0
Design Innovation Paper

Performance Maps for a Bio-Inspired Robotic Condylar Hinge Joint

[+] Author and Article Information
Stuart C. Burgess

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Bristol,
Bristol BS8 1TR, UK
e-mail: S.C.Burgess@bristol.ac.uk

Appolinaire C. Etoundi

Department of Engineering
Design and Mathematics,
University of the West of England,
Bristol BS16 1QY, UK
e-mail: Appolinaire.Etoundi@uwe.ac.uk

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Mechanisms and Robotics Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF MECHANICAL DESIGN. Manuscript received December 6, 2013; final manuscript received July 28, 2014; published online October 8, 2014. Assoc. Editor: Matthew B. Parkinson.

J. Mech. Des 136(11), 115002 (Oct 08, 2014) (7 pages) Paper No: MD-13-1564; doi: 10.1115/1.4028168 History: Received December 06, 2013; Revised July 28, 2014

This paper presents performance charts that map the design space of a bio-inspired robotic condylar hinge joint. The joint mimics the design of the human knee joint by copying the condylar surfaces of the femur and tibia and by copying the four-bar motion of the cruciate ligaments. Four aspects of performance are modeled: peak mechanical advantage, RMS (root mean square) mechanical advantage, RMS sliding ratio, and range of movement. The performance of the joint is dependent on the shape of the condylar surfaces and the geometry of the four-bar mechanism. The design space for the condylar hinge joint is large because the four-bar mechanism has a very large number of possible configurations. Also, it is not intuitive what values of design parameters give the best design. Performance graphs are presented that cover over 12,000 different geometries of the four-bar mechanism. The maps are presented on three-dimensional graphs that help designers visualize the limits of performance of the joint and visualize tradeoffs between individual aspects of performance. The maps show that each aspect of performance of the joint is very sensitive to the geometry of the four-bar mechanism. The trends in performance can be understood by analyzing the kinematics of the four-bar mechanism and the shape of the condylar surfaces.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Etoundi, A. C., Burgess, S. C., and Vaidyanathan, R., 2013, “A Bio-Inspired Condylar Hinge for Robotic Limbs,” ASME J. Mech. Rob., 5(3), p. 031011. [CrossRef]
Goodfellow, J., and O'connor, J., 1978, “Mechanics of the Knee and Prosthesis Design,” J. Bone Jt. Surg., Br., 60(3), pp. 358–369.
Hsu, Y., Hung, Y., and Yin, J., 2006, “Design of a Novel Total Knee Prosthesis Using Triz,” J. Med. Biol. Eng., 26(4), pp. 177–185.
Etoundi, A. C., Vaidyanathan, R., and Burgess, S. C., 2011, “A Bio-Inspired Condylar Hinge Joint for Mobile Robots,” IEEE/RSJ IROS International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, San Francisco, CA, September 25–30, pp. 4042–4047.
Etoundi, A. C., Lock, R. J., Vaidyanathan, R., and Burgess, S. C., 2013, “A Bio-Inspired Condylar Knee Joint for Knee Prosthetics,” Int. J. Des. Nat. Ecodyn., 8(3), pp. 213–225. [CrossRef]
Pasini, D., Smith, D., and Burgess, S. C., 2003, “Structural Efficiency Maps for Beams Subject to Bending,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., 217, pp. 207–220. [CrossRef]
Burgess, S., Pasini, D., and Alemzadeh, K., 2004, “Improved Visualisation of the Design Space Using Nested Performance Charts,” Des. Stud., 25, pp. 51–62. [CrossRef]
Daniel, R., and Michael, C., 2013, “The Design Space Boundaries for High Flow Capacity Centrifugal Compressors,” ASME J. Turbomach., 135(3), p. 031035. [CrossRef]
Liu, X. J., Wang, J. S., and Gao, F., 2000, “Performance Atlases of the Workspace for Planar 3-Dof Parallel Manipulators,” Robotica, 18, pp. 563–568. [CrossRef]
Hong, D. W., and Cipra, R. J., 2006, “Visualization of the Contact Force Solution Space for Multi-Limbed Robots,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 128(1), pp. 295–302. [CrossRef]
Su, H. J., and Mccarthy, J. M., 2007, “Synthesis of Bistable Compliant Four-Bar Mechanisms Using Polynomial Homotopy,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 129(10), pp. 1094–1098. [CrossRef]
Rivin, E. I., 1988, Mechanical Design of Robots, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Masouros, S. D., Bull, A. M. J., and Amis, A. A., 2010, “Biomechanics of the Knee Joint,” Orthop. Trauma, 16, pp. 84–91. [CrossRef]
Nordin, M., and Frankel, V. H., 1989, Basic Biomechanics of the Musculoskeletal System, Lea & Febiger, Philadelphia, PA.
Schwenke, T., Borgstede, L. L., Schneider, E., Andriacchi, T. P., and Wimmer, M. A., 2005, “The Influence of Slip Velocity on Wear of Total Knee Arthroplasty,” Wear, 259(7–12), pp. 926–932. [CrossRef]
Boublik, M., Blevins, F. T., and Steadman, J. R., 1994, “Anatomy: Bony Architecture, Biomechanics, and Meniscience,” Traumatic Disorders of the Knee, Springer, New York, pp. 3–8.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Bio-inspired condylar hinge joint

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Femur profile used in case study

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Generation of tibia profile

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Effect of aspect ratio on mechanical advantage for 90 deg rotation (r1-max > r2-max)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Effect of offset angle on range (for large offset gap)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Effect of zero offset gap on range

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In