"The ankle is naturally capable of a complicated three-dimensional motion, but most rigid exoskeletons allow only a single pivot point," says Yong-Lae Park. The new robotic device was designed using soft plastics and composite materials. (Credit: Carnegie Mellon)

Robotic ankle moves more like the real thing

Engineers have created a soft, wearable device that mimics the natural movements of muscles, tendons, and ligaments of the lower leg.

They developed the active orthotic device using soft plastics and composite materials, instead of a rigid exoskeleton. The soft materials, combined with pneumatic artificial muscles (PAMs), lightweight sensors, and advanced control software, made it possible for the robotic device to achieve natural motions in the ankle.

Yong-Lae Park, an assistant professor of robotics at Carnegie Mellon University.Park, did the work while a post-doctoral researcher at Harvard’s Wyss Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering. He says the same approach could be used to create rehabilitative devices for other joints of the body or even to create soft exoskeletons that increase the strength of the wearer. The researchers describe the design in the journal Bioinspiration & Biomimetics.

3-D motion

The robotic device would be suitable for aiding people with neuromuscular disorders of the foot and ankle associated with cerebral palsy, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, multiple sclerosis, or stroke. These gait disorders include drop foot, in which the forefoot drops because of weakness or paralysis, and equinus, in which the upward bending motion of the ankle is limited. Conventional passive ankle braces can improve gait, but long-term use can lead to muscle atrophy because of disuse.

Active, powered devices can improve function and also help re-educate the neuromuscular system, Park says. “But the limitation of a traditional exoskeleton is that it limits the natural degrees of freedom of the body,” he adds. The ankle is naturally capable of a complicated three-dimensional motion, but most rigid exoskeletons allow only a single pivot point.

The soft orthotic device, by contrast, enabled the researchers to mimic the biological structure of the lower leg. The device’s artificial tendons were attached to four PAMs, which correspond with three muscles in the foreleg and one in the back that control ankle motion. The prototype was capable of generating an ankle range of sagittal motion of 27 degrees—sufficient for a normal walking gait.

“Intelligent” control

The tradeoff, however, is that the soft device is more difficult to control than a rigid exoskeleton. It thus required more sophisticated sensing to track the position of the ankle and foot and a more intelligent scheme for controlling foot motion, Park says.

Among the innovations in the device are sensors made of a touch-sensitive artificial skin, thin rubber sheets that contain long microchannels filled with a liquid metal alloy. When these rubber sheets are stretched or pressed, the shapes of the microchannels change, which in turn causes changes in the electrical resistance of the alloy. These sensors were positioned on the top and at the side of the ankle.

Park says additional work will be necessary to improve the wearability of the device. This includes artificial muscles that are less bulky than the commercially produced PAMs used in this project. A subsequent project, which will be presented at an upcoming technical conference, used flat, strap-like actuators instead of the cylindrical PAMs.

The device has yet to be tested on patients to determine its performance as a rehabilitative tool.

The Wyss Institute and the National Science Foundation funded the project.

Source: Carnegie Mellon

chat1 Comment

You are free to share this article under the Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported license.

  1. Babu G. Ranganathan

    IMAGINE A SCIENTIST or genetic engineer in a lab who by using intelligent planning and design makes an entire living cell, including its DNA, from scratch in a laboratory. This cell reproduces into billions of more cells.

    After a hundred years, someone discovers this cell and thinks that it is nothing more than an accident of nature. That it originated by chance and was not ultimately a product of any intelligence or design. Doesn’t that sound like atheists on this site?

    In reality scientists have never created life. Even if they do, it won’t be by chance. What scientists have done through intelligent design and planning is genetically modify already existing forms of life through genetic engineering. By modifying already existing forms of life scientists have been able to produce new forms of life, but they did not produce these new life forms from non-living matter.

    In every case of modern genetic engineering scientists have had to use already existing forms of life or their parts. But, again, if scientists do produce a living cell from scratch, it won’t be by chance but by intelligent design. So, such a feat would never support any theory of a chance origin of life.

    Recently, a scientist did use intelligent design and planning in building DNA from scratch and then planting it in an already living cell.

    Natural laws can explain how an airplane or living cell works, but it’s irrational to believe that mere undirected natural laws can bring about an airplane or a cell. Once you have a complete and living cell then the genetic program and biological machinery exist to direct the formation of more cells, but how could the cell have originated naturally when no directing code and mechanisms
    existed in nature? All of the founders of modern science believed in God. Read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM

    Sincerely,
    Babu G. Ranganathan*
    (B.A. theology/biology)

    Author of popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS

    * I have had the privilege of being recognized in the 24th edition of Marquis “Who’s Who In The East” for my writings on religion and science, and I have given successful lectures (with question and answer time afterwards) defending creation from science before evolutionist science faculty and students at various colleges and universities.

We respect your privacy.