Affiliations: [a]
Research and Innovation, Southampton Solent University, Southampton, UK
| [b]
Department of Production and Systems, University of Minho, Guimarães, Portugal
| [c]
Department of Textile Engineering, University of Minho, Guimarães, Portugal
| [d]
Department of Fiber Science & Apparel Design, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA
| [e] Escuela de Kinesiología, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad de Valparaíso, Valparaíso, Chile
Correspondence:
[*]
Address for correspondence: Sara Bragança, Research and Innovation, Southampton Solent University, Southampton, UK. E-mail: [email protected].
Abstract: BACKGROUND:Collecting anthropometric data for real-life applications demands a high degree of precision and reliability. It is important to test new equipment that will be used for data collection OBJECTIVE:Compare two anthropometric data gathering techniques – manual methods and a Kinect-based 3D body scanner – to understand which of them gives more precise and reliable results. METHODS:The data was collected using a measuring tape and a Kinect-based 3D body scanner. It was evaluated in terms of precision by considering the regular and relative Technical Error of Measurement and in terms of reliability by using the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient, Reliability Coefficient, Standard Error of Measurement and Coefficient of Variation. RESULTS:The results obtained showed that both methods presented better results for reliability than for precision. Both methods showed relatively good results for these two variables, however, manual methods had better results for some body measurements. CONCLUSION:Despite being considered sufficiently precise and reliable for certain applications (e.g. apparel industry), the 3D scanner tested showed, for almost every anthropometric measurement, a different result than the manual technique. Many companies design their products based on data obtained from 3D scanners, hence, understanding the precision and reliability of the equipment used is essential to obtain feasible results.
Keywords: Anthropometry, 3D body scanner, repeatability, body measurements
