Design of a novel above-knee prosthetic leg with a passive energy-saving mechanism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The push-off phase is a critical part of initiating movement during walking, and it requires a significant amount of energy. Recent research has shown that the passive use of springs in parallel with the leg can harvest the push-off energy and reduce the total metabolic energy of walking for healthy subjects. In this study, we present the design of a prosthetic leg with a passive-based mechanism to reduce walking energy consumption for above-knee amputees. The mechanism stores energy during the stance phase of the gait cycle and releases it to support the prosthetic leg during locomotion. The known polycentric knee joint 3R36 and the ankle-foot joint ESAR were chosen and adopted for this study. We also utilized a ratchet clutch that connects with a spring and rope from the pylon to the foot which regulates movement and saves energy. Our simulations demonstrate that the spring stores elastic energy from approximately 22% of the gait cycle and reaches its maximum energy storage at approximately 50% of the walking cycle. The energy is then released at approximately 58% of the stride cycle during the push-off phase. The motion of the proposed prosthetic leg for individuals with transfemoral amputations mimics the normal walking pattern of healthy individuals well.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".