Multiple force sensors (naming convention)

[m-lancini]

What do we do in scenarios which contains multiple force sensors?

• One file per sensor: subject_N_run_R_wrench_sensor_1.csv, subject_N_run_R_wrench_sensor_2.csv, ..., subject_N_run_R_wrench_sensor_S.csv
• One file with fields differentiating the sensor the data come: subject_N_run_R_wrench.csv

time	sensor_1_force_x	sensor_1_force_y	sensor_1_force_z	sensor_1_torque_x	sensor_1_torque_y	sensor_1_torque_z	sensor_2_force_x	sensor_2_force_y	sensor_2_force_z	sensor_2_torque_x	sensor_2_torque_y	sensor_2_torque_z
...	...	...	...	...	...	...	...	...	...	...	...	...
...	...	...	...	...	...	...	...	...	...	...	...	...

or

time	frame	force_x	force_y	force_z	torque_x	torque_y	torque_z	frame	force_x	force_y	force_z	torque_x	torque_y	torque_z
...	sensor_1	...	...	...	...	...	...	sensor_2	...	...	...	...	...	...
...	sensor_1	...	...	...	...	...	...	sensor_1	...	...	...	...	...	...

I would say the first option (one file per sensor) is more general. The second one is used if all the sensors in the tesbed shares the same acquisition interface which it is not quite common (if differet interfaces, then you wouldneed some SW to mix the data).

_Originally posted by @alfonsotecnalia in https://github.com/aremazeilles/eurobench_documentation/pull/26#issuecomment-608326430_

[m-lancini]

What do we do in scenarios which contains multiple force sensors?

• One file per sensor: subject_N_run_R_wrench_sensor_1.csv,

Just to make sure "wrench_sensor_1" will be replaced by the specific measurement instrument name? like subject_N_run_R_left_crutch.csv?

[alfonsotecnalia]

Yes. It should be a meaningful ID/name or a serial/number (if it had)

[aremazeilles]

I think we should be compatible with option 1 and 2. For 2 I agree that the acquisition timestamp should be shared across all stored data.

[aremazeilles]

What do we do in scenarios which contains multiple force sensors?

• One file per sensor: subject_N_run_R_wrench_sensor_1.csv,

Just to make sure "wrench_sensor_1" will be replaced by the specific measurement instrument name? like subject_N_run_R_left_crutch.csv?

I would keep the type in the name: subject_N_run_R_force_id. And for joint file (option_2), use similar id: id_force_x, id_force_y

[aremazeilles]

Do we agree on the last proposal? I would rather use an id (number) or label (text) to differentiate the different sensor files or column in the joint file. The serial number can be problematic, if you are not using the same device.

[alfonsotecnalia]

I would keep the type in the name: subject_N_run_R_force_id. And for joint file (option_2), use similar id: id_force_x, id_force_y

I agree. To sum up:

• name of the file: subject_N_run_R_wrench_tagOrID if we have files from different sensors and subject_N_run_R_wrench if only one file containing the info of all the sensors.
• content:

time	tagOrID1_force_x	tagOrID1_force_y	tagOrID1_force_z	tagOrID1_torque_x	tagOrID1_torque_y	tagOrID1_torque_z	...	tagOrIDN_force_x	tagOrIDN_force_y	tagOrIDN_force_z	tagOrIDN_torque_x	tagOrIDN_torque_y	tagOrIDN_torque_z
...	...	...	...	...	...	...	...	...	...	...	...	...	...
...	...	...	...	...	...	...	...	...	...	...	...	...	...

[m-lancini]

I'd go for tags or label, IDs could be tricky to handle... for me Alfonso summary is ok