See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/268745075

Transfemoral Prosthesis with Polycentric Knee Mechanism: Design, Kinematics,

Dynamics and Control Strategy

Article · December 2013

DOI: 10.12970/2308-8354.2013.01.02.5

CITATIONS READS

6 2,356

3 authors, including:

Alexander Poliakov Olena Chepenyuk

Sevastopol State University, Russian Federation Sevastopol National Technical University
35 PUBLICATIONS   85 CITATIONS    5 PUBLICATIONS   21 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

System synthesis of transfemoral prosthesis prototype with intellectual-synergetic control of artificial knee View project

The design of hip joint wear simulator View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Alexander Poliakov on 25 November 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Journal of Rehabilitation Robotics, 2013, 1, 109-123 109

Transfemoral Prosthesis with Polycentric Knee Mechanism:

Design, Kinematics, Dynamics and Control Strategy

Oleksandr M. Poliakov*, Victor B. Lazarev and Olena O. Chepenyuk

Laboratory of Biomechanics, Sevastopol National Technical University, 33, Universitetskaya str., Sevastopol,
99053, Ukraine
Abstract. Research results obtained developing budget model of transfemoral prosthesis with polycentric knee joint
mechanism and microprocessor control are presented in this work. Dimensions of the mechanism links were determined
on the basis of multicriteria optimization by the method of systematic investigation of parameter space with parameters
uniformly distributed in multidimensional cube. Control strategy of the prosthesis with active drive units of knee and ankle
joints and variable rigidity of magnetorheological damper was formulated.

Keywords: Transfemoral Prosthesis, Artificial Knee, Bernstein's Problem, Optimality Criterion, Synergy, Control
System.

INTRODUCTION It is especially difficult to achieve minimal discomfort

Since ancient times people have wanted to create
devices that allow to restore their functions lost due to
various reasons, for example, functions that are vital for
moving in space using limbs. A lot of doctors and
engineers thought that creation of devices (prostheses)
replacing limbs was quite simple. Indeed, during a long
period of time there have been created a lot of
prostheses that have been continuously improved and
now some of them have reached the level of highly
developed constructions.
Modern artificial limbs satisfy most of the amputee’s
requirements. Some designs embody attainment of the
newest technologies; they provide amputees with the
majority of necessary conditions for social rehabilitation
and virtually allow them to return to active lifestyle.
However, even these prostheses are not perfect and,
moreover, are currently quite expensive and
unavailable for many disabled people.
Assuming the limbs perfect (with emotional,
physiological, and functional points of view), even the
most perfect prosthesis will match them only to some
extent. Therefore, in the design of a new prosthesis
first of all it is necessary to strive to ensure that
amputee with prosthesis experiences minimal
discomfort (ultimate comfort). It is this concept that is
now accepted as basic in Prosthetics and Prosthesis
Making.
*Address correspondence to this author at the Laboratory of Biomechanics,
Sevastopol National Technical University, 33, Universitetskaya str.,
Sevastopol, 99053, Ukraine; Tel: +38 (050) 3982769; Fax: +38 (0692) 43-51-
61; E-mail: alex_polyakov@inbox.ru
during walking of amputees with transfemoral
amputation. This is due to the fact that in relevant
prostheses (transfemoral prosthesis, above knee
prosthesis) there are mechanisms of the knee and
ankle joints that perform their functions in coordination
with hip joint which is actuated by muscles. During
motion of healthy limb under the influence of the central
nervous system (CNS), thigh, shin and foot motion self-
organization synergetic processes are implemented [1],
the laws of which up to now have not been fully known.
In this regard, when controlling the transfemoral
prosthesis, it becomes necessary to solve problems
connected with the motion uncertainty of its elements.
Practice shows that recovery of people with
transfemoral amputation takes a long time. During
walking they spend about 80% more energy in
comparison with healthy individuals [2] and experience
significant discomfort. The greatest contribution to the
discomfort of amputee walking with the prosthesis
makes functioning of artificial knee joint mechanism
significantly different from natural. Therefore, one of the
main goals in designing of artificial knee mechanisms
in transfemoral prostheses, not contradicting the
concept stated above, is to provide kinematic, dynamic
and other function of amputee gait closest to normal
gait.
Improvement of prostheses design considering the
achievements of modern technologies and accessibility
for most amputees is important scientific and technical
task that will allow improving quality of life of many
people. This paper presents research results obtained
during development of budget model of transfemoral

E-ISSN: 2308-8354/13 © 2013 Synergy Publishers

110 Journal of Rehabilitation Robotics, 2013, Vol. 1, No. 2
prosthesis with polycentric knee joint mechanism and
microprocessor control.
SOME FEATURES OF HUMAN WALKING
Studying of the musculoskeletal system elements
movements, observed during human walking, their
similarity and variability is extremely important to create
qualitative artificial limbs and synthesize control
systems. Ideally, prosthesis must fulfill all natural limb
functions that vary significantly depending on
numerous factors.
The first studies of normal gait are associated with
Aristotle (IV century BC) and the foundations of modern
biomechanics - with D. Borelli (early XVII century) who
created models of human and animal bodies in the
form of lever systems [4]. To date, biomechanical
principles and character of human motion during
walking had been studied in details and described in
numerous literature sources [1, 5-9, etc.].
Basic walking parameters are typical for most
healthy people. Normal walking process is cyclical
(Gait Cycle - GC) with two well-defined phases: Stance
Phase - StPh (60% -65%) GC and Swing Phase -
SwPh (35% -40%) GC, which in turn include a number
of time intervals usually measured in percentage of
cycle time [9].
StPh:
initial contact (heel strike): interval - 0%; limit: start of
1st double support;
loading response: interval – 0% - 10%; limits: end of
1st double support, start of one leg support;
midstance (mid support): interval – 10% - 30%; limits:
end of the first half of stance, start of the second half of
stance;
terminal stance: interval – 30% - 50%; limits: end of
single support, start of double support;
end of stance (pre-swing): interval – 50% - 65%; limits:
end of double support, preparing swing;
SwPh:
initial swing: interval – 65% - 70%; limits: start of swing,
one legged support;
- mid swing: interval: 70% - 85%; limits: middle of
swing, middle of one leg support;
- terminal swing: interval: 85% - 100%; limits: mid
of swing, mid of single support.
Poliakov et al.
For space-time representation metachronograms
are used; they show the sequential change of limbs


configurations during walking (Figure 1). If rk = ( xk , zk ) ,
k = 1,..., 5 is vector defined by coordinates of the limb
reference points associated with the hip joint - 1, knee
joint – 2, ankle joint - 3, heel – 4 and toe –5, then
instant configuration of the limb
Leg is determined by a
variety of vectors




Leg = (r1 ,..., r5 ). (1)
Denote period of walking by T and step length by
L . Also consider that T = T
+ T+ and L = L
+ L+ ,
where T
, T+ - durations of the stance phase and the
swing phase, L
, L+ - lengths of the stance and the
swing step parts, respectively. Assuming that during
walking process some reference point is moving in
horizontal direction with constant speed v,
L = vT = v (T
+ T+ ) . However, in the stance phase
speed of the foot can be considered approximately
equal to zero, thus in the swing phase in horizontal
direction it moves faster than reference point with the
speed V = v + u , where u - relative speed of the foot.
Therefore, a step length can be approximately defined
as L = ( v + u ) T+ .
Figure 1: Transit metachronogram of one walking step in the
road coordinate system. Numbers denote trajectories of the
centers of: 1 - hip joint, 2 - knee joint, 3 - ankle joint, 4 - heel,
5 – toe.
However, even during stationary walking, neither of
the points on human body is moving with constant
speed. In this regard, reference (basal) point is usually
chosen conditionally and more often it is associated
with the center of the hip joint. Assuming that the
center of the hip joint O * in horizontal direction is
moving uniformly with the speed v , we get so-called
locomotor system of coordinates O* x* z* . Transition
from the road to locomotor system of coordinates is
carried out by the Galilean transformations:


( )
rk (t )= xk (t )
vt , z k (t ) . In the locomotor system of
Transfemoral Prosthesis with Polycentric Knee Mechanism
coordinates metachronograms have pendular character
and usually are presented separately for the stance
and swing phases of walking.
During process of walking, joints angles of limb
elements, rotational torques generated by muscles,
capacity and magnitude of supporting reactions are
changing. Angle values
H ,
K ,
A (H – hip joint, K –
knee joint, A – ankle joint) can be determined, for
example, from metachronograms [10, 11], and
corresponding torques Th , Tk , Ta and powers Ph , Pk ,
Pa can be obtained by solving the inverse dynamics
problems of bipedal walking or by other methods [12-
21 and other sources].
Despite the complexity of the neural control system,
human gait is characterized by smoothness and
regularity of movement. However, analysis of multiple
samples of similar limb movements indicates that they
almost never repeat. This effect was discovered by
Bernstein and was named by him as "repetition without
repetition" [22]. That is, when the same movements are
repeated in the same conditions, despite substantially
same final result, trajectories of limb elements and
processes of driving muscles are different. If in any of
observations motion parameters turn out to be the
same it should be perceived as accidental event.
Bernstein suggested that drive limb muscles did not act
independently and performed their functions under the
influence of the CNS correcting each other's mistakes.
At every new movement the CNS generates different
commands and repetition is performed in the conditions
at some extent different from previous motion [22].
On the basis of Bernstein assumption hypothesis
that the CNS generates adaptive limb motion can be
formulated; its simplified scheme of control upon
reaching certain goal is shown in Figure 2. However,
this hypothesis does not allow solving fully the problem
of movement uniqueness in excessive number of
degrees of freedom inherent in the limb.
Basing on the results of numerous observations,
Bernstein suggested that the CNS was not looking for
unique solution of kinematic redundancy problem by
eliminating redundant degrees of freedom, but was
using it to provide the most accurate execution of the
task [22]. But this raises a lot of questions that, up to
now, are impossible to give definite answer to.
Figure 2: Simplified diagram of the control system of limb
movement at the implementation of some intentions.
Journal of Rehabilitation Robotics, 2013, Vol. 1, No. 2 111
Muscles consist of a large number of motor units
that make different contributions to generated muscular
strength. Each joint is driven by more than one muscle
and to evaluate contribution of each of them to the
implemented torque is very difficult. How and in what
sense the CNS solves the problem of kinematic
redundancy is one of the main problems of the motor
control called "Bernstein problem"[23].
Solution of "Bernstein problem" has been widely
discussed, and in most works methods of optimization
with additional kinematic, dynamic, energetic,
physiological or complex motion conditions, stated on
the basis of objective laws of nature or plausible
hypotheses, that did not contradict experiments, were
used [24-28]. This approach allows excluding some of
independent variables imposing additional conditions
on the limb motion. The main problem that occurs is
that none of suggested criteria allows obtaining real
motion practically. For example, if performance
criterion is taking into account, energetically inefficient
motion can be obtained; motion effective from the
standpoint of energy consumption is not always
comfortable from physiological point of view, etc. That
is, in optimization process several criteria or complex
quality criteria, which, besides, can be contradictory,
often should be taken into account. Significant
difficulties occur with implementation of quality criteria
when purpose or character of the environment impact
on human is changing during process of motion. Thus,
the use of various quality criteria in the prosthesis
control systems can be desirable, but not necessary,
and, moreover, cannot be sufficient condition for its
effectiveness.
Despite the perception that "Bernstein problem"
cannot be successfully solved by eliminating redundant
degrees of freedom, approach described above was
generally accepted and has dominated for the last 50
years [29]. One of the possible alternative approaches
(principle of abundance) has been proposed recently. It
is based on provision stating that redundant degrees of
freedom are not eliminated but are always involved
virtually in all of the natural motor (locomotive) actions
in order to provide stability and flexibility necessary for
successful solution of the problem in badly formulated
conditions [30]. In [31] it is stated as hypothesis that,
according to such approach, on each level of the
hierarchy, synergies are formed so as to display one of
multiple input signals (problems) into signals affecting
individual elements (effectors). Such synergies can be
found among elementary variables that stabilize or
don’t stabilize total output of the system of elements. At
112 Journal of Rehabilitation Robotics, 2013, Vol. 1, No. 2
each level of the hierarchy, input mapping provides
flexibility of the combination of output (elementary)
variables that leads to stable state of the whole system
defined by input signals. This flexibility has many
advantages, including ability to perform several tasks at
the same time [29, 32].
Principle of abundance and other similar principles
that are being used to solve "Bernstein problem” are
based on synergic effects of muscular activity carried
out under control of the CNS commands. These effects
th
were discovered in the late 19 century but in the
current literature on motor control they are also
connected with the name of N. Bernstein [23].
According to hypothesis suggested by him, muscle
synergy is such connection between several muscles
that control signal activates them together and
proportionately. When changing the task, control signal
leads to parallel changes in all muscles connected
together synergistically [23]. For example, in [33] it is
noted that predictions of synchronization and muscles
activation level (outputs) based on rotation angle of the
knee joint and floor reaction force (inputs) are similar to
the prediction of activation level based on the floor
reaction forces and rotation angles of the hip, knee and
ankle joints. That is, authors claim that, basing on the
analysis of numerous experimental data, they found
synergistic connection between elementary parameters
of human walking. This allowed them, knowing one
joint angle (for example
K ), to determine others (
H
and
A ).
It should be noted that in available literature sources
one can find a lot of works in which authors point to
synergies identified by them between motion
parameters of the upper and lower limbs that have not
only humans but also animals [see, e.g., 34-43]. For
practical use of these connections at executive level,
"Bernstein problem" related to kinematic redundancy is
usually replaced by another problem called "Pseudo-
Bernstein problem" [44, 45]. It’s formulated the
following way:
- to determine combination of the rotation angles
(the inverse problem of kinematics) or forces in
muscles (the inverse problem of dynamics) it is
necessary to perform motor task when number
of degrees of freedom exceeds number of
parameters defining the problem.
Both these problems are related to the class of
incorrect problems [33]. Their solutions can be found
on the basis of so-called synergetic criteria that allow
finding concerted movements of limbs elements similar
Poliakov et al.
to those observed in nature. Currently there is no
reason to assert that these movements are optimal
from many points of view. However, the fact that they
lead to desired final result for various initial conditions
and are to some extent characterized by invariant
properties allows considering them synergetic or at
least conditionally synergetic [46].
When developing control strategy of transfemoral
prosthesis, it is necessary to take into account many
factors, including those that characterize similarity and
variability of walking process. Such aspects as
character of the environment where walking is
implemented, as well as the type of walking, the tactical
and strategic intentions of the amputee, the
surmounted or possible obstacles are also very
important. Redundant number of degrees of freedom
allows obtaining infinite number of motion variants of
the limb elements to achieve the ultimate goal of
walking, but only some of them can be considered
optimal from the viewpoint of the amputee. That is,
control system, to be considered the best, should allow
amputee to realize movements that are not optimal in
accordance with objective laws of physics but the best
from his personal (subjective) point of view. For
functioning of such control system it is necessary to be
able in real-time mode to receive, process and use
information from the CNS. Currently, rapid
development of making technology of bioprosthesis, in
control systems of which such information is being
used, is being observed. However, significant increase
of functional reliability of these prostheses and their
mass production are obviously possible only in remote
prospect.
Thus, in advanced control systems of the budget
transfemoral prostheses it is desirable to use
information that can be technologically available from
advanced sensor devices that register various
parameters of walking in real-time mode. These
parameters can be used in control of the prostheses in
different ways. For example, basing on experimental
data, the process of walking can be parameterized [47],
including consideration of segmentation of different
phases [48], and used to predict configuration changes
of the limb relatively to the current state [49]. [50-52]
present some of the possible approaches to
optimization of walking speed for different
parameterized gaits derived from experimental data.
But simulation results of such variants of walking
indicate that they do not correspond to natural ones.
Transfemoral Prosthesis with Polycentric Knee Mechanism
In conclusion, it should be noted that a detailed
study of biomechanical laws of human walking is
necessary for understanding of mathematical problems
solved by the CNC during motor commands formation.
It can be reasonably assumed that such laws and
algorithms of their implementation exist objectively. For
example, it is known that individual is capable to walk
in different modes. This testifies not only kinematic
capabilities of the musculoskeletal system in general
and the limbs in particular, but also that the CNS uses
certain intelligent algorithms to provide realization of
normal walking mode, generated during ontogeny and
implemented mostly subconsciously, and also other
modes (including quite inefficient from different points
of view) realized consciously on subjective level. For
multiple implementations of such modes it is required
to have certain skills that can be acquired in course of
training. In consequence the CNS will use them to form
desired commands leading to desired final result of
motion. For comparison, animals that have
musculoskeletal system with the same kinematic
freedoms as humans are notable to implement special
modes of walking and always move at normal walking
mode [34]. Nevertheless, after purposeful training they
are able to move in modes different from normal.
Due to this, acquisition, processing and
systematization of the data of the limbs elements
various movements during walking are very important
procedures to find neurophysiologic laws of the motor
control that will be eventually used in real control
systems of the prostheses.
ARTIFICAL KNEE MECHANISMS OF
TRANSFEMORAL PROSTHESES
Creation of new prosthesis is quite difficult complex
problem and just new design solutions will not be
enough to solve it. Modern prostheses must satisfy
subjective requirements of the amputees and be
configured in such away as to provide them maximum
comfort. In addition, amputee must be trained to walk
on the particular prosthesis and realize all its positive
and negative features. Advanced control systems of
the prostheses must also be taught. Herewith, teaching
of the control system is desirable to perform
simultaneously with training of the amputee.
Modern transfemoral prostheses have modular
structure and main elements that can be
interchangeable and designed independently from
each other. At the same time, their structural unification
into a single unit leads to formation of the
Journal of Rehabilitation Robotics, 2013, Vol. 1, No. 2 113
biomechanical system where they acquire new quality
properties.
As was noted above, artificial knee mechanism is
one of the most important parts of the transfemoral
prosthesis. The primary concern of prosthetic knee joint
function is the means for controlling its articulation.
During walking, the control system must provide
resistance of the prosthetic limb to flexion in the knee
joint during its loading (stance phase control) and in
unloaded condition it should facilitate smooth flexion
and extension of the limb in the joint (swing phase
control) [3].
Currently, in transfemoral prostheses two main
categories of the artificial knee joints are used: purely
mechanical and microprocessor controlled. In turn,
each of these categories is subdivided into functional
classes according to the degree of stability during the
stance phase and sensitivity during the swing phase;
these phases are characteristic for every type of knee
joint mechanisms. In [53] the main advantages and
disadvantages of commercially available artificial knee
joints used in modern transfemoral prostheses are
shown.
Safety of knee joint during the stance phase is
determined by its stability that characterizes ability of
the prosthesis to perceive external load without the loss
of stability, and in the opinion of amputees, is one of
the most important quality characteristics of the
prosthesis. According to safety level, voluntarily stable,
stable and hyper stable transfemoral prostheses are
distinguished [53]. As a rule, more active patients can
use constructions with lower level of stability, because
they are more capable to control the limb. In addition,
when choosing the most appropriate prosthesis, level
of limb amputation is taken into account, since patients
with large residual musculature are capable to
reproduce higher torques in the hip joint and the
prostheses most suitable for them are those with less
stable knee joints.
From the structural point of view two types of the
artificial knee joints are distinguished: single-axis and
polycentric. Specific mechanisms are generally most
suitable for certain amputees, where level of activity,
experience and residuum length are all important
factors to consider [54]. Polycentric knee joints are
characterized by instantaneous center of rotation (ICR)
which position changes with changing of knee flexion
angle and largely determines the stability of the
prosthesis during the stance phase of walking.
114 Journal of Rehabilitation Robotics, 2013, Vol. 1, No. 2 Poliakov et al.

Trajectory of the ICR is determined by kinematic shin with simultaneous change of lengths of links AB
parameters of the mechanism underlying construction and DC leads to significant changes in shapes of
of the artificial knee joint. Thus, by variation of centroids in relative motion of links AD and BC.
kinematic parameters one can provide characteristics
(including desired level of stability), that are preferred KINEMATICS AND DYNAMICS OF THE
for different groups of amputees. TRANSFEMORAL PROSTHESIS WITH
POLYCENTRIC KNEE JOINT MECHANISM
Designing budget version of transfemoral
prosthesis, we accepted the concept of artificial knee Describing kinematics of walking on the
joint based on the four-bar mechanism with possibility transfemoral prosthesis with polycentric knee joint
of microprocessor control in the stance and swing mechanism, we agree to count angles of rotation of the
phases. Its kinematic dimensions were determined by limb elements (links) from negative direction of axis Oz
multicriteria optimization based on systematic study of of the road coordinate system Oxz and consider them
parameter space of points uniformly distributed in positive if they are directed counterclockwise. Notations
multidimensional cube [55, 56]. Technique of synthesis of kinematic parameters and generalized coordinates
is described in detail in [57]. by indexes R and L denote right (prosthetic) and left
(healthy) feet, respectively.
As the main condition of synthesis, criterion of
proximity of realized and desired centroids of the four- Vector constraint equations of the prosthetic leg are
given by (Figure 3b):
link mechanisms, that theoretically provide necessary
stability level of the prosthesis: voluntarily stable, stable 






OO* + O* A + AB + BK + KE
OE = 0;
or hyper stable, was taken. Additional terms, 



(2)
parametric and functional limitations were taken into AB + BC
AD
DC = 0.
account to ensure strength of the links, desired The system (2) can be represented as system of
cosmetic requirements, conditions of forces trans- four nonlinear equations:
mission and possibility of placing additional devices
into real prosthesis. As a result, Pareto-optimal set of x HipR + lFR sin  FR + l1 sin 1 + lBK sin ( SR +  )
four-link mechanisms was obtained; its every element , (3a)
+lSR sin  SR
xER = 0
satisfied the conditions of synthesis. 3-D model of one
zHipR
lFR cos  FR
l1 cos 1
lBK cos ( SR +  )
embodiment of this set is shown in Figure 3a.
, (3b)
It should be noted, that changing of inclination angle
lSR cos  SR
zER = 0
of element BC (Figure 3b) relatively to axial line of the

(a) (b)
Figure 3: 3-D model of the polycentric artificial knee joint mechanism of transfemoral prosthesis (a); kinematic scheme of
human walking with prosthesis with the polycentric artificial knee joint mechanism (b).
Transfemoral Prosthesis with Polycentric Knee Mechanism
l1 sin 1 + lBC sin ( SR +  )
lAD sin ( FR +  )
l2 sin  2 = 0 , (3c)
l1 cos 1 + lBC cos ( SR +  )
lAD cos ( FR +  )
l2 sin  2 = 0 , (3d)
where
= DAO* ,
= EKB , lFR , lSR , - lengths of the
femur and shin elements of the prosthesis,
respectively; l1 = lAB , l2 = lDC .
From the system of equations (3) (one of which is
redundant, providing that x HipR = vt ) with given
kinematic parameters of the prosthesis elements and
independent variables
F ,
S ,
A , angles of rotation
1 ,

2 and coordinate zHipR can be uniquely determined.
This allows determining configuration space of the
prosthetic leg and plotting its transit metachronogram if
necessary.
It should be noted that in order to obtain
metachronogram closest to natural, base of the
prosthetic foot is made in form of circular arc with
radius R , that makes it simple to describe analytically
change in the position of its point of contact with
bearing surface. Such foot forms with bearing surface
integrable kinematic connection x
C = R

. Thus,
trajectory of the point H is a cycloid and trajectory of
the point E - curtailed cycloid (Figure 4a). Thereby,
considering that xC = R
, xER = R
r sin  ,
 r sin  
zER = R
r cos  , we obtain  AR = arctg  .
 R
r cos   orthogonal Cartesian coordinate system (Figure 4b).
Thus, length of the foot turned out to be a variable and
depends on the current state of the stance phase, i.e.
is function of
.
(a)
Figure 4: Diagram of the foot rolling along rectilinear base (a); moving coordinates A
connected with the femur element of
the prosthesis (b).
Journal of Rehabilitation Robotics, 2013, Vol. 1, No. 2 115
In the swing phase of the prosthetic leg angle
AR is
counted from negative direction of the axis Oz to the
top surface of the foot (line ET ), and the first two
equations of system (3) are as follows:
x HipR + lFR sin  FR + l1 sin 1 + l BK sin ( SR +  )
, (3a*)
+lSR sin  SR + lTR sin  A
xTR = 0
zHipR
lFR cos  FR
l1 cos 1
l BK cos ( SR +  )
. (3b*)

lSR cos  SR
lTR cos  A
zTR = 0
If model of the knee joint is represented as
rotational kinematic pair, and models of the foot and
ankle joints are taken similarly as for the prosthetic
limb, than systems of constraint equations of the
healthy limb are derived in similar way, and with given
independent parameters x HipL , zHipL ,
FL ,
SL and
AL
they appear linear relative to xTL and zTL .
Artificial knee joint articulated with the femoral
element of the artificial limb moves together with it,
participating in transportation motion. At the same time,
its movable links move relative to the femoral element,
being, thus, in relative motion. To describe this motion
and to build centrode in relative motion of the shin
element relative to the femoral element, we choose
coordinate system, which origin is compatible with point
A and abscissa axis A
is directed along link AD . Axis
of ordinates A
is directed so that A
is right

Turning it around +
+  FR , we obtain
angle
2
coordinate system A
x * z
* , which axes A
x * and A
z * are
(b)
116 Journal of Rehabilitation Robotics, 2013, Vol. 1, No. 2
parallel to axes O* x * and O* z* of locomotor coordinate
system O* x * z* . Coordinates of the point A in road
system Oxz : x A = x HipR + lFR sin
FR , zA = zHipR
lFR cos  FR .
The system of constraint equations in terms of
moving coordinates A
is given by:
l1 sin 1 + l2 sin  2
l BC sin  3 = l AD ;
l1 cos 1 + l2 cos  2
l BC cos  3 = 0 .
Solutions of system (5) for fixed position of the point
A are functions
1 = F1 (
3 ) and
2 = F2 (
3 ) . But, since

3 is determined by the angle of rotation of the shin
component
SR , then
1 = F
1 ( SR ) and
3 = F
3 ( SR ) .
Consequently, for fixed position of the point A
coordinates of points B and C are also functions of

SR . But coordinates of the point A (and, hence, point
D ) are defined by the angle of rotation of the femoral
element
FR and by coordinates of the center of the hip
joint O* ( x HipR , zHipR ) . At the same time, value of x HipR
depends on the speed of walking v , and x HipR is
determined from the system of constraint equations (3).
Therefore, both in the locomotor and in the road
coordinate systems ( O* x * z* and Oxz , respectively)
coordinates of the points B and C (and, hence, the
ICR) are functions of three variables:
FR ,
SR and
AR .
In synthesis of polycentric knee joint, desired
centroid was initialized in coordinate system A
and
kinematic parameters of the mechanism were
determined by the condition of minimal roof-mean-
square deviation of actual centroid from the desired.
Thus, on each step of synthesis procedure (i.e., for
each set of kinematic parameters) in the locomotor
system of coordinates O* x * z* positions of trajectory
points of the ICR for the parameters of normal walking
at discrete points of the stance phase were calculated
and their locations relative to the GRFV (ground
reaction force vector) were compared. The set of
kinematic parameters was considered qualitative when
in all points of the stance phase the ICR was located
behind the GRFV relative to the direction of the limb
motion.
During the process of multicriteria synthesis of
polycentric knee joint mechanism, many sets of
kinematic parameters, represented as a set of n -
dimensional points uniformly distributed over the N-
dimensional space, have been studied [55]. To assure
the quality of synthesis, number k of such points must
be large enough, and, consequently, it becomes
necessary to obtain solutions of the aforementioned
systems of constraint equations. Since their analytical
solutions are quite cumbersome, in program of
Poliakov et al.
synthesis developed by authors, numerical iterative
method for solving the systems of polynomial equations
of Laguerre’s type that allows minimizing the number of
iterations for finding the real solutions at arbitrary initial
approximations was used [58].
Suppose that connections in considered
biomechanical system are ideal, holonomic and there is
(5a) no friction in them [59]. Consider particular case:
single-support variant of walking at constant speed v
(5b) in horizontal direction along the axis Ox of the road
coordinate system Oxz . In this case it is possible to
assume x HipR = vt and consider zHipR variable determined
by the phase of walking. Also assume that periodic
functions zHipR ( t ) and zHipL ( t ) are connected by

T
relationship: zHipL ( t ) = zHipR  t +  .
 2
Considered biomechanical system has 7 degrees of
freedom and its possible configurations are uniquely
determined by 7 generalized coordinates:
FR ,
FL ,
SR ,

SL ,
AR ,
AL . Its dynamic equations in the process of
walking on the transfemoral prosthesis with polycentric
knee joint mechanism were derived from Lagrange
equations of the second kind [59]:
d  L  L

= Qi , i = 1, 7 (6)
dt  q
i  qi
where L = K
P - Lagrange function; K and P - kinetic
and potential energies of the biomechanical system,
respectively; Qi - generalized forces.
To determine the kinetic energy of each link,
following formula was used [59]:
Ki =
1
2
( )
 miVi 2 + 2mi (Vi   i ) ,
i + J i i 2  , i = 1, 7 (7)
where Vi - speed of the pole (fixed point of the i-link);

i - angular speed of the i-link;
i - radius vector of the
mass center of the i-link with the beginning at the pole;
mi - mass of the i-link; J i - moment of inertia of i-link
relative to the pole. For the femoral components of the
legs points OR* and OL* were chosen as poles, for the
torso – point OT* with coordinates xO* = xO* = xO* ,
T R L
zO* + zO*
zO* = R L
, for the shin of the left (healthy) leg –
T
2
conditional center of rotation of the knee joint (in the
model - geometric center of rotational kinematic pair
K L ), for the shin component of the right leg prosthesis
– the ICR of the polycentric mechanism of the artificial
knee joint, for the feet of both legs - centers of rotation
of the ankle joints ER and EL .
Transfemoral Prosthesis with Polycentric Knee Mechanism Journal of Rehabilitation Robotics, 2013, Vol. 1, No. 2 117

According to (7), kinetic energy of the torso K T is system, the rest torques are generated by muscles
given by: under the influence of the CNS. Despite the fact that in
assumptions accepted above movements of the legs
( )
   are considered identical and their generalized
+ z
HipL
2
z

 m  v 2 + HipR

2m l 
coordinates differ only by the phase shift, torques of the
1  
T T T T
4
 similar joints of the left and right legs differ not only by
K T = K1 =  , (8)
2 the phase, because they set in motion elements of the
 zHipR + zHipL
 v cos T + sin T
+ JTO* 
T
2
objects basically different from each other.

 2  
To surfaces of the feet at the points PR and PL
where lT , mT , JTO * - length, mass and moment of reactions RR and RL , represented as projections on the
inertia of the torso relative to the point OT* , respectively. axes Ox and Oz of the road coordinate system Oxz :
Expressions analogous to (8) can be obtained for other RRx , RRz , RLx , RLz , are applied.
elements of the system, but, due to their
cumbersomeness, they are not shown in this paper. Elementary work of all forces acting on the
The kinetic energy of the system is equal to the sum of elements of the system can be written in the following
kinetic energies of all its elements: form:
7
 W = ( RRz + RLz )  z
(THR + THL )  H
K = K T + K FR + K FL + K SR + K SL + K AR + K AL =
K i . (9)
i =1 + (THR
TKR )  FR + (THL
TKL )  FL +
, (11)
+ (TKR
TAR )  SR + (TKL
TAL )  SL
The potential energy P is determined for possible
configuration of the system: +RRx u Rx + RRz u Rz + RLx u Lx + RLz u Lz

P = g
(OT )
 mT z * + lT cos T + ( mFR + mSR + mAR ) zHipR 


 + ( m + m + m ) z 
FL SL AL Hipl
 ( mFR lFCR + mSR lFR + mAR lFR ) cos  FR

g 
 + ( mSR lSCR + mAR lSR ) cos  SR + mAR l ACR cos  AR 
 ( mFL lFCL + mSL lFL + mAL lFL ) cos  FL

g 
 + ( mSL lSCL + mAL lSL ) cos  SL + mAL l ACL cos  AL 
where mFR , lFR , mFL , lFL , mSR , lSR , mSL , lSL , mAR , lAR ,
mAL , l AL - masses and lengths of the hips, shins and
feet of the right (index R ) and left (index L ) legs, and
lFCR , lFCL , lSCR , lSCL , l ACR , l ACL - distances from their
mass centers to the poles OR* , OL* , K R , K L , ER , EL ,
respectively. To derive expression (10) elastic
properties of the feet and ankle joints and the potential
energy of the links of the polycentric knee joint
mechanism, which masses m1 and m2 are
considerably smaller than mSR , were not taken into
account.
To determine generalized forces Qi the internal
non-conservative forces acting on the elements of
considered biomechanical system, were taken into
account. First of all, these are torques THR , THL , TKR ,
TKL , TAR actuating hips, knees and feet of both legs at
the hip, knee and ankle joints. It should be noted that
torque TKR is applied to the link AB of the polycentric
mechanism unlike TKL applied directly to the shin of the
left leg. Torques TKR and TAR are generated by motors
working under commands of the prosthesis control
where, in the stance phase


u Rx = u
Rx = x HipR + lFR sin  FR + l1 sin 1
, (12)
 +l BK sin ( SR +  ) + lSR sin  SR
xER

, (10)


u Rz = u
Rz = zHipR
lFR cos  FR
l1 cos 1
 , (13)

l BK cos ( SR +  )
lSR cos  SR
zER
and in the swing phase
+
u Rx = u
Rx = x HipR + lFR sin  FR + l1 sin 1
, (12a)
+l BK sin ( SR +  ) + lSR sin  SR + lTR sin  AR
xTR
+
u Rz = u
Rz zHipR
lFR cos  FR
l1 cos 1
l BK cos ( SR +  )
. (13)

lSR cos  SR
lTR cos  AR
zTR
Expressions for u Lx and u Lz , necessary to calculate
variations
u Lx and
u Lz , are written similarly.
Equating (11) to zero and grouping coefficients of
variations of generalized coordinates, we obtain
generalized forces Qi , i = 1, 7 .
After differentiation of the Lagrange function L ,
defined in (6), we obtain system of seven non-linear
equations describing dynamics of the model of walking
on the transfemoral prosthesis. It can be shown that
this system can be reduced to the following form [60]:
( )
B (
)


+ gAf1 (
) + D (
) f2

= C (
) W , (14)
where
118 Journal of Rehabilitation Robotics, 2013, Vol. 1, No. 2

= (T  FR  FL  SR  SL  AR  AL ) ,
T
W = (THR
THL TKR TKL TAR TAL RRx RRz RLx
B (
) , A , D (
) - matrix of order 7
7 ; C (
) -
matrix of order 7
10 ; f1 (
) , f2 (

) - vectors of order
7
1 , which elements are functions of generalized
coordinates and generalized speed, respectively.
TRANSFEMORAL PROSTHESIS CONTROL
STRATEGY
The suggested variant of transfemoral prosthesis
relates to the class of microprocessor controlled
constructions. Control of the prosthesis is carried out
during all walking cycle by the assignment of
demanded rotary motions to the link AB of hinged
mechanism of knee joint relative to point A and to the
artificial foot relative to point ER with the help of electric
motors. Demanded rigidity of knee joint is provided by
magnetorheological damper with the rigidity controlled
by commands of control system.
The main objective of control of the transfemoral
prosthesis in the stance phase is to give the artificial
knee joint as many as possible of weight-bearing
functions which quadriceps muscle group gives to
natural knee joint [61], and in the swing phase – to
provide movements of the prosthetic limb closest to
natural. Synthesis criteria of microprocessor systems
for prosthesis control in the stance and swing phases
were formulated in detail in [62].
Now a great number of conceptions realized in the
control systems of the biped robots, exoskeletons and
transfemoral prostheses, which as a rule use energy or
kinematic approach [63-75 and other sources], are
known. In our opinion, for the control of transfemoral
prosthesis kinematic conception implicitly considering
energy features of walking is the most acceptable.
Thus, for example, it seems quite substantiated to
suppose that sequence of limbs configurations in the
process of normal walking corresponds to the minimal
energy consumption [76-82]. Thereby, implementation
of natural samples of kinematics of various models of
walking is one of the most important problems of the
transfemoral prosthesis control. Thus, invariant walking
features, that can be termed synergetic, observed in
the experiments can be used [77, 83, 84]. Thus, for
example in [77], it is noted that hinged synergy is
exploited at some control points during human walking.
In particular, it is possible to consider as such control
points the beginning of the phase of double-support
walking [77] or the end of the single-support phase
[84]. The analysis of various variants of walking
Poliakov et al.
performed by us confirms conclusions, which are
especially important to plan the limbs movements in the
RLz ) ;
T
stance phase. Considering them, it is possible to set
with a high degree of reliability the limb configuration in
the beginning of the stance phase at various speeds of
motion of the amputee.
In the control system of transfemoral prosthesis at
unilateral amputation information on the functioning of
healthy leg, which under condition of symmetry of
walking allows to predict the most probable laws of
variation of generalized coordinates of the prosthesis
on short-term time interval [70,85,86], can be
effectively used.
The suggested conception of prosthesis control is
constructed on the basis of satisfaction of the
maximum comfort level of amputee in process of life
activity and is based on the results of analysis of
features of standard variants of human walking and the
data about walking of the amputee that is registered,
handled and used in real-time mode. During its
development, the necessary requirements, which
practical realization will allow providing the most
comfortable conditions to the amputee during walking
with various speeds and performance of other functions
necessary in everyday life, were formulated.
First of all, the amputee and the artificial limb in
control system should be considered as the whole
biomechanical system representing single control
object with a great number of obvious and implicit
connections between its elements. To receive state
information on this system and forecast its behavior in
short-term prospect, it should contain a lot of sensors
that allow obtaining various information in real-time
mode. This information can be used both during
teaching of the amputee to walk on the prosthesis and
during its operation. It is important to note that control
system should be taught together with the amputee
(see, for example, [87-89]) with simultaneous
identification of parameters of the controlled
biomechanical system.
Secondly, control system of the prosthesis should
provide automatic mode of its functioning, however, if it
is necessary, amputee should have possibility to
control the prosthesis consciously by active influence
on its elements. To assure feedback, prosthesis should
have active elements allowing applying to the amputee
tactile, sound, light etc. signals. The control system
should automatically and on the commands from the
amputee switch the prosthesis to various operating
Transfemoral Prosthesis with Polycentric Knee Mechanism
modes and use for compiling of instruction to effectors
rules of standing, transition from the sitting to standing
position and back, walking on horizontal, inclined plane
surfaces and ladders, load lifting etc.
Thirdly, the control system should have possibility to
store information on operating process of the
prosthesis for its subsequent analysis for realignment
of the prosthesis and elaboration of new control
instructions providing the most comfortable conditions
for the amputee during walking. And, finally, it should
have given the set of criteria of dangerous conditions
and provided methods of their blocking.
The simplified structural diagram of the transfemoral
prosthesis control system capable to provide
requirements formulated above is presented on Figure
5.
Practical realization of the control system based on
the requirements formulated above became possible
due to accessibility of the up-to-date element base and
development of the software allowing organizing quite
simple process of gathering, processing and use of the
information about the state of control object.
The basic element of the control system is the
master controller with architecture ARM Cortex M3
providing performance of following functions:
- accounting of attitude position of the body parts
of the amputee and the prosthesis in real-time
mode;
- forecast of movements;
Figure 5: Structural diagram of the transfemoral prosthesis control system.
Journal of Rehabilitation Robotics, 2013, Vol. 1, No. 2 119
- forming of control actions;
- retention of current data for subsequent teaching
of the amputee and control system;
- motion safety control.
Practical realization of the control system based on
the requirements formulated above became possible
due to accessibility of the up-to-date element base and
development of the software allowing organizing quite
simple process of gathering, processing and use of the
information about the state of control object.
The basic element of the control system is the
master controller with architecture ARM Cortex M3
providing performance of following functions:
- accounting of attitude position of the body parts
of the amputee and the prosthesis in real-time
mode;
- forecast of movements;
- forming of control actions;
- retention of current data for subsequent teaching
of the amputee and control system;
- motion safety control.
The master controller communicates with two
peripheral controllers that provide gathering and
processing of the signals from sensors registering the
state of healthy leg and prosthesis in real-time mode.
For these purposes digital gyroscopes ITG3205 (for
measurement of angular velocities of rotating links) and
120 Journal of Rehabilitation Robotics, 2013, Vol. 1, No. 2
digital accelerometers ADXL345 (for measurement of
linear accelerations of the links centers of mass) are
used. In addition, on the artificial knee joint and on the
foot, encoders (digital rotation sensors) and pressure
sensors are mounted, and on the belt of the amputee
besides ITG3205 and ADXL345 - digital magnetometer
HMC5883L.
For estimation of the GRF, walking speed and
position identification of the prosthesis in the stance
phase there are pressure sensors in the reference
points of the artificial foot. Thus, the property of
walking, consisting in the fact that contact time of the
foot with bearing surface measured from the heel strike
to pre-swing is well correlated with the speed of
amputee motion, is used.
In the process of teaching amputee to walk on the
prosthesis, to ensure safety, special stand including
standard trainer "treadmill" is used. Teaching begins
with modes of standing and pacing in one place. The
amputee learns to raise and lower prosthetic limb
carrying out rotary motions of the stump with various
amplitudes. Thus, the control system on the basis of
the information received from sensors measuring angle
of rotation and angular velocity of the femoral element
forms instructions controlling drive units of the knee
and ankle joints using samples of the data stored in
microcomputer memory. During the process of
teaching initial data samples can be changed according
to the data received from sensors mounted on the
healthy leg or at the instance of the amputee wishing to
provide itself the most comfortable state. If the
amputee is satisfied with the prosthesis operation
process, process of teaching for this mode is finished
and the primary identification of the parameters of
biomechanical system is carried out using dynamical
equations (14) and finally formed motion samples. In
the storage of microcomputer, the criterion, according
to which the control system identifies current mode of
the prosthesis functioning, based on registration of the
magnetometer mounted on the amputee belt, is being
stored.
The process of teaching to walk on plane horizontal
surface begins at speed of treadmill corresponding to
the minimal speed of normal walking. Thus, the
kinematic samples of walking characteristic for current
mode stored in the microcomputer storage are used.
The amputee starts the stance phase of motion with
the healthy leg and the prosthetic leg is in the swing
phase. Thus, the adaptive control system forms control
Poliakov et al.
signals realizing trajectories of the prosthesis elements
characteristic for current mode. The information on
functioning of the healthy leg and prosthesis is
maintained in storage of microcomputer and is
constantly updated. The process of teaching on the
current mode comes to an end as soon as laws of
variation of drives torques and rigidity of damper,
providing desirable motions of the prosthesis elements,
are revealed.
At this stage possible synergetic connections in the
reference points of walking cycle are being
investigated. If such connections are found, the walking
cycle is being segmented and the prosthesis control
can be carried out inside each segment at given
configurations on the boundaries.
Teaching of the amputee and control system for
other walking modes: walking up and down inclined
"treadmill", load lifting and lowering etc. is carried out
similarly.
CONCLUSION AND FUTURE CONSIDERATIONS
The suggested variant of the transfemoral
prosthesis was developed on the basis of
comprehensive analysis of up-to-date commercially
accessible constructions. The main objective pursued
thus consisted in formulation of the requirements which
would allow obtaining construction accessible to the
various strata of the invalids provided the maintenance
of high quality characteristics. As a result of the
analysis, prototype with four-link mechanism of the
artificial knee joint has been accepted as the basis. It
can be explained by the fact that such mechanism can
be universal and provide, if it is necessary, various
levels of stability: voluntarily stable, stable and hyper
stable. In the result of kinematic multicriteria
optimization, the base variant has been determined,
which can be adjusted to provide during operational
process various shapes of centrodes in the relative
motion of the femoral and shin elements, that now is
know-how.
The suggested variant of the prosthesis is modular
construction and its functional characteristics can
considerably differ depending on artificial foot used in
it, which in a base variant is supposed to be actively
controlled and function as a part of a whole
biomechanical system. Subsequently it is planned to
develop artificial foot with the increased level of
universalization that will allow extending functionality of
the prosthesis in whole and reducing its total cost.
Transfemoral Prosthesis with Polycentric Knee Mechanism
It is necessary to note that the most difficult stage in
the creation of the new prosthesis is developing of its
control system. It is it that defines the set of quality
indicators of finished product. Control system
functioning is determined by dynamics of the
prosthesis, which, in turn, depends on the values of
parameters of its structural component. Therefore, it
becomes necessary to perform dynamic optimization of
the construction. The system of non-linear differential
equations of dynamic of walking (14) is quite difficult
that determines also the complexity of dynamic
optimization process. However, if controllability of the
considered biomechanical system is accepted as the
main criterion, then any construction of the prosthesis
with control system characterized by stability in
desirable range of walking parameters of the amputee
can be considered optimal in dynamic sense.
On the basis of analysis of accessible patent and
literature sources we developed the control strategy
practically realized on the basis of the up-to-date
element base and its software. The main attention is
given to the questions of teaching of the invalid to walk
on the prosthesis with simultaneous training of control
system. I.e., the control system is represented as a
constantly developing object on the basis of information
coming both from the amputee and from the sensory
system of the prosthesis.
Currently, along with computer modeling of
operation of artificial knee joint of the transfemoral
prosthesis, laboratory researches, including also the
control system debugging, have been carried out. The
preliminary results indicate realizability of strategy
chosen by us and possibility to create budgetary
variant of the construction possessing high qualitative
indicators.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This work is supported by grants from the Ministry
of Education and Science of Ukraine [0111U003330,
0113U001251].
REFERENCES
[1] Perry J, Burnfield JM. Gait analysis: normal and pathological
function. 2nded. Thorofare, NJ: Slack 2010.
[2] Prosthetic & Orthotic Information Resource/Artificial
Limbs/Trans-Femoral (Above-Knee) Prosthesis. Available
from: http://prostheticresource.com/prosthetic/artificial-
limbs.html
[3] Blumentritt S, Schererr HW, Wellershaus U, Michael JW.
Design Principles, Biomechanical Data and clinical
experience with a polycentric knee offering controlled stance
Journal of Rehabilitation Robotics, 2013, Vol. 1, No. 2 121
phase knee flexion: A preliminary report. J Prosth Orth 1997;
9(1): 18-19.
[4] Baker R. The history of gait analysis before the advent of
modern computers. Gait Posture 2007; 26(3): 331-42.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2006.10.014
rd
[5] Whittle MW. Gait analysis. An Introduction. 3 ed. Oxford:
Butterworth–Heinemann 2002.
st
[6] Craik R, Oatis CA. Gait analysis: Theory and application. 1
ed. Maryland Heights: Mosby 1995.
[7] Rose R, Gamble JG. Human walking. 3
rd
ed. Philadelphia:
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2006.
[8] Harris GF, Smith PA. Human motion analysis: Current
applications and future directions. IEEE 1996.
[9] Pasparakis D, Darras N. Normal walking principles, basic
concepts, terminology 3-dimensional clinical gait analysis.
EEXOT 2009; 60(4): 183-94.
[10] Gage JR. A quantitative description of normal gait. In: Gage
nd
JR, ed. The treatment of gait problems in cerebral palsy. 2
ed. London, England: Mac Keith Press 2004.
[11] Saleh M, Murdoch G. In defence of gait analysis. observation
and measurement in gait assessment. J Bone Joint Surg Br
1985; 67: 237-41.
[12] Moreira P, Lugrís U, Cuadrado J, Flores P. Biomechanical
models for human gait analyses using inverse dynamics
th
formulation. In Proc of the 5 Portuguese Biomechanics
Congress 2013. Available from: http://repositorium.sdum.
uminho.pt/bitstream/1822/23057/1/ 6.11.41%202013.pdf
[13] Bresler B, Frankel JP. The forces and moments in the leg
during level walking. Trans ASME 1950; 72(1): 27-36.
[14] Vaughan CL, Davis BL, O’Connor JC. Dynamics of human
nd
gait. 2 ed. Cape Town: Kiboho Publishers 1999.
[15] Onyshko S, Winter DA. A mathematical model for the
dynamics of human locomotion. J Biomech 1980; 13(4): 361-
68.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0021-9290(80)90016-0
[16] Winter DA, Robertson DGE. Joint torque and energy patterns
in normal gait. Biological Cybernetics 1978; 29(3): 137-42.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00337349
[17] Zarrugh MY. Kinematic prediction of intersegment loads and
power at the joints of the leg in walking. J Biomech 1981;
14(10): 713-25.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0021-9290(81)90054-3
[18] Wells RP. The projection of the ground reaction force as a
predictor of internal joint moments. Bull Prosth Res 1981;
18(1): 15-19.
[19] Gurfinkel VS, Fomin SV, Shtilkind TK. Determination of joint
moments during locomotion. Biophysics 1970; 2: 380-83.
[20] Ghafari AS, Meghdari A, Vossoughi GR. Forward dynamics
simulation of human walking employing an iterative feedback
tuning approach. J Systems Control Eng 2009; 223(3): 289-
97.
[21] Zelik KE, Kuo AD. Human walking isn’t all hard work:
evidence of soft tissue contributions to energy dissipation
and return. J Exp Biol 2010; 213(4): 4257-64.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1242/jeb.044297
[22] Bernstein NA. On the construction of movements (in
Russian). Moscow: Medgiz 1947.
[23] Latash ML, Scholz JP, Schöner G. Toward a new theory of
motor synergies. Motor Control 2007; 11(3): 276-308.
[24] Winters JM, Woo SL-Y. Multiple muscle systems:
Biomechanics and movement organization. New York:
Springer-Verlag 1990.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-9030-5
[25] Rosenbaum DA, Loukopoulos LD, Meulenbroek RGM,
Vaughan J, Engelbrecht SE. Planning reaches by evaluating
stored postures. Psychol Rev 1995; 102(1): 28-67.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.102.1.28
122 Journal of Rehabilitation Robotics, 2013, Vol. 1, No. 2
[26] Mussa-Ivaldi FA, Hogan N. Integrable solutions of kinematic
redundancy via impedance control. Int J Robotics Res 1991;
10(5): 481-91.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/027836499101000504
[27] Todorov E. Optimality principles in sensorimotor control. Nat
Neurosci 2004; 7(9): 907-15.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nn1309
[28] Arechavaleta G, Laumond J-P, Hicheur H, Alain Berthoz A.
An optimality principle governing human walking. IEEE Trans
Robotics 2008; 24(1): 5-14.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TRO.2008.915449
[29] Gorniak SL, Zatsiorsky VM, Latash ML. Emerging and
disappearing synergies in a hierarchically controlled system.
Exp Brain Res 2007; 183(2): 259-70.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00221-007-1042-9
[30] Gelfand IM, Latash ML. On the problem of adequate
language in motor control. Motor Control 1998; 2: 306-13.
[31] Latash ML, Scholz JP, Schöner G. Toward a new theory of
motor synergies. Motor Control 2007; 11: 275-307.
[32] Zatsiorsky VM, Latash ML. Prehension synergies. Ex Sport
Sci Rev 2004; 32: 75-80.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00003677-200404000-00007
[33] Popovic DB, Jonic S. Determining synergy between joint
angles during locomotion by radial basis function neural
networks. In Proc. of the 20th Annual International
Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology
Society 1998; 20(5): 2301-04.
[34] Smolyaninov VV. Spatio-temporal problems of locomotion
control. Adv Phys Sci 2000; 170(10): 1063-28.
[35] Mijovic B, Popovic MB, Popovic DB. Synergistic control of
forearm based on accelerometer data and artificial neural
networks. Brazilian J Med Biol Res 2008; 41: 389-97.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0100-879X2008005000019
[36] Latash ML, Gorniak S, Zatsiorsky VM. Hierarchies of
synergies in human movements. Kinesiology (Zagreb) 2008;
40(1): 29-38.
[37] Alessandro C, Delis I, Nori F, Panzeri S, Berret B. Muscle
synergies in neuroscience and robotics: From input-space to
task-space perspectives. Front Comp Neuro 2013; 7: 43.
[38] Alessandro C, Nori F. Identification of synergies by
optimization of trajectory tracking tasks. I Proc of IEEE
RAS/EMBS International Conference on Biomedical Robotics
and Biomechatronics 2012; pp. 924-30.
[39] Cappellini G, Ivanenko YP, Poppele RE, Lacquaniti F. Motor
patterns in human walking and running. J Neurophysiol 2006;
95: 3426-37.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/jn.00081.2006
[40] d'Avella A, Bizzi E. Shared and specific muscle synergies in
natural motor behaviors. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2005; 102:
3076-81.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0500199102
[41] Fautrelle L, Ballay Y, Bonnetblanc F. Muscular synergies
during motor corrections: Investigation of the latencies of
muscle activities. Beh Brain Res 2010; 214: 428-36.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2010.06.015
[42] Hauser H, Neumann G, Ijspeert AJ, Maass W. Biologically
inspired kinematic synergies enable linear balance control of
a humanoid robot. Biol Cybernet 2011; 104: 235-49.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00422-011-0430-1
[43] Weiss EJ, Flanders M. Muscular and postural synergies of
the human hand. J Neurophysiol 2004; 92: 523-35.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/jn.01265.2003
[44] Latash ML. Control of human movement. Urbana, IL: Human
Kinetics 1993.
[45] Latash ML. Synergy. New York: Oxford University Press
2008.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195333169.001.000
1
Poliakov et al.
[46] Kolesova M, Polyakov A, Kalinin M. Quantitative and
qualitative estimations of the manipulator end-effector
trajectory planning by synergetic criterion. FactaUniversitatis.
Series Mechanics, Automatic Control and Robotics 2008;
7(1): 53-70.
[47] Huang Q, Yu Z, Zhang W, Duan X, Huang Y, Li K.
Generation of humanoid walking pattern based on human
walking measurement. In Proc. of the IEEE-RAS
International Conference on Humanoid Robots (Humanoids)
2008; pp. 99-104.
[48] Serhan H, Nasr C, Hénaff P, Ouezdou F. A new control
strategy for ROBIAN biped robot inspired from human
walking. In Proc. of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference
on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) 2008; pp. 2479-
85.
[49] Chalodhorn R, Grimes D, Grochow K, Rao R. Learning to
walk through imitation. In Proc. of the International
Conference on Artificial Intelligence 2007; pp. 2084-90.
[50] Faber F, Behnke S. Stochastic Optimization of bipedal
walking using gyro feedback and phase resetting. In Proc. of
the IEEE-RAS International Conference on Humanoid
Robots (Humanoids) 2007; pp. 203-09.
[51] Niehaus N, Röfer T, Laue T. Gait optimization on a humanoid
robot using particle swarm optimization. In Proc. of
nd
2 Workshop on Humanoid Soccer Robots at the IEEE-RAS
International Conference on Humanoid Robots (Humanoids)
2007: Available from: http://www.ais.uni-bonn.de/human-
oidsoccer/ws07/papers/HSR-2-101.pdf
[52] Hemker T, Stelzer M, Stryk O, Sakamoto H. Efficient walking
speed optimization of a humanoid robot. Int J Rob Res 2009;
28(2): 303-14.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0278364908095171
[53] Michael JW. Modern prosthetic knee mechanisms. Clin Orth
Rel Res 1999; (361): 39-47.
[54] Radcliffe CW. Four-Bar linkage prosthetic knee mechanisms:
Kinematics, alignment and prescription criteria. Prosth
OrthInt 1994; 18(3): 159-73.
[55] Sobol IM, Statnikov RB. The choice of optimal parameters in
tasks with many criteria, Moscow: Science 1981.
[56] Statnikov RB, Matusov JB. Multicriteria optimization and
engineering. New York: Chapman & Hall 1995.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-2089-4
[57] Poliakov O, Chepenyuk O, Pashkov Y, Kalinin M, Kramar V.
Multicriteria synthesis of a polycentric kneeprosthesis for
transfemoral amputees. Int J Chem Biol Eng 2012; 6: 147-
52.
[58] Poliakov O, Pashkov Y, Kolesova M, Chepenyuk O, Kalinin
M, Kramar V. New Laguerre’s type method solving of a
polynomial equations systems. Int J WASET 2012; 69: 888-
93.
[59] Lurie AI. Aanalytical mechanics. Moscow: Fizmatgiz 1961.
[60] Formal'skiy AM. Moving the anthropomorphic mechanisms.
Moscow: Science 1982.
[61] Mauch HA. Stance control for above-knee artificial legs
design considerations in the S-N-S knee. Bul Prosth Res Fall
1968.
[62] Zahedi S, Sykes A, Lang S, Cullington I. Adaptive prosthesis
– a new concept in prosthetic knee control. Robotica 2005;
23: 337-44.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0263574704001365
[63] Bar A, Ishai G, Meretsky P, Koren Y. Adaptive
microcomputer control of an artificial knee in level walking. J
Biomed Eng 1983; 5: 145-50.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0141-5425(83)90034-1
[64] Vukobratovi M, Kiranski N. Real time dynamics of
manipulation robots. Berlin: Springer-Verlag 1985.
 Transfemoral Prosthesis with Polycentric Knee Mechanism
[65] Popovic D, Tomovic R, Tepavac D. Control aspects of active
above-knee prosthesis. Int J Man-Mach Stud 1991; 35(6):
751-67.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0020-7373(05)80159-2
[66] Popovi D, Ouztöreli MN, Stein RB. Optimal control for the
active above-knee prosthesis. Ann Biomed Eng 1991; 19(2):
131-50.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02368465
[67] Vallery H, Burgkart R, Hartmann C, Mitternacht J, Riener R,
Buss M. Complementary limb motion estimation for the
control of active knee prostheses. Biomed Eng 2011; 56(1):
45-51.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/bmt.2010.057
[68] Vicentini F, Canina M, Rovetta A. Lower limb prosthesis:
Final prototype release and control setting methodologies. Inf
in Con, Autom and Rob II 2007; pp. 163-73.
[69] Scandaroli G, Borges G, Ferreira da Rocha A, Nascimento F.
Adaptive knee joint control for an active amputee prosthesis.
In Proc. of the IEEE Latin American Robotic Symposium
2008; pp. 164-69.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/LARS.2008.12
[70] Wang F, Wu C, Zhang Y, Xu X. Design and implementation
of coordinated control strategy for biped robot with
heterogeneous legs. In Proc. of IEEE International
Conference on Mechatronics and Automation 2007; pp.
1559-64.
[71] Zlatnik D, Steiner B, Schweitzer G. Finite-state control of a
trans-femoral (TF) prosthesis. IEEE Transaction on Control
Systems Technolog 2002; 10(3): 408-20.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/87.998030
[72] Stein JL, Flowers WC. Stance phase control of above-knee
prostheses: knee control versus SACH foot design. J
Biomech 1988; 20(1): 19-28.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0021-9290(87)90263-6
[73] Sup F, Bohara A, Goldfarb M. Designed and control of a
powered transfemoral prosthesis. Int J Rob Res 2008; 27(2):
263-73.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0278364907084588
[74] Wang TK, Ju MS, Tsuei YG. Adaptive control of above knee
electro-hydraulic prosthesis. J Biomech Eng 1992; 114(3):
421-24.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.2891406
[75] Kapti AO, Yucenur MS. Design and control of an active
artificial knee joint. Mech Mach Theory 2006; 41(12): 1477-
85.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2006.01.017
[76] Nishii J. Legged insects select the optimal locomotor pattern
based on energetic cost. Biol Cyb 2000; 83: 435-42.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.robot.2011.12.006
Received on 24-09-2013 Accepted on 11-11-2013
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.12970/2308-8354.2013.01.02.5
© 2013 Poliakov et al.; Licensee Synergy Publishers.
This is an open access article licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted, non-commercial use, distribution and reproduction in
any medium, provided the work is properly cited.
View publication stats
Journal of Rehabilitation Robotics, 2013, Vol. 1, No. 2 123
[77] Nishii J, Hashizume Y, Kaichida S, Suenaga H, Tanaka Y.
Constraint and exploitation of redundant degrees of freedom
during walking. Rob Auton Sys 2012; 60: 679-84.
[78] Nishii J. Legged insects select the optimal locomotor pattern
based on energetic cost. Biol Cyb 2000; 83: 435-42.
[79] Zarrugh MY, Todd FN, Ralston HJ. Optimization of energy
expenditure during level walking. Eur J Ap Phys 1974; 33:
293-306.
[80] Zarrugh MY, Radcliffe CW. Predicting metabolic cost of level
walking. Eur J Ap Phys 1978; 38: 215-23.
[81] Minetti AE, Alexander RM. A theory of metabolic costs for
bipedal gaits. J Theor Biol 1997; 186: 467-76.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jtbi.1997.0407
[82] Donelan JM, Kram R, Kuo AD. Mechanical and metabolic
determinants of the preferred step width in human walking.In
Proc. of the Royal Society of London, Series B 2001; 268:
1985-92.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2001.1761
[83] Kaichida S, Hashizume Y, Nishii J. An analysis of leg
trajectory of human walking from the view point of joint
coordination.In Proc. of The 3rd International Symposium on
Mobiligence 2009; pp. 409-12.
[84] Kaichida S, Hashizume Y, Ogihara N, Nishii J. An analysis of
leg joint synergy during bipedal walking in Japanes
emacaques. In Proc of 33rd Annual International Conference
of the IEEE EMBS (Boston, Massachusetts USA) 2011; pp.
8183-86.
[85] Vallery H, Buss M. Complementary limb motion estimation
based on interjoint coordination using principal components
analysis. In Proc. of the IEEEInternational Conference on
Control Applications (Munich, Germany) 2006; pp. 933-38.
[86] Alzaydi AA, Cheung A, Joshi N, Wong S. Active prosthetic
knee fuzzy logic - PID motion control, sensors and test
platform design. Int J Sci Eng Res 2012; 2(12): 1-17.
[87] Kawato M, Furukawa K, Suzuki R. A hierarchical neural-
network model for control and learning of voluntary
movement. Biol Cyber 1987; 57: 169-85.
[88] Miyamoto H, Kawato M, Setoyama T, Suzuki R. Feedback-
error-learning neural network for trajectory control of a robotic
manipulator. Neur Networks 1988; 1: 251-65.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0893-6080(88)90030-5
[89] Kalanovic VD, Popovic D, Skaug NT. Feedback error
learning neural network fortrans-femoral prosthesis. IEEE
Trans Rehab Eng 2000; 8(1): 71-80.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/86.830951
Published on 31-01-2014