Hopping with degressive spring stiffness in a full-leg exoskeleton lowers metabolic cost compared with progressive spring stiffness and hopping without assistance

2019 ◽  
Vol 127 (2) ◽  
pp. 520-530
Author(s):  
Stephen P. Allen ◽  
Alena M. Grabowski
Keyword(s):  
Elastic Energy ◽  
Metabolic Cost ◽  
Spring Stiffness ◽  
Metabolic Power ◽  
Metabolic Demand ◽  
Nonlinear Spring ◽  
Vertical Stiffness ◽  
Leg Stiffness ◽  
Linear Spring ◽  
Stiffness Profile

When humans hop with a passive-elastic exoskeleton with springs in parallel with both legs, net metabolic power (Pmet) decreases compared with normal hopping (NH). Furthermore, humans retain near-constant total vertical stiffness ( ktot) when hopping with such an exoskeleton. To determine how spring stiffness profile affects Pmet and biomechanics, 10 subjects hopped on both legs normally and with three full-leg exoskeletons that each used a different spring stiffness profile at 2.4, 2.6, 2.8, and 3.0 Hz. Each subject hopped with an exoskeleton that had a degressive spring stiffness (DGexo), where stiffness, the slope of force vs. displacement, is initially high but decreases with greater displacement, linear spring stiffness (LNexo), where stiffness is constant, or progressive spring stiffness (PGexo), where stiffness is initially low but increases with greater displacement. Compared with NH, use of the DGexo, LNexo, and PGexo numerically resulted in 13–24% lower, 4–12% lower, and 0–8% higher Pmet, respectively, at 2.4–3.0 Hz. Hopping with the DGexo reduced Pmet compared with NH at 2.4–2.6 Hz ( P ≤ 0.0457) and reduced Pmet compared with the PGexo at 2.4–2.8 Hz ( P < 0.001). ktot while hopping with each exoskeleton was not different compared with NH, suggesting that humans adjust leg stiffness to maintain overall stiffness regardless of the spring stiffness profile in an exoskeleton. Furthermore, the DGexo provided the greatest elastic energy return, followed by LNexo and PGexo ( P ≤ 0.001). Future full-leg, passive-elastic exoskeleton designs for hopping, and presumably running, should use a DGexo rather than an LNexo or a PGexo to minimize metabolic demand. NEW & NOTEWORTHY When humans hop at 2.4–3.0 Hz normally and with an exoskeleton with different spring stiffness profiles in parallel to the legs, net metabolic power is lowest when hopping with an exoskeleton with degressive spring stiffness. Total vertical stiffness is constant when using an exoskeleton with linear or nonlinear spring stiffness compared with normal hopping. In-parallel spring stiffness influences net metabolic power and biomechanics and should be considered when designing passive-elastic exoskeletons for hopping and running.

Leg exoskeleton reduces the metabolic cost of human hopping

2009 ◽  
Vol 107 (3) ◽  
pp. 670-678 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alena M. Grabowski ◽  
Hugh M. Herr
Keyword(s):  
Metabolic Cost ◽  
Metabolic Energy ◽  
Metabolic Power ◽  
Metabolic Demand ◽  
Mass System ◽  
Leg Muscles ◽  
Single Leaf ◽  
Leg Stiffness ◽  
Reaction Forces ◽  
Linear Spring

During bouncing gaits such as hopping and running, leg muscles generate force to enable elastic energy storage and return primarily from tendons and, thus, demand metabolic energy. In an effort to reduce metabolic demand, we designed two elastic leg exoskeletons that act in parallel with the wearer's legs; one exoskeleton consisted of a multiple leaf (MLE) and the other of a single leaf (SLE) set of fiberglass springs. We hypothesized that hoppers, hopping on both legs, would adjust their leg stiffness while wearing an exoskeleton so that the combination of the hopper and exoskeleton would behave as a linear spring-mass system with the same total stiffness as during normal hopping. We also hypothesized that decreased leg force generation while wearing an exoskeleton would reduce the metabolic power required for hopping. Nine subjects hopped in place at 2.0, 2.2, 2.4, and 2.6 Hz with and without an exoskeleton while we measured ground reaction forces, exoskeletal compression, and metabolic rates. While wearing an exoskeleton, hoppers adjusted their leg stiffness to maintain linear spring-mass mechanics and a total stiffness similar to normal hopping. Without accounting for the added weight of each exoskeleton, wearing the MLE reduced net metabolic power by an average of 6% and wearing the SLE reduced net metabolic power by an average of 24% compared with hopping normally at frequencies between 2.0 and 2.6 Hz. Thus, when hoppers used external parallel springs, they likely decreased the mechanical work performed by the legs and substantially reduced metabolic demand compared with hopping without wearing an exoskeleton.

scholarly journals Reliability of Unilateral Vertical Leg Stiffness Measures Assessed During Bilateral Hopping

2015 ◽  
Vol 31 (5) ◽  
pp. 285-291 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sean J. Maloney ◽  
Iain M. Fletcher ◽  
Joanna Richards
Keyword(s):  
Coefficient Of Variation ◽  
Center Of Mass ◽  
Reaction Force ◽  
Force Plate ◽  
Vertical Stiffness ◽  
Coefficients Of Variation ◽  
Leg Stiffness ◽  
Average Coefficient ◽  
Left And Right ◽  
Stiffness Profile

The assessment of vertical leg stiffness is an important consideration given its relationship to performance. Vertical stiffness is most commonly assessed during a bilateral hopping task. The current study sought to determine the intersession reliability, quantified by the coefficient of variation, of vertical stiffness during bilateral hopping when assessed for the left and right limbs independently, which had not been previously investigated. On 4 separate occasions, 10 healthy males performed 30 unshod bilateral hops on a dual force plate system with data recorded independently for the left and right limbs. Vertical stiffness was calculated as the ratio of peak ground reaction force to the peak negative displacement of the center of mass during each hop and was averaged over the sixth through tenth hops. For vertical stiffness, average coefficients of variation of 15.3% and 14.3% were observed for the left and right limbs, respectively. An average coefficient of variation of 14.7% was observed for bilateral vertical stiffness. The current study reports that calculations of unilateral vertical stiffness demonstrate reliability comparable to bilateral calculations. Determining unilateral vertical stiffness values and relative discrepancies may allow a coach to build a more complete stiffness profile of an individual athlete and better inform the training process.

scholarly journals Application of Leg, Vertical, and Joint Stiffness in Running Performance: A Literature Overview

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-25
Author(s):  
Artur Struzik ◽  
Kiros Karamanidis ◽  
Anna Lorimer ◽  
Justin W. L. Keogh ◽  
Jan Gajewski
Keyword(s):  
Knee Joint ◽  
Elastic Energy ◽  
Joint Stiffness ◽  
Oxygen Cost ◽  
Spring Stiffness ◽  
Mechanical Stiffness ◽  
Running Performance ◽  
Vertical Stiffness ◽  
Lower Oxygen ◽  
Insight Into

Stiffness, the resistance to deformation due to force, has been used to model the way in which the lower body responds to landing during cyclic motions such as running and jumping. Vertical, leg, and joint stiffness provide a useful model for investigating the store and release of potential elastic energy via the musculotendinous unit in the stretch-shortening cycle and may provide insight into sport performance. This review is aimed at assessing the effect of vertical, leg, and joint stiffness on running performance as such an investigation may provide greater insight into performance during this common form of locomotion. PubMed and SPORTDiscus databases were searched resulting in 92 publications on vertical, leg, and joint stiffness and running performance. Vertical stiffness increases with running velocity and stride frequency. Higher vertical stiffness differentiated elite runners from lower-performing athletes and was also associated with a lower oxygen cost. In contrast, leg stiffness remains relatively constant with increasing velocity and is not strongly related to the aerobic demand and fatigue. Hip and knee joint stiffness are reported to increase with velocity, and a lower ankle and higher knee joint stiffness are linked to a lower oxygen cost of running; however, no relationship with performance has yet been investigated. Theoretically, there is a desired “leg-spring” stiffness value at which potential elastic energy return is maximised and this is specific to the individual. It appears that higher “leg-spring” stiffness is desirable for running performance; however, more research is needed to investigate the relationship of all three lower limb joint springs as the hip joint is often neglected. There is still no clear answer how training could affect mechanical stiffness during running. Studies including muscle activation and separate analyses of local tissues (tendons) are needed to investigate mechanical stiffness as a global variable associated with sports performance.

scholarly journals Biomechanical and metabolic aspects of backward (and forward) running on uphill gradients: another clue towards an almost inelastic rebound

2020 ◽  
Vol 120 (11) ◽  
pp. 2507-2515 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Rasica ◽  
S. Porcelli ◽  
A. E. Minetti ◽  
G. Pavei
Keyword(s):  
Elastic Energy ◽  
Metabolic Cost ◽  
Mechanical Work ◽  
Predictive Equation ◽  
Metabolic Power ◽  
Lower Efficiency ◽  
Kinematic Data

Abstract Purpose On level, the metabolic cost (C) of backward running is higher than forward running probably due to a lower elastic energy recoil. On positive gradient, the ability to store and release elastic energy is impaired in forward running. We studied running on level and on gradient to test the hypothesis that the higher metabolic cost and lower efficiency in backward than forward running was due to the impairment in the elastic energy utilisation. Methods Eight subjects ran forward and backward on a treadmill on level and on gradient (from 0 to + 25%, with 5% step). The mechanical work, computed from kinematic data, C and efficiency (the ratio between total mechanical work and C) were calculated in each condition. Results Backward running C was higher than forward running at each condition (on average + 35%) and increased linearly with gradient. Total mechanical work was higher in forward running only at the steepest gradients, thus efficiency was lower in backward running at each gradient. Conclusion Efficiency decreased by increasing gradient in both running modalities highlighting the impairment in the elastic contribution on positive gradient. The lower efficiency values calculated in backward running in all conditions pointed out that backward running was performed with an almost inelastic rebound; thus, muscles performed most of the mechanical work with a high metabolic cost. These new backward running C data permit, by applying the recently introduced ‘equivalent slope’ concept for running acceleration, to obtain the predictive equation of metabolic power during level backward running acceleration.

A model of scale effects in mammalian quadrupedal running

2002 ◽  
Vol 205 (7) ◽  
pp. 959-967 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hugh M. Herr ◽  
Gregory T. Huang ◽  
Thomas A. McMahon
Keyword(s):  
Time Course ◽  
Scale Effects ◽  
Metabolic Cost ◽  
Integrative Model ◽  
Stride Frequency ◽  
Published Data ◽  
Model Parameters ◽  
Cost Of Transport ◽  
Vertical Stiffness ◽  
Leg Stiffness

SUMMARYAlthough the effects of body size on mammalian locomotion are well documented, the underlying mechanisms are not fully understood. Here, we present a computational model of the mechanics, control and energetics that unifies some well-known scale effects in running quadrupeds. The model consists of dynamic, physics-based simulations of six running mammals ranging in size from a chipmunk to a horse (0.115-676 kg). The `virtual animals' are made up of rigid segments (head, trunk and four legs) linked by joints and are similar in morphology to particular species. In the model, each stance limb acts as a spring operating within a narrow range of stiffness, forward motion is powered and controlled by active hip and shoulder torques, and metabolic cost is predicted from the time course of supporting body weight. Model parameters that are important for stability (joint stiffnesses,limb-retraction times and target positions and velocities of the limbs) are selected such that (i) running kinematics (aerial height, forward speed and body pitch) is smooth and periodic and (ii) overall leg stiffness is in agreement with published data. Both trotting and galloping gaits are modeled,and comparisons across size are made at speeds that are physiologically similar among species. Model predictions are in agreement with data on vertical stiffness, limb angles, metabolic cost of transport, stride frequency, peak force and duty factor. This work supports the idea that a single, integrative model can predict important features of running across size by employing simple strategies to control overall leg stiffness. More broadly, the model provides a quantitative framework for testing hypotheses that relate limb control, stability and metabolic cost.

scholarly journals Reducing the metabolic energy of walking and running using an unpowered hip exoskeleton

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tiancheng Zhou ◽  
Caihua Xiong ◽  
Juanjuan Zhang ◽  
Di Hu ◽  
Wenbin Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Energy Consumption ◽  
Design Method ◽  
Metabolic Cost ◽  
Metabolic Energy ◽  
Spring Stiffness ◽  
Spatiotemporal Parameters ◽  
The Common ◽  
Hip Flexion ◽  
Optimal Stiffness ◽  
Insight Into

Abstract Background Walking and running are the most common means of locomotion in human daily life. People have made advances in developing separate exoskeletons to reduce the metabolic rate of walking or running. However, the combined requirements of overcoming the fundamental biomechanical differences between the two gaits and minimizing the metabolic penalty of the exoskeleton mass make it challenging to develop an exoskeleton that can reduce the metabolic energy during both gaits. Here we show that the metabolic energy of both walking and running can be reduced by regulating the metabolic energy of hip flexion during the common energy consumption period of the two gaits using an unpowered hip exoskeleton. Methods We analyzed the metabolic rates, muscle activities and spatiotemporal parameters of 9 healthy subjects (mean ± s.t.d; 24.9 ± 3.7 years, 66.9 ± 8.7 kg, 1.76 ± 0.05 m) walking on a treadmill at a speed of 1.5 m s−1 and running at a speed of 2.5 m s−1 with different spring stiffnesses. After obtaining the optimal spring stiffness, we recruited the participants to walk and run with the assistance from a spring with optimal stiffness at different speeds to demonstrate the generality of the proposed approach. Results We found that the common optimal exoskeleton spring stiffness for walking and running was 83 Nm Rad−1, corresponding to 7.2% ± 1.2% (mean ± s.e.m, paired t-test p < 0.01) and 6.8% ± 1.0% (p < 0.01) metabolic reductions compared to walking and running without exoskeleton. The metabolic energy within the tested speed range can be reduced with the assistance except for low-speed walking (1.0 m s−1). Participants showed different changes in muscle activities with the assistance of the proposed exoskeleton. Conclusions This paper first demonstrates that the metabolic cost of walking and running can be reduced using an unpowered hip exoskeleton to regulate the metabolic energy of hip flexion. The design method based on analyzing the common energy consumption characteristics between gaits may inspire future exoskeletons that assist multiple gaits. The results of different changes in muscle activities provide new insight into human response to the same assistive principle for different gaits (walking and running).

scholarly journals Mechanics, energetics and implementation of grounded running technique: a narrative review

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. e000963
Author(s):  
Sheeba Davis ◽  
Aaron Fox ◽  
Jason Bonacci ◽  
Fiddy Davis
Keyword(s):  
Postural Stability ◽  
Injury Risk ◽  
Metabolic Cost ◽  
Duty Factor ◽  
Vertical Oscillation ◽  
Leg Stiffness ◽  
Speed Range ◽  
Impact Attenuation ◽  
Acute Increase ◽  
Recreational Runners

Grounded running predominantly differs from traditional aerial running by having alternating single and double stance with no flight phase. Approximately, 16% of runners in an open marathon and 33% of recreational runners in a 5 km running event adopted a grounded running technique. Grounded running typically occurs at a speed range of 2–3 m·s−1, is characterised by a larger duty factor, reduced vertical leg stiffness, lower vertical oscillation of the centre of mass (COM) and greater impact attenuation than aerial running. Grounded running typically induces an acute increase in metabolic cost, likely due to the larger duty factor. The increased duty factor may translate to a more stable locomotion. The reduced vertical oscillation of COM, attenuated impact shock, and potential for improved postural stability may make grounded running a preferred form of physical exercise in people new to running or with low loading capacities (eg, novice overweight/obese, elderly runners, rehabilitating athletes). Grounded running as a less impactful, but metabolically more challenging form, could benefit these runners to optimise their cardio-metabolic health, while at the same time minimise running-related injury risk. This review discusses the mechanical demands and energetics of grounded running along with recommendations and suggestions to implement this technique in practice.

scholarly journals Metabolic cost of calcification in bivalve larvae under experimental ocean acidification

2016 ◽  
Vol 74 (4) ◽  
pp. 941-954 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christina A. Frieder ◽  
Scott L. Applebaum ◽  
T.-C. Francis Pan ◽  
Dennis Hedgecock ◽  
Donal T. Manahan
Keyword(s):  
Ocean Acidification ◽  
Climate Change Impacts ◽  
Metabolic Cost ◽  
Shell Formation ◽  
Metabolic Demand ◽  
Shell Size ◽  
Saturation State ◽  
Shell Mass ◽  
Energy Limitation ◽  
Endogenous Reserves

Abstract Physiological increases in energy expenditure frequently occur in response to environmental stress. Although energy limitation is often invoked as a basis for decreased calcification under ocean acidification, energy-relevant measurements related to this process are scant. In this study we focus on first-shell (prodissoconch I) formation in larvae of the Pacific oyster, Crassostrea gigas. The energy cost of calcification was empirically derived to be ≤ 1.1 µJ (ng CaCO3)−1. Regardless of the saturation state of aragonite (2.77 vs. 0.77), larvae utilize the same amount of total energy to complete first-shell formation. Even though there was a 56% reduction of shell mass and an increase in dissolution at aragonite undersaturation, first-shell formation is not energy limited because sufficient endogenous reserves are available to meet metabolic demand. Further studies were undertaken on larvae from genetic crosses of pedigreed lines to test for variance in response to aragonite undersaturation. Larval families show variation in response to ocean acidification, with loss of shell size ranging from no effect to 28%. These differences show that resilience to ocean acidification may exist among genotypes. Combined studies of bioenergetics and genetics are promising approaches for understanding climate change impacts on marine organisms that undergo calcification.

A stiffness adjustment mechanism maximally utilizing elastic energy of a linear spring for a robot joint

2015 ◽  
Vol 29 (20) ◽  
pp. 1331-1337 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Uemura ◽  
K. Matsusaka ◽  
Y. Takagi ◽  
S. Kawamura
Keyword(s):  
Elastic Energy ◽  
Adjustment Mechanism ◽  
Linear Spring ◽  
Stiffness Adjustment

scholarly journals Elastic energy savings and active energy cost in a simple model of running

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (11) ◽  
pp. e1009608
Author(s):  
Ryan T. Schroeder ◽  
Arthur D. Kuo
Keyword(s):  
Elastic Energy ◽  
Energy Cost ◽  
Energy Savings ◽  
Mechanical Energy ◽  
Metabolic Cost ◽  
The Body ◽  
Metabolic Energy ◽  
Energetic Cost ◽  
Mass Model ◽  
Human Running

The energetic economy of running benefits from tendon and other tissues that store and return elastic energy, thus saving muscles from costly mechanical work. The classic “Spring-mass” computational model successfully explains the forces, displacements and mechanical power of running, as the outcome of dynamical interactions between the body center of mass and a purely elastic spring for the leg. However, the Spring-mass model does not include active muscles and cannot explain the metabolic energy cost of running, whether on level ground or on a slope. Here we add explicit actuation and dissipation to the Spring-mass model, and show how they explain substantial active (and thus costly) work during human running, and much of the associated energetic cost. Dissipation is modeled as modest energy losses (5% of total mechanical energy for running at 3 m s-1) from hysteresis and foot-ground collisions, that must be restored by active work each step. Even with substantial elastic energy return (59% of positive work, comparable to empirical observations), the active work could account for most of the metabolic cost of human running (about 68%, assuming human-like muscle efficiency). We also introduce a previously unappreciated energetic cost for rapid production of force, that helps explain the relatively smooth ground reaction forces of running, and why muscles might also actively perform negative work. With both work and rapid force costs, the model reproduces the energetics of human running at a range of speeds on level ground and on slopes. Although elastic return is key to energy savings, there are still losses that require restorative muscle work, which can cost substantial energy during running.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document