Brendan O'Flynn

Brendan O'Flynn

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

23Years (2004-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
5 October 2020 in Sensors
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MMMatteo Menolotto
Matteo Menolotto
DKDimitrios Sokratis Komaris
Dimitrios Sokratis Komaris
STSalvatore Tedesco
Salvatore Tedesco
BOBrendan O'Flynn
Brendan O'Flynn
MWMichael Walsh
Michael Walsh
The rapid technological advancements of Industry 4.0 have opened up new vectors for novel industrial processes that require advanced sensing solutions for their realization. Motion capture (MoCap) sensors, such as visual cameras and inertial measurement units (IMUs), are frequently adopted in industrial settings to support solutions in robotics, additive manufacturing, teleworking and human safety. This review synthesizes and evaluates studies investigating the use of MoCap technologies in industry-related research. A search was performed in the Embase, Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar. Only studies in English, from 2015 onwards, on primary and secondary industrial applications were considered. The quality of the articles was appraised with the AXIS tool. Studies were categorized based on type of used sensors, beneficiary industry sector, and type of application. Study characteristics, key methods and findings were also summarized. In total, 1682 records were identified, and 59 were included in this review. Twenty-one and 38 studies were assessed as being prone to medium and low risks of bias, respectively. Camera-based sensors and IMUs were used in 40% and 70% of the studies, respectively. Construction (30.5%), robotics (15.3%) and automotive (10.2%) were the most researched industry sectors, whilst health and safety (64.4%) and the improvement of industrial processes or products (17%) were the most targeted applications. Inertial sensors were the first choice for industrial MoCap applications. Camera-based MoCap systems performed better in robotic applications, but camera obstructions caused by workers and machinery was the most challenging issue. Advancements in machine learning algorithms have been shown to increase the capabilities of MoCap systems in applications such as activity and fatigue detection as well as tool condition monitoring and object recognition.

5 August 2018 in Sensors
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Andrea AncillaoAndrea Ancillao
Andrea Ancillao
STSalvatore Tedesco
Salvatore Tedesco
JBJohn Barton
John Barton
BOBrendan O'Flynn
Brendan O'Flynn
In the last few years, estimating ground reaction forces by means of wearable sensors has come to be a challenging research topic paving the way to kinetic analysis and sport performance testing outside of labs. One possible approach involves estimating the ground reaction forces from kinematic data obtained by inertial measurement units (IMUs) worn by the subject. As estimating kinetic quantities from kinematic data is not an easy task, several models and protocols have been developed over the years. Non-wearable sensors, such as optoelectronic systems along with force platforms, remain the most accurate systems to record motion. In this review, we identified, selected and categorized the methodologies for estimating the ground reaction forces from IMUs as proposed across the years. Scopus, Google Scholar, IEEE Xplore, and PubMed databases were interrogated on the topic of Ground Reaction Forces estimation based on kinematic data obtained by IMUs. The identified papers were classified according to the methodology proposed: (i) methods based on direct modelling; (ii) methods based on machine learning. The methods based on direct modelling were further classified according to the task studied (walking, running, jumping, etc.). Finally, we comparatively examined the methods in order to identify the most reliable approaches for the implementation of a ground reaction force estimator based on IMU data.

15 May 2008 in Talanta
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
SMSean Cian Mathuna
Sean Cian Mathuna
Terence O'DonnellTerence O'Donnell
Terence O'Donnell
RMRafael V. Martinez-Catala
Rafael V. Martinez-Catala
JRJames Rohan
James Rohan
BOBrendan O'Flynn
Brendan O'Flynn

17 January 2024 in IEEE Sensors Journal
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
GMGholamhosein Moloudian
Gholamhosein Moloudian
Mohammadamin HosseinifardMohammadamin Hosseinifard
Mohammadamin Hosseinifard
SKSanjeev Kumar
Sanjeev Kumar
Roy B. V. B. SimorangkirRoy B. V. B. Simorangkir
Roy B. V. B. Simorangkir
JBJohn Buckley
John Buckley
BOBrendan O'Flynn
Brendan O'Flynn
As the Internet of Things (IoT) continues to expand, the demand for the use of energy-efficient circuits and battery-less devices has grown rapidly. Battery-less operation, zero maintenance and sustainability are the desired features of IoT devices in fifth generation (5G) networks and green Industry 4.0 wireless systems. The integration of energy harvesting systems, IoT devices and 5G networks has the potential impact to digitalize and revolutionize various industries such as Industry 4.0, agriculture, food, and healthcare, by enabling real-time data collection and analysis, mitigating maintenance costs, and improving efficiency. Energy harvesting plays a crucial role in envisioning a low-carbon Net Zero future and holds significant political importance. This survey aims at providing a comprehensive review on various energy harvesting techniques including radio frequency (RF), multi-source hybrid and energy harvesting using additive manufacturing technologies. However, special emphasis is given to RF-based energy harvesting methodologies tailored for battery-free wireless sensing, and powering autonomous low-power electronic circuits and IoT devices. The key design challenges and applications of energy harvesting techniques, as well as the future perspective of System on Chip (SoC) implementation, data digitization in Industry 4.0, next-generation IoT devices, and 5G communications are discussed.

19 June 2019 in JMIR mHealth and uHealth
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
STSalvatore Tedesco
Salvatore Tedesco
MSMarco Sica
Marco Sica
Andrea AncillaoAndrea Ancillao
Andrea Ancillao
STSuzanne Timmons
Suzanne Timmons
JBJohn Barton
John Barton
BOBrendan O'Flynn
Brendan O'Flynn
Journal of Medical Internet Research - International Scientific Journal for Medical Research, Information and Communication on the Internet #Preprint #PeerReviewMe: Warning: This is a unreviewed preprint. Readers are warned that the document has not been peer-reviewed by expert/patient reviewers or an academic editor, may contain misleading claims, and is likely to undergo changes before final publication, if accepted, or may have been rejected/withdrawn. Readers with interest and expertise are encouraged to sign up as peer-reviewer, if the paper is within an open peer-review period. Please cite this preprint only for review purposes or for grant applications and CVs (if you are the author). Background: Few studies have investigated the validity of mainstream wrist-based activity trackers in healthy older adults in real-life, as opposed to laboratory settings. Objective: This study explored the performance of two wrist-worn trackers (Fitbit Charge2 and Garmin Vivo Smart HR+) estimating steps, energy expenditure, moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) levels, and sleep parameters (TST and WASO) against gold-standard technologies in a cohort of healthy older adults in free-living environment. Methods: Overall, 20 subjects (> 65 years) took part in the study. The devices were worn by the subjects for 24 hours, and the results were compared against validated technology (ActiGraph and New Lifestyles NL-2000i). Mean error, MAPE, ICC and Bland-Altman plots were computed for all the parameters considered. Results: Regarding step-counting, all the trackers are highly correlated with each other (ICCs > 0.89). While Fitbit tends to over-count steps (MPE: 12.36%), Garmin and ActiGraph under-count with a MPE of 9.36% and 11.53%. Garmin had poor ICC values when considering energy expenditure compared against the criterion. Fitbit has moderate-to-good ICCs when compared against the other activity trackers, and showed the best results (MAPE: 12.25%) even if underestimated the amount of calories burnt. For MVPA levels estimation, the wristband trackers were highly correlated (ICC = 0.96), however, were moderately correlated against the criterion and over-estimated the minutes of MVPA activity. When analyzing the sleep parameters, the ICCs were poor for all cases, except when comparing Fitbit with the criterion, which showed a moderate agreement. TST is slightly over-estimated with the Fitbit, although providing good results with an average MAPE equal to 10.13%. On the other hand, WASO estimation was poorer and was over-estimated by Fitbit but under-estimated by Garmin. Again, Fitbit was the most accurate, with an average MAPE of 49.7%. Conclusions: Results suggest that the tested well-known devices could be adopted to estimate steps, energy expenditure, and sleep duration with an acceptable level of accuracy in the population of interest, while clinicians should be cautious in considering other parameters for clinical and research purposes.

4 December 2018 in Sensors
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MTMohammed Taj-Eldin
Mohammed Taj-Eldin
CRChristian Ryan
Christian Ryan
BOBrendan O'Flynn
Brendan O'Flynn
PGPaul Galvin
Paul Galvin
The goal of real-time feedback on physiological changes, stress monitoring and even emotion detection is becoming a technological reality. People in their daily life experience varying emotional states, some of which are negative and which can lead to decreased attention, decreased productivity and ultimately, reduced quality of life. Therefore, having a solution that continuously monitors the physiological signals of the person and assesses his or her emotional well-being could be a very valuable tool. This paper aims to review existing physiological and motional monitoring devices, highlight their features and compare their sensing capabilities. Such technology would be particularly useful for certain populations who experience rapidly changing emotional states such as people with autism spectrum disorder and people with intellectual disabilities. Wearable sensing devices present a potential solution that can support and complement existing behavioral interventions. This paper presents a review of existing and emerging products in the market. It reviews the literature on state-of-the-art prototypes and analyzes their usefulness, clinical validity, and discusses clinical perspectives. A small number of products offer reliable physiological internal state monitoring and may be suitable for people with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). It is likely that more promising solutions will be available in the near future. Therefore, caregivers should be careful in their selection of devices that meet the care-receiver’s personal needs and have strong research support for reliability and validity.