# Evaluation of BLE Star Network for Wireless Wearable Prosthesis/Orthosis Controller +
## 4 Results
### Peripheral Node Power Supply Current  
Figure 5 shows the mean and standard deviation of the 10 measurements of the average and, separately, maximum current consumption of the peripheral node as a function of the connection interval and event length. There was a strong trend towards lower average current consumption at longer connection intervals for all event lengths. There was no clear trend vs. connection interval for the maximum currents. Initially, [PERSON]'s test was applied at each connection interval to test for differences in the average current consumption and, separately, maximum current consumption across the event length. All six comparisons were significant for the average current (\(p\)\(\leq\) 0.002), albeit with small average differences, and separately for the maximum current (\(p\)\(\leq\) 0.002). Table 2 lists the post hoc Nemenyi pair-wise comparison results for both the average and maximum current. There were no obvious trends vs. event length for either the average or maximum current consumption results. Figure 5: (**a**) Average current and (**b**) maximum current consumed (over 7 s of data) vs. connection interval and event length. Mean \(\pm\) standard deviation of 10 current consumption measurements were used per result. Next, [PERSON]'s test was applied at each event length to test for differences in the average current consumption and, separately, maximum current consumption across the _connection interval_. All 15 comparisons were significant for the average current (\(p\leq 3.84\,\times\,10^{-9}\)) and, separately, for the maximum current (\(p\leq 1.69\,\times\,10^{-6}\)). Table 3 lists the post hoc Nemenyi pair-wise comparison results for both the average and maximum current. For the average current, statistically significant differences were generally found between the lower valued connection intervals of 10, 20, and 30 ms and the higher valued connection intervals of 40, 50, and 100 ms. There were no obvious trends vs. connection interval for the maximum current consumption results, many of which did not show statistical differences. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Connection Interval (ms)**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Event Lengths Compared (\(\mu\)s)**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**\(p\)-Value (Significant) for:**} \\ \cline{3-5}  & & **Average Current** & **Maximum Current** \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{10} & 2500 vs. 5000 & 0.174 & 0.174 \\ \cline{2-5}  & 2500 vs. 7500 & 0.037 (*) & 0.001 (*) \\ \cline{2-5}  & 5000 vs. 7500 & 0.001 (*) & 0.037 (*) \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{20} & 2500 vs. 5000 & 0.109 & 0.001 (*) \\ \cline{2-5}  & 2500 vs. 7500 & 0.373 & 0.065 \\ \cline{2-5}  & 5000 vs. 7500 & 0.002 (*) & 0.065 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{30} & 2500 vs. 5000 & 0.001 (*) & 0.109 \\ \cline{2-5}  & 2500 vs. 7500 & 0.261 & 0.109 \\ \cline{2-5}  & 5000 vs. 7500 & 0.065 & 0.001 (*) \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{40} & 2500 vs. 5000 & 0.003 (*) & 0.001 (*) \\ \cline{2-5}  & 2500 vs. 7500 & 0.900 & 0.174 \\ \cline{2-5}  & 5000 vs. 7500 & 0.002 (*) & 0.174 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{50} & 2500 vs. 5000 & 0.001 (*) & 0.001 (*) \\ \cline{2-5}  & 2500 vs. 7500 & 0.174 & 0.632 \\ \cline{2-5}  & 5000 vs. 7500 & 0.037 (*) & 0.010 (*) \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{100} & 2500 vs. 5000 & 0.007 (*) & 0.504 \\ \cline{2-5}  & 2500 vs. 7500 & 0.001 (*) & 0.001 (*) \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{2-5}  & 5000 vs. 7500 & 0.760 & 0.037 (*) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Nemenyi post hoc pair-wise statistical results vs. event length. (*) denotes \(p\leq 0.05\).