4.7 Article

Design, Development,and Validation of a Lightweight Nonbackdrivable Robotic Ankle Prosthesis

期刊

IEEE-ASME TRANSACTIONS ON MECHATRONICS
卷 24, 期 2, 页码 471-482

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TMECH.2019.2892609

关键词

Ankle-foot; design; nonbackdrivable; prosthesis; robotics; transmission; transtibial amputee

资金

  1. National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research [90RE5014-02-00]
  2. College of Engineering at the University of Utah

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Robotic ankle prostheses can imitate the biomechanical function of intact legs at the cost of a larger weight and size compared to conventional passive prostheses. Unfortunately, increased weight and size negatively affect comfort and socket stability, ultimately limiting their clinical viability. Alternatively, a nonbackdrivable transmission system can be used to actively regulate the ankle position during nonweight bearing activities only. This semiactive design can be made smaller and lighter as a result of the lower actuation power requirements. However, the transmission system must withstand high loads during stance and standing. Thus, available semiactive prostheses are still significantly heavier and have a larger build height than passive ankle prostheses. In this paper, we present the design, development, and validation of a semiactive ankle prosthesis with a nonbackdrivable cam follower mechanism designed to lower the load on moving components and align with the foot longitudinally as necessary to reduce the prosthesis weight and size. The proposed ankle mechanism is similar to 50% shorter, has similar to 40% wider range of motion (ROM), and is estimated to be similar to 27% lighter than available semiactive prostheses. Experiments with a transtibial subject show that the semiactive prosthesis can increase foot clearance up to 142% and reduce the load on the residual limb as low as 32% compared to passive prostheses.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据