Gait Analysis
For this project we were in our Capstone groups and we had to figure out the question: What is the relationship between the height and gate frequency for walking humans? How we figured this question out is by putting two pieces of duct tape onto the ground 10 ft away from each other in each member of our group walked that distance.While we walk this distance We recorded the data by having an app called accelerometer, where We duct tape our phone with the accelerometer app to our chests in walked 10 ft. We then gathered our data, and put it into Google Sheets to create a graph and an equation to figure out what was the difference between all of our walking.
We found that people that are taller have faster acceleration rather than their shorter counterparts. We conducted a study with three subjects. One student was 5’9, one was 5’7, and the final was 6’0. Each student walked 10 feet with an accelerometer app taped to their chest. Our three data points were, 5’7 ( -0.124), 5’9 (0.035), 6’0 (0.207). The average acceleration was 0.08. We used this as our comparison point. Any acceleration above 0.08 you can make the prediction that they are taller than 5’9. Visa Versa an acceleration below 0.08 you can predict that the person is below 5’9. We decided that 5’9 was the correct high to use because it was near the average of all of our heights.
Overall I would say we completed a fairly good project. We created a predictive model and had pretty good data and results. However if we could do this again there would be three main changes. First, we would get a larger data spread. Whether this is taking more trials or using more classmates. This would give us more accurate results. Second, we would make a more complex predictive model. Our “if” “Then” statements limited our group. A more complex predictive model would allow our group to compare acceleration to exact heights. Finally, we could have measured other components rather than just acceleration. Through our trials I found that acceleration was a little inconsistent. We could have used something like step distance instead.