Mechatronic Device for Locomotor Training

Duda, Sławomir; Gąsiorek, Damian; Gembalczyk, Grzegorz; Kciuk, Sławomir; Mężyk, Arkadiusz

doi:10.1515/ama-2016-0049

Abstract

This paper presents a novel mechatronic device to support a gait reeducation process. The conceptual works were done by the interdisciplinary design team. This collaboration allowed to perform a device that would connect the current findings in the fields of biomechanics and mechatronics. In the first part of the article shown a construction of the device which is based on the structure of an overhead travelling crane. The rest of the article contains the issues related to machine control system. In the prototype, the control of drive system is conducted by means of two RT-DAC4/PCI real time cards connected with a signal conditioning interface. Authors present the developed control algorithms and optimization process of the controller settings values. The summary contains a comparison of some numerical simulation results and experimental data from the sensors mounted on the device. The measurement data were obtained during the gait of a healthy person.

References

1. Akdogan E., Adli M.A. (2011), The design and control of a therapeutic exercise robot for lower limb rehabilitation: Physiotherabot, Mechatronics, 21(3), 509-522.10.1016/j.mechatronics.2011.01.005
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
2. Bae J., Tomizuka M. (2012), A gait rehabilitation strategy inspired by an iterative learning algorithm, Mechatronics, 22(2), 213-221.10.1016/j.mechatronics.2012.01.009
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
3. Behrman A.L., Harkema S.J. (2000), Locomotor training after human spinal cord injury: a series of case studies, Physical Therapy, 80(7), 688-700.10.1093/ptj/80.7.688
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
4. Botticello A.L., Rohrbach T., Cobbold N. (2014), Disability and the built environment: aninvestigation of community and neighborhood land uses and participation for physically impaired adults, Annals of Epidemiology, 24(7), 545-550.10.1016/j.annepidem.2014.05.003
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
5. Boyd J.E., Little J.J. (2005), Biometric gait recognition, Advanced Studies in Biometrics, Springer, 3161, 19-42.10.1007/11493648_2
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
6. Campa R., Kelly R., Santibanez V. (2004), Windows-based real-time control of direct-drive mechanisms: platform description and experiments, Mechatronics, 14(9), 1021-1036.10.1016/j.mechatronics.2004.04.004
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
7. Cao J., Xie S.Q., Das R., Zhu G.L. (2014), Control strategies for effective robot assisted gait rehabilitation: The state of art and future prospects, Medical engineering & Physics, 36(12), 1555-1566.10.1016/j.medengphy.2014.08.005
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
8. Cappozzo A., Della Croce U., Leardini A., Chiari L. (2005), Human movement analysis using stereophotogrammetry Part 1: theoretical background, Gait & Posture, 21(2), 186–196.10.1016/S0966-6362(04)00025-6
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
9. Duda S., Gembalczyk G., Kciuk S., Gasiorek D. (2014), Mechatronic device to protect against falls during locomotor rehabilitation, Proceedings of the 3rd Joint International Conference on Multibody System Dynamics, Busan, 121-122.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
10. Duda S., Kawlewski K., Gembalczyk G. (2015), Concept of the System for Control over Keeping up the Movement of a Crane, Solid State Phenomena, 220, 339-344.10.4028/www.scientific.net/SSP.220-221.339
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
11. Duda S., Michnik R., Kciuk S., Jurkojć J., Kawlewski K., Machoczek T. (2011), The conception of a mechatronic device for locomotor training, Aktualne Problemy Biomechaniki, 5, 29-36.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
12. Faust O., Yu W., Acharya U.R. (2015), The role of real-time in biomedical science: A meta-analysis on computational complexity, delay and speedup, Computers in Biology and Medicine, 58, 73-84.10.1016/j.compbiomed.2014.12.02425618217
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
13. Gembalczyk G., Duda S. (2012), Design and validation of devices for measuring the force and the angle of inclination rope in crane, Modelowanie inżynierskie, 14(45), 32-38. [in Polish]
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
14. Hesse S., Werner C. (2009), Connecting research to the needs of patients and clinicians, Brain Research Bulletin, 78, 26-34.10.1016/j.brainresbull.2008.06.00418601984
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
15. Hidler J., Brennan D., Black I., Nichols D., Brady K. Nef T. (2011), ZeroG: Overground gait and balance training system, Journal of Rehabilitation Research & Development, 48(4), 287-298.10.1682/JRRD.2010.05.009821674384
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
16. Hidler J.M., Wall A.E. (2005), Alteration in muscle activation patterns during robotic-assisted walking, Clinical Biomechanics, 20, 184-193.10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2004.09.01615621324
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
17. Hussain S., Xie S.Q., Jamwal P.K. (2013), Control of a robotic orthosis for gait rehabilitation, Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 61(9), 911-919.10.1016/j.robot.2013.01.007
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
18. Kaliński K.J., Buchholz C. (2015), Mechatronic design of strongly nonlinear systems on a basis of three wheeled mobile platform, Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 52-53, 700-721.10.1016/j.ymssp.2014.06.016
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
19. Lunenburger L., Colombo G., Riener R., Dietz V. (2004), Biofeedback in gait training with the robotic orthosis Lokomat, Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, 4888-4891.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
20. Mailah M., Jahanabadi H., Zain M.Z.M., Priyandoko G. (2009), Modelling and control of a human-like arm incorporating muscle models, Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science, 223(7), 1569-1577.10.1243/09544062JMES1289
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
21. Marchal-Crespo L., Reinkensmeyer D.J. (2009), Review of control strategies for robotic movement training after neurologic injury, Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 6, 20.10.1186/1743-0003-6-20271033319531254
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
22. Mulroy S.J., Klassen T., Gronley J.K., Eberly V.J., Brown D.A., Sullivan K.J. (2010), Gait parameters associated with responsiveness to treadmill training with body-weight support after stroke: an exploratory study, Physical Therapy, 90(2), 209-223.10.2522/ptj.2009014120022996
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
23. Sawers A., Ting L.H. (2014), Perspectives on human-human sensorimotor interactions for the design of rehabilitation robots, Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 11, 142.10.1186/1743-0003-11-142419726125284060
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
24. Sherafat S., Salavati M., Takamjani I.E., Akhbari B., Mohammadirad S., Mazaheri m., Negahban H. (2013), Intrasession and intersession reliability of postural control in participants with and without nonspecific low back pain using the Biodex Balance System, Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics, 36(2), 111-118.10.1016/j.jmpt.2012.12.00523499146
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
25. Walker M.L., Ringleb S.I., Maihafer G.C., Walker R., Crouch J.R., Van Lunen B., Morrison S. (2010), Virtual reality–enhanced partial body weight–supported treadmill training poststroke: feasibility and effectiveness in 6 subjects. Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation, 91(1), 115-122.10.1016/j.apmr.2009.09.00920103405
Search in Google Scholar Back to article

Mechatronic Device for Locomotor Training

Abstract

Paradigm

My account