Evaluation of Motion/Force Transmission Between Passive/Active Orthosis and Subject Through Forward Dynamic Analysis

  • Francisco Mouzo
  • Urbano Lugris
  • Javier CuadradoEmail author
  • Josep M. Font-Llagunes
  • Francisco J. Alonso
Conference paper
Part of the Biosystems & Biorobotics book series (BIOSYSROB, volume 15)


Forward dynamic analysis of the acquired gait of subjects assisted by either passive or active knee-ankle-foot orthoses and crutches is used to evaluate the motion and force transmission between orthosis and subject depending on the connecting stiffness. Unlike inverse dynamic analysis, this approach allows to consider the subject’s limbs and the assistive devices as different entities, so that their relative behavior may be studied. The quality of motion transmission and the intensity of interface forces are evaluated for a range of connecting stiffness values, so that those providing the best trade-off between both aspects can be identified.


Reaction Force Stance Phase Revolute Joint Forward Dynamic Passive Torque 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



This work has been supported by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness under project DPI2015-65959-C3-1-R, cofinanced by the European Union through EFRD.


  1. 1.
    J.A.C. Ambrosio, A. Kecskemethy, Multibody dynamics of biomechanical models for human motion via optimization, in Multibody Dynamics—Computational Methods and Applications, ed. by J.C. Garcia Orden, J.M. Goicolea, J. Cuadrado (Springer, Dordrecht, 2007), pp. 245–270Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    D.G. Thelen, F.C. Anderson, Using computed muscle control to generate forward dynamic simulations of human walking from experimental data. J. Biomech. 39, 1107–1115 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    P.C. Silva, M.T. Silva, J.M. Martins, Evaluation of the contact forces developed in the lower limb/orthosis interface for comfort design. Multibody Sys.Dyn. 24(3), 367–388 (2010)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    K.H. Koch, K. Mombaur, ExoOpt—a tool for evaluating exoskeleton designs using model-based optimization, in Proceedings of International Workshop on Wearable Robotics, Bayona, Spain, Sep. 2014Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    U. Lugris, J. Carlin, A. Luaces, J. Cuadrado, Gait analysis system for spinal cord-injured subjects assisted by active orthoses and crutches. J. Multi-body Dyn. 227(4), 363–374 (2013)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    J. Garcia de Jalon, E. Bayo, Kinematic and Dynamic Simulation of Multibody Systems (Springer, New York, 1994). Chapter 5Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    F. Mouzo, U. Lugris, R. Pamies-Vila, J.M. Font-Llagunes, J. Cuadrado, Underactuated approach for the control-based forward dynamic analysis of acquired gait motions, in Proceedings of ECCOMAS Thematic Conference on Multibody Dynamics 2015, Barcelona, Spain, Jun–Jul 2015Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Francisco Mouzo
    • 1
  • Urbano Lugris
    • 1
  • Javier Cuadrado
    • 1
    Email author
  • Josep M. Font-Llagunes
    • 2
  • Francisco J. Alonso
    • 3
  1. 1.Laboratory of Mechanical EngineeringUniversity of La CoruñaA CoruñaSpain
  2. 2.Department of Mechanical Engineering and the Biomedical Engineering Research CentreTechnical University of CataloniaBarcelonaSpain
  3. 3.Department of Mechanical, Energetics and Materials EngineeringUniversity of ExtremaduraBadajozSpain

Personalised recommendations