visual3d:documentation:kinematics_and_kinetics:pose_estimation
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Next revision | Previous revision | ||
| visual3d:documentation:kinematics_and_kinetics:pose_estimation [2024/06/14 17:23] – created sgranger | visual3d:documentation:kinematics_and_kinetics:pose_estimation [2025/04/08 14:04] (current) – wikisysop | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| - | |**Language: | + | ====== |
| - | + | ||
| - | |===== Contents | + | |
| Visual3D has two distinctive approaches to computing the position and orientation of a segment. The first approach is the Six Degrees of Freedom method, which determines the position and orientation of segments independently from one another based solely upon measurements of that segment. The second approach is the Inverse Kinematics method, where segments form a hierarchical linked chain with joint properties that define the " | Visual3D has two distinctive approaches to computing the position and orientation of a segment. The first approach is the Six Degrees of Freedom method, which determines the position and orientation of segments independently from one another based solely upon measurements of that segment. The second approach is the Inverse Kinematics method, where segments form a hierarchical linked chain with joint properties that define the " | ||
| - | ===== Six Degrees of Freedom | + | ==== Six Degrees of Freedom ==== |
| The [[Visual3D: | The [[Visual3D: | ||
| Line 13: | Line 11: | ||
| The method' | The method' | ||
| - | ===== Inverse Kinematics | + | ==== Inverse Kinematics ==== |
| An alternative to the 6 DOF solution is to define joints (e.g. explicitly state which segments are connected by a joint) and to specify the properties of all joints. Because the targets used to track the segments are often subject to measurement error and soft tissue artifact, motion about some of the degrees of freedom maybe much larger than the motion that would be realistically possible. | An alternative to the 6 DOF solution is to define joints (e.g. explicitly state which segments are connected by a joint) and to specify the properties of all joints. Because the targets used to track the segments are often subject to measurement error and soft tissue artifact, motion about some of the degrees of freedom maybe much larger than the motion that would be realistically possible. | ||
| Line 21: | Line 19: | ||
| Lu and O’Connor (1999) described a global optimization process where physically realistic joint constraints can be added to the model to minimize the effect of the soft tissue and measurement error. Lu and O’Connor termed this process Global Optimization while other inside the biomechanics community prefer the term " | Lu and O’Connor (1999) described a global optimization process where physically realistic joint constraints can be added to the model to minimize the effect of the soft tissue and measurement error. Lu and O’Connor termed this process Global Optimization while other inside the biomechanics community prefer the term " | ||
| - | ===== Choosing between 6 DOF and IK ===== | + | ==== Choosing between 6 DOF and IK ==== |
| Many practitioners are interested in the questions: **How close are the 6 DOF and IK methods in terms of data and which one is correct?** | Many practitioners are interested in the questions: **How close are the 6 DOF and IK methods in terms of data and which one is correct?** | ||
| Line 31: | Line 29: | ||
| In general I find that a visual inspection of the data in Visual3D will give you a good clue of whether IK is useful or not. If looking at the data in Visual3D you see a lot of joints disarticulating then IK will generally be a good idea. (For example I have looked at the upper extremities in baseball pitching and golf and you often see the elbow blow apart and IK helps this sort of data considerably.) | In general I find that a visual inspection of the data in Visual3D will give you a good clue of whether IK is useful or not. If looking at the data in Visual3D you see a lot of joints disarticulating then IK will generally be a good idea. (For example I have looked at the upper extremities in baseball pitching and golf and you often see the elbow blow apart and IK helps this sort of data considerably.) | ||
| - | ===== Lecture Notes ===== | + | ==== Lecture Notes ==== |
| - | [[[https:// | + | [[https:// |
| - | ===== Marker Sets and Pose Estimation | + | ==== Marker Sets and Pose Estimation ==== |
| - | [[[https:// | + | [[https:// |
| While these opinions are Allan' | While these opinions are Allan' | ||
| Line 43: | Line 41: | ||
| If you have any questions related to Allan' | If you have any questions related to Allan' | ||
| - | ===== Further Reading | + | ==== Further Reading ==== |
| Leardini A, Belvedere C, Nardini F, Sancisi N, Conconi M, Parenti-Castelli V (2017) Kinematic models of lower limb joints for musculo-skeletal modelling and optimization in gait analysis. J Biomech. 2017 Sep 6;62:77-86. doi: 10.1016/ | Leardini A, Belvedere C, Nardini F, Sancisi N, Conconi M, Parenti-Castelli V (2017) Kinematic models of lower limb joints for musculo-skeletal modelling and optimization in gait analysis. J Biomech. 2017 Sep 6;62:77-86. doi: 10.1016/ | ||
| Line 57: | Line 55: | ||
| [[[https:// | [[[https:// | ||
| - | |||
| - | Retrieved from "" | ||
visual3d/documentation/kinematics_and_kinetics/pose_estimation.1718385804.txt.gz · Last modified: 2024/06/14 17:23 by sgranger