Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-c9gpj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-10T23:27:22.389Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Trajectory generator design based on the user's intentions for a CMC lower-limbs rehabilitation device

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 July 2014

L. Seddiki ,
K. Guelton ,
J. Zaytoon  and
H. Akdag
L. Seddiki*
Affiliation:
LIASD EA4383, Paris 8 University, 2 rue de la Liberté, 93526 Saint-Denis Cedex 2, France
K. Guelton
Affiliation:
CReSTIC EA3804, University of Reims Champagne-Ardenne, Moulin de la Housse BP 1039, 51687 Reims Cedex 2, France
J. Zaytoon
Affiliation:
CReSTIC EA3804, University of Reims Champagne-Ardenne, Moulin de la Housse BP 1039, 51687 Reims Cedex 2, France
H. Akdag
Affiliation:
LIASD EA4383, Paris 8 University, 2 rue de la Liberté, 93526 Saint-Denis Cedex 2, France
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: lynda.seddiki@ai.univ-paris8.fr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

This paper deals with the design of the control structure of a lower-limbs rehabilitation device in closed muscular chain called Sys-Reeduc. This control structure aims at providing a safe behavior to the user when performing rehabilitation exercises. It is based on two levels. The first level is concerned with the robust trajectory tracking of robotic device and has been the subject of previous studies. Nevertheless, it does not allow, by itself, the user to voluntarily drive the device. Therefore, a trajectory generator constituting the second level is presented in this paper to complete the whole control structure. This high-level control layer is described by a set of dedicated discrete state machines that provide the appropriate sequencing of elementary rehabilitation movements. These elementary movements are dynamically characterized so that clinician may choose the required trajectory parameters to adapt rehabilitation protocols and training to each individual. To realize a complete rehabilitation exercise, the sequence of elementary movements is triggered by thresholds relative to the measurement of the efforts applied by the user on the device. This allows the user to play an active role in its rehabilitation exercises and safely drive the machine at his/her own initiative. The design of the main exercises (isokinetic, isometric, and isotonic) used in the context of lower limbs rehabilitation is described, and simulation results illustrate the effectiveness of the proposed trajectory generator-based control approach.

Keywords

Lower limbs rehabilitationRehabilitation deviceControl structureTrajectory generatorHuman-driven rehabilitation device
Type
Articles
Information
Robotica , Volume 34 , Issue 5: RAAD , May 2016 , pp. 1026 - 1041
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Dallaway, J. L, Jackson, R. D and Timmers, P. H. A., “Rehabilitation robotics in Europe,” IEEE Trans. Rehab. Eng. 3 (1), 35–45 (1995).Google Scholar
2.Riener, R., “Control of Robots for Rehabilitation,” Proceedings of the EUROCON, Belgrade, Serbia (Nov. 2005) pp. 33–36.Google Scholar
3.Lutz, G. E., Palmitier, R. A. and An, K. N., “Comparaison of tibio-femoral joint forces during open kinetic chain and closed kinetic chain exercices,” J. Bone Joint Surg. 75A, 732–739 (1993).Google Scholar
4.Steinkamp, L. A., Dillingham, M. F. and Markel, M. D., “Biomechanical consideration in patellofemoral joint rehabilitation,” Am. J. Sports Med. 21 (3), 438–444 (1993).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Mickkelsen, C., Werner, S. and Eriksson, E., “Closed kinetic chain alone compared to combined open and closed kinetic chain exercices for quadricpes strenthening after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with respect to return to sports: A prespective matched follow-up study,” Knee Surg. Sports Traumatol. Arthroc. 8, 337–342 (2000).Google Scholar
6.Metrailler, P., Blanchard, V., Perrin, I., Brodard, R., Frischknecht, R., Schmitt, C., Fournier, J., Bouri, M. and Clavel, R., “Improvement of Rehabilitation Possibilities with the MotionMakerTM,” Proceedings of the IEEE EMBS, Pisa, Italy (2006) pp 359–364.Google Scholar
7.Gross, M. T., Huffman, G. M., Phillips, C. N. and Wray, J. A., “Intramachine and intermachine reliability of the biodex and cybex® II for knee flexion and extension peak torque and angular work,” J. Orthop. Sports Phys. Ther. 13 (6), 329–335 (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Moughamir, S., Zaytoon, J., Manamanni, N. and Afilal, L., “A system approach for control development of lower limbs training machines,” Control Eng. Pract. 10, 287–299 (2002).Google Scholar
9.Xerri, B., Delaveyne, R., Devaud, C., Haslin, N., Greneche, S., Samson, N. and Touati, L., “Les appareils d'isocinétisme en évaluation et en rééducation musculaire: intérêt et utilisation,” Agence National d'accréditation et d'évaluation en santé 113, 1–8 (2001).Google Scholar
10.Jezernik, S., Colombo, G. and Morari, M., “Automatic gait-pattern adaptation algorithms for rehabilitation with a 4-dof robotics orthosis,” IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 20 (3), 574–582 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Patterson, C., Raschner, C., Platzer, H. P. and Puehringer, R., “A Comparison of Different Tests to Assess Lower Extremity Left/Right Strength Imbalances,” Isokin. Exer. Sci. (IOS Press) 14 136–137 (2006).Google Scholar
12.Colombo, G., Schreier, R., Mayr, A., Plewa, H., and Rupp, R., “Novel Tilt Table with Integrated Robotic Stepping Mechanism: Design Principles and Clinical Application,” Proceedings of the 9th IEEE International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics, Chicago, IL (2005) pp 227–230.Google Scholar
13.Jones, P. A. and Bampouras, T. M., “A comparison of isokinetic and functional methods of assessing bilateral strength imbalance,” J. Strength Cond. Res. 24 (6), 1553–1558 (2010).Google Scholar
14.Seddiki, L., Guelton, K. and Zaytoon, J., “Concept and Takagi-Sugeno descriptor tracking controller design of a closed muscular chain lower limbs rehabilitation device,” IET Control Theory Appl. 4 (8), 1407–1420 (2010).Google Scholar
15.Dombre, E., Duchemin, G., Poignet, P. and Pierrot, F., “DERMAROB: A safe robot for reconstructive surgery,” IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 19 (5), 876–884 (2003).Google Scholar
16.Pan, L., Song, A., Xu, G., Li, H., Xu, B. and Xiong, P., “Hierarchical safety supervisory control strategy for robot-assisted rehabilitation exercise,” Robotica 31 (5), 757–766 (2013).Google Scholar
17.Akdoğana, E. and Adli, M. A., “The design and control of a therapeutic exercise robot for lower limb rehabilitation: Physiotherabot,” Mechatronics 21 (3), 509–522 (2011).Google Scholar
18.Ju, M-S., Lin, C-C-K., Lin, D-H., Hwang, I-S. and Chen, S-M., “A rehabilitation robot with force position hybrid fuzzy controller: Hybrid fuzzy control of rehabilitation robot,” IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Reh. Eng. 13 (3), 349–358 (2005).Google Scholar
19.Denève, A., Moughamir, S., Afilal, L. and Zaytoon, J., “Control system design of a 3-DOF upper limbs rehabilitation robot,” Comput. Methods Programs Biomed. 89 (2), 202–214 (2008).Google Scholar
20.Liberzon, D., Switching in Systems and Control, (Birkauser, Boston, MA, 2003) ISBN: 0-8176-4297-8.Google Scholar
21.Hsieh, M.-S., Chen, C.-S. and Chien, K.-S., “Intelligent passive control for lower limb rehabilitation system,” Trans. Can. Soc. Mech. Eng. 7 (3), 1023–1033 (2013).Google Scholar
22.Hsieh, M.-S., Chien, C.-S. and Chien, K.-S., “Intelligent sliding-mode control for knee rehabilitation system,” Appl. Mech. Mater. 284–287 (8), 2249–2254 (2013).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23.Tanaka, K. and Wang, H. O., Fuzzy Control Systems Design and Analysis: A Linear Matrix Inequality Approach (John Wiley, London, 2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24.Seddiki, L., Guelton, K., Zaytoon, J. and Akdag, H., “Design of a Trajectory Generator for a Lower-Limbs Rehabilitation Device,” Proceedings of the 8th IFAC Symposium on Biological and Medical Systems, Budapest, Hungary (Aug. 29–31, 2012) pp. 201–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25.Zaytoon, J., Moughamir, S., Manamanni, N., Afilal, L. and Angelloz, L., “Formal Specifications of Sequential Control for Training Machines for the Lower Limbs,” Proceedings of the IEEE EMBS, Vol. 4 (2001) pp. 3468–3471.Google Scholar
26.Seddiki, L., Guelton, K., Afilal, L. and Zaytoon, J., “A 6 Degrees of Freedom Kinematical Model of the Knee for the Design of a New Rehabilitation Device,” Proceedings of the 3rd European Medical and Biological Engineering Conference, Prague, Czech Republic (Nov. 2005) pp. 1–4.Google Scholar