Tekscan pressure sensors are used in biomechanics research to measure joint contact loads. While the overall accuracy of these sensors has been reported previously, the effects of different calibration algorithms on sensor accuracy have not been compared. The objectives of this validation study were to determine the most appropriate calibration method supplied in the Tekscan program software and to compare its accuracy to the accuracy obtained with two user-defined calibration protocols. We evaluated the calibration accuracies for test loads within the low range, high range, and full range of the sensor. Our experimental setup used materials representing those found in standard prosthetic joints, i.e., metal against plastic. The Tekscan power calibration was the most accurate of the algorithms provided with the system software, with an overall rms error of 2.7% of the tested sensor range, whereas the linear calibrations resulted in an overall rms error of up to 24% of the tested range. The user-defined ten-point cubic calibration was almost five times more accurate, on average, than the power calibration over the full range, with an overall rms error of 0.6% of the tested range. The user-defined three-point quadratic calibration was almost twice as accurate as the Tekscan power calibration, but was sensitive to the calibration loads used. We recommend that investigators design their own calibration curves not only to improve accuracy but also to understand the range(s) of highest error and to choose the optimal points within the expected sensing range for calibration. Since output and sensor nonlinearity depend on the experimental protocol (sensor type, interface shape and materials, sensor range in use, loading method, etc.), sensor behavior should be investigated for each different application.

1.
Wilson
,
D. C.
,
Niosi
,
C. A.
,
Zhu
,
Q. A.
,
Oxland
,
T. R.
, and
Wilson
,
D. R.
, 2006, “
Accuracy and Repeatability of a New Method for Measuring Facet Loads in the Lumbar Spine
,”
J. Biomech.
0021-9290,
39
(
2
), pp.
348
353
.
2.
Brown
,
T. D.
,
Rudert
,
M. J.
, and
Grosland
,
N. M.
, 2004, “
New Methods for Assessing Cartilage Contact Stress After Articular Fracture
,”
Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res.
0009-921X,
423
, pp.
52
58
.
3.
Wilson
,
D. R.
,
Apreleva
,
M. V.
,
Eichler
,
M. J.
, and
Harrold
,
F. R.
, 2003, “
Accuracy and Repeatability of a Pressure Measurement System in the Patellofemoral Joint
,”
J. Biomech.
0021-9290,
36
(
12
), pp.
1909
1915
.
4.
Otto
,
J. K.
,
Brown
,
T. D.
, and
Callaghan
,
J. J.
, 1999, “
Static and Dynamic Response of a Multiplexed-Array Piezoresistive Contact Sensor
,”
Exp. Mech.
0014-4851,
39
(
4
), pp.
317
323
.
5.
Drewniak
,
E. I.
,
Crisco
,
J. J.
,
Spenciner
,
D. B.
, and
Fleming
,
B. C.
, 2007, “
Accuracy of Circular Contact Area Measurements With Thin-Film Pressure Sensors
,”
J. Biomech.
0021-9290,
40
(
11
), pp.
2569
2572
.
6.
Martinelli
,
L.
,
Hurschler
,
C.
, and
Rosenbaum
,
D.
, 2006, “
Comparison of Capacitive Versus Resistive Joint Contact Stress Sensors
,”
Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res.
0009-921X,
447
, pp.
214
220
.
7.
Tekscan, 2004, “
Tekscan Medical Sensors-Standard Pressures
,” Tekscan Inc., South Boston, MA.
8.
Tekscan, 2001, “
Tekscan I-Scan Pressure Measurement System User’s Manual, Version 5.0
,” Tekscan Inc., South Boston, MA.
9.
Bachus
,
K. N.
,
DeMarco
,
A. L.
,
Judd
,
K. T.
,
Horwitz
,
D. S.
, and
Brodke
,
D. S.
, 2006, “
Measuring Contact Area, Force, and Pressure for Bioengineering Applications: Using Fuji Film and TekScan Systems
,”
Med. Eng. Phys.
1350-4533,
28
(
5
), pp.
483
488
.
10.
Gill
,
T. J.
,
DeFrate
,
L. E.
,
Wang
,
C.
,
Carey
,
C. T.
,
Zayontz
,
S.
,
Zarins
,
B.
, and
Li
,
G.
, 2004, “
The Effect of Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction on Patellofemoral Contact Pressures in the Knee Joint Under Simulated Muscle Loads
,”
Am. J. Sports Med.
0363-5465,
32
(
1
), pp.
109
115
.
11.
Lee
,
T. Q.
,
Gerken
,
A. P.
,
Glaser
,
F. E.
,
Kim
,
W. C.
, and
Anzel
,
S. H.
, 1997, “
Patellofemoral Joint Kinematics and Contact Pressures in Total Knee Arthroplasty
,”
Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res.
0009-921X,
340
, pp.
257
266
.
12.
Lee
,
T. Q.
,
Budoff
,
J. E.
, and
Glaser
,
F. E.
, 1999, “
Patellar Component Positioning in Total Knee Arthroplasty
,”
Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res.
0009-921X,
366
, pp.
274
281
.
13.
Matsuda
,
S.
,
Ishinishi
,
T.
,
White
,
S. E.
, and
Whiteside
,
L. A.
, 1997, “
Patellofemoral Joint After Total Knee Arthroplasty. Effect on Contact Area and Contact Stress
,”
J. Arthroplasty
0883-5403,
12
(
7
), pp.
790
797
.
14.
Anglin
,
C.
,
Brimacombe
,
J. M.
,
Wilson
,
D. R.
,
Masri
,
B. A.
,
Greidanus
,
N. V.
,
Tonetti
,
J.
, and
Hodgson
,
A. J.
, 2008, “
Biomechanical Consequences of Patellar Component Medialization in Total Knee Arthroplasty
,”
J. Arthroplasty
, in press.
15.
Luo
,
Z. P.
,
Berglund
,
L. J.
, and
An
,
K.
, 1998, “
Validation of F-Scan Pressure Sensor System: A Technical Note
,”
J. Rehabil. Res. Dev.
0748-7711,
35
(
2
), pp.
186
191
.
16.
Wirz
,
D.
,
Becker
,
R.
,
Li
,
S. F.
,
Friederich
,
N. F.
, and
Muller
,
W.
, 2002, “
Validation of the Tekscan System for Static and Dynamic Pressure Measurements of the Human Femorotibial Joint
,”
Biomed. Tech.
0013-5585,
47
(
7–8
), pp.
195
201
.
You do not currently have access to this content.