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

net/publication/267336505

Optimization of Six Bar Knee Linkage for Stability of Knee Prosthesis

Article · December 2012

CITATIONS READS

5 1,735

4 authors, including:

Narjes Ghaemi Morteza Dardel

Semnan University Babol Noshirvani University of Technology
3 PUBLICATIONS   5 CITATIONS    89 PUBLICATIONS   873 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Hassan Zohoor
Sharif University of Technology
74 PUBLICATIONS   515 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

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

Biomechanical Research View project

Secon-order nonholonomic constraints View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Narjes Ghaemi on 26 October 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Majlesi Journal of Mechatronic Systems Vol. 1, No. 4, December 2012

Optimization of Six Bar Knee Linkage for Stability of Knee

Prosthesis
Narjes.Ghaemi1, Morteza. Dardel2, Mohammad Hassan Ghasemi3, Hassan.Zohoor4,
1- M.sc student, Babol Noshirvani University of Technology, Babol, Iran.
Email: ghaemi_narges@yahoo.com (Corresponding author)
2- Assistant Professor, Babol Noshirvani University of Technology, Babol, Iran.
Email: dardel@nit.ac.ir
3- Assistant Professor, Babol Noshirvani University of Technology, Babol, Iran.
mhghasemi@nit.ac.ir
4- Professor, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran.
Email: zohoor@sharif.edu

Received July 2012 Revised Sept 2012 Accepted Nov.2012

ABSTRACT:
Loss of lower extremities has been one of the human problems in the human life. Therefore the optimal design of
human lower limb knee prostheses is fundamental in order to restore the lost functionality and aesthetic aspect of the
amputee’s locomotion. This work presents an optimization procedure for the synthesis of a six-bar linkage for knee
prosthesis and its comparison with four-bar linkage counterpart. Different form of six bar linkages, such as Stephenson
and Watt mechanisms are considered and optimized. This study shows that the performance of six bar mechanism case
I (SBM1) is better than other mechanisms.

KEYWORDS: Knee prosthesis, Knee Stability, Four bar Linkage, Six bar linkage

1. INTRODUCTION investigated about knee prosthesis’ stability and

Prosthesis must provide what has become known as
knee stability. In an artificial knee, heel contact is the
most critical period of the stance phase for knee
security.
Most knee prostheses available are divided into two
large groups: prostheses with a single axis of rotation
and polycentric prostheses. Single axis prostheses have
a fixed instantaneous centre of rotation of the relative
motion between the femur and shank, are cheap but
prostheses have not a good performance and do not
provide high stability in stance phase. The second
group, polycentric prostheses are which the position of
the ICR changes at each flexion angle. Polycentric
four-bar knee has been studied by many researchers
such as Sancisi, Raffaele, Castelli [1]-[3].
Four-bar linkage mechanisms for the trans-femoral
amputee have been widely used in the Prostheses knee
for many years and have been studied by many
scientists and scholars. Radcliffe has done useful
studies about knee stability by changing the location of
instantaneous centre of rotation of the relative motion
between the femur and shank and introduced three
different classes of four-bar linkage prosthetic knee
mechanisms, for different groups of trans-femoral
amputee [1], [2]. Sancisi and Raffaele, have been
voluntary control [3]. But although they are useful and
helpful for certain amputees, they are fitted in a limited
number of cases.
Other types of knee mechanisms for through-knee
amputees can also be found. Six-bar linkage knee-ankle
mechanisms (SBM) have been used in some prosthetic
knees in the recent years, but there are not so many
researches about the advantage performance of the Six-
bar mechanism as knee prostheses.
At the University of California, Berkeley, the possible
advantages of using six-bar linkage mechanisms have
been investigated .This mechanism provides the
possibility of increased range of knee motion, better
cosmetic, improved stance phase stability and swing
phase control as compared to four-bar designs. These
advantages are achieved at the expense of added weight
and complexity [4]. Patil and Chakraborty designed a
particular six-bar knee-ankle mechanism to produce
near normal patterns of motion during walking and
squatting [5]. The kinematic and dynamic performance
of the six-bar mechanism used in the prosthetic knee is
investigated by Dewen Jin [6].
This paper will describe the kinematics performance of
several types of six-bar mechanisms and discuss the
differences criteria for four different classes of six-bar

38
Majlesi Journal of Mechatronic Systems Vol. 1, No. 4, December 2012

linkage mechanisms for fitting to amputees and

compare improvement and weakening performance of
the knees with four-bar linkage knee. To specify a
mechanism to simulate a pre-specified ankle trajectory
it is necessary to obtain the length and initial
orientations of linkages. For this purpose an
optimization procedure is proposed. From this
optimization procedure the length and initial
orientations are obtained such that total error between
pre-specified and simulated ankle trajectories to be as
minimum as possible.
To obtain the relativistic kinematic, due to the
nonlinear equations in the six-bar mechanism, a new
method is presented. To achieve natural walking
motion, the hip and ankle flexion, and ankle trajectory
are necessary; the angles can be calculated by solving
the inverse kinematics [7]. And also in this paper is
briefly discussed about the stability of the knee by
changing the location of instantaneous center.
In the next section, we discuss about kinematic analysis Fig. 12. Schematic of a knee with four bar knee
of Mechanisms. linkage.
For obtaining the inverse kinematics of the mechanism
1- Inverse kinematic analysis of knee Bar is it necessary to obtain the angles of different links of
Mechanism the mechanism in terms of position of the couple point
In this section at first kinematic analysis of four and six of and known angles of and . For this
bar knee mechanism are presented. Known four bar and purpose it is necessary to write loop closure equation of
six bar mechanisms are single degree of freedom the mechanism. For Fig.1 this equation in vector form
mechanism, in which one of the linkage attached to the is as follows:
ground is input. For inverse kinematics analysis the
(1)
locus of a point on the coupler is know and angles and
positions of other linkages will be determined. In using All angles are measured relative to horizontal axis in
these mechanisms as an artificial knee, with counter clockwise direction. With separating real and
considering the motion with respect to hip, a two imaginary parts of Eq.(1), we have
degree of freedom mechanism will be obtained. Hence cos cos cos cos (2)
the hip and ankle flexion are necessary to solve the cos
inverse kinematics of knee for given ankle trajectory.
In continue at first inverse kinematics of knee sin sin sin sin (3)
mechanism for four bar knee and then different form of sin
six bar mechanism will be presented.
. From these equations angles and can be obtained
1.1. Inverse kinematic analysis of knee with four- as follows:
bar mechanism (4)
sin
A schematic of the four bar knee linkage to simulate 2
human locomotion is shown in Fig.1. For this
mechanism the length of thigh is assumed to be known, (5)
sin
and unknown parameters are length of different links of 2
four bar mechanism, length of shank and initial
orientation of links fixed to the thigh and shank. where :
(6)
tan

With this known value of link’s angles, the position of

ankle point is determined as:
cos cos cos
(7)
cos cos

39
Majlesi Journal of Mechatronic Systems Vol. 1, No. 4, December 2012

  sin sin sin

(8)
sin sin
Knee with four-bar mechanism (FBM) shown in Fig. 1,
has 9 unknown geometrical parameters, which can be
obtained through an optimization procedure described
in the next section. These unknown parameters are:
, , , , , , , , ] (9)
1.2. Inverse kinematic analysis of knee with six-bar
mechanism
Different types of six bar linkages are known in
machine theory. Among them six bar revolute joint
mechanism known as Watt and Stephenson are
familiar. Compared with four-bar mechanisms, six-bar
mechanisms have much more design parameters. The
excess links provide more flexibility in design and with
them we can obtain some requirement which cannot be
obtained by mechanism with lower links. Four different
types of six bar linkages mechanism are shown in Fig. Fig. 2. Schematics of knee with different six bar
2. In following kinematic analysis of each of these linkages
mechanisms are presented. As we will see, inverse The loop closure equations for different cases of Fig. 2
kinematics of six bar linkage cannot be obtained in a to obtain the angles of different links are:
similar procedure given for four bar knee mechanism.
Hence a simple method will be presented for solving I: 0,   
(10)
the inverse kinematics analysis of these six bar linkage, 0
which can be extended to more complex mechanism II: 0,
too. (11)
In similar to the four bar knee case, the known 0
parameter and angles are and and and III: 0,
other angles and parameters are unknown. (12)
0
IV: 0,
(13)
0
which can be written in real form as:
cos cos cos
cos 0
sin sin sin
sin 0
I: (14)
cos cos cos
cos 0
sin sin sin
sin 0

40
Majlesi Journal of Mechatronic Systems Vol. 1, No. 4, December 2012

cos cos cos cos cos

cos 0 cos cos
sin sin sin cos
sin 0 cos
II: (15) III: (20)
cos cos cos sin cos
cos 0 sin sin
sin sin sin sin
sin 0 sin

cos cos
cos cos cos
cos cos
cos 0
cos
sin sin sin IV: (21)
sin cos
sin 0
cos cos
cos cos cos
III: (16) cos
cos cos
Solving together of Eqs.(10 , 14), Eqs.(11, 15), Eqs.(12,
0
16) and Eqs.(13, 17) in a similar method applied to the
sin sin sin four bar linkage is possible, but is very difficult to
sin sin obtain and useless. Hence a different procedure for
0 obtaining the unknown angles is presented in continuo,
which can be applied to more complex problems.
cos cos cos Unknown parameters which must be obtained through
cos 0 an optimization procedure to simulate pre-specified
sin sin sin knee trajectory for different case of six bar linkage
sin 0 mechanism are:
(22)
IV: cos cos cos (17) I:
, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
cos cos
(23)
0 II:
, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
sin sin sin (24)
sin sin III:
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ]
0 (25)
IV:
The ankle point position coordinates for different cases , , , , , , , , , , , , ]
of Fig. 2 are:
cos cos 2.1. Solution procedure for solving inverse
cos cos kinematics of complex mechanisms and robots
cos cos Forward and inverse kinematics problems of robots and
cos mechanism are in terms of sin or cos of different
I: (18) angles. These terms maybe in multiplied or power form
sin sin
such as cos cos or cos . With using triangular
sin sin identities such expressions can be expressed in terms of
sin sin linear terms of cos or sin such as cos  ,
sin sin  , cos  . With using Taylor expansion
cos cos each of these terms can be expressed as follows:
cos cos cos Δ sin (26)
cos Δ
cos ⋯
cos 2
II: (19) sin sin Δ cos (27)
sin sin
Δ
sin sin ⋯
sin 2
where is the value for the unknown variable at step
sin k’th. For small values of Δ , we have

41
Majlesi Journal of Mechatronic Systems Vol. 1, No. 4, December 2012

cos cos Δ sin (28) sin 0 θ

sin sin Δ cos (29) cos 0 θ
With substituting Eqs. (28-29) in loop closure equation sin sin θ
for mechanisms or robots, with known value of , cos cos θ
Δ can be obtained. cos cos
The presented approach to solving inverse kinematics sin sin
analysis of mechanism or robots is applied to the cos cos cos
proposed six bar knee mechanism. Hence we have: sin sin sin
sin sin cos cos
cos cos sin sin
0 sin cos cos
0 cos sin sin
sin 0 θ sin sin
cos 0 θ cos cos
sin sin θ 0 sin
cos cos θ 0 cos
I: (30) sin 0
cos cos cos 0
sin sin sin sin
cos cos cos cos
sin sin
IV: (33)
cos cos
cos cos sin sin
sin sin cos cos cos
cos cos sin sin sin
sin sin cos cos
sin sin sin sin cos
cos cos cos cos
0 0 sin sin sin
0 0 and finally:
sin 0 θ
(34)
cos 0 θ
sin sin θ
2.2. Optimization Procedure
cos cos θ
Optimization is the act of obtaining the best result
II: (31) under given circumstances.
cos cos The ultimate goal of all such decisions is either to
sin sin minimize the effort required or to maximize the desired
cos cos benefit. Since the effort required or the benefit desired
sin sin in any practical situation can be expressed as a function
cos cos of certain decision variables, optimization can be
sin sin defined as the process of finding the conditions that
cos cos give the maximum or minimum value of a function [8].
sin sin The purpose of the optimization procedure is to find a
sin sin 4BM or 6BM which follows the experimental knee
cos cos motion as better as possible and, at the same time, and
III: (32)
sin 0 should be designed in order to restore the stability
cos 0 during walking. Meantime, the dimensions of links
should be within an acceptable range.
Here, the objective function value F(X) (the function to
minimize) can be obtained as the sum of the squared
distances between the i-th experimental position of the
reference point ( ,  ) at the i-th experimental
flexion angle and the respective position of the coupler
point P at the same flexion angle ( , ), computed

42
Majlesi Journal of Mechatronic Systems Vol. 1, No. 4, December 2012

according to the equations. So the optimization

problem is expressed as

Min 
(35)

where n is the number of selected points in a gait cycle,

21.

Results and Discussion

The reference data for the simulation of ankle knee
motion are given in [7]. After the optimization, the
design parameters for different mentioned knee
mechanism are obtained. These results are shown in
Table 1. The dimensions are in millimeters.

Table 1. Design parameters obtained from optimization

procedure for different mechanisms
mechanism Design parameters
Four-bar
55.5, 48, 46, 54, 399, 1,   47, 1.5, 4.1
Six-bar(1) X = [54, 63, 63.5, 71, 87, 92, 74.5, 79, 386,
53, 78, 3.18, 0.04, 0.53, 0.37]

Six-bar(2) X =[45, 53, 40, 40, 57, 20, 70, 38, 19, 28,
361.5, 0.22, 2.5, 3.14, 0.7]
Six-bar(3) X =[29, 39.5, 30.5, 34, 20, 11, 10 ,8, 9.5, 7,8,
390, 0.17, 1.03, 0.4, 2.67]
Six-bar(4) X =[48, 42, 45, 61, 52, 31, 86, 21, 21, 361,
2.9,. 3,. -23]
The comparison of the generated trajectory of the ankle
joint with expected is shown in Fig. 3. The mean square
errors for four-bar linkage, six-bar linkage case I, six-
bar case II, six-bar case III, six-bar case IV and six-bar
case V are Err 0.038% , Err 0.16%,
Err 0.51%, Err 0.86% and Err
0.36%, respectively.
The comparison of the generated trajectory of the
Instant center with is shown in Fig. 4, shows that
location of the Instant center in the six-bar mechanism1
is more elevated than four-bar mechanism and this
makes that SBM 1 is more stable than FBM.
In Fig. 4c, the most interesting feature of this centrode
is the almost constant height of the instant centers.
According to Fig. 4b, this mechanism is much variation
in the instant center.
The comparison of the generated trajectory of the
Instant center with is shown in Fig. 4 shows that
location of the Instant center in the six-bar mechanism1
is more elevated than four-bar mechanism and this
makes that SBM 1 is more stable than FBM.
The comparison of the generated trajectories of the
ankle joints shown in Figs. 3, shows that the
performance of the SBM1 is better than SBM4,
performance of the SBM4 is better than SBM2 and the
performance of the SBM2 is better than SBM3.

43
Majlesi Journal of Mechatronic Systems Vol. 1, No. 4, December 2012

(b)

Fig 3. The expected trajectory of the ankle joint and

realized trajectory by four-bar and six bar linkage. (c)

(a)
(d)

44
 Majlesi Journal of Mechatronic Systems
(e)
Fig 4 a: Trajectory of the Instant center by four-bar
mechanism b: six-bar case I, c: six-bar case II, d: six-
bar case III, e: six-bar case IV.
Conclusion and discussion
The kinematic performance of the several different
mechanisms such as four-bar linkage and six-bar
linkage are shown in above figures. And are compared
improvement and weakening performance of the six-
bar knees with four-bar linkage knee. Meantime a new
method is presented for solving nonlinear equation of
the six-bar mechanism which eases to obtain kinematic
relations. The comparison of the trajectory of the ankle
joint in swing phase of the six-bar linkage knee with
that of a four-bar knee mechanism shows that six-bar
linkage knee has better performance than four-bar knee
mechanism. Also the comparison between various six-
bar mechanism shows that the performance of six bar
mechanism case I is better than other mechanisms.
View publication stats
Vol. 1, No. 4, December 2012
REFERENCES
[1] Charles W Radcliffe and ME. Deg, “Biomechanics of
Knee Stability Control. with Four-Bar Prosthetic
Knees”, presented at the Proc. ISPO Australia Annual
Meeting, 2003.
[2] C.W. Radcliffe, “Four-bar linkage prosthetic knee
mechanisms: kinematics, alignment and
prescription criteria”, Prosthetics and orthotics
international, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 159–173, 1994.
[3] Nicola Sancisi., Raffaele Caminati.,and Vincenzo
Parenti-Castelli., “Optimal Four-Bar Linkage for
the Stability and the Motion of the Human Knee
Prostheses”, presented at the Atti del XIX
CONGRESSO dell'Associazione Italiana di Meccanica
Teorica e Applicata. Ancona, pp. 1-10, 2009.
[4] K.O Berg, “Knee mechanisms for through-knee
prostheses”, Prosthetics and orthotics international,
pp. 107-112, 1983.
[5] J. K. Chakraborty and K. M. Patil, “A new modular
six-bar linkage trans-femoral prosthesis for
walking and squatting” Prosthetics and Orthotics
International, pp. 98-108, 1994
[6] Dewen Jin., Ruihong Zhang., HO Dimo., Rencheng
Wang., and Jichuan Zhang., “Kinematic and
dynamic performance of prosthetic knee joint
using six-bar mechanism”, Journal of Rehabilitation
Research, pp. 39-48, 2003.
[7] K. H. Low, “Subject-oriented overground walking
pattern generation on a rehabilitation robot based
on foot and pelvic trajectories” Procedia IUTAM 2,
pp. 109-127, 2011.
[8] Singiresu S. Rao., Engineering Optimization Theory
and Practice, Fourth Edition. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.,
Hoboken, New Jersey, Published simultaneously in
Canada, 2009.
45