These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: System and modelling errors in motion analysis: implications for the measurement of the elbow angle in cricket bowling.
    Author: Elliott BC, Alderson JA, Denver ER.
    Journal: J Biomech; 2007; 40(12):2679-85. PubMed ID: 17307186.
    Abstract:
    The system and modelling errors of two fundamentally different motion capture systems (opto-reflective vs. video-based) were tested under various conditions, to determine their ability to accurately measure flexion-extension of the elbow angle in cricket bowling. A mechanical arm was used for all testing, that enabled known elbow flexion-extension and abduction ("carry") angles to be manually set. The root mean squared (RMS) error of 0.6 degrees for the opto-reflective system (Vicon-612) was more accurate in reconstructing a known angle than the video-based system (Peak Motus) (RMS error 2.3 degrees ) in the laboratory, when the same mathematical procedure (model) was applied to calculate the elbow flexion-extension angle. When different models were applied to the raw marker trajectories collected using the video-based system, RMS was lowest for the external marker segmental cluster models (2.3 degrees ) compared with 9.4 degrees for the vector and 4.5 degrees for the projected vector approaches, where joint centres were visually approximated. Real world, field-based comparisons using the video-based system showed that occluding the arm and therefore the shoulder, elbow and wrist joint centre locations by placing a shirt on the arm, increased RMS error for both vector (7.8 degrees -9.0 degrees ) and projected vector (4.3 degrees -5.1 degrees ) modelling approaches.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]