Advertisement

Meccanica

, Volume 52, Issue 3, pp 713–728 | Cite as

Self-adjustment mechanisms and their application for orthosis design

  • Viet Anh Dung Cai
  • Philippe Bidaud
  • Vincent Hayward
  • Florian Gosselin
Advances in Biomechanics: from foundations to applications
  • 189 Downloads

Abstract

Medical orthoses aim at guiding anatomical joints along their natural trajectories while preventing pathological movements, especially in case of trauma or injuries. The motions that take place between bone surfaces have complex kinematics. These so-called arthrokinematic motions exhibit axes that move both in translation and rotation. Traditionally, orthoses are carefully adjusted and positioned such that their kinematics approximate the arthrokinematic movements as closely as possible in order to protect the joint. Adjustment procedures are typically long and tedious. We suggest in this paper another approach. We propose mechanisms having intrinsic self-aligning properties. They are designed such that their main axis self-adjusts with respect to the joint’s physiological axis during motion. When connected to a limb, their movement becomes homokinetic and they have the property of automatically minimizing internal stresses. The study is performed here in the planar case focusing on the most important component of the arthrokinematic motions of a knee joint.

Keywords

Self-adjustment Singular mechanisms Orthosis design 

Supplementary material

11012_2016_574_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (699 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 700 KB)
11012_2016_574_MOESM2_ESM.pdf (644 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (PDF 645 KB)

References

  1. 1.
    Wu G, Cavanagh PR (1995) ISB recommendations for standardization in the reporting of kinematic data. J Biomech 28(10):1257–1261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Goodfellow J, O’Connor J (1978) The mechanics of the knee and prothesis design. J Bone Joint Surg 60:358–369Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Winsman J, Veldpaus F, Janssen J, Huson A, Struben P (1980) A three-dimensional mathematical model of the knee-joint. J Biomech 13:677–685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sancisi N, Parenti-Castelli V (2011) A sequentially-defined stiffness model of the knee. Mech Mach Theory 46(12):1920–1928CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sancisi N, Parenti-Castelli V (2011) A new kinematic model of the passive motion of the knee inclusive of the patella. J Mech Robot 3(4):041003CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Markolf KL, Kochan A, Amstutz HC (1984) Measurement of knee stiffness and laxity in patients with documented absence of the anterior cruciate ligament. J Bone Joint Surg 66:242–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Roaas A, Andersson GBJ (1982) Normal range of motion of the hip, knee and ankle joints in male subjects, 30–40 years of age. Acta Orthop Scand 53(2):205–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    O’Connor J, Goodfellow J (1978) The mechanics of the knee and prothesis design. J Bone Jt SurgGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cai VAD, Bru B, Bidaud P, Hayward V, Gosselin F, Pasqui V (2010) Experimental evaluation of a goniometer for the identification of anatomical joint motions. In: Proceedings of the 13th international conference on climbing and walking robots and the support technologies for mobile machines, pp 1255-1262Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Walker PS, Kurosawa H, Rovick JS, Zimmerman RA (1985) External knee joint design based on normal motion. J Rehabil Res Dev 22:9–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Aaserude GV, Rubin RH (1987) Polycentric Variable Axis Hinge, United States Patent, Pub. Num. 4.699.129Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Herzberg T, Albrod A, Orthosis Knee-Joint (2001) United States Patent, Pub. Num. 6,309,368 B1Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lamb SR, Moore R (1985) Anatomic Fracture Brace For The Knee, United States Patent, Pub. Num. 4,523,585Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lambert G, Orthosis Knee (2006) United States Patent, Pub. Num. US2006/0089581 A1Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Reynolds R, Weber R, Landsberger S, Orthesis Knee (2006) United States Patent, Patent Num. US 2006/0211967 A1Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Spring AN, Kofman J, Lemaire ED (2012) Design and evaluation of an orthotic knee-extension assist. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 20(5):678–687CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Shamaei K, Napolitano P, Dollar AM (2014) Design and functional evaluation of a quasi-passive compliant stance control kneeanklefoot orthosis. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 22(2):258–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Weinberg B, Nikitczuk J, Patel S, Patritti B, Mavroidis C, Bonato P, Canavan P (2007) Design, control and human testing of an active knee rehabilitation orthotic device. In: IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, pp 4126–4133Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cai D, Bidaud P, Hayward V, Gosselin F (2009) Design of self-adjusting orthoses for rehabilitation. In: Proceedings of the 14th IASTED international conference on robotics and applications, Cambridge. MA, USA, pp 215–223Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Cai VAD, Bidaud P, Hayward V, Gosselin F, Desailly Eric (2011) Self-adjusting, isostatic exoskeleton for the human knee joint. In: Annual international conference of the IEEE engineering in medicine and biology society, pp 612-618Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Celebi B, Yalcin M, Patoglu V (2013) ASSISTON-KNEE: a self-aligning knee exoskeleton. In: IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS), 2013, Japan, pp 996–1002Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Jarasse N, Morel G (2011) Connecting a human limb to an exoskeleton. IEEE Trans Robot 28(3):697–710CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ergin MA, Patoglu V, Self-Adjusting Knee Exoskeleton A, for Robot-Assisted Treatment of Knee Injuries, Proc. IEEE, RSJ Int. Conf. on Intelligent Robots and Systems, September 25–30, 2011. San Francisco. CA, USA, pp 4917–4922Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Schorsch JF, Keemink AQL, Stienen AHA, van der Helm FCT, Abbink DA (2014) A novel self-aligning mechanism to decouple force and torques for a planar exoskeleton joint. Mech Sci 5:2935CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Stienen AHA, Hekman EEG, van der Helm FCT, van der Kooij H (2009) Self-aligning exoskeleton axes through decoupling of joint rotations and translations. IEEE Trans Robot 25:628–633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ding X, Dai JS (2010) Compliance analysis of mechanisms with spatial continuous compliance in the context of screw theory and Lie groups. J Mech Eng Sci Proc I MechE Part C 224(11):2493–2504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kinzel GL, Hall AS, Hillberry BM (1972) Measurement of the total motion between two body segments—i. analytical development. J Biomech 5:93–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Viet Anh Dung Cai
    • 1
  • Philippe Bidaud
    • 2
  • Vincent Hayward
    • 3
  • Florian Gosselin
    • 4
  1. 1.Ho Chi Minh city University of Technology and EducationHo Chi MinhVietnam
  2. 2.ONERA - Chemin de la HunirePalaiseauFrance
  3. 3.Sorbonne UniversitesParisFrance
  4. 4.Interactive Robotics LaboratoryCEA, LISTGif-sur-YvetteFrance

Personalised recommendations