In the previous section, we scaled and made model and kinematic adjustments sequentially. Modern computational methods have enabled new algorithms to adjust the model and kinematic data together. This could save time by reducing the number of inputs from a user and reduce residuals further than an expert iteratively changing settings on each step.

AddBiomechanics is a tool that can use OpenSim models and data and perform all of these steps automatically. We will use the web interface to process the same data, and then analyze the changes it made to improve the simulation results.

1. Preparing the inputs to AddBiomechanics

2. Accessing the AddBiomechanics web app

3. Setting up a new folder for the example

4. Upload data and run the AddBiomechanics tool

Questions

  1. Assess the IK results by looking at the marker errors.
    1. In the IK folder, open the file that ends in “summary.txt”. What was the average marker RMSE and the average marker max error?
    2. Open the file containing the marker errors between the IK solution and the experimental data (in the IK folder, find the file that ends in “marker_errors.pdf”). Markers that are on both limbs are plotted together. For both legs, which Marker has the highest RMSE?
  2. Look at the Marker with the highest error by visualizing the results in the OpenSim GUI. Load the model (final.osim) and the IK results (in the IK folder, find the .mot file). Find the Marker of interest on the model. How did the tool move the Marker?
  3. Overlay the experimental data with the IK solution. To do this, under the model, expand the “Motions” section, right-click “Coordinates” and click Associate Motion Data…. Go to the MarkerData subfolder and choose the .trc file. Does the Marker with the highest error track closely to the experimental data (blue marker)?

5. Adjusting settings for marker tracking

Markers in OpenSim models have a boolean property tag called <fixed>. Broadly, setting this tag to true for a Marker indicates to the tool that this Marker’s location should not move as much as a Marker with the tag set to false. (Note that OpenSim’s Scale Tool uses a similar but different interpretation of this tag. See the Scale Tool documentation for more information). In this section, we will adjust this setting for the Markers that could be causing issues and re-run the tool.

Questions

  1. Assess the new IK results. Were results improved by the change by “fixing” the Marker? Support your answer with quantitative data from any plots and other output, and with visualizing the model and results.
  2. Plot the coordinates that are located closest to the updated Marker for both the results in the previous section and this section. How did the IK results change for this coordinate? Coordinates can be plotted in a couple ways: 1) in the GUI, or 2) in the file ending in “ik.pdf” provided in the IK results folder.
  3. Overlay the experimental data on the new IK motion as done in the previous section.
    1. Does the Marker with the highest error track closely to the experimental data (blue marker)?
    2. Recall that the Scale and IK steps were completed at the same time when using AddBiomechanics. 
      1. How can this explain any issues with the placement of this Marker? 
      2. What is a downside to performing these steps at the same time?
  4. Why might it have been necessary to set this Marker as “fixed” for AddBiomechanics when it was not “fixed” when using the OpenSim Scale Tool (i.e., scaling a model during a static trial)?
  5. Looking at all of the marker errors, suggest other Markers that you may consider “fixing” in future iterations.

6. Assessing Inverse Dynamics Results

The Inverse Dynamics step was also completed, with the results printed to the ID folder.

Questions

  1. Assess the quality of the Inverse Dynamics results. In the ID results folder, open the file ending in “summary.txt”.
    1. What are the average residual force and torque?
    2. How do these values compare to the residuals after RRA?
    3. Look at all 6 residual values over the trial by opening the file ending in “id.pdf” provided in the ID results folder. How do these values compare with the residuals after RRA?
  2. Investigate some of the changes that were made by the tool to reduce residuals. Similar to RRA, the inertial parameters of bodies and kinematics can be changed to reduce residuals.
    1. In the top folder of the downloaded results, open README.txt. How does the total mass of the model compare to the mass of the subject that was used as an input to the tool?
    2. Which bodies had some of the largest changes, both as percentage changes and absolute changes. Are these changes changes reasonable? Why or why not?
  3. Assess the quality of your ID results by comparing your ID results from those obtained in the original paper (Rajagopal et al., 2016). Plot your results for the three sagittal plane coordinates (hip_flexion, knee_angle, and ankle_angle) through either: 1) plotting in the GUI, or 2) opening the file ending in “id.pdf” provided in the ID results folder.
    1. How well do your results match with the original work? Some aspects to consider include the timing of peaks, the relative magnitude of the different joint moments, and the absolute magnitude of the different joint moments.
    2. Are these differences surprising given that the processing steps were performed differently?


Next: Questions: Computing Joint Moments with Experimental Data

Previous: Part I: Computing Joint Moments with OpenSim

Home: Computing Joint Moments with Experimental Data