ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2021
Validation of 3-Space Wireless Inertial Measurement Units Using an Industrial Robot.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Time and Frequency Domain Analysis of IMU-Based Orientation Estimation Algorithms with Comparison to Robotic Arm Orientation as Reference.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- A Robust Method for Validating Orientation Sensors Using a Robot Arm as a High-Precision Reference.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Adaptive Lifting Index (Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Upper limb movement quality measures: comparing IMUs and optical motion capture in stroke patients performing a drinking task.Frontiers in digital health · 2024Article
- Shoulder Range of Motion Measurement Using Inertial Measurement Unit-Validation with a Robot Arm.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Benchmarking Dataset of Signals from a Commercial MEMS Magnetic-Angular Rate-Gravity (MARG) Sensor Manipulated in Regions with and without Geomagnetic Distortion.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Inertial Measurement Units (IMUs) are beneficial for motion tracking as, in contrast to most optical motion capture systems, IMU systems do not require a dedicated lab. However, IMUs are affected by electromagnetic noise and may exhibit drift over time; it is therefore common practice to compare their performance to another system of high accuracy before use. The 3-Space IMUs have only been validated in two previous studies with limited testing protocols. This study utilized an IRB 2600 industrial robot to evaluate the performance of the IMUs for the three sensor fusion methods provided in the 3-Space software. Testing consisted of programmed motion sequences including 360° rotations and linear translations of 800 mm in opposite directions for each axis at three different velocities, as well as static trials. The magnetometer was disabled to assess the accuracy of the IMUs in an environment containing electromagnetic noise. The Root-Mean-Square Error (RMSE) of the sensor orientation ranged between 0.2° and 12.5° across trials; average drift was 0.4°. The performance of the three filters was determined to be comparable. This study demonstrates that the 3-Space sensors may be utilized in an environment containing metal or electromagnetic noise with a RMSE below 10° in most cases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.