assess the quality of fit and function of assistive devices during physical activities and movement such as walking and running. However, the dynamic performance of various pressure sensor configurations is not well established. OBJE...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hamilton, M, Sivasambu, H, Behdinan, K, Andrysek, J
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Canadian Online Publication Group 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10443500/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37614935
http://dx.doi.org/10.33137/cpoj.v4i1.36059
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Pressure sensing at the body-device interface can help assess the quality of fit and function of assistive devices during physical activities and movement such as walking and running. However, the dynamic performance of various pressure sensor configurations is not well established. OBJECTIVE(S): Two common commercially available thin-film pressure sensors were tested to determine the effects of clinically relevant setup configurations focusing on loading areas, interfacing elements (i.e. ‘puck’) and calibration methods. METHODOLOGY: Testing was performed using a customized universal testing machine to simulate dynamic, mobility relevant loads at the body-device interface. Sensor performance was evaluated by analyzing accuracy and hysteresis. FINDINGS: The results suggest that sensor calibration method has a significant effect on sensor performance although the difference is mitigated by using an elastomeric loading puck. Both sensors exhibited similar performance during dynamic testing that agree with accuracy and hysteresis values reported by manufacturers and in previous studies assessing mainly static and quasi-static conditions. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that sensor performance under mobility relevant conditions may be adequately represented via static and quasi-testing testing. This is important since static testing is much easier to apply and reduces the burden on users to verify dynamic performance of sensors prior to clinical application. The authors also recommend using a load puck for dynamic testing conditions to achieve optimal performance.