A simple exoskeleton that assists plantarflexion can reduce the metabolic cost of human walking

Philippe Malcolm, Wim Derave, Samuel Galle, Dirk De Clercq, Philippe Malcolm, Wim Derave, Samuel Galle, Dirk De Clercq

Abstract

Background: Even though walking can be sustained for great distances, considerable energy is required for plantarflexion around the instant of opposite leg heel contact. Different groups attempted to reduce metabolic cost with exoskeletons but none could achieve a reduction beyond the level of walking without exoskeleton, possibly because there is no consensus on the optimal actuation timing. The main research question of our study was whether it is possible to obtain a higher reduction in metabolic cost by tuning the actuation timing.

Methodology/principal findings: We measured metabolic cost by means of respiratory gas analysis. Test subjects walked with a simple pneumatic exoskeleton that assists plantarflexion with different actuation timings. We found that the exoskeleton can reduce metabolic cost by 0.18±0.06 W kg(-1) or 6±2% (standard error of the mean) (p = 0.019) below the cost of walking without exoskeleton if actuation starts just before opposite leg heel contact.

Conclusions/significance: The optimum timing that we found concurs with the prediction from a mathematical model of walking. While the present exoskeleton was not ambulant, measurements of joint kinetics reveal that the required power could be recycled from knee extension deceleration work that occurs naturally during walking. This demonstrates that it is theoretically possible to build future ambulant exoskeletons that reduce metabolic cost, without power supply restrictions.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Figure 1. Metabolic cost and performance index.
Figure 1. Metabolic cost and performance index.
(A) Δ Net metabolic cost versus unpowered condition. Asterisks indicate significant differences versus unpowered condition. (B), 43% condition versus without exoskeleton. Asterisk indicates significant difference. (C) Performance index. Asterisks indicate significant difference versus 13% condition. Numbers below bars indicate differences expressed as percentages of net metabolic cost in unpowered or standard shoes condition. Horizontal bars indicate actuation duration. Vertical lines indicate heel contact and toe off. Filled circles (•) and triangles (▴) respectively indicate results derived , from Sawicki and Ferris and Norris et al. (young adults population). Error bars indicate inter-subject s.e.m. Black and grey dashed lines indicate mean±s.e.m. of third-order polynomial curve fit. **p≤0.01, *p≤0.05.
Figure 2. Body centre of mass (COM)…
Figure 2. Body centre of mass (COM) height.
(A) COM height versus height at heelstrike during right leg stride cycle. Error bars indicate inter-subject s.e.m. Opaque horizontal bars indicate actuation duration of right leg exoskeleton. Transparent bars indicate the actuation duration of opposite leg exoskeleton. Vertical lines delimit single & double stance phases. (B) COM height during double stance phase. Arrows indicate COM drop after heel contact. It can be noted that the arrows are slightly larger than the minima of the lines in the chart. This due to the temporal variation of the occurrence of minimum COM height is which is not shown in the lines in the chart as these only show the mean evolution of COM height. Asterisk indicates significant Pearson’s correlation between Δ COM drop versus unpowered condition and Δ net metabolic cost versus unpowered condition. Black line and arrow indicate unpowered condition. *p≤0.05.
Figure 3. Hypothetical feasibility of an ambulant…
Figure 3. Hypothetical feasibility of an ambulant recycling exoskeleton.
Black and green line respectively show knee and exoskeleton power in 43% onset condition. Numbers in chart surface indicate work during certain power peaks. Asterisks indicate significant difference between absolute value of knee swing deceleration work (Wknee−) versus positive exoskeleton work (Wexo+). Knee power is shown starting from the previous stride swing phase to illustrate how knee swing deceleration could be recycled into plantarflexion power during push off with a mechanism. Horizontal bar indicates actuation duration. Vertical lines indicate heel contact and toe off. Error bars indicate inter-subject s.e.m. **p≤0.01.

References

    1. Hreljac A (1993) Preferred and energetically optimal gait transition speeds in human locomotion. Med Sci Sports Exerc 25: 1158–1162.
    1. Fornaris E, Aubert M (1998) Le légionnaire romain, cet athlète méconnu. Hist Sci Med 32: 161–168.
    1. Cavagna GA, Heglund NC, Taylor CR (1977) Mechanical work in terrestrial locomotion: two basic mechanisms for minimizing energy expenditure. Am J Physiol 233: R243–R261.
    1. Bogue R (2009) Exoskeletons and robotic prosthetics: a review of recent developments. Ind Rob 36: 421–427 doi .
    1. Ferris DP (2009) The exoskeletons are here. J Neuroeng Rehabil 6: 17 doi:.
    1. Norris JA, Granata KP, Mitros MR, Byrne EM, Marsh AP (2007) Effect of augmented plantarflexion power on preferred walking speed and economy in young and older adults. Gait Posture 25: 620–627 doi:.
    1. Sawicki GS, Ferris DP (2008) Mechanics and energetics of level walking with powered ankle exoskeletons. J Exp Biol 211: 1402–1413 doi:.
    1. Sawicki GS, Ferris DP (2009) Powered ankle exoskeletons reveal the metabolic cost of plantar flexor mechanical work during walking with longer steps at constant step frequency. J Exp Biol 212: 21–31 doi:.
    1. Malcolm P, Fiers P, Segers V, Van Caekenberghe I, Lenoir M, et al. (2009) Experimental study on the role of the ankle push off in the walk-to-run transition by means of a powered ankle-foot-exoskeleton. Gait Posture 30: 322–327 doi:.
    1. Sawicki GS, Domingo A, Ferris DP (2006) The effects of powered ankle-foot orthoses on joint kinematics and muscle activation during walking in individuals with incomplete spinal cord injury. J Neuroeng Rehabil 3: 3 doi:.
    1. Gordon KE, Sawicki GS, Ferris DP (2006) Mechanical performance of artificial pneumatic muscles to power an ankle-foot orthosis. J Biomech 39: 1832–1841 doi:.
    1. Wiggin MB, Collins SH, Sawicki GS (2012) A Passive Elastic Ankle Exoskeleton Using Controlled Energy Storage and Release to Reduce the Metabolic Cost of Walking. Proceedings 7th Annual Dynamic Walking Conference. 24–25.
    1. Winter DA (1983) Energy generation and absorption at the ankle and knee during fast, natural, and slow cadences. Clin Orthop Relat Res: 147–154.
    1. Herr H (2009) Exoskeletons and orthoses: classification, design challenges and future directions. J Neuroeng Rehabil 6: 21 doi:.
    1. Ruina A, Bertram JEA, Srinivasan M (2005) A collisional model of the energetic cost of support work qualitatively explains leg sequencing in walking and galloping, pseudo-elastic leg behavior in running and the walk-to-run transition. J Theor Biol 237: 170–192 doi:.
    1. Kuo AD (2002) Energetics of actively powered locomotion using the simplest walking model. J Biomech Eng 124: 113–120 doi:.
    1. Brockway JM (1987) Derivation of formulae used to calculate energy expenditure in man. Hum Nutr Clin Nutr 41: 463–471.
    1. Ishikawa M, Komi P V, Grey MJ, Lepola V, Bruggemann GP (2005) Muscle-tendon interaction and elastic energy usage in human walking. J Appl Physiol 99: 603–608 doi:.
    1. Au SK, Dilworth P, Herr H (2006) An ankle-foot emulation system for the study of human walking biomechanics. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. 2939–2945. doi:.
    1. Bregman DJJ, Van der Krogt MM, De Groot V, Harlaar J, Wisse M, et al. (2011) The effect of ankle foot orthosis stiffness on the energy cost of walking: A simulation study. Clin Biomech 26: 955–961 doi .
    1. Grabowski A, Farley CT, Kram R (2005) Independent metabolic costs of supporting body weight and accelerating body mass during walking. J Appl Physiol 98: 579–583 doi:.
    1. Givoni B, Goldman RF (1971) Predicting metabolic energy cost. J Appl Physiol 30: 429–433.
    1. Perera S, Mody SH, Woodman RC (2006) Meaningful change and responsiveness in common physical performance measures in older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc 54: 743–749 doi:.
    1. Smith AE, Quigley M, Waters R (1982) Kinematic Comparison of the BiCaal Orthosis and the Rigid Polypropylene Orthosis in Stroke Patients. Orthot Prosthet 36: 49–55.
    1. Browning RC, Modica JR, Kram R (2007) The effects of adding mass to the legs on the energetics and biomechanics of walking. Med Sci Sports Exerc 39: 515–525 doi:.
    1. Walsh CJ, Endo K, Herr H (2007) A quasi-passive leg exoskeleton for load-carrying augmentation. Int J HR 4: 487–506.
    1. Gregorczyk KN, Hasselquist L, Schiffman JM, Bensel CK, Obusek JP, et al. (2010) Effects of a lower-body exoskeleton device on metabolic cost and gait biomechanics during load carriage. Ergonomics 53: 1263–1275 doi:.
    1. Van Dijk W, Van der Kooij H, Hekman E (2011) A Passive Exoskeleton with Artificial Tendons. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics. 1–6. doi:.
    1. Collins SH, Kuo AD (2010) Recycling energy to restore impaired ankle function during human walking. PLoS one 5: e9307 doi:.
    1. Van den Bogert AJ (2003) Exotendons for assistance of human locomotion. Biomed Eng Online 2: 17 doi:.
    1. Qingguo L, Naing V, Maxwell DJ (2009) Development of a biomechanical energy harvester. J Neuroeng Rehabil 6: 22 doi:.
    1. Galle S, Malcolm P, Derave W, De Clercq D (2013) Adaptation to walking with an exoskeleton that assists ankle extension. Gait Posture.
    1. Thirunarayan MA, Kerrigan DC, Rabuffetti M, Croce UD, Saini M (1996) Comparison of three methods for estimating vertical displacement of center of mass during level walking in patients. Gait Posture 4: 306–314 doi .
    1. Dempster WT (1955) Space requirements of the seated operator. WADC Tech Rep: 55–159.
    1. Mifflin MD, St Jeor ST, Hill LA, Scott BJ, Daugherty SA, et al. (1990) A new predictive equation for resting energy expenditure in healthy individuals. Am J Clin Nutr 51: 241–247.

Source: PubMed

Подписаться