New York Marathon here we come…

 

SABLE_NT_NEW_YORK_MARATHON.jpg

A nice little good news story from James Lee (SABEL NT) on using technology in the preparation of an athlete for competition. And all for a great cause too!

Full article below and on ABC radio (from 2:06:30)

Territorian hitsNY’s streets for great cause
NT News Tuesday Ma8 8, 2018
In November, Territorian Na­talie Merida will take on the New York Marathon in a bid to raise funds for the Miracle Babies Foundation
After her experience with premature twins, Ms Merida said she decided to take on the marathon as a personal chal­lenge and to acknowledge the foundation for supporting her family. “I am running for family and my miracle four-year-olds “ she said.
“The foundation was a huge support to us during the good and bad days.” Helping her to prepare for the gruelling 42km is exercise and sports science expert Jim Lee. The Charles Darwin University lecturer is currently working on the appli­cation and development of wearable technologies within the sporting, workplace and rehabilitation environments.
“Using new technology in­ vented by my colleague and CDU Adjunct Professor Dr Danny James, I hope to accu­rately prescribe and improve her training program.” he said.
“The SABEL Sense device offers nine channels rather than the two or three of most devices so it will enable us to collect more data and monitor her training more effectively, improving performance feed­ back.” Dr Lee said that working with Ms Merida would also provide an opportunity to gather data and test the tech­nology. “Ultimately it will help all athletes and coaches by de­veloping software that will as­sist in monitoring performance,” he said.

 

 

Advertisements

How Technology Helps Measure Soccer Statistics and Tactics

Over the last 5-6 months, I have had different conversations with people who are working on technologies related to soccer.  And I recall writing about Tactical Analysis in Soccer for SportTechie some years back and thought I will reshare it here plus add a bit of update as some things have changed since then.

What are some of the Football Tactical Analysis Websites?

Squawka is a tactical analysis web application that provides a platform where one can view real-time and post-match statistics of (almost) everything that goes on in a football match. This includes time of possession, number of passes, number of shots, shot accuracy, chances created, tackles (or duels), blocks (or defensive actions), player stats etc. Match analysis data is presented in a field diagram with coloured dots and lines and heat maps. Those statistics can then be filtered by team and player for various types of analysis – whether it’s comparing player performance or looking at shots from one team or overall team events. A useful feature is the timeline scrolling which allows one to look at specific 5 min blocks of match activity.

Screen Shot 2014-09-01 at 9.46.42 PM

Player Performance Comparison

Screen Shot 2014-09-01 at 10.04.14 PM

Shots – where they were taken and where they landed

Screen Shot 2014-09-01 at 9.59.22 PM

Events Heat Maps

The comparison matrix is another interesting tool on the site that looks at stats over an entire season. For example, one can select five different teams in the 2013/2014 season of the Australian League and compare stats that they are interested in. The stats displayed can be filtered by ‘total for the season’, ‘average per game’ or ‘per 90 metrics’. One can also compare teams from different leagues and different seasons.

A special metric of this website is the Squawka Player Performance Score which is calculated using a large amount of data. This player performance score is broken down into “attack”, “defence” and “possession” statistics.

Screen Shot 2014-09-01 at 8.11.33 PM

Comparison Matrix Example

Four Four Two also provides match analysis data on their website in their Stats Zone section. It pretty much provides the same data available in Squawka, except the information is presented in a slightly different way and they don’t have a player performance score. The  Stats Zone allows all the match activities of a player to be viewed together in the Overall-player dashboard, instead of having to select the individual events in the Squawka dashboard. {Update: unfortunately FourFourTwo has discontinued Stats Zone due to limited resources}

Screen Shot 2014-09-01 at 10.56.06 PM.png

Stats Zone and what their Summary Statistics used to look like

Another site called Outside of the Boot writes commentaries and analysis on selected matches and supports their analysis using statistical data from the above two websites. Other than breaking down the statistics and what was going on in each match, they give reviews on the general style and tactics of a team, player or coach.

Where and how are the data collected?

Regardless of how the data is presented, what’s important is the reliability of the data and where their source is. Interestingly, both sites get their data from Opta, a sports data company that collect, package, analyse and distribute live data. Opta briefly explains on their website that their data collection process is labour intensive with three performance analysts assigned to each match; with one collecting all of the home team actions, one doing the away team and a third analyst checking the data for consistency and adding additional layers of data. They then run a full post-match check within 48 hours to ensure that the database is as accurate as possible.

But what exactly does each analyst do? By using their proprietary software, each Opta analyst puts in the live video feed of a match, then by using hotkeys, every activity that involves the ball is “tagged” – this “tagging” or tracking will record the time each activity started and ended and the X-Y coordinates of the start and end positions. For those who have used video analysis software like SportsCode (now owned by Hudl) or Dartfish, this will sound familiar. But what Opta has done is standardize their activity definition and tracking methods, so every analyst is trained to tag or code the exact same way. This means consistency in the data, allowing every match and every player to be compared using the same standards. The cool thing is, by feeding in historical matches (like all the past world cup matches), they can compare the performance of players from different decades. Check out this video that talks a bit more about what Opta Sports do:

Is there alternative (automated) technologies?

There are a number of athlete tracking technology out there that are either based on wearable technology (Catapult Sports, Tracktics, Polar Team, STATSports & SPT etc) or camera and image processing technology (Stats SportVU and TRACAB). The advantage of wearable sensors is that they can accurately track each athlete’s acceleration and impacts (in three axes) and some even track the players’ heart rate – something that is not possible with any of the current camera or video technology. But data from wearable sensors typically belong to the teams and not shared unless there is an arrangement with broadcasters. With Stats, they claim to not only track real-time 2D (X-Y) positioning data of the ball and the players, but its complex algorithms can also analyse and work out information like speeds, distances, possessions, passings, defence stats and turnovers. So technically, automating tactical analysis to some extent is possible but how much information can be made publicly available is another question.

Some final thoughts

The technology and methods used in Tactical Analysis in football have become more widespread over the years (and its still growing). The statistics that are made available can not only give punters additional information for betting, it can add new dimensions to watching each game. It provides viewers with a better understanding of what the players are actually doing (individually and as a team) and how they have been performing over a season with an unbiased quantified evaluation. For coaches and team managers, it means their decisions (in terms of training, strategising or even talent identification) don’t have to rely too much on gut feel but can be supported with numbers. How much they want to trust those numbers is another thing altogether.

If you know an exceptional app or technology in tactical analysis that is not mentioned here or maybe its still in development, feel free to leave a comment about it, and finally, thanks for reading!


Here are a few other related articles and blogs for those who like geek out a bit more on the topic:

  • Different Game: https://differentgame.wordpress.com/
  • Paper on big data and tactical analysis in elite soccer: link
  • Paper on tactical analysis using pattern recognition: link
  • Paper on a new tactical metric that looks at effective play: link

Customising What Athletes Wear And Use – 3D Scanning And Other Tech

The term bespoke or tailor-made brings to mind an image of a tailor measuring up a customer with a measuring tape so that he can make a suit that fits the customer. Four things typically happen in the whole suit-making process: 1) measuring the customer, 2) picking the preferred materials, 3) making the first fitting and 4) making adjustments based on the first fitting and customer’s feedback. The fourth step might repeat if the subsequent fittings are still not satisfactory. It is a tedious process but the outcome is getting the perfect fit for the customer.

In sports, athletes can have custom made helmets, shoes, protective gear, mouth guards, seats, suits, prosthetics and other adaptive equipment. We are not talking about just having custom aesthetic designs that are unique and represents the athlete. Custom made apparel or equipment that fits a specific athlete’s shape and style can not only improve comfort, protection, their range of movement, aerodynamics and overall performance. Let’s have a look at what technologies or methods are involved in customising them.

3D scanning

3D scanning is able to capture a lot more detailed measurements including curves (down to the millimetres) which standard ‘straight-line’ measurement tools like the measuring tape or vernier callipers are not quite capable of doing. Here are some parts of the body that are 3D scanned in order to be fitted:

  1. The athlete’s head; it can be scanned to create a 3D model, which is then used to design and make a custom fit helmet liner for football players.
  2. The feet are also commonly scanned to produce custom orthotics or high-performance athletic footwear.
  3. The lower body where athletes need to be seated or positioned in a certain way during competition; and it helps with designing custom-fit equipment, enhancing comfort and aerodynamics.  (e.g. slalom kayak seat or racing wheelchair seats or a luge)
  4. Stumps (amputations or limb difference) are scanned to help design better fitting prosthesis.

The more common 3D scanners are hand-held scanners like the Artec3D Eva or Creaform3D. They are typically portable and great for scanning around an object or body part. One of the downsides I find is the person doing the scan needs to have steady hands to maintain continuation/tracking and it takes some practice to get a scan right. There are measuring arm scanners that are basically a robotic arm that moves in multiple axes and has a laser scanner or touch probe at the end.  The user moves the scanner/probe at the end of the arm around the object and translates the coordinates to a 3D model. It helps with the problem of shaky hands but it might take longer for the probe to travel around the object. Terrestrial laser scanners are capable of scanning an entire stadium but might be an overkill to scan a wrist or a hand. There are also laser scanners built specifically for the foot where the foot is placed into the scanner and the scanning is done in just 15 seconds or less. Another increasingly popular 3D scanning method is photogrammetry. It is a good and cheap option that allows ‘scanning’ to be done with just a smartphone camera and the key factor is really the software.

Jess_3D_Scanning_Knee_Position-250.png

Kayak Athlete (Jess Fox) being scanned with a Creaform scanner (source: 3D systems)

Moulds

Before 3D scanning, moulds were probably the next best thing to getting the shape of a foot or stump or mouth. In some cases, moulds are still used due to a lack of access to 3D scanning and it is an effective low-cost solution in developing countries. In the case of the mouth guard, getting the mould or impression of the athlete’s teeth and gums is still the best if not the only way to make a custom mouth guard. Athletes can get the impressions themselves using a DIY kit or go to a dental clinic and have the dentist or dental prosthetist ensure that everything is aligned properly. There is also this custom ski boot liner that is designed to be fitted while the user is wearing it and the ski boot liner is injected with polyurethane foam that moulds around the wearer’s feet and solidifies after a short time. If you find it hard to imagine how that works, check out this video about the custom ski boot fitting process that also includes foot scanning and assessment:

3D Motion Capture

Motion capture or MoCap for short is typically used for biomechanical analysis. The typical ‘gold-standard’ MoCap systems are the optical systems. Athletes are (sometimes) made to put on compression garments and have markers placed on the joints that need to be analysed. Then multiple cameras set up around the athletes capture their movement. An example of customisation using Mocap is bike fitting systems. MoCap based bike fitting systems by STT Systems or Retul analyse the athlete’s posture and various biomechanical parameters and recommend an ideal configuration and position. It results in a combination of improved ergonomics as well as performance. Another application that utilises MoCap is golf fitting. The athlete’s golf swing is analysed during the MoCap session and the software breaks down the data and looks at key swing characteristics of the athlete. Then with reference to a huge database of golf swing profiles, a recommendation is generated for the clubs best suited to the athlete’s swings.

Note: There are many other optical (MoCap) systems out there for bike or golf fitting and some of their technology vary and some of them incorporate high-speed cameras. There are also inertial sensing systems and different products will have different levels of accuracy but they all track 3D motion.

BEN1632

An example of a bike fitting mocap system from Bioracer Motion.

Other Complementary Tech

Sometimes, applying any of the above technologies alone is not enough to complete the customisation process and they are complemented with other measurements or sensing technologies.

Pressure sensing technologies are often used for gait analysis and customising footwear. It gives the podiatrist a better idea of how the athlete walks/runs, where the pressure points are and which parts of the sole require more support. They are also used in golf fitting clinics together with Mocap to provide data on the golfer’s balance and pressure distribution during each swing.

3D printing almost goes hand in hand with 3D scanning and we will find in many links or examples above where 3D printing has been utilised to prototype the equipment and sometimes even used as the final product in competition as seen in this paracyclist’s prosthetic leg.

With customisations that are trying to improve aerodynamics, they usually need to perform wind tunnel tests (or aero tests) or simulations. The results of the wind tunnel tests will provide feedback for further design optimisations such as the cycling helmet. And the team at NTNU has even gone to the extent of 3D printing a model of Chris Froome to test and optimise his time trial suit.

teamsky1-352x176

Luca Oggiano and the Chris Froome 3D replica in the NTNU wind tunnel (source: NTNU)

Final word

We are in a period where customisation of sportswear and equipment is slowly becoming a norm. Other than the improvement of technologies and processes involved in customisation, the mindsets of athletes have also shifted to see the benefits of wearing and using tailor-made equipment. With major shoe companies like Nike, adidas and New balance partnering with technology companies to further explore performance centred customisation, it will be interesting to see how the technologies will progress and what boundaries can be pushed with customisation.

What else do you think could be or should be customised for an athlete? Would you like to explore making something unique or bespoke? Do leave a comment or feel free to reach out. With that thanks for reading!

Kim Blair, ISEA past president hits the spot for sport in Switzerland, May 2018

in-conversation-with-kim-blair-quote.jpg
Good friend of SABEL and former president of the Internationa Sports Engineering Association Kim Blair is a guest speaker at ThinkSport’s the SPOT in Lausanne, May 2018.

Kim’s unique perspective as the founder of MIT’s sports enterprise and long time sports engineering affectionardo is speaking on the rise of digital information in sport. Jay from think sport and Kim recently had a bit of a chat about it……. (Read the full interview here)

When Winning Is A Drag

We all know the advantages that innovation has brought to athletes in many sports with ways to enhance performance through technology. It has often been about reducing drag, from the skin suits worn by skaters to the dimples on golf balls to the latest in cycling technology.

In the early 2000s, working seriously to improve the aerodynamics of cycling was still a bit of a novelty, remembers Doctor Kim Blair formerly of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who has been at the forefront of sports innovation. “Using wind tunnels like the one we have at MIT was not something that everyone did. That changed as more people became aware that a five percent difference in aerodynamics can mean the difference between getting a place on the podium or not.”

A former NASA engineer, Blair first made the connection between technology and sport as a graduate student who was also a passionate triathlete and saw that aerospace design and sporting success had lots in common. Now he serves as an external advisor for the new sports innovation program based in MIT’s department of mechanical engineering.

“Sports organisations might not be the lead developers in new technologies, but they are often the first adapters,” he says. “That’s partly because there are low regulatory hurdles to introducing innovations, if you compare sport with the health sector, for example. And also because people in sports are willing to try new things that might give them an edge.” 

 

The SPOT, a pioneering new event launched by ThinkSport, aims to stimulate progress in sport by bringing together bright minds and fresh innovations inside and outside the industry. The inaugural edition of the annual two-day event will take place from 15 to 16 May 2018 at the SwissTech Convention Center in Lausanne and will focus on the themes of connected sport, new sports including E-sports, performance & health, and media & marketing. Presented in an untraditional format, The SPOT will provide for an engaging conference and workshop programme, a Marketplace and Demo Zone featuring innovative products and solutions, numerous networking opportunities and an international start-up contest to promote and award new business ideas.

 

Technologies Used To Monitor Training In Sprint Kayaking [Survey]

What is Sprint (or Flatwater) Kayaking

In case you are haven’t heard of the sport, Sprint Kayaking isn’t the most popular sport in the world. In fact, it isn’t a very easy sport to get into. For example, if I am new to the sport, I might need to join a club to get access to the equipment and training programs. Then I would sign up for an introductory course of sorts to learn the basics of kayaking on the water and safety in the water. After I sort out the basics, which is probably done on more stable kayaks, I will try to move into the kayaks designed for sprints. These sprint kayaks will be a lot more tippy but they allow the trained paddler to go on the water really quickly – hence the name sprint kayak. The length of the process from being new to the sport to being able to comfortably paddle on a sprint kayak will vary between individuals but I would say it is between a few months to a year. Then to be really good in the sport will take years of training or 10,000 hours as Malcolm Gladwell popularised in his book Outliers. [There are many debates on the actual number of hours (to become an expert in anything) but the point is: it’s hard work.]

My own brief experience in the sport

Years ago when I was in the sport as a teenager, the only technology we used was the stop-watch that took the time of our 200m/500m/1000m sprints or it was used as a timer for doing interval sessions. Back then, I only competed at the national level and never went further. Work and life commitments took over and I even moved to a different city. Now with a young family, having time to go flatwater kayaking is quite the luxury.

 

Kayaking_on_the_yarra

my first kayaking session of 2018

 

Here comes the “tech” bit

But being a sports engineer, I recently revisited the use of technology in sprint kayaking training and was thinking of a couple of ideas of adopting technologies that are available in the market to help with training. I did a bit of research and it seems like most kayaking people use products that were designed for runners or cyclists to track their training. A commonly used product is the running/cycling app Strava. I know a handful of people who secure their Garmin (or other fitness) watches onto their boat and simply start a “run” to track the session. The data then goes onto the Strava platform or any other platform they use.

 

IMG_9430

my “run” on Strava

 

Nelo has a training app that paddlers can use by securing their Android phone onto their kayaks and it uses GPS and the motion sensors on their phone to track their training. The great thing about their app is that it incorporates a Coach’s app that monitors up to 6 different paddlers. There are also a couple of iOS apps on the market that tracks water sports of various kinds including waterspeed app or paddle logger. These ones are a bit more generic.

Then there’s also sensor products specific for paddling sports such as the Vaaka Cadence sensor, the Motionize sensor, and the Kayak Power Meter.

There might be some more that I haven’t come across or they are only used in research labs at the moment. But even with what seems like a good range of training products, I still feel that there is something missing with all these different products. Maybe it is just the sports engineer in me that thinks that way. I am keen to speak to other canoeists/kayakers/paddlers out there who may or may not use technology in their training and get some feedback.

So if you are a canoeist/kayaker/paddler, could you please fill out this survey: link. Your time and input will be much appreciated and will help shape the future of any tech that’s developed! If what I talked about here interests you, leave your email at the end of the survey and I will keep you posted on future developments. Lastly, please also forward this to your fellow canoeist/kayaker/paddler friends. Thank you and thanks for reading!

 

Wearable Technology at the top end of down under

Dr_Jim_Lee_-_Higher_Degrees_by_Research_-_YouTube.png

Here’s a little piece from SABEL Labs, NT on wearable technology (Looking good Jim!). Find out about post graduate opportunities in sport, cattle monitoring and urban transport too. More on Jim’s Sports Lab or download an information pack from Charles Darwin University http://study.cdu.edu.au/jim-lee

 

The Force Shoe by Xsens

Do Force Platforms, Pressure Sensors And Smart Insoles Do The Same Thing?

Force platforms, pressure sensors and smart insoles are all devices that a person can step on and get some insight related to their weight or the pressure they are exerting on those devices with each step. Other than that, they are quite different and can have very different applications. This post is just an attempt to break that down. Feel free to jump to the different sections that are of interest:

[Force PlatformsPressure SensorsSmart InsolesSummaryMore on Smart Insoles]

Force platforms

A Force Platform (FP) is an equipment that you would typically find in a lab – an engineering lab, a biomechanics lab, gait analysis lab, ergonomics lab.. you get the idea. They are great for measuring forces applied directly onto its surface. So when a force platform is placed on the ground, you could step on it to find out how much force you are exerting on the platform. For those platforms that measure multiple axes, you could also slide an object across the platform to measure resistance forces between the surfaces. In sports engineering, FPs enable studies in walking/running gait, jumping (and landing), friction measurements in water polo balls or shoes or gloves, the coefficient of restitution of balls, aerodynamic drag (when placed in a wind tunnel), and more.

IMG_1075

An example of a Kistler Force Platform (blue) set up in a wind tunnel

For anyone keen to explore what else is done with force platforms in sports engineering, feel free to do a quick search on these journals: Sports Engineering JournalSports Technology Journal or Journal of Sports Engineering & Technology.

Inside Force Platforms

The majority of Force Platforms in the market are set up with multiple Strain gauges or Piezoelectric sensors/elements that deform proportionally to the applied load. There is also the not so common Hall Effect sensing Force Platform which doesn’t require an external signal amplifier/conditioner like the strain gauges and piezoelectric sensors do. They are typically quite expensive and their prices vary with the number of sensors, size, construction, and additional data acquisition (or signal amplifier) systems.

For those who can’t afford the expensive systems and is adventurous enough to try and build something, a sports physics researcher from the University of Sydney wrote a paper providing details of a cheaper home made force plate. Essentially he used Piezos that were manufactured for sonar applications and they cost $25 each. A quick search on Instructables also showed one DIY instruction on making a strain gage force plate. For the slightly less adventurous, there is also the option of the Wii Balance Board as a cheap force plate alternative. There have been some validations of the gaming platform as a standing balance assessment tool, a golf swing analysis tool, and for use in other medical applications. The only downsides of the Wii Balance Board are the user weight limitation and that a custom software is required to access and read the data.

Pressure sensors

There are three main differences between Pressure sensors and Force platforms. Pressure sensors are typically flexible and can be placed on flat or curved surfaces, unlike Force platforms that have to be mounted rigidly. The other difference is pressure sensors do not measure force vectors. Thirdly (or a slight extension of the second), Pressure sensors only quantify pressure that is perpendicular to it (single axis) so it cannot determine shear forces or friction between two surfaces. Due to their flexibility, pressure sensors have been used to determine comfort and fit in aircraft seats for Paralympians, analyse medical mattresses, measure the pressure of grip during a golf swing, pressure distribution on bicycle handlebars, and more.

fsr402

Single force sensitive resistor (FSR) from interlink electronics

Pressure sensors are mostly made out of either resistive sensors or capacitive sensors. The main differences between them are the sensing material used and their electrodes. They can be constructed as single sensing nodes or they can also be constructed in a row-column array fashion. The advantage of the array or matrix construction (over single nodes) is that it requires fewer connections. In an array, the intersection between each row and column is a sensing node. So a 3 by 3 array creates 9 sensing nodes while only needing 6 connections.  On the other hand, 9 single sensing nodes will need 9+1 connections where the +1 is the common ground. The difference becomes much bigger as the number of sensing nodes increases (For example 100 sensing nodes can be achieved using a 10 by 10 array that needs 20 connections or 100 single sensing nodes that need 101 connections).

Single Sensor Nodes Vs Arrays 2

A simple illustration of Single sensing node Vs Sensor Matrix/Array

However, the matrix construction is not without its challenges. The matrix sensor circuit is prone to parasitic crosstalk (capacitive or resistive). This means when pressure is applied on one node or multiple nodes, the electrical readings for other (unactivated) nodes might be affected. This is also known as “ghosting”. Unless some correction is applied, the measurements/readings become inaccurate and potentially useless. Also, the bigger the matrix, the more complex the correction. But if accurate absolute readings are not required, then it’s fine.

A related side story

I have been following the development of this smart yoga mat that was successfully crowdfunded on Indiegogo back in Dec 2014. Fast forward to 2017, they are still struggling to deliver the product. Looking through their updates, we can see they had to deal with sensor accuracy (possibly the crosstalk or ghosting issue); and on top that, some other issues they had include sensor durability, mat materials suitability, and accuracy of their tracking algorithms (which they are using some form of AI). Having prototyped a smart exercise mat around the same time they started, I can fully understand the challenges and why it is taking that long. Then again I am not sure it is worth all that effort. Personally, I think that simply relying on a pressure sensing mat to monitor and give (technique) feedback on yoga poses (or any exercises) has its limitations. Adding camera tracking (possibly utilising the camera on the tablet) might help. That saying, it is not stopping others from developing similar products as seen in this video.

Smart Insoles

Smart Insoles or Instrumented Insoles are essentially pressure sensors made in the shape of a shoe sole. The sensors are usually made in a similar fashion described earlier. Most of the Smart Insoles are also built with IMUs so that it adds a bit more context to the pressure data such as whether the wearers are standing, walking, running or jumping. The greatest advantage of Smart Insoles is they allow feet pressure mapping and measurement on-the-go. Things like continual gait analysis and activity monitoring, and it even has medical application likes foot ulcer prevention and falls prevention.

contnt_img

Source: Footlogger.com

There are a couple of shoemakers that designed their shoes with the Smart Insole embedded within the shoe like the Altra IQ for running and the Iofit for tracking golf swing stance. The good thing about them is they have designed everything to fit properly into a shoe, made for a specific function. So users don’t run the risk of their Smart Insole not fitting properly into their shoes and collecting inaccurate measurements. On the other hand, users are restricted with specific shoes for pressure monitoring or activity analysis.  But at the end of the day, the pros and cons are really dependent on the individual.

Brief Summary

Going back to the question: “Do Force Platforms, Pressure Sensors and Smart Insoles do the same thing?”; there are some things that they are all capable of performing (e.g. gait analysis), but they all do it in a different way.  Also, there are certain measurements or monitoring that are unique for each sensor. Here’s a simple table that sums it up:

Sensors Measures shear force Measures Pressure Doesn’t require rigid mounting Portable Tracks Motion
Force Plates X X ✔/X
Pressure Sensors X ✔/X X
Smart Insoles X


More about Smart Insoles

Personally, I feel that Smart Insoles is a great idea, with many useful applications in sports and health. Over the last few years, there has been an increase in research and development in this area with many patents generated in the process; and companies around the world have come up with commercial products around the concept of Smart Insoles. It is definitely still in its early stages and I am not sure if it has even reached Early Adopters yet. Sadly, one company that I followed (Kinematix) has already closed shop due to a lack of funding. Perhaps it is ahead of its time like the adidas intelligent running shoe with intelligent active cushioning. Nevertheless, I believe the potential (of Smart Insoles) is there and I think targeting specific niches/problems will probably have a better outcome than designing for a generic application.

If you have an idea or project needing a smart insole or custom pressure sensor, feel free to contact us or leave a comment. We might be able to help you with it or at least point you in the right direction. As always, thanks for reading!


Other related articles: