当前位置： SCI文献检索 > Biomedical Engineering Online期刊下所有文献 > Evaluation of three force-position hybrid control methods for a robot-based biological joint-testing system.

Evaluation of three force-position hybrid control methods for a robot-based biological joint-testing system.

Abstract：

BACKGROUND:Robot-based joint-testing systems (RJTS) can be used to perform unconstrained laxity tests, measuring the stiffness of a degree of freedom (DOF) of the joint at a fixed flexion angle while allowing the other DOFs unconstrained movement. Previous studies using the force-position hybrid (FPH) control method proposed by Fujie et al. (J Biomech Eng 115(3):211-7, 1993) focused on anterior/posterior tests. Its convergence and applicability on other clinically relevant DOFs such as valgus/varus have not been demonstrated. The current s1tudy aimed to develop a 6-DOF RJTS using an industrial robot, to propose two new force-position hybrid control methods, and to evaluate the performance of the methods and FPH in controlling the RJTS for anterior/posterior and valgus/varus laxity tests of the knee joint. METHODS:An RJTS was developed using an industrial 6-DOF robot with a 6-component load-cell attached at the effector. The performances of FPH and two new control methods, namely force-position alternate control (FPA) and force-position hybrid control with force-moment control (FPHFM), for unconstrained anterior/posterior and valgus/varus laxity tests were evaluated and compared with traditional constrained tests (CT) in terms of the number of control iterations, total time and the constraining forces and moments. RESULTS:As opposed to CT, the other three control methods successfully reduced the constraining forces and moments for both anterior/posterior and valgus/varus tests, FPHFM being the best followed in order by FPA and FPH. FPHFM had root-mean-squared constraining forces and moments of less than 2.2 N and 0.09 Nm, respectively at 0° flexion, and 2.3 N and 0.14 Nm at 30° flexion. The corresponding values for FPH were 8.5 N and 0.33 Nm, and 11.5 N and 0.45 Nm, respectively. Given the same control parameters including the compliance matrix, FPHFM and FPA reduced the constraining loads of FPH at the expense of additional control iterations, and thus increased total time, FPA taking about 10 % longer than FPHFM. CONCLUSIONS:The FPHFM would be the best choice among the methods considered when longer total time is acceptable in the intended clinical applications. The current results will be useful for selecting a force-position hybrid control method for unconstrained laxity tests using an RJTS.

journal_name

Biomed Eng Online

journal_title

Biomedical engineering online

authors

Hsieh HJ,Hu CC,Lu TW,Lu HL,Kuo MY,Kuo CC,Hsu HC

doi

10.1186/s12938-016-0195-9

subject

Has Abstract

pub_date

2016-06-07 00:00:00

pages

issue

issn

1475-925X

pii

10.1186/s12938-016-0195-9

journal_volume

pub_type

杂志文章

在线工具

Evaluation of three force-position hybrid control methods for a robot-based biological joint-testing system.