journal article·2026-01-21

A quantitative approach for engineering lower limb fit in compressive wearables: sizing system specifications generation and testing based on theoretical pressure calculations

Eric Beaudette, Lucy Dunne

Publisher page

Abstract

Accurate fit is imperative in compressive wearables for movement-sensing, where functional performance can be negatively affected by factors such as garment migration and looseness. Iterative production of sensing wearables for formative testing is resource-demanding, however, and estimating compressive fit is complicated due to variable textile properties and nonlinear strain effects. This work presents (1) a novel method for quantitatively developing and evaluating sizing systems for compression wearables and (2) testing of variable input parameters in an example use case of compressive products. Anthropometric data (10 circumferential measurements) were extracted from 74 body scans to test: four garment designs covering different portions of the leg; properties of three textiles; and four size strategies (5, 7, 10, and 15 sizes). The percentage of individuals accommodated was measured for these simulated sizing systems. Results indicated both material properties and garment type strongly affected accommodation, while the number of sizes yielded relatively small effects. The garment design incorporating the fewest body measurements accommodated the most bodies and increases in accommodation (up to 41.9%) were observed when removing measurements at the thigh and above. The textile with a weaker initial linear stress–strain slope and nonlinear curve was originally theorized to provide more accommodation for all conditions; however, for some garment designs a material with more moderate mechanical properties was the most accommodating, which highlights the complexity of nonlinear tensile properties paired with material thickness effects. In addition, insights are extracted from findings to support efficient compressive garment prototyping.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Textile materials and evaluations · 3D Shape Modeling and Analysis · Advanced Sensor and Energy Harvesting Materials

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

University of Minnesota, St Paul, MN, USA

References (40)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/j.cll.2019.11.00410.1016/j.cll.2019.11.004 ↗
2. Gioberto G. Measuring joint movement through garment-integrated wearable sensing 2015. Available at: http://conservancy.umn.edu/handle/11299/172666 (accessed September 2021).
3. Gioberto G Coughlin J Bibeau K Dunne LE. Detecting bends and fabric folds using stitched sensors. In: Proceedings of the 2013 International Symposium on Wearable Computers. Zurich Switzerland: ACM Press 2013 pp. 53–56. doi: 10.1145/2493988.249435510.1145/2493988.2494355 ↗
4. Harms H Amft O Troster G. Influence of a loose-fitting sensing garment on posture recognition in rehabilitation. In: 2008 IEEE Biomedical Circuits and Systems Conference 2008 pp. 353–356. Available at: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/469694710.1109/BIOCAS.2008.4696947 ↗
5. 10.1177/0887302X2199931410.1177/0887302X21999314 ↗
6. 10.1177/0887302X1988027010.1177/0887302X19880270 ↗
7. 10.1080/00405000.2020.173066410.1080/00405000.2020.1730664 ↗
8. 10.1016/S0965-206X(02)80016-X10.1016/S0965-206X(02)80016-X ↗
9. 10.1002/ajpa.133004030210.1002/ajpa.1330040302 ↗
10. 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2000.tb06474.x10.1111/j.1749-6632.2000.tb06474.x ↗
11. Griffin L Compton C Dunne LE. An analysis of the variability of anatomical body references within ready-to-wear garment sizes. In: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM International Symposium on Wearable Computers. Heidelberg: ACM Press 2016 pp. 84–91. doi: 10.1145/2971763.297180010.1145/2971763.2971800 ↗
12. 10.1080/0040516020868895510.1080/00405160208688955 ↗
13. 10.2165/11591420-000000000-0000010.2165/11591420-000000000-00000 ↗
14. Granberry R Duvall J Dunne LE Holschuh B. An analysis of anthropometric geometric variability of the lower leg for the fit and function of advanced functional garments. In: Proceedings of the 2017 ACM International Symposium on Wearable Computers (ISWC ’17). New York: ACM Press 2017 pp. 10–17. doi: 10.1145/3123021.312303410.1145/3123021.3123034 ↗
15. 10.2478/aut-2021-005710.2478/aut-2021-0057 ↗
16. Youn S Mathur K Knowles C Ju B Sennik B Jur J. Simulation-based prediction model to optimize contact pressure of knitted fabrics for wearable garments. In: Ahram T Taiar R editors. Human Interaction and Emerging Technologies (IHIET-AI 2023): Artificial Intelligence and Future Applications. AHFE (2023) International Conference. AHFE Open Access; vol. 70. doi: 10.54941/ahfe100294410.54941/ahfe1002944 ↗
17. 10.1016/j.cad.2023.10363810.1016/j.cad.2023.103638 ↗
18. 10.1007/978-1-84882-608-3_410.1007/978-1-84882-608-3_4 ↗
19. Stjepanovič Z Pilar T Rudolf A Jevšnik S. 3D virtual prototyping of clothing products. In: Bartkowiak G editor. Innovations in clothing technology & measurement techniques. Lodz: Technical University of Lodz Press; 2012. p. 28–41.
20. Vuruskan A, Ashdown SP. Comparison of actual and virtual pressure of athletic clothing in active poses. Int J Cloth Sci Technol 2024; doi: 10.1108/IJCST-02-2024-0036
21. 10.3390/ijerph1710355410.3390/ijerph17103554 ↗
22. Porciuncula F, Roto AV, Kumar D, et al. Wearable movement sensors for rehabilitation: a focused review of technological and clinical advances. PM&R 2018; 10(9, Suppl. 2): S220–S232.
23. 10.1109/JSEN.2020.301901610.1109/JSEN.2020.3019016 ↗
24. 10.1186/1743-0003-2-710.1186/1743-0003-2-7 ↗
25. 10.1039/C8MH01062E10.1039/C8MH01062E ↗
26. 10.1002/eem2.1204110.1002/eem2.12041 ↗
27. 10.2165/00007256-199519040-0000610.2165/00007256-199519040-00006 ↗
28. McDaniel LW, Rasche A, Gaudet L, Jackson A. Reducing the risk of ACL injury in female athletes. Contemp Issues Educ Res 2010; 3(3): 15–20.
29. Robinette KM Daanen H Paquet E. The CAESAR project: a 3-D surface anthropometry survey. In: Second International Conference on 3-D Digital Imaging and Modeling (Cat. No. PR00062) 1999 pp. 380–386.10.1109/IM.1999.805368 ↗
30. McNeel R, et al.. Rhinoceros 3D. Seattle, WA: Robert McNeel & Associates; 2010.
31. 10.1002/cpe.374510.1002/cpe.3745 ↗
32. Peterson BG Carl P Boudt K et al. PerformanceAnalytics: Econometric Tools for Performance and Risk Analysis 2020. Available at: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=PerformanceAnalytics
33. 10.3390/ma1416446110.3390/ma14164461 ↗
34. ASTM. Standard Test Method for Thickness of Textile Materials 1997. Available at: https://www.astm.org/d1777-96r19.html
35. ISO. ISO 13934-1 – Textiles — Tensile properties of fabrics 2013. Available at: https://www.iso.org/standard/60676.html
36. 10.1007/s12289-010-0845-610.1007/s12289-010-0845-6 ↗
37. R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing 2021. Available at: https://www.R-project.org/.
38. 10.1080/1463922X.2010.50527110.1080/1463922X.2010.505271 ↗
39. 10.1016/B978-0-08-102604-5.00001-910.1016/B978-0-08-102604-5.00001-9 ↗
40. Loercher C Morlock S Schenk A. Design of a motion-oriented size system for optimizing professional clothing and personal protective equipment. J Fashion Technol Textile Eng. 2018; S4: 014. doi:10.4172/2329-9568.S4-014.10.4172/2329-9568.S4-014 ↗