SLIP with swing leg augmentation as a model for running

Rashty, Aida Mohammadi Nejad; Sharbafi, Maziar Ahmad; Seyfarth, André

doi:10.1109/iros.2014.6942909

Cited by 3 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Also, the CoP excursion and the effective leg length may change when runners tend to land more on the fore-foot at higher speeds (Breine et al, 2014;Lai et al, 2020). Lastly, pendulum effects of the segmented swing-leg on stiffness should be considered (Clark et al, 2017;Kugler & Janshen, 2010;Maykranz & Seyfarth, 2014;Rashty et al, 2014). Together, this would result in a complex model to estimate leg stiffness.…”

Section: Vertical Stiffnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The swing leg motion is often ignored in SLIP models as they essentially describe the course of one step (technically a half-cycle). Rashty et al (Rashty et al, 2014) showed that by modelling the pendular motion of the swing leg in the conventional SLIP model, the generated momentum of the swing leg induces sequential steps. Consequently, the forward motion becomes more stable, which led the authors to suggest that the swing leg may help to reduce muscular force provided by the stance leg (Rashty et al, 2014).…”

Section: Leg Swingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The biomechanics of running and running styles: a synthesis

Oeveren

Ruiter

Beek

et al. 2021

Sports Biomechanics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Running movements are parametrised using a wide variety of devices. Misleading interpretations can be avoided if the interdependencies and redundancies between biomechanical parameters are taken into account. In this synthetic review, commonly measured running parameters are discussed in relation to each other, culminating in a concise, yet comprehensive description of the full spectrum of running styles. Since the goal of running movements is to transport the body centre of mass (BCoM), and the BCoM trajectory can be derived from spatiotemporal parameters, we anticipate that different running styles are reflected in those spatiotemporal parameters. To this end, this review focuses on spatiotemporal parameters and their relationships with speed, ground reaction force and whole-body kinematics. Based on this evaluation, we submit that the full spectrum of running styles can be described by only two parameters, namely the step frequency and the duty factor (the ratio of stance time and stride time) as assessed at a given speed. These key parameters led to the conceptualisation of a so-called Dual-axis framework. This framework allows categorisation of distinctive running styles (coined 'Stick', 'Bounce', 'Push', 'Hop', and 'Sit') and provides a practical overview to guide future measurement and interpretation of running biomechanics.

show abstract

Section: Vertical Stiffnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Leg Swingmentioning

confidence: 99%

The biomechanics of running and running styles: a synthesis

Oeveren

Ruiter

Beek

et al. 2021

Sports Biomechanics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Instead of Velocity based leg adjustment, a second approach which can be considered as a template based control method for leg swinging is to assume a passive pendulum-like movement of the swing leg (Knuesel et al, 2005 ; Mohammadinejad et al, 2014 ). Mochon and McMahon presented a model comprising a stiff stance leg and a segmented swing leg (Mochon and McMahon, 1980 ) which provides a better match of human walking dynamics, compared with the inverted pendulum model.…”

Section: Locomotor Sub-function Concept and Template Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, swing leg movement is still a missing part in SLIP based models. In Mohammadinejad et al ( 2014 ), we presented a new model combining SLIP for stance leg with pendulum movement for the swing leg in running. In this model the pendulum length is adapted at each step to attenuate any perturbation or error from desired movement.…”

Section: Locomotor Sub-function Concept and Template Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this paper we explain how understanding bipedal locomotion using the concept of three locomotor sub-functions can be employed to design and control assistive wearable robots. In that respect, first, we survey our previous studies on combinations of the control concepts of three locomotor sub-functions to achieve stable gaits (Sharbafi et al, 2013b , 2014 , 2016 , 2017 ; Mohammadinejad et al, 2014 ; Oehlke et al, 2016 ; Sharbafi and Seyfarth, 2017 ; Zhao et al, 2017 ). Then, we show that considering such an architecture to control a wearable robot, an actuator can be designed with optimal performance for a range of motions required for different locomotor sub-functions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Locomotor Sub-functions for Control of Assistive Wearable Robots

2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A primary goal of comparative biomechanics is to understand the fundamental physics of locomotion within an evolutionary context. Such an understanding of legged locomotion results in a transition from copying nature to borrowing strategies for interacting with the physical world regarding design and control of bio-inspired legged robots or robotic assistive devices. Inspired from nature, legged locomotion can be composed of three locomotor sub-functions, which are intrinsically interrelated: Stance: redirecting the center of mass by exerting forces on the ground. Swing: cycling the legs between ground contacts. Balance: maintaining body posture. With these three sub-functions, one can understand, design and control legged locomotory systems with formulating them in simpler separated tasks. Coordination between locomotor sub-functions in a harmonized manner appears then as an additional problem when considering legged locomotion. However, biological locomotion shows that appropriate design and control of each sub-function simplifies coordination. It means that only limited exchange of sensory information between the different locomotor sub-function controllers is required enabling the envisioned modular architecture of the locomotion control system. In this paper, we present different studies on implementing different locomotor sub-function controllers on models, robots, and an exoskeleton in addition to demonstrating their abilities in explaining humans' control strategies.

show abstract

Lower Extremity Kinematic and Kinetic Characteristics as Effects on Running Economy of Recreational Runners

CHEN,

SEGERS,

ZHANG

et al. 2024

Medicine &Amp; Science in Sports &Amp; Exercise

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Determine associations between running economy (RE) and running sagittal plane kinematic and kinetic parameters. Method A total of thirty male recreational runners (age: 21.21 ± 1.22 years, VO2max: 54.61 ± 5.42 ml·kg-1·min-1) participated in two separate test sessions. In the first session, the participant’s body composition and RE at 10 and 12 km·h-1 were measured. In the second session, measurements were taken for the sagittal plane of hip, knee, and ankle angles and range of motion (ROM), as well as ground reaction force. Results Moderate correlations were found between lower energy costs at 12 km·h-1 and smaller hip flexion at toe-off (r = 0.373) as well as smaller peak hip flexion during stance (r = 0.397). During the swing phase, lower energy costs at 10 km·h-1 were moderately correlated with smaller peak knee flexion and smaller knee flexion and extension ROM (r = 0.366 ~ 0.443). Lower energy costs at 12 km·h-1 were moderately correlated with smaller peak hip and knee flexion as well as knee extension ROM (r = 0.369 ~ 0.427). In terms of kinetics, there was a moderate correlation between higher energy costs at 10 km·h-1 and larger peak active force, as well as larger peak braking and propulsion force (r = -0.470 ~ 0.488). Lower energy costs at 12 km·h-1 were moderately to largely correlated with smaller peak impact and braking force (r = 0.486 and -0.500, respectively). Regarding the statistical parametric mapping analysis, most outcomes showed associations with RE at 10 km·h-1, including knee flexion (42.5% ~ 65.5% of the gait cycle), ankle plantarflexion (32.5% ~ 36% of the gait cycle), active force (30.5% ~ 35% of the stance phase), and propulsion force (68% ~ 72.5% of the stance phase). Lower energy costs at 12 km·h-1 were correlated with smaller hip flexion (5.5% ~ 12% and 66.5% ~ 74%) and smaller knee flexion (57% ~ 57.5%) during the running gait cycle. Conclusions This study indicates that biomechanical factors are associated with RE in recreational runners. To design effective training methods to improve RE, coaches and runners should focus on the sagittal plane kinematics of the hip, knee, and ankle, as well as lower vertical and horizontal kinetic parameters.

show abstract

SLIP with swing leg augmentation as a model for running

Cited by 3 publications

References 25 publications

The biomechanics of running and running styles: a synthesis

The biomechanics of running and running styles: a synthesis

Locomotor Sub-functions for Control of Assistive Wearable Robots

Lower Extremity Kinematic and Kinetic Characteristics as Effects on Running Economy of Recreational Runners

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About