Biomechanics and energetics of walking in powered ankle exoskeletons using myoelectric control versus mechanically intrinsic control.
Biomechanics and energetics of walking in powered ankle exoskeletons using myoelectric control versus mechanically intrinsic control.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/s12984-018-0379-6
复制
发表时间：
2018-05-25
影响因子：
5.1
通讯作者：
Ferris DP
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Koller JR;Remy CD;Ferris DP
用于辅助机器人设备的控制器可以分为两大类：使用神经信号的控制器和使用机械固有信号的控制器。这两种方法在研究设备中都很普遍，但两者之间的直接比较可以深入了解它们的相对优势和劣势。我们研究了使用两种不同控制模式的机器人踝关节外骨骼行走的受试者：基于比目鱼肌活动（神经信号）的动态增益比例肌电控制，以及基于步态事件（机械固有信号）的基于定时的机械固有控制。我们假设受试者在两种控制器之间会有不同的代谢工作率测量值，因为我们预测受试者会以独特的方式使用每种控制器，因为一种控制器依赖于肌肉募集，而另一种则不依赖。这两个控制器具有相同的平均致动信号，因为我们使用来自肌电控制器的行走的控制信号来形成机械固有控制信号。不同之处在于，肌电控制器允许由用户的比目鱼肌肌肉募集控制的致动信号的逐步变化，而基于定时的控制器在每一步都具有相同的致动信号，而不管肌肉募集如何。我们观察到两个控制器之间的代谢工作率没有统计学显著差异。受试者行走时，比目鱼肌活动减少11%，在中期和后期的立场和显着减少峰值比目鱼肌招聘时，使用基于时间的控制器比使用肌电控制器。而步行与肌电控制器，受试者走了显着更高的平均积极和消极的总踝关节功率相比，步行与定时控制器。我们解释减少踝关节的力量和肌肉活动与基于时间的控制器相对于肌电控制器产生更大的松弛效果。当使用由机械内在信号驱动的控制器时，受试者能够比使用由神经信号驱动的控制器时更少地参与肌肉水平，但这对他们的代谢工作率没有影响。这些结果表明，控制器的类型（神经与机械）可能会影响个人如何使用机器人外骨骼进行治疗康复或人类性能增强。本文的在线版本（10.1186/s12984-018-0379-6）包含补充材料，可供授权用户使用。
Controllers for assistive robotic devices can be divided into two main categories: controllers using neural signals and controllers using mechanically intrinsic signals. Both approaches are prevalent in research devices, but a direct comparison between the two could provide insight into their relative advantages and disadvantages. We studied subjects walking with robotic ankle exoskeletons using two different control modes: dynamic gain proportional myoelectric control based on soleus muscle activity (neural signal), and timing-based mechanically intrinsic control based on gait events (mechanically intrinsic signal). We hypothesized that subjects would have different measures of metabolic work rate between the two controllers as we predicted subjects would use each controller in a unique manner due to one being dependent on muscle recruitment and the other not. The two controllers had the same average actuation signal as we used the control signals from walking with the myoelectric controller to shape the mechanically intrinsic control signal. The difference being the myoelectric controller allowed step-to-step variation in the actuation signals controlled by the user’s soleus muscle recruitment while the timing-based controller had the same actuation signal with each step regardless of muscle recruitment. We observed no statistically significant difference in metabolic work rate between the two controllers. Subjects walked with 11% less soleus activity during mid and late stance and significantly less peak soleus recruitment when using the timing-based controller than when using the myoelectric controller. While walking with the myoelectric controller, subjects walked with significantly higher average positive and negative total ankle power compared to walking with the timing-based controller. We interpret the reduced ankle power and muscle activity with the timing-based controller relative to the myoelectric controller to result from greater slacking effects. Subjects were able to be less engaged on a muscle level when using a controller driven by mechanically intrinsic signals than when using a controller driven by neural signals, but this had no affect on their metabolic work rate. These results suggest that the type of controller (neural vs. mechanical) is likely to affect how individuals use robotic exoskeletons for therapeutic rehabilitation or human performance augmentation. The online version of this article (10.1186/s12984-018-0379-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
登录
查看更多内容
使用未经动荡的外骨骼降低人行走的能源成本。
影响因子：
64.8
作者：
Collins, Steven H.;Wiggin, M. Bruce;Sawicki, Gregory S.
通讯作者：
Sawicki, Gregory S.
影响因子：
1.4
作者：
Ferris, DP;Czerniecki, JM;Hannaford, B
通讯作者：
Hannaford, B
影响因子：
5.1
作者：
Cain, Stephen M.;Gordon, Keith E.;Ferris, Daniel P.
通讯作者：
Ferris, Daniel P.
影响因子：
2.4
作者：
Lewis CL;Ferris DP
通讯作者：
Ferris DP
影响因子：
7.8
作者：
Au, Samuel;Berniker, Max;Herr, Hugh
通讯作者：
Herr, Hugh