2015 Eslamy

Title Emulation of Ankle Function for Different Gaits through Active Foot Prostheses: Actuation Concepts, Control and Experiments
Leitung Prof. Dr. phil. Andre Seyfarth
Autor Mahdy Eslamy (m.eslamy at gmail dot com)
Letzte Bearbeitung Mar. 8th 2015 (Under Review)

Outline

1. Motivation: Why Research in this Field?

2. Background and Previous Outcomes

3. Contributions of this Thesis

  • Power and Energy Requirements in Active Prosthetic Feet in Different Actuation Mechanisms
  • Control of Active Foot Prostheses

4. Conclusions

Motivation

Lower extremity amputations done in Germany:

  • More than 60000 per year (Institut für das Entgeltsystem im Krankenhaus, 2012)

Important Question:

  • How can engineering help the amputees to regain their normal locomotion performance?

Previous Works

Performance of Passive Prosthetic Feet

  • slower self-selected speeds than able-bodied people [Waters1976]
  • expend more metabolic energy [Molen1973]
  • kinematic difference between amputated side and sound side [Sanderson1997]
Some passive foot prostheses from Ossur and Ottobock
Ankle joint power: Amputated vs. Non-amputated Side (Postema1997)

The above figure shows that there is „Lack of Power Generation“ on the amputated side

Active Prosthetic feet

Performance of Active Prosthetic feet

• Reduce metabolic cost of transfer (CoT) (Au2009)

• Emulate ankle power similar to the human ankle

The desired and real ankle joint power for PAKO experiments

Challenges for Active Prosthetic feet

  • Power and Energy Requirements
    • As low as possible
  • Control
    • How should the robot know what to do for each gait?

Why low Power and Energy Requirements?

  • Lower Power Requirement –> Smaller Motor, Less Weight
  • Lower Energy Requirement –> Smaller Battery, Less Chargings

One Solution is to focus on:

  • Biologically-Inspired Actuation Mechanisms

Mechanical model of the biological actuator (Muscle)

Mechanical model of the biological actuator
Different Muscle Models based on Hill's works

Important Question:

  • What is the importance of those Components and their Configurations in Power and Energy requirements of active foot prostheses?
  • First Actuation Scheme could be as simple as DD (Direct Drive) or SEA (Series Elastic Actuator)
DD actuator vs SEA actuator

Peak Power and Energy Requirement

Procedure to obtain Peak Power and Energy Requirement
  • Peak Power and Energy Requirement: DD vs. SEA
Peak Power and Energy Requirement DD vs SEA walking 1.55 m/s
  • Comparison of the Peak Power Requirement
Comparison of the Peak Power Requirement

As it is seen, the PP (peak power) requirement of SEA actuator is reduced about 58% in comparison to DD (see also the pictures of DD and SEA).

Important Question:

  • Why PP and Energy Requirements of SEA are less than DD?
  • Comparison of Motor Force and velocity (DD vs SEA)
Comparison of Motor velocity (DD vs SEA)
  • As it is seen, the motor velocity in SEA is less than DD in the push-off time (the red zone), as power is the multiplication of force and velocity, consequently the PP requirements will also be less.
  • In addition, as a considerable amount of power is provided by spring, the motor power requirement in general is less than DD and because of this matter the Energy requirement is also less than DD.

Importance of Stiffness for PP Requirement

PP changes w.r.t. spring stiffness in SEA actuator
  • As it is seen in this figure, there is only one stiffness that really minimizes the PP requirement in SEA actuators (this holds for all speeds)

Parallel Elastic Element (PEE)

  • In this section we consider the effect of adding a parallel elastic element on the PP and Energy requirements of active foot prostheses.
Parallel Elastic Element (PEE) could be also used in a powered ankle

Different Approaches for Parallel Elastic Element

  • We could have different types of actuators when we include a parallel element
Different Approaches for Parallel Elastic Element PS: Parallel Spring UPS: Unidirectional Parallel Spring

Peak Power and Energy Requirement in case of Adding a Parallel Element

effect of PEE on PP and Energy Requirement
  • In comparison to SEA, the PE (parallel element) reduced the PP requirement but increased the Energy requirement (figure for Walking)

Motor Velocity, force and power pattern: SEA vs. SEA+UPS

Motor Velocity, force and power pattern: SEA vs. SEA+UPS
  • The PP of SEA+UPS reduced because the peak force of SEA+UPS is less than SEA, however as in SEA+UPS the motor is doing work against the parallel spring in swing phase, this requires power and consequently energy requirement increases in comparison to SEA.

Conclusion on Parallel Elastic Element

  • To reduce disadvantages for Energy Requ. in PS/UPS approach, we should control when and how long the UPS is engaged
  • No case was found in which PS had a better result than UPS (in terms of PP and Energy Requ.)
  • SEA could be an acceptable compromise for actuation

Damping Element (DE)

  • In this section we consider the effect of adding damping element on PP and Energy requirement in active foot prostheses.
Damping Element (DE) to be used in an active foot prosthesis

Parallel or Series Damping Element (DE)

  • Damping element could be in series or parallel with the motor:
Damping element could be in series or parallel with the motor, PEDA: Parallel Elastic Damping Actuator, SEDA: Series Elastic Damping Actuator

Damping Element (DE) in Active Foot Prostheses: Different Gaits

  • In addition we also consider the level walking and stair ascending and descending and investigate the power and energy requirements for these gaits
we also consider the level walking and stair ascending and descending to investigate the power and energy requirements for these gaits

Peak Power and Energy Requirements

Peak Power and Energy Requirements: PEDA vs SEDA vs SEA

Conclusions on Damping Element:

  • Stiffness is required for all gaits
  • Damping shows on-off behavior (as seen in the picture for level walking and stair ascent the damping should be off however for stair descent it is required)
  • SEA could be an acceptable compromise for actuation

Bi-articular Actuation in Active Foot Prosthesis

Main ankle plantar-flexors

There are two main ankle plantar-flexors: Soleus and Gastrocnemius, Soleus is mono-articular and Gastrocnemius is bi-articular

Main ankle plantar-flexors: Soleus and Gastrocnemius

How to Benefit from Bi-articular Actuation in Active Foot Prosthesis

  • How to select appropriate stiffness: The Weighted Sum of PP and Energy Requirement
The Weighted Sum of PP and Energy Requirement, lambda is a weighting factor

Comparison of PP and Energy requirements: SEA vs. SEA+G

Comparison of PP and Energy requirements: SEA vs. SEA+G
  • As it is seen the weighted sum approach, defines the PP and Energy requirement of an active foot prosthesis in a way that both PP and Energy requirements could be determined by the designer so that they are not far away from minim values.

Control Challenges in Active Foot Prostheses

Slave controller is for DC motor control, Master controller is for Gait Identification

Lab experiments with PAKO

  • Results for walking 0.5 m/s (PAKO: Powered Ankle Knee Ortho-prosthesis)
Lab experiments with PAKO, motor force, velocity and ankle power and angle
abschlussarbeiten/phd/mahdyeslamy.txt · Zuletzt geändert: 13.09.2016 11:20 von Dario Tokur
GNU Free Documentation License 1.3
Driven by DokuWiki Recent changes RSS feed Valid CSS Valid XHTML 1.0