TPress
1.
Rigney, S. M.; Simmons, A.; Kark, L.
Mechanical characterization and comparison of energy storage and return prostheses Artikel
In: Med. Eng. Phys., Bd. 41, S. 90–96, 2017, ISSN: 1350-4533.
Abstract | Links | Schlagwörter: 1E90 Sprinter, article, biomechanics, body weight, Cheetah Xtreme, comparative study, controlled study, female, finite element analysis, Flex-foot Cheetah, foot prosthesis, force, gait, human, human experiment, mechanical torsion, rigidity, simulation, Vari-flex Modular
@article{Rigney2017,
title = {Mechanical characterization and comparison of energy storage and return prostheses},
author = {S. M. Rigney and A. Simmons and L. Kark},
url = {https://www.embase.com/search/results?subaction=viewrecord&id=L614136635&from=export},
doi = {10.1016/j.medengphy.2017.01.003},
issn = {1350-4533},
year = {2017},
date = {2017-01-01},
journal = {Med. Eng. Phys.},
volume = {41},
pages = {90–96},
address = {L. Kark, Graduate School of Biomedical Engineering, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia},
abstract = {The suitability of finite element analysis (FEA) for standardizing the mechanical characterization of energy storage and return (ESAR) prostheses was investigated. A methodology consisting of both experimental and numerical analysis was proposed and trialed for the Vari-flex® ModularTM, Flex-foot Cheetah and Cheetah Xtreme by Össur® and a 1E90 Sprinter by Ottobock®. Gait analysis was conducted to determine suitable orientation angles for non-destructive testing (NDT) of the ESAR prostheses followed by a quasi-static inverse FEA procedure within COMSOL Multiphysics®, where the NDT conditions were replicated to determine the homogenized material properties of the prostheses. The prostheses’ loading response under bodyweight for an 80 kg person was then simulated, using both Eigenfrequency and time-dependent analysis. The apparent stiffness under bodyweight was determined to be 94.7, 48.6, 57.4 and 65.0 Nmm−1 for the Vari-flex® ModularTM, Flex-foot Cheetah, Cheetah Xtreme and 1E90 Sprinter, respectively. Both the energy stored and returned by the prostheses varied negatively with stiffness, yet the overall efficiency of the prostheses were similar, at 52.7, 52.0, 51.7 and 52.4% for the abovementioned prostheses. The proposed methodology allows the standardized assessment and comparison of ESAR prostheses without the confounding influences of subject-specific gait characteristics.},
keywords = {1E90 Sprinter, article, biomechanics, body weight, Cheetah Xtreme, comparative study, controlled study, female, finite element analysis, Flex-foot Cheetah, foot prosthesis, force, gait, human, human experiment, mechanical torsion, rigidity, simulation, Vari-flex Modular},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
The suitability of finite element analysis (FEA) for standardizing the mechanical characterization of energy storage and return (ESAR) prostheses was investigated. A methodology consisting of both experimental and numerical analysis was proposed and trialed for the Vari-flex® ModularTM, Flex-foot Cheetah and Cheetah Xtreme by Össur® and a 1E90 Sprinter by Ottobock®. Gait analysis was conducted to determine suitable orientation angles for non-destructive testing (NDT) of the ESAR prostheses followed by a quasi-static inverse FEA procedure within COMSOL Multiphysics®, where the NDT conditions were replicated to determine the homogenized material properties of the prostheses. The prostheses’ loading response under bodyweight for an 80 kg person was then simulated, using both Eigenfrequency and time-dependent analysis. The apparent stiffness under bodyweight was determined to be 94.7, 48.6, 57.4 and 65.0 Nmm−1 for the Vari-flex® ModularTM, Flex-foot Cheetah, Cheetah Xtreme and 1E90 Sprinter, respectively. Both the energy stored and returned by the prostheses varied negatively with stiffness, yet the overall efficiency of the prostheses were similar, at 52.7, 52.0, 51.7 and 52.4% for the abovementioned prostheses. The proposed methodology allows the standardized assessment and comparison of ESAR prostheses without the confounding influences of subject-specific gait characteristics.
2017
Rigney, S. M.; Simmons, A.; Kark, L.
Mechanical characterization and comparison of energy storage and return prostheses Artikel
In: Med. Eng. Phys., Bd. 41, S. 90–96, 2017, ISSN: 1350-4533.
Abstract | Links | Schlagwörter: 1E90 Sprinter, article, biomechanics, body weight, Cheetah Xtreme, comparative study, controlled study, female, finite element analysis, Flex-foot Cheetah, foot prosthesis, force, gait, human, human experiment, mechanical torsion, rigidity, simulation, Vari-flex Modular
@article{Rigney2017,
title = {Mechanical characterization and comparison of energy storage and return prostheses},
author = {S. M. Rigney and A. Simmons and L. Kark},
url = {https://www.embase.com/search/results?subaction=viewrecord&id=L614136635&from=export},
doi = {10.1016/j.medengphy.2017.01.003},
issn = {1350-4533},
year = {2017},
date = {2017-01-01},
journal = {Med. Eng. Phys.},
volume = {41},
pages = {90–96},
address = {L. Kark, Graduate School of Biomedical Engineering, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia},
abstract = {The suitability of finite element analysis (FEA) for standardizing the mechanical characterization of energy storage and return (ESAR) prostheses was investigated. A methodology consisting of both experimental and numerical analysis was proposed and trialed for the Vari-flex® ModularTM, Flex-foot Cheetah and Cheetah Xtreme by Össur® and a 1E90 Sprinter by Ottobock®. Gait analysis was conducted to determine suitable orientation angles for non-destructive testing (NDT) of the ESAR prostheses followed by a quasi-static inverse FEA procedure within COMSOL Multiphysics®, where the NDT conditions were replicated to determine the homogenized material properties of the prostheses. The prostheses’ loading response under bodyweight for an 80 kg person was then simulated, using both Eigenfrequency and time-dependent analysis. The apparent stiffness under bodyweight was determined to be 94.7, 48.6, 57.4 and 65.0 Nmm−1 for the Vari-flex® ModularTM, Flex-foot Cheetah, Cheetah Xtreme and 1E90 Sprinter, respectively. Both the energy stored and returned by the prostheses varied negatively with stiffness, yet the overall efficiency of the prostheses were similar, at 52.7, 52.0, 51.7 and 52.4% for the abovementioned prostheses. The proposed methodology allows the standardized assessment and comparison of ESAR prostheses without the confounding influences of subject-specific gait characteristics.},
keywords = {1E90 Sprinter, article, biomechanics, body weight, Cheetah Xtreme, comparative study, controlled study, female, finite element analysis, Flex-foot Cheetah, foot prosthesis, force, gait, human, human experiment, mechanical torsion, rigidity, simulation, Vari-flex Modular},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
The suitability of finite element analysis (FEA) for standardizing the mechanical characterization of energy storage and return (ESAR) prostheses was investigated. A methodology consisting of both experimental and numerical analysis was proposed and trialed for the Vari-flex® ModularTM, Flex-foot Cheetah and Cheetah Xtreme by Össur® and a 1E90 Sprinter by Ottobock®. Gait analysis was conducted to determine suitable orientation angles for non-destructive testing (NDT) of the ESAR prostheses followed by a quasi-static inverse FEA procedure within COMSOL Multiphysics®, where the NDT conditions were replicated to determine the homogenized material properties of the prostheses. The prostheses’ loading response under bodyweight for an 80 kg person was then simulated, using both Eigenfrequency and time-dependent analysis. The apparent stiffness under bodyweight was determined to be 94.7, 48.6, 57.4 and 65.0 Nmm−1 for the Vari-flex® ModularTM, Flex-foot Cheetah, Cheetah Xtreme and 1E90 Sprinter, respectively. Both the energy stored and returned by the prostheses varied negatively with stiffness, yet the overall efficiency of the prostheses were similar, at 52.7, 52.0, 51.7 and 52.4% for the abovementioned prostheses. The proposed methodology allows the standardized assessment and comparison of ESAR prostheses without the confounding influences of subject-specific gait characteristics.
2017
Rigney, S. M.; Simmons, A.; Kark, L.
Mechanical characterization and comparison of energy storage and return prostheses Artikel
In: Med. Eng. Phys., Bd. 41, S. 90–96, 2017, ISSN: 1350-4533.
@article{Rigney2017,
title = {Mechanical characterization and comparison of energy storage and return prostheses},
author = {S. M. Rigney and A. Simmons and L. Kark},
url = {https://www.embase.com/search/results?subaction=viewrecord&id=L614136635&from=export},
doi = {10.1016/j.medengphy.2017.01.003},
issn = {1350-4533},
year = {2017},
date = {2017-01-01},
journal = {Med. Eng. Phys.},
volume = {41},
pages = {90–96},
address = {L. Kark, Graduate School of Biomedical Engineering, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia},
abstract = {The suitability of finite element analysis (FEA) for standardizing the mechanical characterization of energy storage and return (ESAR) prostheses was investigated. A methodology consisting of both experimental and numerical analysis was proposed and trialed for the Vari-flex® ModularTM, Flex-foot Cheetah and Cheetah Xtreme by Össur® and a 1E90 Sprinter by Ottobock®. Gait analysis was conducted to determine suitable orientation angles for non-destructive testing (NDT) of the ESAR prostheses followed by a quasi-static inverse FEA procedure within COMSOL Multiphysics®, where the NDT conditions were replicated to determine the homogenized material properties of the prostheses. The prostheses’ loading response under bodyweight for an 80 kg person was then simulated, using both Eigenfrequency and time-dependent analysis. The apparent stiffness under bodyweight was determined to be 94.7, 48.6, 57.4 and 65.0 Nmm−1 for the Vari-flex® ModularTM, Flex-foot Cheetah, Cheetah Xtreme and 1E90 Sprinter, respectively. Both the energy stored and returned by the prostheses varied negatively with stiffness, yet the overall efficiency of the prostheses were similar, at 52.7, 52.0, 51.7 and 52.4% for the abovementioned prostheses. The proposed methodology allows the standardized assessment and comparison of ESAR prostheses without the confounding influences of subject-specific gait characteristics.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
The suitability of finite element analysis (FEA) for standardizing the mechanical characterization of energy storage and return (ESAR) prostheses was investigated. A methodology consisting of both experimental and numerical analysis was proposed and trialed for the Vari-flex® ModularTM, Flex-foot Cheetah and Cheetah Xtreme by Össur® and a 1E90 Sprinter by Ottobock®. Gait analysis was conducted to determine suitable orientation angles for non-destructive testing (NDT) of the ESAR prostheses followed by a quasi-static inverse FEA procedure within COMSOL Multiphysics®, where the NDT conditions were replicated to determine the homogenized material properties of the prostheses. The prostheses’ loading response under bodyweight for an 80 kg person was then simulated, using both Eigenfrequency and time-dependent analysis. The apparent stiffness under bodyweight was determined to be 94.7, 48.6, 57.4 and 65.0 Nmm−1 for the Vari-flex® ModularTM, Flex-foot Cheetah, Cheetah Xtreme and 1E90 Sprinter, respectively. Both the energy stored and returned by the prostheses varied negatively with stiffness, yet the overall efficiency of the prostheses were similar, at 52.7, 52.0, 51.7 and 52.4% for the abovementioned prostheses. The proposed methodology allows the standardized assessment and comparison of ESAR prostheses without the confounding influences of subject-specific gait characteristics.