Comparison of point foot, collisional and smooth rolling contact models on the bifurcations and stability of bipedal walking

Authors

  • W. G. Charles College of Engineering, Swansea University, Swansea, UK
  • P. Mahmoodi College of Engineering, Swansea University, Swansea, UK
  • R. S. Ransing College of Engineering, Swansea University, Swansea, UK
  • I. Sazonov College of Engineering, Swansea University, Swansea, UK
  • M. I. Friswell College of Engineering, Swansea University, Swansea, UK

Keywords:

Passive walking, gait analysis, roll-over shape, prosthetic foot, foot contact, bifurcation diagrams, basin of attraction

Abstract

Traditional biped walkers based on passive dynamic walking usually have flat or circular feet. This foot contact may be modelled with an effective rocker – represented as a roll-over shape – to describe the function of the knee–ankle–foot complex in human ambulation. Mahmoodi et al. has represented this rollover shape as a polygon with a discretised set of collisions. In this paper point foot, collisional and smooth rolling contact models are compared. An approach based on the Lagrangian mechanics is used to formulate the equations for the swing phase that conserves mechanical energy. Qualitative insight can be gained by studying the bifurcation diagrams of gait descriptors such as average velocity, step period, mechanical energy and interleg angle for different gain and length values for the feet, as well as different mass and length ratios. The results from the three approaches are compared and discussed. In the case of a rolling disk, the collisional contact model gives a negligible energy loss; incorporated into the double inverted pendulum system, however, reveals much greater errors. This research is not only useful for understanding the stability of bipedal walking, but also for the design of rehabilitative devices such as prosthetic feet and orthoses.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Chyou, T., Liddell, G. F., & Paulin, M. G. (2011). An upper-body can improve the stability

and efficiency of passive dynamic walking. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 285, 126–135.

Hansen, A. H., & Childress, D. S. (2004). Effects of shoe heel height on biologic rollover

characteristics during walking. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, 41,

–554.

Hansen, A. H., & Childress, D. S. (2005). Effects of adding weight to the torso on roll-over

characteristics of walking. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, 42, 381–390.

Hansen, A. H., Childress, D. S., & Knox, E. H. (2004). Roll-over shapes of human locomotor

systems: Effects of walking speed. Clinical Biomechanics (Bristol, Avon), 19, 407–414.

Garcia, M., Chatterjee, A., Ruina, A., & Coleman, M. (1998). The simplest walking model:

Stability, complexity, and scaling. Journal of Biomechanical Engineering, 120, 281–288.

Geyer, H., Seyfarth, A., & Blickhan, R. (2006). Compliant leg behaviour explains basic

dynamics of walking and running. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences,

, 2861–2867.

Goswami, A. (1999). Postural stability of biped robots and the foot-rotation indicator ( FRI )

Point. The International Journal of Robotics Research, 18, 523–533.

Goswami, A., Thuilot, B., & Espiau, B. (1996). Compass-like biped robot Part I : Stability and

bifurcation of passive gaits. [Research Report] RR-2996, INRIA.

Kuo, A. D., Donelan, J. M., & Ruina, A. (2005). Energetic consequences of walking like

an inverted pendulum: Sstep-to-step transitions. Exercise and Sport Sciences Reviews, 33,

–97.

Li, Q., & Yang, X. S. (2012). New walking dynamics in the simplest passive bipedal walking

model. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 36, 5262–5271.Mahmoodi, P., Ransing, R. S., & Friswell, M. I. (2013). Modelling the effect of heel to toe

roll-over contact on the walking dynamics of passive biped robots. Applied Mathematical

Modelling, 37, 7352–7373.

Mahmoodi, P., Ransing, R. S., & Friswell, M. I. (2016). A novel mathematical formulation

for predicting symmetric passive bipedal walking motion with unbalanced masses. Applied

Mathematical Modelling, 40, 3895–3906. doi:10.1016/j.apm.2015.10.051

McGeer, T. (1990). Passive dynamic walking. The International Journal of Robotics Research,

, 62–82.

Miff, S. C.,Hansen, A.H., Childress, D. S.,Gard, S. A.,&Meier, M. R. (2008). Roll-over shapes

of the able-bodied knee–ankle–foot system during gait initiation, steady-state walking, and

gait termination. Gait & Posture, 27, 316–322.

Naval Biodynamics Laboratory (1988). Anthropometry and mass distribution for human

analogues. Report Number NBDL-87R003. Bethesda, MD: Naval Medical Research and

Development Office.

Richter, H., Simon, D., Smith, W. A., & Samorezov, S. (2015). Dynamic modeling, parameter

estimation and control of a leg prosthesis test robot. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 39,

–573.

Schwab, A. L., & Wisse, M. (2001). Basin of attraction of the simplest walking model.

Proceedings of the ASME Design Engineering Technical Conference, 6, 531–539.

Downloads

Published

2016-05-01

How to Cite

Charles, W. G., Mahmoodi, P., Ransing, R. S., Sazonov, I., & Friswell, M. I. (2016). Comparison of point foot, collisional and smooth rolling contact models on the bifurcations and stability of bipedal walking. European Journal of Computational Mechanics, 25(03), 273–293. Retrieved from https://journals.riverpublishers.com/index.php/EJCM/article/view/819

Issue

Section

Original Article