Journal of Mechanisms and Robotics.

Received September 14, 2015;

Accepted manuscript posted December 17, 2015. doi:10.1115/1.4032274
Copyright (c) 2015 by ASME

Design and Analysis of a Cable-Driven

Articulated Rehabilitation System for Gait
Training

Aliakbar Alamdari ∗
Graduate Research Assistant, Student Member of ASME

d
Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering

ite
SUNY at Buffalo
Buffalo, NY, 14260
aalamdar@buffalo.edu

ed
py
Venkat Krovi
Professor, ASME Fellow
Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering

Co
SUNY at Buffalo
Buffalo, NY, 14260
vkrovi@buffalo.edu

ot
tN
Assisted motor therapies play a critical role in enhancing 1 INTRODUCTION
functional musculoskeletal recovery and neurological reha-
Several neurological disorders including stroke, spinal
ip

bilitation. Our long term goal is to assist and automate

cord injury, cerebellar disorders, and neuromuscular diseases
the performance of repetitive motor-therapy of the human
manifest themselves via generation of abnormal patterns of
r

lower limbs. Hence, in this paper, we examine the viabil-

lower limb motion. Numerous studies have noted that sys-
sc

ity of a light-weight and reconfigurable hybrid (articulated-

tematic deployment of rehabilitation regimen (of adequate
multibody and cable) robotic system for assisting lower-
intensity, duration, and consistency) can help restore mo-
extremity rehabilitation and analyze its performance. A hy-
nu

tor functionalities in such patients [1]. However, significant

brid cable-actuated articulated multibody system is formed
challenges exist for realization of an automated rehabilita-
when multiple cables are attached from a ground-frame to
tion system that can function in close coordination with a
Ma

various locations on an articulated-linkage based orthosis.

Our efforts initially focus on developing an analysis and
simulation framework for the kinematics and dynamics of
the cable-driven lower limb orthosis. A Monte Carlo ap-
ed
patient’s musculoskeletal system.
Traditionally, lower limbs motor therapy is carried out
manually, requiring multiple (often 3 or more) physiothera-

proach is employed to select configuration parameters in- pists. The difficulty and inconsistency in therapy from one
cluding cuff sizes, cuff locations, and the position of fixed session to the next motivated researchers to develop gait
winches. The desired motions for the rehabilitative exer- training treadmills with body weight support to provide con-
pt

cises are prescribed based upon motion patterns from a nor- sistent gait motion [2–4]. Our interest is in rehabilitation sys-
mative subject cohort. We examine the viability of using tems which allow for significant greater flexibility of thera-
ce

two controllers —a joint-space feedback linearized PD con- peutic motions/forces as well as customization of the train-
troller and a task-space force-control strategy —to realize ing regimen. Volpe et al. [5] review the successes noted
Ac

trajectory- and path- tracking of the desired motions within
a simulation environment. In particular, we examine per-
formance in terms of (i) coordinated control of the redun-
dant system; (ii) reducing internal stresses within the lower-
extremity joints; and (iii) continued satisfaction of the uni-
lateral cable-tension constraints throughout the workspace.
∗ Corresponding author.
from several groups in reducing impairment and enhanc-
ing human motor control with task specific exercises de-
livered by robotic devices. It is worth noting that several
exoskeleton systems such as BLEEX [6], MIT exoskeleton
[7], HAL-3 [8] have been developed (in non-rehabilitation
contexts) to augment human walking. Additionally, many
active/passive orthoses such as gravity-balancing leg ortho-
sis [9], pneumatic-muscle powered ankle-foot orthosis [10],
elastic knee orthosis [11], ALEX [12], and LOPES [13] have
been developed.

Alamdari 1 JMR-15-1266

Downloaded From: http://mechanismsrobotics.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/27/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Journal of Mechanisms and Robotics. Received September 14, 2015;
Accepted manuscript posted December 17, 2015. doi:10.1115/1.4032274
Copyright (c) 2015 by ASME end-effector type apparatus cables are directly connected to
the subject’s ankle, and only apply force at the ankle. In
the C-ALEX [17] design, no rigid or joints are employed
within the exoskeleton. Instead, three cuffs are connected
to the waist, thigh, and shank, and four cables are routed
through the cuffs to actuate two degrees-of-freedom of the
7 5
4
human user lower limbs. The exoskeleton is controlled in
3
force mode using assist-as-needed control paradigm. Our
proposed design differs in seeking to take advantage of the
1
2 hybrid cable-articulated architecture.
The main challenge in any cable-robot control scheme

d
6 is satisfaction of the tensionability conditions, i.e., assuring
that all cables are always in tension. The manipulation is

ite
Fig. 1. RObotic Physical Exercise and System (ROPES): A Cable- performed via increasing and decreasing the lengths of the
Driven Robotic Rehabilitation System for Lower-Extremity. Motors 1, cables connected to the end-effector. One can increase the

ed
2, 3 and 4 are placed in appropriate positions to generate positive number of redundant cables to satisfy the tensionability of
cable tensions to move lower limbs in the sagittal plane along the the cables. However, this increases the interference of the
desired trajectory, and likewise motors 5, 6 and 7 are placed in frontal cables in the working space. The minimum sufficient number

py
plane to generate positive cable tensions based upon the prescribed of cables in mulibody systems that guarantees all cables are
lateral exercises for lower limbs. in tension have been investigated in [18].
In traditional cable robots, multiple cables are at-

Co
tached to single-payload/platform from multiple points on
Several of these architectures are now being evaluated the ground. In contrast, in the proposed articulated multi-
for rehabilitation application potential to help patients to body cable-robot system, cables are connected to different

ot
overcome muscle-weakness and remedy abnormal motor links of the multibody system from multiple points on the
control etc. The challenge arises both for design of robotic ground as illustrated in Fig. 1. In this work, we assume a
tN
system with adequate degrees of freedom to not hinder natu- simplified model wherein each human lower limb segment
ral gait kinematics/dynamics as well as coordinated control (i.e. foot, shank and thigh) and its corresponding lorthosis-
to achieve the normal physiological gait patterns. Among link are considered as one part. Thus, each human lower
ip

clinically-deployed rehabilitation systems, Lokomat [14] is limbs maybe considered as a serial multibody system driven
an exoskeletal orthosis which is attached to a patient’s legs by the cables attached to them.
r

to assist the person to walk on the treadmill. The Haptic Limited literature has examined multi-body articulated
sc

Walker [15] is a multidegree-of-freedom system intended to cable-drive systems in the past. For example, the wrench
generates foot pedal motions to simulate regular and stair closure workspace of multibody cable-driven mechanisms is
walking. However, in addition to performance limitations, determined based on Lagrange’s approach [18] and recipro-
nu

these devices are expensive and only available in some clini- cal screw theory [19]. The concept of generalized forces and
cal or rehabilitation centers. Lagrange’s method have been employed to eliminate forces
Ma

Hence, in this paper, we examine the feasibility of a and moments from the equilibrium equations. It is notewor-
light-weight and reconfigurable hybrid (articulated multi- thy that the operational workspace of multibody cable-driven
body and cable) robotic system for assisting lower-extremity systems is largely impacted by the choice of cable placement
rehabilitation and analyze its performance. Many of the com- and routing. Bryson and Agrawal [20] identified and ana-
ed

monly prescribed rehabilitation exercises engender closed- lyzed cable configurations for serial robot driven by cables.
loop ankle trajectories which can be realized by an appro- Yan et al. [21] designed a 7-DOF humanoid arm driven with
priate cable-driven rehabilitation device. Such closed-loop 14 cables. They employed the force closure method to evalu-
pt

ankle trajectories can serve to guide the other leg-members ate the workspace of multi-finger grasping. In [22, 23], a hy-
(shank/thigh) via the natural kinematics and dynamics of the brid articulated-cable parallel mechanism named PACER de-
ce

limbs. Cable robots are well-known for their low inertia, rel- veloped by authors for upper limb rehabilitation in 3D space
atively large workspace, low fabrication costs and reconfig- in which with appropriate design, and proper selection of the
Ac

urability. The use of cables allows the relatively heavy mo- position of cable winches and cable attachment points to the
tors and gearboxes to be moved from the joints to the base. multibody system, the positive tension in the cables assured.
This reduces the mass and inertia of the moving bodies and The key contribution of this paper is the development
can allow the robot to be designed with smaller, less costly and feasibility/performance evaluation of a reconfigurable
motors. hybrid cable-articulated architecture that will work closely
Several recent exoskeleton designs have emerged to take with the human musculoskeletal system to provide motor
advantage of the cable-based architecture. In [16] a cable- therapies. This system is an extension of traditional single-
driven robotic gait training system called CaLT was designed body cable-driven to multibody cable-driven system. The
for gait training of spinal cord injury patients, and it deliv- combined system features multiple holonomic cable-loop-
ered a promising and acceptable experimental results. In this closure constraints acting on a tree-structured multibody

Alamdari 2 JMR-15-1266

Downloaded From: http://mechanismsrobotics.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/27/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Journal of Mechanisms and Robotics. Received September 14, 2015;
Accepted manuscript posted December 17, 2015. doi:10.1115/1.4032274
Copyright (c) 2015 by
system. ASME
The wrench feasible workspace [24] of RObotic yF
Physical Exercise and System (ROPES) is determined and w4 xF
K t1 y0
improved by adding linear tensional and torsional springs C4 C3
to articulated-multibody system to cover whole operational u4 x0

workspace of the prescribed ankle trajectory. Such springs T4 t 4 , l 4 qh

d 4x R T3 t 3 ,l 3
help in keeping cables taut, and result in larger workspace.
d 4y
There remains significant design-freedom in determining the
location of base spooling motors as well as the sizing of Kt2 q3
the cable-attachment (cuffs) to the articulated-leg-frame. We C0
highlight the opportunity to exploit this freedom by design- y1

optimization to enhance the functional performance. Specif- qk

x1 d 3x

d
ically, the focus of this paper is to assist the performance C1 C2
of repetitive therapy of human lower limbs in sagittal plane. d 3y

ite
The desired motion is prescribed based upon normative sub- y2
jects’ motion patterns. The appropriate coordination of ca- T1 t1 ,l1 T2 t 2 ,l 2

ed
ble forces to each segment of the lower limbs is realized by
p
an impedance/force-field and a feedback linearized PD con- d1y d 2y x2 2
+ qa

trollers to (i) assure the tensionability in cables, and (ii) avoid x3 y3

py
increasing the internal forces at the lower extremity joints.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows: In
Fig. 2. A cable-driven robotic rehabilitation system, in which Ti , ti
Section 2, the kinematic analysis of ROPES is presented.

Co
are cable tension and cable unit vector, respectively; diy and dix are
The dynamic equations of motion of ROPES using the
cuff size and its position in the local frame; Kti is tensional spring for
Newton-Euler, and Lagrangian approach are derived in both
increasing the wrench feasible workspace.
joint-space and task-space in Section 3. In Section 4, the

optimal cable configuration analysis of ROPES is identified,
and then the tension distribution in the resulting optimal con-
figuration is examined in Section 5, and Section 6 and 7 are
devoted to designing feedback-linearized PD controller and
impedance/force-field controller for ROPES, and finally Sec-
ip
ot
gles as shown in Fig. 2), and JT = tTi ∂∂uqi is a Jacobian matrix
tN
which maps joint angular velocities to the cable velocities.
The angular velocity and acceleration of each segment
i.e., thigh, shank and foot in sagittal plane can be found such

tion 8 concludes the paper. that for thigh is, ωt = q̇1 , ω̇t = q̈1 , and linear acceleration
of the mass center of thigh is act = ω̇t × lct + ωt × (ωt × lct ),
2 KINEMATIC ANALYSIS OF ROPES
r

where lct = F R1 1 lct is the thigh mass center vector expressed

sc

In order to describe the motion of the lower limbs driven

in fixed frame; 1 lct is the thigh mass center vector expressed
with cables, the coordinate systems {F}, {0}, {1}, {2} and
in frame {1} (position vector from the origin of frame {0}
{3} are attached to the trunk, hip, knee, ankle and the end
nu

to the mass center of thigh), and F Ri is rotation matrix from

of the foot, respectively, as illustrated in Fig. 2. The cable
fixed frame to ith frame of reference.
length li , cable unit vector ti and Jacobian matrix JT can be
Similarly, the angular velocity and acceleration for the
found by writing the loop-closure equations for each cable.
Ma

shank can be expressed by, ωs = q̇1 + q̇2 , ω̇s = q̈1 + q̈2 , and
In these relations wi denotes the winch position respect to the
linear acceleration of the mass center of shank is acs = at +
fixed frame {F}, and ui denotes the position vector of cable
ω̇s × lcs + ωs × (ωs × lcs ), where lcs = F R2 2 lcs is the link (shank)
attachment point to orthosis respect to the fixed frame {F}.
mass center vector expressed in fixed frame; 2 lcs is the shank
ed

mass center vector expressed in frame {2} (position vector

ui − wi + li ti = 0, i = {1, 2, 3, 4} (1) from the origin of frame {1} to the mass center of shank),
pt

and linear acceleration at can be found by substitution of lt

q
li = (wi − ui )T (wi − ui ) (2) instead of lct in equation of act .
ti = (wi − ui ) /li
ce

(3) Finally for the foot, the angular velocity and accelera-
tion can be written as, ω f = q̇1 + q̇2 + q̇3 , ω̇ f = q̈1 + q̈2 + q̈3 ,
and linear acceleration is acf = as + ω̇ f × lcf + ω f × (ω f × lcf ),
Ac

By taking the derivative of both sides of Eqn. (1) with

where lcf = F R3 3 lcf is the foot mass center vector expressed in
respect to time, and multiplying both sides of resulting equa-
fixed frame, and 3 lcf is the foot mass center vector expressed
tion to tTi , it gives the Jacobian matrix as follows
in frame {3} (position vector from the origin of frame {2} to
the mass center of the foot), and linear acceleration as can be
∂ ui found by substitution of ls instead of lcs in equation of acs .
l˙i = −tTi q̇ = −JT q̇ (4)
∂q
2.1 Cable attachments in ROPES
where q̇ = [q̇1 , q̇2 , q̇3 ]T (note that q1 = 3π 2 − θh , q2 = θk and The combined human leg and orthosis is controlled in
q3 = 3π
2 −θ a which θ h , θk , θa are hip, knee and ankle joint an- sagittal plane using four cables. More cables may unnec-

Alamdari 3 JMR-15-1266

Downloaded From: http://mechanismsrobotics.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/27/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Journal of Mechanisms and Robotics. Received September 14, 2015;
Accepted manuscript posted December 17, 2015. doi:10.1115/1.4032274
Copyright (c) 2015 complicate
essarily by ASME the workspace design and analysis, and within the cable-articulated orthosis, one linear tensional
fewer than four cables makes it impossible for unilateral spring is attached between the fixed ground and the thigh,
cable-tension constraints to be satisfied. The cables are con- Kt1 , and another tensional spring is connected the thigh to
nected to each link of orthosis using cuffs. The cuff for the the shank, Kt2 . Such springs help in keeping cables taut, and
thigh link is of radius d4y and is positioned a distance d4x improve the wrench feasible workspace without adding re-
from the origin of frame {0}. The cuff for the shank link dundant cables to cover whole operational workspace of the
is of radius d3y and is placed a distance d3x from the ori- predefined ankle trajectory. Without loss of generality, the
gin of frame {1}. Similarly, the cuffs for the foot link are springs are modeled as linear springs with stiffness constant
of radius d2y and d1y , respectively, and they are positioned a K and zero free-length. The generated force will then be-
distance d2x and d1x from the origin of frame {2}. It is as- come Kti lti which lti is the vector of zero-free length springs.
sumed each cable attachment point, Ci , as shown in Fig. 2, Many designers of orthoses and prostheses have sized

d
is placed on a circle with center of C0 , of radius R, and angle their devices based on the average kinetic and kinematic
θi , i = {1, 2, 3, 4} respect to the fixed coordinate frame. data of human [26, 27]. The compliance of lower extrem-

ite
ity joints during locomotion can be investigated by the con-
cept of quasi-stiffness. This term can be distinguished from
Table 1. Design parameter ranges of independent parameters of

ed
the passive and active stiffness of a joint typically used to
ROPES. describe the local tangent to the moment-angle curve shown
Parameter Range Units Parameter Range Units for given joint at a specific angle [28]. As illustrated in Fig.

py
3, the quasi-stiffness of a joint is defined more globally, as
d1y [45, 85] mm d2y [50, 85] mm
the slope of the best linear fit on the moment-angle curve of
d3y [55, 95] mm d4y [75, 125] mm a joint over a whole stride or specific phase of a stride [29].

Co
d1x [70, 220] mm d2x [70, 220] mm A series of empirical studies [29–31] have been conducted to
characterize the quasi-stiffness and linear behavior of lower
d3x [110, 440] mm d4x [150, 450] mm extremity joints during walking for adult humans as function

ot
θ1 [170, 195] deg θ2 [260, 330] deg of body size (height and weight). This forms the basis of
a normative anthropometric statistical model which we will
θ3 [−10, 80] deg θ4 [110, 165] deg
tN
employ to predict the hip, knee and ankle quasi-stiffness for
adults walking on level ground. The mean value of quasi-
stiffness of each joint is enumerated in Table 2.
The cable configuration parameters, as described in Fig.
ip

2, are allowed to vary within the ranges given in Table. 1. For

example, the radius of cable cuff attached to the thigh, d4y , is Table 2. Quasi-stiffness of lower extremity joints and stiffness of tor-
r

allowed to vary from the 75mm to 125mm in increments of sional springs placed on the orthosis with units of Nm/rad [29–31].
sc

5mm, and its position, d4x , is allowed to range from 150mm Parameter Value
to 450mm in increments of 5mm.
nu

Hip quasi-stiffness in extension phase KHe 320

Hip quasi-stiffness in flexion phase KH f 335
Ma

3 DYNAMIC EQUATIONS OF MOTION OF LOWER Knee quasi-stiffness in extension phase KKe 263
LIMBS DRIVEN WITH CABLES
Knee quasi-stiffness in flexion phase KK f 304
Guaranteeing positive cable tensions for the cable-
driven articulated orthosis (within an adequately large work- Ankle quasi-stiffness in plantar-flexion phase KAp 202
ed

region) remains a critical issue. Hence the dynamic equa- Ankle quasi-stiffness in dorsi-flexion phase KAd 246
tions of human lower limb (orthosis + human leg) were de-
veloped to facilitate model-based control of the tension dur- Hip stiffness on the orthosis KOH 327
pt

ing the rehabilitation exercises. The exercises include normal Knee stiffness on the orthosis KOK 283
walking in the sagittal plane and lateral leg-lifting in frontal
ce

Ankle stiffness on the orthosis KOA 224

plane. For this purpose, two dimensional equations of mo-
tion for each segment of the human leg was formulated sep-
Ac

arately in the sagittal and frontal planes. In sagittal plane,

the hip and knee flexion/extension motion and the dorsiflex-
ion/plantar flexion motion of the ankle are considered. Sim-
ilarly, the equation of motion for lateral leg-lifting exercise
is derived in the frontal plane while considering additional
degrees-of-freedom at the hip (abduction/adduction) and an-
kle (inversion/eversion) joints.
As shown in [25], adding springs between ground and
multibody or between links can improve wrench feasible
workspace of cable-driven system. Exploiting this idea
Moreover, additional torsional springs are placed on the
orthosis at hip (KOH ), knee (KOK ), and ankle (KOA ) joints,
and their values are defined in Table 2.
3.1 Newton-Euler dynamic formulation in sagittal
plane
In this section, a Newton-Euler formulation is used to
derive dynamics equations of the cable-driven articulated or-
thosis (Fig. 2) in the sagittal plane. Such a formulation is

Alamdari 4 JMR-15-1266

Downloaded From: http://mechanismsrobotics.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/27/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Journal of Mechanisms and Robotics. Received September 14, 2015;
Accepted manuscript posted December 17, 2015. doi:10.1115/1.4032274
Copyright (c)1602015 by ASME 70 100
in dorsi-flexion phase; Eq. (5) concisely can be written as
60 80
140
J f T f = F f . It is worth of mentioning that at each instant,
50 60
120 Eqn. (5) is a linear equation in terms of T f .
40 40
Similarly, the formulation can be constructed for shank
Ankle Moment (N.m)

Knee Moment (N.m)

Hip Moment (N.m)

100 K Hf
30 20
in sagittal plane as
80 20 0

10 -20
K He
60  
K Ap 0 -40 T3
40
K Ad -10 K Kf -60    Fs f 
20
t3 −ts f tts 0 0  
 Fts  (6)
-20 -80
us3 × t3 −us2 × ts f us1 × tts −ms f mts Ms f 

0 -30 -100
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 -0.3 -0.1 0.1 0.3 0.5
Ankle Angle (rad) Knee Angle (rad) Hip Angle (rad)
Mts

d
 
Fig. 3. Ankle, knee, and hip moment vs. angle curve for repre- ms as − ms g
=

ite
sentative subject walking at 1.25 m/s. Quasi-stiffness is claculated Is ω̇s + [ωs ×]Is ωs + Jk − Ja
based on the slope of the best-line fit to the moment-angle curve for
ankle plantar-flexion (KAp ), ankle dorsi-flexion (KAd ), knee flexion

ed
where Jk = (KKe/K f + KOK )q2 − st2 × Kt2 lt2 , Is =
(KK f ), knee extension (KKe ), and hip extension (KHe ) and flexion
F R 2 I F RT ; t is the unit vector along the cable with
(KH f ) [29–31]. 2 s 2 3
magnitude T3 ; tts and mts are the unit vectors of force Fts

py
and moment Ms f exerted from thigh to the shank; ms is the
very useful in a design/simulation setting in helping analyze mass of the shank; usi , i = {1, 2, 3} are the position vector

Co
force-profiles (both internal forces/moments within as well from the mass center of the shank to the point of application
as the external forces needed to drive) the cable-articulated of the applied force expressed in the fixed frame; KKe/K f is
orthosis. Each segment’s dynamic equations, subjected to quasi-stiffness of knee which depends on the stance phase
cable-and constraint-forces, is derived separately. Note that during walking, for example, KKe/K f = KK f in flexion

ot
each segment is subjected to cable forces as well as con- phase, KKe/K f = KKe in extension phase; both inertia tensor
straint forces and moments. Since the weight and moment of Is and the angular velocity ωs of the foot are expressed in
tN
inertia of the orthosis segments and cuffs are much smaller fixed frame of reference, and finally Kt2 and lt2 are zero-free
than lower limbs segments, their weight and moment of in- length tensional spring stiffness and vector along the spring,
ertia are ignored in this simulation . The recursive Newton- respectively; st2 is the position vector from the mass center
ip

Euler formulation in the sagittal plane is written for the foot of the shank to the spring attachment point on the orthosis;
segment in matrix form as follows (notice that boldface sym- the generated force by the linear axial springs is equal to
r

bols have been used for vectors and matrices), Kt2 lt2 which lt2 is the vector of zero-free length spring. This
sc

spring provides a tensile force proportional to its length.

Equation (6) can be written compactly as Js Ts = Fs .
nu

  Newton-Euler formulation for thigh can also be expressed

  T1 by Jt Tt = Ft , where
t1 t2 ts f 0  T2 
  (5)
Ma

u f 1 × t1 u f 2 × t2 u f 3 × ts f ms f  Fs f   
Ms f t4 −tts tbt 0 0
Jt = (7)
  ut4 × t4 −ut2 × tts ut3 × tbt −mts mbt
m f af − Fext − m f g
=  T
If ω̇ f + [ω f ×]If ω f − Mext − u f 4 × Fext + Ja Tt = T4 Fts Fbt Mts Mbt
ed

 
mt at − mt g
Ft =
where Ja = KAP/Ad (q3 − 3π It ω̇t + [ωt ×]It ωt − Jk + Jh
2 )+KOA (q3 −Φ3 ); Φ3 is the initial
pt

angular position of the torsion spring installed at the ankle

joint on the orthosis, and ti , i = {1, 2, 3, 4} is a unit vector
ce

along the cable expressed in fixed frame and Ti is the mag- where Jh = KHe/H f (q1 − 3π 2 ) + KOH (q1 − Φ1 ) − st1 × Kt1 lt1 ,
nitude of cable forces; ts f and ms f are unit vectors of force It = F R1 1 It F RT1 ; mt is the mass of the thigh; t4 is the unit
Ac

Fs f and moment Ms f exerted from shank to the foot in sagit- vector along the cable with magnitude T4 ; tbt and mbt are
tal plane; Fext and Mext are given external forces and mo- the unit vectors of force Fbt and moment Mbt exerted from
ments from the ground to the foot; m f is the mass of the the human body to the thigh; uti , i = {2, 3, 4} is the position
foot; u f i , i = {1, 2, 3} is the position vector from the mass vector from the mass center of the thigh to the point of ap-
center of the foot to the point of application of the applied plication of the applied force expressed in the fixed frame;
forces expressed in the fixed frame. Notice that the iner- KHe/H f is quasi-stiffness of hip which depends on the stance
tia tensor If of the foot is expressed in fixed frame of refer- phase during walking, for example, KHe/H f = KH f in flexion
ence i.e., If = F R3 3 If F RT3 ; KAP/Ad is quasi-stiffness of ankle phase, KHe/H f = KHe in extension phase; Φ1 is the initial an-
which depends on the stance phase during walking, for ex- gular position of the torsion spring installed at the hip joint;
ample, KAP/Ad = KAP in plantar-flexion phase, KAP/Ad = KAd st1 is the position vector from the mass center of the thigh to

Alamdari 5 JMR-15-1266

Downloaded From: http://mechanismsrobotics.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/27/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Journal of Mechanisms and Robotics. Received September 14, 2015;
Accepted manuscript posted December 17, 2015. doi:10.1115/1.4032274
Copyright (c)
the2015 byattachment
spring ASME point on the orthosis, and K and l and JT is a Jacobian which maps cable tensions into the joint
t1 t1
are zero-free length tensional spring stiffness constant and torques (Eqn. (4)); δ P and δ XTi denote the virtual displace-
vector along the spring, respectively. ment vector of the end-effector and cable attachment point
By assembling Eqns. (5), (6) and (7) the number of in- on each segment of lower limb, then they are substituted
dependent action-reaction forces and moments at the joint by the relations δ P = Je δ q and δ XTi = ∂∂uqi δ q, respectively;
can be reduced, and the compact form dynamic equations of the vector ui denotes the position vector of cable attachment
lower limb motion with cable-driven system in sagittal plane points with respect to fixed frame of reference.
can be obtained as One can find the generalized coordinates as

J9×10 T10×1 = F9×1 (8) Q = JTT T + JTe Fe (11)

d
where where

ite
 1 2
J f J f 0 0 J3f 0 0 J4f 0 0

 T ∂ u1 T ∂ u2 T ∂ u3 T ∂ u4 
t1 ∂ q t2 ∂ q t3 ∂ q t4 ∂ q
J =  0 0 J1s 0 J2s J3s 0 J4s J5s 0 

ed
T  T ∂ u11 T ∂ u21 T ∂ u13 T ∂ u41 
0 0 0 Jt1 0 Jt2 Jt3 0 Jt4 Jt5 JT = t1 ∂ q t2 ∂ q t3 ∂ q t4 ∂ q 
2 2 2 2
 T tT1 ∂∂ qu1 tT2 ∂∂ uq2 tT3 ∂∂ uq3 tT4 ∂∂ uq4
T = T1 T2 T3 T4 Fs f Fts Fbt Ms f Mts Mbt

py
3 3 3 3
T
F = FTf FTs FtT

where JTT T is the part of generalized force related to cable

where Jif , Jis and Jti are the ith column of the J f , Js and Jt ,
respectively, defined in Eqns. (5), (6) and (7). Similarly,
dynamic equations of each segment of human leg can be
Co
forces and JTe Fe includes generalized external forces and mo-
ments (Fe = [Fext , Mext ]T ).
This form is well suited for trajectory tracking control
applications where the desired end-effector trajectory is pre-

ot
derived separately for the orthosis in the frontal plane (but sented in terms of joint angles, velocities, and accelerations
omitted here for brevity [32]). for which a feedback linearization controller is developed.
tN
3.2 Closed-form dynamic formulation in joint-space 3.3 Closed-form dynamic formulation in task-space
ip

The Lagrangian formulation is developed to reduce the However, in other circumstances (e.g. development of
size of structure matrix J in Eqn. (8). The general form of an impedance controller) we may wish to move the ankle
r

dynamic equations for the cable-driven system in joint-space on a trajectory in Cartesian space without converting task-
sc

can be written as space variables. In such cases, the joint-space dynamics can
be projected into the task-space to realize the (often lower-
M(q)q̈ + V(q̇, q) + G(q) = Q (9) order) task-space dynamics equations as follows
nu

where vector q = [q1 , q2 , q3 ]T are the generalized coordi- M̃P̈ + Ṽ + G̃ = Q̃ (12)

Ma

nates; M is the inertial matrix which is positive-definite,

symmetric and hence invertible; V = [V1 , V2 , V3 ]T is the
where M̃ = J−T −1 −T V − MJ−1 J̇ q̇ , G̃ =


velocity coupling vector which includes velocity-squared e MJe , Ṽ = Je e e

terms (centrifugal forces) and velocity product terms (Cori- J−T −T

e G, and Q̃ = Je Q.
ed

olis forces), and G = [G1 , G2 , G3 ]T is combination of gravi- It is noteworthy that although the equations are ex-
tational forces and spring forces. pressed in task-space, still some terms such as Ṽ, G̃, and Q̃
are written as function of joint variables q. Due to nonlinear-
pt

Except for gravitational and inertial forces, the gener-

alized forces Q account for all other forces acting on lower ity of inverse kinematics, it is impossible to write everything
in terms of task-space variables, P.
ce

limb. So, the contribution of cable forces to the dynamics of

multibody system is modeled as point forces applied to the
links. By the principle of virtual work
Ac

4 PRELIMINARY CONFIGURATION ANALYSIS IN

ROPES VIA MONTE CARLO APPROACH
4
QT δ q = FTe δ P + ∑ Ti tTi (δ XTi ) (10) In order to account for the positive tension condition
i=1 present in cable-driven systems, more useful workspaces
4   have been proposed. Two of the more commonly utilized
∂ ui
= FTe (Je δ q) + ∑ Ti tTi δq ones are introduced here. The wrench-closure workspace
i=1 ∂q (WCW) [33] (also called the controllable workspace [34],
or force-closure workspace [35, 36]), is defined as the set
where Je is the conventional Jacobian matrix which maps of end effector poses for which any arbitrary wrench can be
end-effector output force into n-dimensional joint torques resisted/exerted by the platform while maintaining positive

Alamdari 6 JMR-15-1266

Downloaded From: http://mechanismsrobotics.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/27/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Journal of Mechanisms and Robotics. Received September 14, 2015;
Accepted manuscript posted December 17, 2015. doi:10.1115/1.4032274
Copyright (c) 2015
cable by ASME
tensions. This workspace depends only on the geo- −10◦ to 50◦ (or q1 = 220◦ to 280◦ ), θk = q2 = 0◦ to 60◦ , and
metric parameters of the system i.e. the locations of the θa = −10◦ to 25◦ (or q3 = 245◦ to 280◦ ).
cable attachment points on the base and platform and the The total number of independent parameters is 12 (eight
pose of the platform. Several algorithms have been proposed cuff parameters dix and diy which i = {1, 2, 3, 4}, and four
for efficiently computing the boundary of the wrench-closure angles for the position of cable attachment points to the fixed
workspace. frame, θi ). Systematically determining each configuration in
T
If JT is full rank, then Eqn. (11) is under-determined and the range defined in Table 1 would be extremely time con-
has many tension solutions for a given pose, q, and desired suming. Thus, alternatively, a Monte Carlo approach is em-
set of Q − JTe Fe . In general, these tension solutions may not ployed to rapidly explore configurations within quite large
be strictly positive, but only positive cable tensions are valid independent configurations.
for controlling ROPES. Solving Eqn. (11) for the tension

d
vector, T, yields the following Eqn. (13);

Ankle range of motion (deg)

30 60

Knee range of motion (deg)

0.5 m/s 1 m/s 1.5 m/s 0.5 m/s

ite
20 1 m/s
1.5 m/s
40
10

T = (JTT )# (Q − JTe Fe ) + ηJT λ (13) 0

ed
20
T
−10

−20 0
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
where (JTT )# is the Moore-Penrose pseudo-inverse of matrix

py
Time (sec) Time (sec)

Normalized Ground Reaction Force

JTT , λ is an arbitrary constant, and ηJT is a basis for the null 60 1.5
T

Hip range of motion (deg)

0.5 m/s
space of JTT such that JTT ηJT = 0. 0.5 m/s
1 m/s 1 m/s

Co
T 40 1.5 m/s
1.5 m/s 1
For this case, since JTT is 3 × 4, then ηJT is 4 × 1 vector.
T 20
The λ = 0 case of Eqn. (13) is the minimum norm solution 0.5
0
but the tension vector components are not guaranteed to be

ot
non-negative. −20
0 1 2 3
0
0 1 2 3
If all elements of the null vector, ηJT , have the same Time (sec) Time (sec)
T
tN
sign, then it can be seen that regardless of minimum norm
solution values a λ can be chosen such that the ηJT term Fig. 4. Hip, knee, ankle and normalized ground reaction forces of
T
be more than particular solution and gives a tension solution healthy subject during walking with different speeds. These values
ip

which all components are positive. Here, we calculate the are considered as desired angles and forces, in trajectory tracking
wrench-closure workspace by exploiting this characteristic problem [38].
r

(i.e., if all elements of the null vector are the same sign, then
sc

the point belongs to the wrench-closure workspace). Since

the conditions of the wrench-closure workspace are quite To accomplish this analysis, a random value for each of
these 12 independent parameters in a given range, shown in
nu

strict, and set of wrenches that the end-effector will have

to resist/exert are known, a more useful workspace called Table 1, is selected. Then, the subsequent randomly selected
wrench-feasible workspace (WFW) [24] can be used such configuration is checked for wrench feasible workspace.
Ma

that cable tensions are greater than some prescribed mini-
mum and less than some prescribed maximum values. This
workspace depends not only on geometric parameters, but
also on the allowable tension ranges, gravitational effects,
ed
Configurations which satisfy the wrench feasibility con-
straints are accumulated in database of desired configura-
tions.
To visualize the trends of these high-dimensional data-

and the required wrench set. set, each possible parameter value is shown in separate x-axis
The choice of cable attachment both on fixed frame and on the plot, in a range defined for parameter values in Table 1,
and the number of wrench feasible configurations including
pt

cuffs have significant effects on the operational workspace

of the ROPES. Inappropriate selections in cable attachments each possible parameter value is drawn on y-axis (see Fig. 5,
6, and 7).
ce

can mitigate or restrain the ability of ROPES to perform

the prescribed task, while a proper configuration might pro- Figures 5, 6, and 7 show configuration analysis plot
vide additional capabilities and enlarge the wrench-feasible which all configuration parameters were randomly selected
Ac

workspace. with uniform distribution. These plots can provide in-

4.1 Optimization of configuration parameters
Table 3 shows parameter values for subject’s thigh,
shank, and foot (length, weight, moment of inertia, and
mass-center location) taken from an anthropometric database
[37]. From the a typical walking gait in task-space, the
desired task in joint-space is generated and shown Fig. 4.
The desired workspace in joint-space is also defined as θh =
sight into the parameter value trends which result in high-
performance (higher WFW). If higher WFW be achieved in a
range defined for parameter values shown in Table 1, ROPES
would be more robust to errors in setup and assembly.
As shown in Fig. 5, the trend for d1x suggests that pa-
rameter should be as close as possible to ankle joint, and
trend for d2x suggests that the parameter should be as far as
possible from the ankle joint. The trends for d3x and d4x ex-
hibit that it is preferable to select a value in range of 220◦

Alamdari 7 JMR-15-1266

Downloaded From: http://mechanismsrobotics.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/27/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Journal of Mechanisms and Robotics. Received September 14, 2015;
Accepted manuscript posted December 17, 2015. doi:10.1115/1.4032274
Copyright (c) 2015
Table 3. by ASME and mass distribution for human body [37]
Anthropometry
340
Parameter Value Units Parameter Value Units d
1y
320
d2y
lt 472 mm ls 466 mm 300 d3y

Number of configurations
lf 243.3 mm mt 11.8 kg 280 d4y

ms 4.5 kg mf 1.1 kg 260

(It )z 1157.9 kg.cm2 (Is )z 392.8 kg.cm2 240

220
(I f )z 30.4 kg.cm2 uf3 117 mm
200
us1 183 mm us2 283 mm
180
ut2 262 mm ut3 210 mm

d
160
40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130

ite
diy (mm)

to 260◦ . As illustrated in Fig. 6, the trend for d1y indicates Fig. 6. The trend of each cuff radius.
an evidence that the cuff radius is better to be chosen with

ed
smaller size, here 56mm is selected for d1y . The trend for d2y
suggest bigger size for second cuff radius. Accordingly, the 600

py
θ1
trends for cuffs radius, d3y and d4y , suggests that there are θ2
500
better to be selected around 65mm and 115mm, respectively. 400
θ3
Similarly, the preferred values for winch positions are shown θ4

Number of configurations

Co
200
400
in Fig. 7.
0
These initial trends indicate that there is an opportunity 300 165 190
to further optimize the performance of the ROPES system.

ot
For example, the d2y trend indicates there might be value in 200

extending that particular parameter beyond 90 mm. We high-

100
tN
light the opportunity and intend to pursue this as one aspect
of future work.
0
−10 15 40 65 90 115 140 165 190 215 240 265 290 315 340
For the subsequent control analysis, one particular con- θi (deg)
ip

figuration (from among the numerous high-performance con-

figurations) was selected (as shown in Figs. 5, 6 and 7 with Fig. 7. The trend of cable placements on the fixed frame.
r

red arrows).
sc

Perhaps the most commonly implemented method in the lit-

erature relies upon the minimization (or maximization) of
nu

700
some function of the cable tensions. In [34], it was shown
d1x
600 100
d2x
that while the L∞ -norm provides optimal solutions, they may
Ma

d3x be discontinuous along a given trajectory. The optimal solu-

Number of configurations

500
50 d4x tion can, however, be approximated using a p-norm (1 < p <
400 ∞), and the resulting minimum-norm solution is proven to be
0
180 220 260 300 340 380 420 unique and continuous except at singular configurations.
ed

300
In [40], a discussion on the potential limitations of the
200 more traditional L1 and L2 norms is provided in the context
of tension distribution. Use of the L1 -norm results in a linear
pt

100
programming problem which seeks to minimize (or maxi-
mize) the sum of the tensions. The primary drawback of
ce

0
60 100 140 180 220 260 300 340 380 420 460
d (mm)
ix
this approach is that it is susceptible to discontinuities, as
the optimal operating point may jump from one vertex of the
Ac

Fig. 5. The distance of each cuff from the local frame origin as feasible polyhedron to another between successive computa-
shown in Fig. 2. tions. This can potentially excite high-frequency modes and
degrade the stability of the system. The L2 -norm, which re-
sults in a quadratic programming problem and seeks to min-
imize (or maximize) the sum of the squared tensions, im-
5 TENSION DISTRIBUTION IN ROPES proves upon this limitation by providing a smooth objective
A variety of tension distribution algorithms have been function.
proposed for resolving the actuation redundancy present in Both methods, however, result in tensions that fre-
most cable-driven robots. Each of these approaches have quently lie on the lower or upper tension limits. Opera-
different characteristics and varying computational cost [39]. tion at the lower tension limits increases the risk of a cable

Alamdari 8 JMR-15-1266

Downloaded From: http://mechanismsrobotics.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/27/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Journal of Mechanisms and Robotics. Received September 14, 2015;
Accepted manuscript posted December 17, 2015. doi:10.1115/1.4032274
Copyright (c) 2015 byslack,
becoming ASME and can result in low stiffness properties. the movement, hence it increases the error [47, 48]. Simulat-
Operation at the upper tension limits results in excessively ing everyday normal activities by using haptic interfaces is
high torque requirements. Thus, the alternative methods pre- the third group of controllers [49]. Finally, the last group is
sented by these authors allow for the cable tensions to be robot for encouraging patients for performing exercises [50].
steered towards a desired region of operation. Despite the All these controllers are always implemented using position,
potential limitations of utilizing the L1 and L2 norms for the force or impedance control.
purposes of cable tension distribution, efficient algorithms Here, the trajectory tracking controller tracks the desired
for these problems are readily found in general optimization normal cycle using a feedback linearized PD controller. The
packages. desired trajectory was obtained from recorded data of healthy
The tensionability of the multibody system, driven by subject during walking with attached markers to human leg
cables, can be evaluated by the analysis of rank and null as shown in Fig. 4 [38].
space of the structure matrix JTT of the multibody system.

d
In this controller, the desired trajectory in terms of gen-
This equation at each instant of time is a set of linear equa- eralized coordinates is defined as a function of time qd =

ite
tions in terms of T. The size of Jacobian matrix JTT is 3 × 4 qd (t). The block diagram of the proposed control law for
which indicates that the number of unknowns is one more trajectory tracking system is shown in Fig. 8. Hence, from

ed
than the the number of equations. If the number of unknowns closed-form dynamic equations (Eqn. 9) one can write the
was equal to the number of equations, there would be one and virtual control law as
only one solution for each cable.

py
While a variety of redundancy resolution techniques
have been proposed, one approach commonly used is based τ1 = M(q) (q̈d + Kd q̇e + K p qe ) + V(q̇, q) + G(q) (15)
on minimizing the norm of the cable tensions. This has

Co
the beneficial effect of minimizing the energy and torque re- This law linearizes the equations to an exponentially
quirements of the system. The optimization problem can be stable system, q̈ + K q̇ + K q = 0, where q = q − q,
e d e p e e d
formulated as: K = diag{K , K , K }, and K = diag{K , K , K }
p p1 p2 p3 d d1 d2 d3

minkTk p
subject to: JTT T = Q − JTe Fe and Tmin ≤ Ti ≤ Tmax , i =
ot
are positive matrices. In this simulation the controller gain
(14) coefficients are selected to be K pi = 125 and Kdi = 15, and
tN
user-determined allowable minimum and maximum cable
tensions are chosen to be 2 and 80N, respectively.
As previously noted, there are more cables than the DOF
ip

{1, 2, 3, 4}. Thus, the optimized cable tensions must satisfy of orthosis, therefore there are many solutions for cable ten-
the dynamic equilibrium equations and remain within some sions. As we discussed in cable tension distribution section,
r

specified upper and lower bounds. In general, the lower limit it is desirable to find the set of cable tensions with smaller
sc

corresponds to the amount of tension required to keep the positive values. This can be solved by quadratic program-
cables taut, while the upper bound depends on the torque ca- ming approach. Then, the cable force distribution can be
pacity of the motors and/or the failure point of the cables.
nu

obtained from Eqn. (14) and JTT T = τ1 − JTe Fe = τ2 .

Ma

6 TRAJECTORY TRACKING CONTROLLER DE-

SIGN FOR THE MULTIBODY CABLE-DRIVEN qd Fe J eT (q)
SYSTEM qd + - T
+ + + +
Appropriate controller design is a critical aspect of de- PD M(q) min T p Lower Limbs
ed

t1 t2 + Orthosis
velopment of rehabilitative robots and motor therapy. In - +

[41], control strategies have been categorized in four groups. V(q,q),G(q) IMU
Compensation sensors
The first group is assisting controllers which move the pa-
pt

q
tients injured limbs in a predefined trajectory to stretch the
limb muscles and rebuild the human motor control system. Fig. 8. Block diagram of trajectory tracking controller for human user
ce

Effort is thought to be essential for provoking motor plas- lower limbs.

ticity [42], and stretching can help prevent stiffening of
Ac

soft tissue and reduce spasticity, at least temporarily [43].

Impedance control is the main approach in assisting control
paradigm which helps the patient to follow the desired tra-
jectory with some deviation, depending on the impedance
gains [44]. More recent controllers have used more sophisti-
cated forms of mechanical impedance than stiffness, includ-
ing for example viscous force fields [45], and creating virtual
objects that assist in achieving the desired movement [46].
The second group is challenge-based controllers which
try to strengthen the muscles by providing resistance against
Alamdari
With this controller and quadratic programming, the
ROPES is able to follow the desired trajectory as shown
in Fig. 9. The hip, knee and ankle angles corresponding
to the closed-loop ankle trajectory, and cable length varia-
tions are shown in Fig. 9, and tensile cable forces are illus-
trated in Fig. 10. Moreover, the Fig. 11 shows the internal
forces/moments at the lower extremity joints obtained from
Eqns. (5), (6) and (7). These results exhibit and ensure that
the internal stresses at these joints never exceed the corre-
sponding forces/moments during normal walking.
9 JMR-15-1266

Downloaded From: http://mechanismsrobotics.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/27/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Journal of Mechanisms and Robotics. Received September 14, 2015;
Accepted manuscript posted December 17, 2015. doi:10.1115/1.4032274
Copyright (c) 2015 by ASME
Hip, knee and ankle joint angles with ROPES Cable Length Variations with ROPES implemented before for rehabilitation purposes, and have
40 1.6

Hip angle(deg)
20
L L L L shown their capabilities for providing compliant interaction 1 2 3 4

0
1.4 with the human limbs. Here, we present the development of
−20
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 1.2
impedance and force-field control for human lower limbs.
Knee angle(deg)

60

Cable Length (m)

Actual
40 1
Desired
7.1 Impedance control
20
0.8 The goal of the position-based impedance controller is
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
0.6
to create a virtual force to the leg while it is moving along a
Ankle angle(deg)

40
target path. Let P be the current position of ankle in a Carte-
20
0.4 sian reference frame attached to subject’s trunk. The more
0
distance between the current position and desired position,

d
−20 0.2
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Time(sec)
0 0.5 1 1.5
Time (sec)
2 2.5 3
the more forces will be applied to thigh and shank to bring

ite
back ankle point toward the target path in sagittal plane. The
Fig. 9. Hip, knee, ankle, and cable length variations during a gait impedance controller tries to control the lower limb such that
cycle. against an external force it acts as a mass-spring-damper sys-

ed
tem. So,
80

py



T1 T2 T3 T4 Fd = Ka P̈d − P̈ + Kv Ṗd − Ṗ + Kx (Pd − P) (16)
70
Cable Tension Forces (N)

60
where Ka = diag{Ka1 , Ka2 }, Kv = diag{Kv1 , Kv2 }, and Kx =

Co
50 diag{Kx1 , Kx2 } are impedance gains matrices, P is the cur-
40
rent position of the ankle, and Pd represents the desired po-
sition.

ot
30 Similarly, if foot angle deviates from the desired foot
20 angle trajectory q3d , a torque τd at the ankle joint will bring
tN
the foot towards the desired trajectory, so one can define τd
10
as
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
ip

Time (sec)
τd = Kfα (q̈3d − q̈3 ) + Kfω (q̇3d − q̇3 ) + Kfθ (q3d − q3 )
(17)
r

Fig. 10. Cable tension forces in ROPES.

where Kfα , K f ω , and K f θ are impedance gains, q3 is the cur-
sc

rent foot angle, and q3d represents the desired foot angle. In
Reaction forces/moments at the hip, knee and ankle joints this simulation, the parameters are defined in Table 4.
nu
Forces at the Ankle (N)

Forces at the Knee (N)

40
Anterior and posterior forces 60 As illustrated in the block diagram Fig. 12, the haptic in-
Superior and inferior forces
40 terface in impedance controller design consists of two major
20 20
components, hardware and software. The hardware consists
Ma

0
0 −20 of motors, load cells, orthosis and IMU sensors, and is simu-
−40
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 lated for purposes of the current study. The software compo-
200 nent consists of forward kinematics, gravity compensation,
Forces at the Hip (N)

Joint Moment (N.m)

20 Ankle Knee Hip

and impedance controller blocks which are implemented in
ed

100
0
Matlab/Simulink. The ankle point position (or foot angle)
0
−20 sent from Simulink to virtual reality will be compared to
pt

−100
0 1 2 3 −40 desired target Pd (or desired angle q3d ), and then the de-
0 1 2 3
Time (sec) sired force Fd (or torque τd ) will be generated. Impedance
ce

controller based on the current ankle position/foot angle and

Fig. 11. Internal forces/moments at the lower extremity joints due to desired target reflects forces to cable-driven system. Cable-
cable tensions. based impedance controller utilizes the principle of virtual
Ac

work to create the forces in cable system.

7 FORCE-FIELD AND POSITION-BASED
IMPEDANCE CONTROLLER DESIGN 7.2 Force-field control
Following the discussion in Section 6 about different The goal of force-field controller is to assist the indi-
control strategies in development of rehabilitative robots, vidual to move ankle point along target path, also help the
research has exhibited some evidence that force-control individual in plantar- and dorsi-flexion motion of the foot
based strategies can be more effective for rehabilitation than during normal walking, for those who suffer from a signif-
position-based control alone [41]. Impedance [44,51], force- icant weakness of ankle muscles [53]. Force-field control
field [12, 17, 51], and admittance control [52] have been constructs a virtual tunnel like force-field around the ankle

Alamdari 10 JMR-15-1266

Downloaded From: http://mechanismsrobotics.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/27/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Journal of Mechanisms and Robotics. Received September 14, 2015;
Accepted manuscript posted December 17, 2015. doi:10.1115/1.4032274
Copyright (c) 2015 by ASME angle space. And also, two upper and lower bounds are cre-
Hardware Software Pd
q P ated as joint angle limits, qup and qlow for the safety of foot
IMU Sensors
Forward Impedance / to avoid increasing the absolute value of the foot angle (see
Kinematics Force-Field
Fig. 14). To understand the force field tunnels concept, a
force field around the ankle target path (thick red line) is il-
Lower limbs + Gravity
Orthosis Compensation Fd lustrated in Fig. 13. For the normal force Fn , outside the
+
T - + Td + tunnel rn , the magnitude almost equals to Kn and apply force
Load Cell J eT (q) along the stream line (blue lines) and normal to target path,
and the magnitude close to the target path equals to zero.
Motors PD min T p Likewise, for the tangential force Ft , outside the tunnel rt ,
the magnitude roughly equals to zero and gradually increase

d
to Kt inside the tunnel.

ite
Fig. 12. A block diagram for impedance control of human user lower Magnitude of force−field around the desired path
limbs by creating a virtual force to the ankle point to move it along the −0.75

target path.

ed
−0.8

Table 4. Parameters/gains of impedance and force-field controller

py
Parameter Value Parameter Value Parameter Value −0.85

Y(m)
Kai 1 Kvi 10 Kxi 25

Co
−0.9
Kfα 0.5 Kfω 4 Kfθ 8
δn 8 δt 3 rn 8 −0.95

rt 2 Kn 20 Kt 10

ot
ζn 20 ζt 10 −1
−0.5 −0.4 −0.3 −0.2 −0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3
X(m)
tN
point target path, and along the desired foot angle trajectory. Fig. 13. The magnitude of force-field (black arrows) around the an-
If the ankle point (or foot angle) deviate from the target path kle path (red line), and the stream of forces around the path (blue
ip

(or foot desired angle trajectory), the controller acts as spring curve lines).
and brings them back to target.
r
sc

The high level force-field controller generates: (i) a Foot angle variation along the traget path
force Fd at the ankle point that has a normal (Fn ) and tan-
gential (Ft ) components, i.e., Fd = Fn + Ft , (ii) a torque vec-
nu

Foot angle magnitude

tor τd which similarly has a normal (τn ) and tangential (τt ) Upper bound
components. The normal components i.e. Fn and τn are re- Lower bound
Foot angle path
sponsible for pulling ankle point (or foot angle) towards the
Ma

Target path
Foot angle (deg)

20
target path (or desired joint angle trajectory), and tangential
10
components i.e. Ft and τt are tangential to target path/desired
0
joint angle trajectory, and assist in tracking the target path (or 0.2
−10 0.1
ed

desired joint angle trajectory) [17]. So, −0.75 0

−0.8 −0.1
−0.2
−0.85
−0.3
−0.9
 
2dmin 2 2dmin 2 −0.4
pt

kFn k = Kn 1 − e−( rn ) , kFt k = Kt e−( rt ) (18) −0.95 −0.5 X(m)

Y(m) −1
ce

 2q
 2q
−( min )2 −( min )2
kτn k = ζn 1 − e δn , kτt k = ζt e δt (19) Fig. 14. The magnitude of foot angle (cyan line) on the target path
(red line), and upper and lower bound around the foot angle (blue
Ac

where Kn and ζn are gain vectors for normal force-field, and
Kt and ζt are gain vectors for tangential force-field, respec-
tively; dmin is minimum distance from the ankle point to a
point on the target path, and qmin is the distance between the
current foot angle and desired joint angle.
Two virtual force-field tunnels with diameters rn and rt
are created around the target path in task-space, and sim-
ilarly two force-field tunnels with diameters δn and δt are
created around the desired joint angle trajectory in the joint
curve lines).
8 Discussion
In this paper we examined various aspects of the mod-
eling, analysis and simulation of an articulated-multibody
cable-driven system for rehabilitative exercises on lower ex-
tremity. The sagittal-plane dynamic model of lower limbs
with 3-DOF was formulated based on the both Newton-Euler
and Lagrangian formulations to support the design/control

Alamdari 11 JMR-15-1266

Downloaded From: http://mechanismsrobotics.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/27/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Journal of Mechanisms and Robotics. Received September 14, 2015;
Accepted manuscript posted December 17, 2015. doi:10.1115/1.4032274
Copyright (c) 2015 The
efforts. by ASME
Newton-Euler approach allows for monitoring
of the internal forces (both within the orthosis as well as
the human) which is critical from a design perspective. The
Lagrangian formulation aids development of controllers for
simulation- or hardware-testing) after elimination of inter-
nal constraint forces. We highlighted how the wrench feasi-
ble workspace of ROPES depends on the selection of cable
placement both on fixed frame and mobile frames (attached
to the orthosis). We identified and analyzed the design-space
for cable configuration including cuff sizes, distance of cuffs
from local frames, and cable attachment points to the ground
[5] Volpe, B. T., Ferraro, M., Krebs, H. I., and Hogan, N.,
2002. “Robotics in the rehabilitation treatment of patients
with stroke”. Current Atherosclerosis Reports, 4(4), pp. 270–
276.
[6] Zoss, A. B., Kazerooni, H., and Chu, A., 2006. “Biome-
chanical design of the berkeley lower extremity exoskeleton
(bleex)”. Mechatronics, IEEE/ASME Transactions on, 11(2),
pp. 128–138.
[7] Walsh, C. J., Endo, K., and Herr, H., 2007. “A quasi-passive
leg exoskeleton for load-carrying augmentation”. Interna-
tional Journal of Humanoid Robotics, 4(03), pp. 487–506.
[8] Kawamoto, H., and Sankai, Y., 2002. “Power assist system

d
frame. This analysis helped to identify not only the most- hal-3 for gait disorder person”. Computers helping people
sensitive configurations of ROPES but also the most-robust with special needs, pp. 19–29.

ite
(with respect to assembly- and set-up errors). We highlight [9] Banala, S. K., Agrawal, S. K., Fattah, A., Krishnamoor-
the opportunity and intend to pursue this as one aspect of thy, V., Hsu, W.-L., Scholz, J., and Rudolph, K., 2006.
“Gravity-balancing leg orthosis and its performance evalua-

ed
future work.
tion”. Robotics, IEEE Transactions on, 22(6), pp. 1228–1239.
For the subsequent control analysis, we down-selected
[10] Ferris, D. P., Czerniecki, J. M., Hannaford, B., of Washington,
one particular configuration (from among the numerous U., and System, V. P. S. H., 2005. “An ankle-foot orthosis

py
high-performance configurations). Two types of controllers powered by artificial pneumatic muscles”. Journal of Applied
were implemented for Lagrangian model, trajectory tracking Biomechanics, 21(2), p. 189.
PD controller in joint-space, and force-control strategies in [11] Cherry, M. S., Choi, D. J., Deng, K. J., Kota, S., and Ferris,

Co
task-space. Simulation results for both controllers were pre- D. P., 2006. “Design and fabrication of an elastic knee ortho-
sented to show how model-based controller can apply forces sis: preliminary results”. In ASME 2006 International De-
through cable-driven system. Finally, using the cable tension sign Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and

ot
results, and splitting the Jacobian matrix derived in Newton- Information in Engineering Conference, American Society of
Euler formulation, we were able to calculate the internal Mechanical Engineers, pp. 565–573.
[12] Banala, S. K., Kim, S. H., Agrawal, S. K., and Scholz, J. P.,
tN
forces and moments at the hip, knee and ankle joints due
2009. “Robot assisted gait training with active leg exoskele-
to forces through cable-driven systems to avoid increasing of
ton (alex)”. Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering,
internal stresses at lower extremity joints. IEEE Transactions on, 17(1), pp. 2–8.
ip

For future work, there is an opportunity to include mo- [13] Veneman, J., Ekkelenkamp, R., Kruidhof, R., Van der Helm,
bility in fixed bases and add springs in series with cables to F., and Van der Kooij, H., 2005. “Design of a series elastic-
r

(i) generate appropriate pretension in cables without becom- and bowden cable-based actuation system for use as torque-
sc

ing slack, (ii) be able to change the ROPES stiffness, and actuator in exoskeleton-type training”. In Rehabilitation
(iii) increase the safety of mechanism as well. Last but not Robotics, 2005. ICORR 2005. 9th International Conference
least is the need for experimental validation of this overall on, IEEE, pp. 496–499.
nu

framework. [14] Jezernik, S., Colombo, G., Keller, T., Frueh, H., and Morari,
M., 2003. “Robotic orthosis lokomat: A rehabilitation and
research tool”. Neuromodulation: Technology at the neural
Ma

Acknowledgment interface, 6(2), pp. 108–115.

This work was partially supported by the National Sci- [15] Schmidt, H., 2004. “Hapticwalker-a novel haptic device for
ence Foundation awards CNS-1314484 and IIS-1319084. walking simulation”. In Proc. of’EuroHaptics.
[16] Wu, M., Hornby, T. G., Landry, J. M., Roth, H., and Schmit,
ed

B. D., 2011. “A cable-driven locomotor training system for

References restoration of gait in human sci”. Gait & posture, 33(2),
pp. 256–260.
pt

[1] Alamdari, A., Jun, S., Ramsey, D., and Krovi, V., 2016. “A re-
view of home-based robotic rehabilitation”. In Encyclopedia [17] Jin, X., Cui, X., and Agrawal, S. K., 2015. “Design of a
of Medical Robotics. World Scientific. (In press). cable-driven active leg exoskeleton (c-alex) and gait training
ce

[2] Hornby, T. G., Zemon, D. H., and Campbell, D., 2005. experiments with human subjects”. In Robotics and Automa-
“Robotic-assisted, body-weight–supported treadmill training tion (ICRA), 2015 IEEE International Conference on, IEEE,
pp. 5578–5583.
Ac

in individuals following motor incomplete spinal cord injury”.

Physical therapy, 85(1), pp. 52–66.
[3] Joffe, D., Watkins, M., Steiner, L., and Pfeifer, B., 2002.
“Treadmill ambulation with partial body weight support for
the treatment of low back and leg pain.”. The Journal of or-
thopaedic and sports physical therapy, 32(5), pp. 202–13.
[4] Field-Fote, E. C., 2001. “Combined use of body weight sup-
port, functional electric stimulation, and treadmill training to
improve walking ability in individuals with chronic incom-
plete spinal cord injury”. Archives of physical medicine and
rehabilitation, 82(6), pp. 818–824.
[18] Rezazadeh, S., and Behzadipour, S., 2011. “Workspace analy-
sis of multibody cable-driven mechanisms”. Journal of Mech-
anisms and Robotics, 3(2), p. 021005.
[19] Mustafa, S. K., and Agrawal, S. K., 2012. “On the force-
closure analysis of n-dof cable-driven open chains based on
reciprocal screw theory”. Robotics, IEEE Transactions on,
28(1), pp. 22–31.
[20] Bryson, J. T., and Agrawal, S. K., 2014. “Analysis of opti-
mal cable configurations in the design of a 3-dof cable-driven
robot leg”. In ASME 2014 International Design Engineer-

Alamdari 12 JMR-15-1266

Downloaded From: http://mechanismsrobotics.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/27/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Journal of Mechanisms and Robotics. Received September 14, 2015;
Accepted manuscript posted December 17, 2015. doi:10.1115/1.4032274
Copyright (c) 2015 by ASME
ing Technical Conferences and Computers and Information
in Engineering Conference, American Society of Mechanical
Engineers, pp. V05AT08A090–V05AT08A090.
[21] Yang, G., Lin, W., Pham, C., and Yeo, S. H., 2005. “Kinematic
design of a 7-dof cable-driven humanoid arm: a solution-
in-nature approach”. In Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics.
Proceedings, 2005 IEEE/ASME International Conference on,
IEEE, pp. 444–449.
[22] Alamdari, A., and Krovi, V., 2015. “Parallel articulatedcable
exercise robot (PACER): novel home-based cabledriven par-
allel platform robot for upper limb neurorehabilitation”. In
Proceedings of the ASME 2015 International Design Engi-
neering Technical Conferences and Computers in Engineer-
ing Conference, August 2-5, American Society of Mechanical
Engineers.
[23] Alamdari, A., and Krovi, V., 2015. “Modeling and control
of a novel home-based cable-driven parallel platform robot:
Pacer”. In Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 2015
IEEE/RSJ International Conference on, IEEE.
[24] Bosscher, P., Riechel, A. T., and Ebert-Uphoff, I., 2006.
“Wrench-feasible workspace generation for cable-driven
robots”. Robotics, IEEE Transactions on, 22(5), pp. 890–902.
[25] Taghavi, A., Behzadipour, S., Khalilinasab, N., and Zohoor,
H., 2013. “Workspace improvement of two-link cable-driven
mechanisms with spring cable”. In Cable-Driven Parallel
Robots. Springer, pp. 201–213.
[26] Collins, S. H., and Kuo, A. D., 2010. “Recycling energy to
restore impaired ankle function during human walking”. PLoS
one, 5(2), p. e9307.
[27] Sup, F., Varol, H. A., Mitchell, J., Withrow, T., and Goldfarb,
M., 2008. “Design and control of an active electrical knee and
ankle prosthesis”. In Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatron-
ip
ics, 2008. BioRob 2008. 2nd IEEE RAS & EMBS Interna-
tional Conference on, IEEE, pp. 523–528.
r
[28] Frigo, C., Crenna, P., and Jensen, L., 1996. “Moment-angle
sc
relationship at lower limb joints during human walking at dif-
ferent velocities”. Journal of Electromyography and Kinesi-
ology, 6(3), pp. 177–190.
nu
[29] Shamaei, K., Sawicki, G. S., and Dollar, A. M., 2013. “Es-
timation of quasi-stiffness and propulsive work of the hu-
man ankle in the stance phase of walking”. PloS one, 8(3),
Ma
p. e59935.
[30] Shamaei, K., Sawicki, G. S., and Dollar, A. M., 2013. “Esti-
mation of quasi-stiffness of the human hip in the stance phase
of walking”. PLoS ONE, 8(12), 12, p. e81841.
ed
[31] Shamaei, K., Sawicki, G. S., and Dollar, A. M., 2013. “Es-
timation of quasi-stiffness of the human knee in the stance
phase of walking”. PloS one, 8(3), p. e59993.
pt
[32] Alamdari, A., and Krovi, V., 2015. “Robotic physical exercise
and system (ROPES): A cable-driven robotic rehabilitation
ce
system for lower-extremity motor therapy”. In Proceedings
of the ASME 2015 International Design Engineering Techni-
cal Conferences and Computers in Engineering Conference,
Ac
August 2-5, American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
[33] Gouttefarde, M., and Gosselin, C. M., 2006. “Analysis
of the wrench-closure workspace of planar parallel cable-
driven mechanisms”. Robotics, IEEE Transactions on, 22(3),
pp. 434–445.
[34] Verhoeven, R., and Hiller, M., 2002. “Tension distribution in
tendon-based stewart platforms”. In Advances in Robot Kine-
matics. Springer, pp. 117–124.
[35] Lim, W. B., Yang, G., Yeo, S. H., and Mustafa, S. K., 2011. “A
generic force-closure analysis algorithm for cable-driven par-
Alamdari
Downloaded From: http://mechanismsrobotics.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/27/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
allel manipulators”. Mechanism and Machine Theory, 46(9),
pp. 1265–1275.
[36] Saber, O., 2015. “A spatial translational cable robot”. Journal
of Mechanisms and Robotics, 7(3), p. 031006.
[37] Chandler, R., Clauser, C. E., McConville, J. T., Reynolds, H.,
and Young, J. W., 1975. Investigation of inertial properties of
the human body. Tech. rep., DTIC Document.
[38] Stansfield, B., Hillman, S., Hazlewood, M., and Robb, J.,
2006. “Regression analysis of gait parameters with speed in
normal children walking at self-selected speeds”. Gait & pos-
ture, 23(3), pp. 288–294.
[39] Pott, A., 2014. “An improved force distribution algorithm for
d
over-constrained cable-driven parallel robots”. In Computa-
tional Kinematics. Springer, pp. 139–146.
ite
[40] Borgstrom, P. H., Jordan, B. L., Sukhatme, G. S., Batalin, M.,
Kaiser, W. J., et al., 2009. “Rapid computation of optimally
safe tension distributions for parallel cable-driven robots”.
ed
Robotics, IEEE Transactions on, 25(6), pp. 1271–1281.
[41] Marchal-Crespo, L., and Reinkensmeyer, D. J., 2009. “Re-
view of control strategies for robotic movement training after
py
neurologic injury”. Journal of neuroengineering and rehabil-
itation, 6(1), p. 20.
Co
[42] Perez, M. A., Lungholt, B. K., Nyborg, K., and Nielsen, J. B.,
2004. “Motor skill training induces changes in the excitabil-
ity of the leg cortical area in healthy humans”. Experimental
Brain Research, 159(2), pp. 197–205.
ot
[43] Reinkensmeyer, D. J., Kahn, L. E., Averbuch, M., McKenna-
Cole, A., Schmit, B. D., and Rymer, W. Z., 2000. “Under-
standing and treating arm movement impairment after chronic
tN
brain injury: progress with the arm guide”. Journal of reha-
bilitation research and development, 37(6), pp. 653–662.
[44] Yano, H., Kasai, K., Saitou, H., and Iwata, H., 2003. “De-
velopment of a gait rehabilitation system using a locomotion
interface”. The Journal of Visualization and Computer Ani-
mation, 14(5), pp. 243–252.
[45] Hesse, S., Schmidt, H., and Werner, C., 2006. “Machines to
support motor rehabilitation after stroke: 10 years of experi-
ence in berlin”. Journal of rehabilitation research and devel-
opment, 43(5), p. 671.
[46] Ekkelenkamp, R., Veltink, P., Stramigioli, S., and van der
Kooij, H., 2007. “Evaluation of a virtual model control for
the selective support of gait functions using an exoskeleton”.
In Rehabilitation Robotics, 2007. ICORR 2007. IEEE 10th
International Conference on, IEEE, pp. 693–699.
[47] Yoon, J., Ryu, J., and Lim, K.-B., 2006. “Reconfigurable
ankle rehabilitation robot for various exercises”. Journal of
Robotic Systems, 22(S1), pp. S15–S33.
[48] Lam, T., Wirz, M., Lünenburger, L., and Dietz, V., 2008.
“Swing phase resistance enhances flexor muscle activity dur-
ing treadmill locomotion in incomplete spinal cord injury”.
Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair, 22(5), pp. 438–446.
[49] Boian, R. F., Deutsch, J. E., Lee, C. S., Burdea, G. C., and
Lewis, J., 2003. “Haptic effects for virtual reality-based post-
stroke rehabilitation”. In Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Envi-
ronment and Teleoperator Systems, 2003. HAPTICS 2003.
Proceedings. 11th Symposium on, IEEE, pp. 247–253.
[50] Huang, V. S., Shadmehr, R., and Diedrichsen, J., 2008. “Ac-
tive learning: learning a motor skill without a coach”. Journal
of neurophysiology, 100(2), pp. 879–887.
[51] Agarwal, P., and Deshpande, A. D., 2015. “Impedance
and force-field control of the index finger module of a hand
exoskeleton for rehabilitation”. In Rehabilitation Robotics
(ICORR), 2015 IEEE International Conference on, IEEE,
13 JMR-15-1266
Journal of Mechanisms and Robotics. Received September 14, 2015;
Accepted manuscript posted December 17, 2015. doi:10.1115/1.4032274
Copyright (c) 2015 by ASME
pp. 85–90.
[52] Aguirre-Ollinger, G., Colgate, J. E., Peshkin, M., Goswami,
A., et al., 2007. “Active-impedance control of a lower-limb
assistive exoskeleton”. In Rehabilitation Robotics, 2007.
ICORR 2007. IEEE 10th International Conference on, IEEE,
pp. 188–195.
[53] Malcolm, P., Derave, W., Galle, S., and De Clercq, D., 2013.
“A simple exoskeleton that assists plantarflexion can reduce
the metabolic cost of human walking”. PloS one, 8(2),
p. e56137.

d
ite
ed
py
Co
ot
tN
r ip
sc
nu
Ma
ed
pt
ce
Ac

Alamdari 14 JMR-15-1266

Downloaded From: http://mechanismsrobotics.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/27/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Journal of Mechanisms and Robotics. Received September 14, 2015;
Accepted manuscript posted December 17, 2015. doi:10.1115/1.4032274
Copyright (c) 2015 by ASME
List of Figures
1 RObotic Physical Exercise and System (ROPES): A Cable-Driven Robotic Rehabilitation System for Lower-Extremity.
Motors 1, 2, 3 and 4 are placed in appropriate positions to generate positive cable tensions to move lower limbs in the
sagittal plane along the desired trajectory, and likewise motors 5, 6 and 7 are placed in frontal plane to generate positive
cable tensions based upon the prescribed lateral exercises for lower limbs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2 A cable-driven robotic rehabilitation system, in which Ti , ti are cable tension and cable unit vector, respectively; diy and
dix are cuff size and its position in the local frame; Kti is tensional spring for increasing the wrench feasible workspace. . . 3
3 Ankle, knee, and hip moment vs. angle curve for representative subject walking at 1.25 m/s. Quasi-stiffness is claculated
based on the slope of the best-line fit to the moment-angle curve for ankle plantar-flexion (KAp ), ankle dorsi-flexion (KAd ),
knee flexion (KK f ), knee extension (KKe ), and hip extension (KHe ) and flexion (KH f ) [29–31]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4 Hip, knee, ankle and normalized ground reaction forces of healthy subject during walking with different speeds. These
values are considered as desired angles and forces, in trajectory tracking problem [38]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

d
5 The distance of each cuff from the local frame origin as shown in Fig. 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6 The trend of each cuff radius. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

ite
7 The trend of cable placements on the fixed frame. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
8 Block diagram of trajectory tracking controller for human user lower limbs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
9 Hip, knee, ankle, and cable length variations during a gait cycle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

ed
10 Cable tension forces in ROPES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
11 Internal forces/moments at the lower extremity joints due to cable tensions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
12 A block diagram for impedance control of human user lower limbs by creating a virtual force to the ankle point to move it

py
along the target path. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
13 The magnitude of force-field (black arrows) around the ankle path (red line), and the stream of forces around the path (blue

Co
curve lines). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
14 The magnitude of foot angle (cyan line) on the target path (red line), and upper and lower bound around the foot angle
(blue curve lines). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

ot
List of Tables
tN
1 Design parameter ranges of independent parameters of ROPES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2 Quasi-stiffness of lower extremity joints and stiffness of torsional springs placed on the orthosis with units of Nm/rad [29–31]. 4
3 Anthropometry and mass distribution for human body [37] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4 Parameters/gains of impedance and force-field controller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
r ip
sc
nu
Ma
ed
pt
ce
Ac

Alamdari 15 JMR-15-1266

Downloaded From: http://mechanismsrobotics.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/27/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use