Accuracy map of an optical motion capture system with 42 or 21 cameras in a large measurement volume.

Optical motion capture is commonly used in biomechanics to measure human kinematics. However, no studies have yet examined the accuracy of optical motion capture in a large capture volume (>100m3), or how accuracy varies from the center to the extreme edges of the capture volume. This study measured the dynamic 3D errors of an optical motion capture system composed of 42 OptiTrack Prime 41 cameras (capture volume of 135m3) by comparing the motion of a single marker to the motion reported by a ThorLabs linear motion stage. After spline interpolating the data, it was found that 97% of the capture area had error below 200μm. When the same analysis was performed using only half (21) of the cameras, 91% of the capture area was below 200μm of error. The only locations that exceeded this threshold were at the extreme edges of the capture area, and no location had a mean error exceeding 1mm. When measuring human kinematics with skin-mounted markers, uncertainty of marker placement relative to underlying skeletal features and soft tissue artifact produce errors that are orders of magnitude larger than the errors attributed to the camera system itself. Therefore, the accuracy of this OptiTrack optical motion capture system was found to be more than sufficient for measuring full-body human kinematics with skin-mounted markers in a large capture volume (>100m3).

[1]  Patric Eichelberger,et al.  Analysis of accuracy in optical motion capture - A protocol for laboratory setup evaluation. , 2016, Journal of biomechanics.

[2]  J. Richards,et al.  The measurement of human motion: A comparison of commercially available systems , 1999 .

[3]  Scott Tashman,et al.  The inaccuracy of surface-measured model-derived tibiofemoral kinematics. , 2012, Journal of biomechanics.

[4]  Chris Bishop,et al.  Next-generation low-cost motion capture systems can provide comparable spatial accuracy to high-end systems. , 2013, Journal of applied biomechanics.

[5]  Markus Windolf,et al.  Systematic accuracy and precision analysis of video motion capturing systems--exemplified on the Vicon-460 system. , 2008, Journal of biomechanics.

[6]  Angela E Kedgley,et al.  Comparative accuracy of radiostereometric and optical tracking systems. , 2009, Journal of biomechanics.

[7]  T. Jenkyn,et al.  Quantifying skin motion artifact error of the hindfoot and forefoot marker clusters with the optical tracking of a multi-segment foot model using single-plane fluoroscopy. , 2011, Gait & posture.

[8]  Bruce Carse,et al.  Affordable clinical gait analysis: an assessment of the marker tracking accuracy of a new low-cost optical 3D motion analysis system. , 2013, Physiotherapy.

[9]  W McKinon,et al.  The association between loss of ankle dorsiflexion range of movement, and hip adduction and internal rotation during a step down test. , 2016, Manual therapy.

[10]  L. Maletsky,et al.  Accuracy of an optical active-marker system to track the relative motion of rigid bodies. , 2007, Journal of biomechanics.

[11]  Shinji Miyazaki,et al.  Comparison of the performance of 3D camera systems , 1995 .

[12]  S. Evans,et al.  Accuracy and repeatability of an optical motion analysis system for measuring small deformations of biological tissues. , 2007, Journal of biomechanics.

[13]  A. Cappozzo,et al.  Human movement analysis using stereophotogrammetry. Part 3. Soft tissue artifact assessment and compensation. , 2005, Gait & posture.

[14]  Silvio Lorenzetti,et al.  Soft Tissue Artefacts of the Human Back: Comparison of the Sagittal Curvature of the Spine Measured Using Skin Markers and an Open Upright MRI , 2014, PloS one.

[15]  Lorenzo Chiari,et al.  Human movement analysis using stereophotogrammetry. Part 4: assessment of anatomical landmark misplacement and its effects on joint kinematics. , 2005, Gait & posture.

[16]  Peter Le,et al.  Evaluating the low back biomechanics of three different office workstations: Seated, standing, and perching. , 2016, Applied ergonomics.