Human locomotion mechanics are characterized by various parameters. These parameters are determined by the physical properties of the human subject as well as those of the external environment. As for the subject, there are kinematics and geometrical variables, such as range of motion of the joints and leg length, as well as physiological variables, such as stiffness of the legs and their muscle-tendon units. These parameters can greatly affect the gait as well as the energy expenditure of the subject in various locomotion scenarios. These effects have been widely investigated by numerous researchers. As for the environment, there are the physical properties of the ground, such as slope, viscosity, damping, and stiffness. Less effort has been directed towards investigating the effects of physical properties of the external environment. Among these properties, the stiffness of the ground seems to be the most significant parameter that can influence the gait and metabolic cost of the subject. While ground stiffness has been numerically studied, experiments are still needed to provide important insights into the mechanics of human locomotion in different locomotion scenarios and speed, and in dealing with different surface stiffnesses.
Furthermore, it is still unclear how humans react to sudden/unexpected stiffness transitions in order to maintain their balance while walking or running. To study the effect of stiffness perturbation of the ground on the human gait, needed is a system that can quickly and accurately regulate the ground stiffness.
In addition, bilateral stiffness regulation ability would be an extremely helpful feature for studying the locomotion mechanics and energy expenditure of mobility-impaired patients who have asymmetrical gaits. Such studies could provide valuable insights into muscle coordination of the legs that are internally and bilaterally connected, which would lead to the ability to regulate the surface stiffness for each leg in an optimal manner in order to achieve better, quicker rehabilitation outcomes.
From the above discussion, it can be appreciated that it would be desirable to have a system and method with which the stiffness of a ground surface can be adjusted to different values for each leg, quickly and independently, without imposing any unwanted change into human locomotion kinematics.
The present disclosure may be better understood with reference to the following figures. Matching reference numerals designate corresponding parts throughout the figures, which are not necessarily drawn to scale.
As described above, it would be desirable to have a system and method with which the stiffness of a ground surface can be adjusted to different values for each leg, quickly and independently, without imposing any unwanted change into human locomotion kinematics. Disclosed herein are examples of such systems and methods. More particularly, disclosed are treadmills that have adjustable surface stiffness. The treadmills comprise a stiffness adjustment mechanism that can be quickly and independently adjusted for each leg. In some embodiments, the stiffness adjustment mechanism can be adjusted by moving the vertical position of a pivot point of a moment arm of the adjustment mechanism.
In the following disclosure, various specific embodiments are described. It is to be understood that those embodiments are example implementations of the disclosed inventions and that alternative embodiments are possible. All such embodiments are intended to fall within the scope of this disclosure.
Described in this disclosure is the design and development of a novel treadmill having the ability to bilaterally adjust the surface stiffness in a purely vertical direction, regardless of the relative location of the person with respect to the treadmill. The stiffness adjustment mechanism of treadmill is based on an energy-efficient linear variable stiffness joint in which the stiffness is altered by moving the position of a pivot point of a moment arm between spring and force points of the mechanism. Therefore, the mechanism can regulate the stiffness from completely passive to rigid with minimum energy consumption regardless of the length of the moment arm or the stiffness of springs of the treadmill. By using strong stiffness adjustment actuators and selecting a short moment arm, the stiffness can be changed very quickly.
With further reference to
The bottom ends of the scissor arms 18 are each operatively connected to a rear end of an input link 30 that translates the vertical force imposed upon the treadmill unit 22 into a horizontal force. In the illustrated embodiment, each input link 30 is connected to a cross member 31 that is pivotally connected to the scissor arms 18 of each scissor mechanism 14. The input link 30 moves along a horizontal guide 32 connected to the stiffness mechanism frame 12 comprising linear bearings that constrain the link's motion to horizontal movement. In some embodiments, the horizontal guide 32 also comprises an embedded linear encoder that can measure the displacement of the input link 30. The front end of the input link 30 is connected to a stiffness adjustment mechanism 34 provided within the stiffness mechanism frame 12 with which the vertical stiffness of a treadmill unit 22, meaning the ease with which the treadmill unit can move downward in response to an applied downward force, can be adjusted.
As is also shown in
When one steps on one of the treadmill units 22 with his or her foot, the downward force of the subject's body weight is transmitted to the associated scissor mechanism 14, which then translates the vertical force into a horizontal force imparted to an input link 30. The input link 30, in turn, transmits the horizontal force to the bottom end of a moment arm 36, which pivots about a pivot point 44 and transmits the force to a linear bearing 38, which then transmits the force to a spring 42. As the pivot point 44 is moved higher along its vertical shaft 48 under the control of its associated stiffness adjustment actuator 50, the leverage with which the moment arm 36 acts on the spring 42 increases and the ease with which the treadmill unit 22 can be displaced downward (i.e., the vertical stiffness) decreases. As the pivot point 44 is moved lower, however, the leverage with which the moment arm 36 acts on the spring 42 decreases and the ease with which the treadmill unit 22 can be displaced downward (i.e., the vertical stiffness) increases. The vertical stiffness reaches its maximum at the point at which the pivot point 44 is generally level with its associated input link 30 (i.e., the “force point”). At that point, no or substantially no vertical displacement of the treadmill unit 22 is possible. The stiffness reaches its minimum at the point at which the pivot point 44 is generally level with its associated linear bearing 38 (i.e., the “spring point”). As will be appreciated by persons having ordinary skill in the art, the above individually applies to both treadmill units 22 and both stiffness adjustment mechanisms 34.
A prototype adjustable surface stiffness treadmill having a construction similar to that shown in
In order to derive the stiffness formulation of the adjustable surface stiffness treadmill, one may consider the schematic of the scissor mechanism and stiffness adjustment mechanism shown in
When α0=45° and α0−α1<10°, one can assume that the vertical displacement of the treadmill unit surface is equal to the horizontal movement of the input link, i.e., Δh=Δx. Since the scissor mechanism is a passive mechanical element, meaning it does not add energy to the system, one can conclude that the input work is equal to the output work. Therefore, the vertical force applied to the treadmill unit surface Fv will be equally canceled by the output horizontal force of the input link Fh:
Fh=Fv (2)
The horizontal force acting on the input link is transmitted to the stiffness adjustment mechanism and rotates the moment arm around the pivot point by β:
where l1 is the vertical distance between the input link and the moment arm. The rotation of the moment arm around its pivot point moves the top end of the moment arm rearward and, therefore, the spring becomes deflected by Δs:
Δs=l2 tan β (4)
where l2 is the vertical distance between the spring and the moment arm. Each spring has a stiffness of Ks. Therefore, the overall stiffness would be equal to Ks. The force due to the spring deflection, i.e., spring force Fs, can be found from the stiffness of the spring L and its deflection as:
Fs=KsΔs (5)
This force will cancel the horizontal force applied by the input link at the bottom end of the moment arm. Therefore, one can write:
The stiffness of the treadmill unit surface defines how much vertical force would lead to one unit of surface deflection:
From Equations (1) and (2), one can conclude that, for small deflections, the effective stiffness of the treadmill unit surface K is equal to the effective stiffness at the input link. Therefore, the surface stiffness can then be found from Equations (3)-(6) as:
As the pivot point travels between the force and spring points using the stiffness adjustment actuator, the ratio between l1 and l2 changes from zero to infinity. As is clear from the equation, this range of stiffness can be achieved regardless of the length of the moment arm or stiffness of the spring. Therefore, even a short moment arm would result in a full range of stiffness. That said, the moment arm preferably is long enough to achieve good resolution in stiffness regulation. Another unique feature of the design is that, as Equation (8) shows, the stiffness is not a function of ft, which indicates that, for small deflections, the surface stiffness is decoupled from the surface deflection. This makes controlling the stiffness much easier as one can correctly assume the stiffness will be constant during the surface deflection.
Assuming the initial height of the surface h0 is set to be around 1 m with an initial α0=45°, the length of the scissor arms of the scissor mechanism should be around 1.4 m. With such scissor arms, one can achieve the vertical displacement of the surface up to the considerable amount of 25 cm and yet limit the change in the angle α to less than 10°. Therefore, decoupling between surface stiffness and its displacement is guaranteed.
As mentioned before, the adjustable surface stiffness treadmill can theoretically change the stiffness from very soft to very rigid. The maximum stiffness that can be expected is, therefore, the structural stiffness of the system. In order to show the range of actual surface stiffness that can be realized with the treadmill, the following experiments were performed. An ATMI force plate was placed over the treadmill surface. Then, a subject with a weight around 75 kg stood on the treadmill while strapped to a LiteGait harness system.
Three markers were placed along the treadmill surface (markers A, B, and C). In addition, another marker (D) was placed at the pivot point. The markers A, B, and C form the skeleton of the treadmill surface in the sagittal plane. To measure the surface displacement, these markers were tracked by a motion capture system.
In order to measure the stiffness and its range, first the pivot point was moved to the force point (the maximum stiffness). With the use of the hydraulic system of the harness system, the weight of the person was being canceled from 0% to 100%. At each cancellation rate, the vertical force applied to the force plate (equal to the actual weight minus the canceled weight) was measured by the force plate and the surface displacement was tracked by the motion capture system. Then, using the stiffness adjustment mechanism, the pivot was moved to different points along the moment arm and the above-mentioned experiment was repeated. In total, the stiffness measurement experiments were conducted for six different points (i.e., levels of surface stiffness) by changing the position of the pivot joint from the force point all the way up to the next end, close to the spring point. The results are shown in
By connecting the vertical forces corresponding surface displacements for each level of stiffness,
The expected stiffness for each position of the pivot point based on Equation (8) is also plotted in
In a further experiment to evaluate the independence of the surface stiffness relative to the location of the subject and vertical displacement of the treadmill surface, the surface stiffness was first set to a certain compliant level. Then, a subject stood statically at three different locations on the surface: two extreme locations at each end and one at the middle of the treadmill. During the loading process at each location, the trajectories of markers A, B, and C in sagittal plane were tracked by the motion capture system.
The surface displacement remained unchanged for the three locations, which reveals that the surface stiffness of the treadmill is independent of the location of the subject while on the treadmill. This is a helpful feature when the speed of the treadmill is not exactly matched with the speed of locomotion, which would result in a relative motion between the person and the treadmill.
The above disclosure describes a novel adjustable surface stiffness treadmill that is capable of bilaterally regulating vertical stiffness of a ground surface. With the novel stiffness adjustment mechanism, one is able to adjust the stiffness within the full range (i.e., theoretically from zero to infinity) in less than 0.5 seconds. The surface compliance is decoupled from the surface vertical deflection up to 30 cm, which provides enough displacement for walking and running gaits. The treadmill's ability to quickly regulate the stiffness was experimentally evaluated. Through preliminarily experiments, it was shown that surface stiffness can greatly affect the walking gait and metabolic cost.
It is noted that the adjustable surface stiffness treadmills can include additional features in order to simulate different ground conditions, such as variable damping and adjustable slope capabilities. It is also noted that, in some embodiments, the treadmill is highly modular, which enables one to remove the treadmill units and replace them with stepmill units. With such a configuration, one can study the effects of ground stiffness on different locomotion scenarios, such as stair ascension and descension.
This application claims priority to U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 62/678,314, filed May 31, 2018, which is hereby incorporated by reference herein in its entirety.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4918766 | Leonaggeo, Jr. | Apr 1990 | A |
5184988 | Dunham | Feb 1993 | A |
7241250 | French | Jul 2007 | B1 |
20040138030 | Wang | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040214693 | Piaget | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20080318737 | Chu | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20160144226 | Artemiadis | May 2016 | A1 |
20160166870 | Lagree | Jun 2016 | A1 |
20160243397 | Artemiadis | Aug 2016 | A1 |
20180345068 | Beyer | Dec 2018 | A1 |
20180345069 | Beyer | Dec 2018 | A1 |
20190366152 | Jafari | Dec 2019 | A1 |
Entry |
---|
Olds, Tim, “Modelling human locomotion: Applications to cycling”, Sports Medicine, 2001, pp. 497-509, vol. 31, No. 7. |
Chao, E. Y., et al., “Normative Data of Knee Joint Motion and Ground Reaction Forces in Adult Level Walking”, Journal of Biomechanics, 1983, pp. 219-233, vol. 16, No. 3, Pergamon Press Ltd., Great Britain. |
Geyer, Hartmut, et al., “Compliant leg behaviour explains basic dynamics of walking and running”, Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 2006, pp. 2861-2867, vol. 273, doi: doi:10.1098/rspb.2006.3637. |
Lichtwark, G.A. and A.M. Wilson, “Optimal muscle fascicle length and tendon stiffness for maximising gastrocnemius efficiency during human walking and running”, Journal of Theoretical Biology, 2008, pp. 662-673, vol. 252, doi: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2008.01.018. |
Ishikawa, Masaki, et al., “Muscle-tendon interaction and elastic energy usage in human walking”, Journal of Applied Physiology, 2005, pp. 603-608, vol. 99, www.jap.org. |
Goswami, Ambarish, “A new gait parameterization technique by means of cyclogram moments: Application to human slope walking”, Gait and Posture, 1998, pp. 15-36, vol. 8. |
Skidmore, Jeffrey, and Panagiotis ARTEMIADIS, “On the effect of walking surface stiffness on inter-limb coordination in human walking: toward bilaterally informed robotic gait rehabilitation”, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, 2016, pp. 1-11, vol. 13, No. 32, doi: 10.1186/s12984-016-0140-y. |
Greene, Peter R. and Thomas A. McMahon, “Reflex Stiffness of Man's Anti-Gravity Muscles During Kneebends While Carrying Extra Weights*”, Journal of Biomechanics, 1979, pp. 881-891, vol. 12, Pergamon Press Ltd., Great Britain. |
Kerdok, Amy E., et al., “Energetics and mechanics of human running on surfaces of different stiffnesses”, Journal of Applied Physiology, 2002, pp. 469-478, vol. 92, http://www.jap.org. |
Vu, Hung Quy, et al., “Improving Energy Efficiency of Hopping Locomotion by Using a Variable Stiffness Actuator”, IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, 2016, pp. 472-486, vol. 21, No. 1, doi: 10.1109/TMECH.2015.2428274. |
Grosu, Victor, et al., “Design of Smart Modular Variable Stiffness Actuators for Robotic-Assistive Devices”, IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, 2017, pp. 1777-1785, vol. 22, No. 4, doi: 10.1109/TMECH.2017.2704665. |
Groothuis, Stefan S., et al., “The Variable Stiffness Actuator vsaUT-II: Mechanical Design, Modeling, and Identification”, IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, 2014, pp. 589-597, vol. 19, No. 2, doi: 10.1109/TMECH.2013.2251894. |
Cestari, Manuel, et al., “An Adjustable Compliant Joint for Lower-Limb Exoskeletons”, IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, 2015, pp. 889-898, vol. 20, No. 2, doi: 10.1109/TMECH.2014.2324036. |
Jafari, Amir, et al., “A Novel Intrinsically Energy Efficient Actuator With Adjustable Stiffness (AwAS)”, IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, 2013, pp. 355-365, vol. 18, No. 1, doi: 10.1109/TMECH.2011.2177098. |
Jafari, Amir, et al., “A New Actuator With Adjustable Stiffness Based on a Variable Ratio Lever Mechanism”, IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, 2014, pp. 55-63, vol. 19, No. 1, doi: 10.1109/TMECH.2012.2218615. |
Skidmore, Jeffrey, et al., “Variable Stiffness Treadmill (VST): System Development, Characterization, and Preliminary Experiments”, IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, 2015, pp. 1717-1724, vol. 20, No. 4, doi: 10.1109/TMECH.2014.2350456. |
Vuong, Ngoc-Dung, et al., “A novel variable stiffness mechanism with linear spring characteristic for machining operations”, Robotica, 2017, pp. 1627-1637, vol. 35, doi: 10.1017/S0263574716000357. |
Jafari, Amir, et al., “How Design Can Affect the Energy Required to Regulate the Stiffness in Variable Stiffness Actuators”, 2012 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Minnesota, USA, 2012, pp. 2792-2797. |
Jafari, Amir, et al., “Determinants for Stiffness Adjustment Mechanisms”, Journal of Intelligent and Robotic Systems, 2016, pp. 435-454, vol. 82, doi: 10.1007/s10846-015-0253-8. |
“Adult litegait”, https://www.litegait.com/products/overview/Adult-LiteGait-Overview (accessed Aug. 19, 2019). |
“Optima Human Performance System”, AMTI force and motion, pp. 1-4, https://www.amti.biz/optima.aspx (accessed Aug. 19, 2019). |
“Motion Capture for Biomechanics and Sports Science”, VICON, pp. 1-7, https://www.vicon.com/motion-capture/biomechanics-and-sport (accessed Aug. 19, 2019). |
“TrueOne 2400 | Making Metabolic Measurements Easy”, Parvo Medics, p. 1, http://www.parvo.com/, (accessed Aug. 19, 2019). |
Barkan, Andrew, et al., “Variable Stiffness Treadmill (VST): a Novel Tool for the Investigation of Gait”, Proceedings—IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 2014, doi: 10.1109/ICRA.2014.6907266. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20190366152 A1 | Dec 2019 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
62678314 | May 2018 | US |