2018-Sustainable Industrial Processing Summit
SIPS2018 Volume 4. Mamalis Intl. Symp. / Advanced Manufacturing
| Editors: | F. Kongoli, A. G. Mamalis, K. Hokamoto |
| Publisher: | Flogen Star OUTREACH |
| Publication Year: | 2018 |
| Pages: | 352 pages |
| ISBN: | 978-1-987820-88-1 |
| ISSN: | 2291-1227 (Metals and Materials Processing in a Clean Environment Series) |
CD shopping page
Challenges in Engineering Devices that Promote Natural Gait in Amputees
Sesh Commuri1; Bhanu Prasad Kotamraju2;1UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA, RENO, Reno, United States; 2UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA, Norman, United States;
Type of Paper: Regular
Id Paper: 266
Topic: 48
Abstract:
State-of-the-art in prosthetic design for below-knee or transtibial amputees is based primarily on the biomechanics of linear walking on level surfaces [1-3]. Existing foot/ankle prostheses tend to be passive devices that cannot accommodate the demands of changing user gait or changes such as surface and slope of the terrain. Limitations on gait imposed by inadequate prosthetic devices can result in musculoskeletal pain and sores that adversely affect the health of the individual [1, 4-6]. Gait asymmetry can also lead to hip/knee replacement surgeries over time. Although some designs recognize the importance of active prosthetic devices, their implementation is complicated due to lack of functional requirements that address user gait under all conditions [7-8]. Recent developments in biomimetic control have resulted in exciting new control strategies that improve the performance of complex systems with human agents [9-10].
While there have been significant advances made in surgical techniques, post-surgical recovery, design and fitting of prosthetic sockets, there has been limited impact on the health outcomes for the amputee. One of the main reasons for the limited improvement is because the available devices cannot easily adapt to user requirements or environments. Fully functional prosthetic feet require real-time detection of gait events to synthesize desired ankle displacements for each gait cycle to mimic natural human locomotion. Dynamic models of human-prosthetic limb system and the foot-ground interaction are also required to implement controllers that can reduce tracking error over each gait cycle (short term objective), while improving the performance over time (long term objective). In this paper, we highlight several of the challenges that have to be addressed in the design of next generation “intelligent” prosthetic devices for transtibial amputees.
It is anticipated that the challenges identified in this paper will pave the way to developing a comprehensive solution to the design and control of computer controlled prosthetic ankles and establish benchmarks for their evaluation.
Keywords:
Biomechanics; Biomedical engineering;References:
[1] Hansen, A.H., D.S. Childress, S.C. Miff, S.A. Gard, and K.P. Mesplay. The human ankle during walking: Implications for design of biomimetic ankle prostheses. Journal of Biomechanics, 2004. 37: p. 1467-1474.[2] Winter, D.A. Energy Generation and Absorption at the Ankle and Knee during Fast, Natural, and Slow Casdence. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 1983. 175: p. 147-154.
[3] Bateni, H. and S.J. Olney. Kinematic and kinetic variations of below-knee amputee gait. Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics, 2002. 14(1): p. 2-13.
[4] A. Mai, S. Commuri, C.P. Dionne, J. Day, W.W.J. Ertl, and L.J. Regens. Effect of prosthetic feet on end-bearing characteristics in users with Transtibial Osteomyoplastic Amputation. Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics, 2013. 25(3): p. 151-158.
[5] A. Mai, S. Commuri, C.P. Dionne, J. Day, W.W.J. Ertl, and L.J. Regens. Effect of Prosthetic Feet on End-bearing Characteristics in an otherwise Healthy Male with Transtibial Osteomyoplastic Amputation. Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics, 2012. 24(4): p. 211-220.
[6] B.P. Kotamraju, S. Commuri, A. Mai, C.P. Dionne, J. Day, K. Veirs, W.W.J. Ertl, and B. Smith. Comparative Study of Residual Muscle Activity in Transtibial Amputees with Osteomyoplastic Amputation and Conventional Amputation during Varied Walking Tasks. Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics, 2018 (to appear).
[7] Jimenez-Fabian, R. and O. Verlinden. Review of control algorithms for robotic ankle systems in lower-limb orthoses, prostheses, and exoskeletons. Medical Engineering & Physics, 2012. 34(4): p. 397-408.
[8] Rai, J.K., R.P. Tewari, and D. Chandra. Hybrid control strategy for robotic leg prosthesis using artificial gait synthesis. International Journal of Biomechatronics and Biomedical Robotics, 2009. 1(1): p. 44-50.
[9] Commuri, S., and A. Mai. Intelligent control of prosthetic ankle joint using gait recognition, in Recent Advances and Future Directions in Adaptation and Control, Editors Sarangapani, J., and K.G. Vamvoudakis, 2016. Elsevier Publications. p. 635-660.
[10] A. Mai and S. Commuri. Robust Control of Prosthetic Ankle through the Integration of User Intent. IFAC Journal of Control Engineering Practice, 2016. vol. 49, pp. 1-16.