Multibody System Dynamics

, Volume 24, Issue 3, pp 367–388 | Cite as

Evaluation of the contact forces developed in the lower limb/orthosis interface for comfort design

  • Paula C. SilvaEmail author
  • Miguel T. Silva
  • Jorge M. Martins


Ankle-Foot Orthoses (AFOs) are technical aids that promote locomotion and rehabilitation of individuals with gait pathologies. Every pathology has its own requirements and this has led to classical solutions that are far from optimal in terms of comfort and overall performance for restoring the human gait. Formal scientific approaches are therefore necessary to take full advantage of the available technological potential and produce more efficient modern devices that can significantly improve the quality of life of people with locomotion impairment. In this work, a computational multibody dynamics approach is adopted. A multibody model of an active AFO is developed and integrated in a whole-body multibody human model developed in the MATLAB environment. In the adopted procedure, normal gait motion data is used as input to the biomechanical model. The experimental data was obtained in the gait lab by acquiring the kinematic and kinetic data of a stride of a healthy female subject. The aim of this integrated model is to estimate the loads transmitted at the foot-leg-orthosis interface. To achieve this, it is essential to decide where the contact between the lower limb and the orthosis should occur, and what are the forces generated in such interface. A contact model between a sphere and a plane is applied together with a friction model to determine the contact forces, and the properties used for the surfaces in contact were based on the available data in the literature and on experimental tests. The results revealed that the contact pressures obtained are below the PPTs (Pain Pressure Thresholds), which represent the patient’s comfort. However, the pressure is dependent on the contact properties between surfaces, meaning that these must be experimentally determined for each material. It was also uncovered that the weight of the orthosis is an important issue in the design of an active AFO as it greatly influences the moments at the ankle, knee, and hip and, therefore, the patient effort when wearing the orthosis.


Ankle foot orthosis (AFO) Multibody dynamics Interface model Contact forces Friction Pressure Comfort 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Silva, P.C., Silva, M.T., Martins, J.M.: Apoio à locomoção e à reabilitação com ortóteses híbridas activas—estado da arte e perspectivas futuras. In: 2° Encontro Nacional de Biomecânica, Évora, Portugal, pp. 425–430 (2007) Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Johnson, G.R., et al.: Performance specification for lower limb orthotic devices. Clin. Biomech. 19, 711–718 (2004) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bergman, D., et al.: A new method for evaluating ankle foot orthosis stiffness: BRUCE. Gait Posture 28, S45 (2008) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Faustini, M.C., et al.: Manufacture of passive dynamic ankle–foot orthoses using selective laser sintering. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 55(2), 784–790 (2008) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Carbtree, C.A., Higginson, J.S.: Modeling neuromuscular effects of ankle foot orthoses (AFO) in computer simulations of gait. Gait Posture 29, 65–70 (2009) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mori, Y., Takayama, K., Nakamura, T.: Development of straight style transfer equipment for lower limbs disabled. In: Proceedings IEEE International Conference on Robotics & Automation, New Orleans, USA, pp. 2486–2491 (2004) Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lünenburger, L., et al.: Biofeedback in gait training with the robotic orthosis Lokomat. In: 26th IEEE EMBS, San Francisco, USA, pp. 4888–4891 (2004) Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gharooni, S., Heller, B., Tokhi, M.O.: A new hybrid spring brake orthosis for controlling hip and knee flexion in the swing phase. IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng. 9(1), 106–107 (2001) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Barbeau, H., et al.: The effect of locomotor training combined with functional electrical stimulation in chronic spinal cord injured subjects: walking and reflex studies. Brain Res. Rev. 40(1–3), 274–291 (2002) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    To, C.S., et al.: Simulation of a functional neuromuscular stimulation powered mechanical gait orthosis with coordinated joint locking. IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng. 13(2), 227–235 (2005) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Agrawal, S.K., Fattah, A.: Theory and design of an orthotic device for full or partial gravity-balancing of a human leg during motion. IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng. 12(2), 157–165 (2004) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gordon, K.E., Sawicki, G.S., Ferris, D.P.: Mechanical performance of artificial pneumatic muscles to power an ankle–foot orthosis. J. Biomech. 39, 1832–1841 (2006) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Saito, Y., et al.: Development of externally powered lower limb orthosis with bi-lateral-servo actuator. In: Proceedings IEEE 9th International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics, Chicago, USA, pp. 394–399 (2005) Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dollar, A.M., Herr, H.: Lower extremity exoskeletons and active orthoses: challenges and state-of-the-art. IEEE Trans. Robot. 24(1), 144–158 (2008) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cullell, A., et al.: Biologically based design of an actuator system for a knee–ankle–foot orthosis. Mech. Mach. Theory 44, 860–872 (2009) zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fleischer, C.R.C., Hommel, G.: Predicting the intended motion with EMG signals for an exoskeleton orthosis controller. In: IEEE Int. Conf. Robot. Auton. Syst. (IROS), Edmonton, Canada, pp. 2029–2034 (2005) Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Duchemin, G., Maillet, P., Poignet, P., Dombre, E.: A hybrid position/force control approach for identification of deformation models of skin and underlying tissues. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 52(2), 160–170 (2005) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Garcia, C.A., Hoffman, S.L., Hastings, M.K., Klaesner, J.W., Mueller, M.J.: Effect of metatarsal phalangeal joint extension on plantar soft tissue stiffness and thickness. Foot 18, 61–67 (2008) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Weijers, R.E., Kessels, A.G.H., Kemerink, G.J.: The damping properties of the venous plexus of the heel region of the foot during simulated heelstrike. J. Biomech. 38, 2423–2430 (2005) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ledouxa, W.R., Blevins, J.J.: The compressive material properties of the plantar soft tissue. J. Biomech. 40, 2975–2981 (2007) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Zheng, Y., Mak, A.: Effective elastic properties for lower limb soft tissues from manual indentation experiment. IEEE Trans. Rehabil. Eng. 7(3), 257–267 (1999) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ramalho, A., Silva, C.L., Pais, A.A.C.C., Sousa, J.J.S.: In vivo friction study of human skin: influence of moisturizers on different anatomical sites. Wear 263(7–12), 1044–1049 (2007) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kwiatkowska, M., et al.: Friction and deformation behaviour of human skin. Wear 267, 1264–1273 (2009) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pons, J.L.: Wearable Robots: Biomechatronic Exoskeletons. Wiley-Blackwell, Hoboken (2008) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lankarani, H.M., Nikravesh, P.E.: A contact force model with hysteresis damping for impact analysis of multibody systems. J. Mech. Des. 112, 369–376 (1990) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Moreno, J.C., Brunetti, F.J., Pons, J.L., Baydal, J.M., Barberà, R.: Rationale for multiple compensation of muscle weakness walking with a wearable robotic orthosis. In: IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Barcelona, Spain, pp. 1914–1919 (2005) Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Silva, P., Silva, M., Martins, J.: Multibody dynamics analysis of an ankle foot orthosis to support locomotion. Int. J. Comput. Vis. Biomech. 2(2), 187–197 (2009) Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    de Jalón, J.G., Bayo, E.: Kinematic and Dynamic Simulation of Multibody Systems—The Real Time Challenge. Springer, Berlin (1993) Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Silva, M.T.: Human motion analysis using multibody dynamics and optimization tools. Tese de Doutoramento, Dept. Eng. Mecânica, Instituto Superior Técnico, U. T. L., Lisboa, Portugal (2003) Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Winter, D.A.: Biomechanics and Motor Control of Human Movement, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York (1990) Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Rome, K., Selbie, S.: Biomechanics in Clinic and Research. Churchill Livingstone Elsevier, London (2008) Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Nigg, B.M., Herzog, W.: Biomechanics of the Musculo-Skeletal System, 3rd edn. Wiley, New York (2007) Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Supan, T.J., Hovorka, C.F.: A review of thermoplastic ankle–foot orthoses adjustments/replacements in young cerebral palsy and spina bifida patients. J. Prosthet. Orthot. 7(1), 15–22 (1995) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Güler, H.C., et al.: A viscoelastic sphere model for the representation of plantar soft tissues during simulations. J. Biomech. 31, 847–853 (1998) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Carlson, J.M.: Functional limitations from pain caused by repetitive loading on the skin: a review and discussion for practitioners, with new data for limiting friction loads. J. Prosthet. Orthot. 18(4), 93–107 (2006) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Winter, D.A.: Biomechanics and Motor Control of Human Gait: Normal, Elderly and Pathological. 2nd edn. Waterloo Biomechanics (1991) Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paula C. Silva
    • 1
    Email author
  • Miguel T. Silva
    • 2
  • Jorge M. Martins
    • 2
  1. 1.IPSetúbal, ESTSetúbalSetúbalPortugal
  2. 2.IDMEC/ISTInst. Sup. TécnicoLisboaPortugal

Personalised recommendations