Biomechanical Energy Harvesting 1

1. INTRODUCTION

Human power is an attractive energy source. Muscle converts food into positive mechanical
work with peak efficiencies of approximately 25%, comparable to that of internal
combustion engines. The work can be performed at a high rate, with 100 W mechanical
easily sustainable by the average person and twice that sustainable by elite athletes. Food,
the original source of the metabolic energy required by muscles, is nearly as rich an energy
source as gasoline and approximately 100 fold greater than batteries of the same weight.
Given these attractive properties, it is not surprising that a number of inventions have
focused on converting human mechanical power into electrical power. These include hand
crank and bicycle generators as well as windup flashlights, radios, and cell phone chargers.
One major drawback of these devices is that they require dedicated power generation by the
user. This serves to limit the time available to produce power and, thus, the amount of
useful energy that can be generated.

Biomechanical energy harvesters generate electricity from people as they go about their
activities of daily living. This results in power generation over much longer durations. An
exemplary energy harvesting device is the self-winding watch which produces enough
electricity to power the device without requiring the user to wind it but is insufficient for
most of our portable power needs. There are a number of devices based on the same
fundamental principle as the self-winding watch using an external load to drive a generator.
The most successful design to date is the spring-loaded energy harvesting backpack that
converts the pack’s linear motion relative to the user into rotational motion of a rotary-
magnetic generator producing as much as 7 W .A second group of energy harvesters use the
body’s own inertia to generate electricity from the compression of the shoe sole harvesting
as much as 0.8 W. Our technique differed from other techniques in two main ways. First,
the device took advantage of the fact that much of the displacement during walking occurs
at body joints and harvested energy from knee motion rather than from an external load or
the compression of the shoe sole. Second, the device selectively engaged power generation
to assist the body in performing negative work, analogous to regenerative braking in hybrid
cars. The main purpose of this seminar is to explain the physiological principles that guided
our design process. We also present a brief description of our device design and its
performance.

College Of Engineering ,Chengannur

Biomechanical Energy Harvesting 2

2. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

2.1 THE COMPRESSION OF THE SHOE SOLE

2.1.1 Overview of Design

The predominantly compressive forces of a heel strike have been harnessed to provide the
tensile forces best suited to excite the PVDF by means of a heel insert. The advantage of
situating the transducer beneath the heel of the foot instead of farther forward near the ball,
lies in the fact that there is more energy dissipated in this location. The wearer's body
weight initially falls wholly on the heel and is only gradually transferred forward with the
step. The heel insert was constructed around a horseshoe-shaped piece of rubber material
cut out from the heel of a sneaker. Two horizontal heel-shaped polycarbonate plates were
glued at their curved edges to the top and bottom rubber edges of the shoe's heel cutout.
Fifteen elongated, rectangular unimorph strips were in turn glued vertically between the two
plates, along shallow front-to-back grooves cut in the polycarbonate. The rubber cutout
erves both to protect the strips from excess compression, i.e. to dissipate the forces which
the strips do not absorb, and to maintain the natural feel of the shoe. Indeed, there is little to
no difference in the sensation of walking with the transducer mounted in the sneaker.

Fig(2.1).Shoe insert composed of(1) Rubber cutout,(2) Poly carbonate plates,(3) copper terminals and (4)
unimorph strips
The unimorph strips themselves were each constructed of one 0.5 inch tall, 52um thick
silver laminated PVDF film (Measurement Specialties) bonded with cyanoacrylate to the

College Of Engineering ,Chengannur

Biomechanical Energy Harvesting 3

side of a slightly wider and longer 4 mil thick PET plastic film substrate (the strips vary in
length with the changing space available in the cutout from 1 to 2.25 inches). This particular
substrate was chosen for its stiffness and spring-like qualities following much
experimentation with different materials. Other plastics failed to return to their original
shape after deformation, began to craze, or were too thick to be bent under a reasonable
force. During a heel strike, the polycarbonate plates are compressed together, in turn
bending all of the PET strips aligned between them. The bending plastic strips induce a
strain in the bonded PVDF film, which is offset from the neutral axis. Compared to bending
solitary strips, this unimorph configuration substantially increases the electrical response of
the PVDF.

Each piece of film was glued to the substrate in the same orientation, with the stretch
direction aligned vertically and the positively poled side of the film facing away from the
substrate. A narrow copper wire was bonded to the inner electrode of each laminate with
conductive epoxy. Another wire was taped to the outer electrode. These leads from each
strip were connected to two copper terminals on the outer edge of the shoe insert so that all
of the charge generators would act in a parallel configuration to maximize the generated
current.

The back ends of the unimorph strips were purposefully cut slightly too large to fit perfectly
straight between the two polycarbonate plates, causing them to remain very slightly bent
when the shoe insert is not in compression. This pre-bending ensures that each of the strips
bends in the same direction under compression so that each piece of film undergoes a tensile
strain and the sign of the voltage produced from each strip is equivalent. This is important
because a strip bending out of unison will cancel the voltage produced by another,
decreasing the effectiveness of the transducer.

College Of Engineering ,Chengannur

Biomechanical Energy Harvesting 4

2.1.2 Power And Efficiency

Two methods were utilized to determine the power output of the transducer system. In the
first case, the potential drop across a known load resistor was measured. In order to
determine the resistor best matched to the impedance of the transducer, the power output for
various loads was measured while the transducer was compressed under a constant force.
The results from this experiment, depicted in Fig(2.2), show that the power peaks at load of
about 500 k Ω.

Fig (2.2) Dependence of power on load resistance, showing best resistance match

The fairly high resistance required to match the transducer's impedance can be explained by
imagining an equivalent circuit composed of the piezoelectric charge generator, a capacitor
for the system's internal capacitance, and a resistor to model the dielectric leakage across
the PVDF. For low frequency applications, however, the internal film resistance is very
high and can be ignored. The structure's low net capacitance of 17 n F requires that the
matching resistance be large. The best load value determined, the voltage from the
transducer across a 470 k_ resistor at a 1 Hz frequency, shown in Figure 3, was recorded
and the root mean square voltage calculated, giving an average power of 0.06 m W. The
peak voltage was measured at 21 V, for a peak power of 0.94 m W. The sharp initial peaks
are caused by the fairly coherent compression of the strips as the weight of the body falls on
the heel.

College Of Engineering ,Chengannur

Biomechanical Energy Harvesting 5

The subsequent rolling transfer of weight forward towards the ball of the foot allows the
strips to straighten, generating the ensuing oppositely signed voltage. The negative spikes
between steps can be attributed to individual strips returning to their fully extended
positions and also to small tensile forces within the heel.

Fig (2.3) Voltage wave form transducer with 470 kΩ load

In the second method, the energy stored on a bucket capacitor was calculated. The capacitor
was connected to the transducer circuit through a full-wave bridge rectifier. With a 1 μF
capacitor (1 Hz excitation), the peak voltage reaches 9.6 V over a 1 second period, yielding
an average power of 0.05 mW. This result is slightly lower than that found with the resistive
load because the 1 μF capacitor does not as closely match the impedance of the transducer.
Tests were also conducted with a larger 100 μF capacitor to demonstrate the effects of a
larger storage medium. Predictably, the stored energy was about an order of magnitude
lower. This highlights the necessity for efficient power conditioning when converting the
output energy to a useful form.

In addition, the electromechanical efficiency of the entire shoe insert was calculated by
comparing the energy required to compress the strips inside the shoe insert with the energy
generated during a corresponding period. The net energy required to compress a single 1
inch long unimorph strip a distance of 1mm was 0.2 mJ. This value can be extrapolated to
the case of the complete transducer, for a total mechanical input of 5.9 mJ. Using the
average power generated by the transducer over a 1 second period, the efficiency of the
transducer is found to be approximately 1%. This measurement takes into account losses
caused by the imperfect compression of the multiple strips along with losses in the transfer
of power from the PVDF to the load. The PVDF stave developed by the MIT Media Lab
achieved an electromechanical efficiency of 0.5% [4]. This calculation, however, used the

College Of Engineering ,Chengannur

Biomechanical Energy Harvesting 6

open circuit voltage from the transducer to determine the raw electrical output. This
approach proved to be extremely difficult in the case of the heel-mounted transducer
because its much lower capacitance was not large enough to sustain a voltage long enough
to be measured accurately. A dual unity gain buffer amplifier circuit was constructed of two
high power op-amps in an attempt to measure the potential but the maximum supply voltage
was not high enough to avoid capping. Very high power op-amps were not considered due
to financial considerations. An accurate measurement of the open circuit voltage would
theoretically give an approximate raw electromechanical efficiency of 2%.

2.2 THE SPRING-LOADED BACKPACK

2.2.1 Overview

Hikers toiling under the weight of a heavy backpack needn't just get hot and sweaty from
their efforts. Some of the energy they expend in walking can now be captured by a
backpack devised by US researchers, which converts it to electricity that can power portable
electronics.

Walking is a particularly good source of human power: during steady hiking the muscles
produce up to 100 W. As far back as 1967, scientists at the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology used piezoelectric devices, which generate electricity when squeezed, inserted
into the heel of a shoe to create power for portable electronics such as pacemakers. But
mechanical generators housed in shoe heels have tended to be rather cumbersome and
fragile.

Fig (2.4).Spring loaded back pack structure

College Of Engineering ,Chengannur

Biomechanical Energy Harvesting 7

The backpack is spring-loaded, so it can bounce up and down when the wearer walks. This
moves a toothed rod, which meshes with a gearwheel. As the gearwheel rotates, it generates
electricity.

The heavier the load, the more power the pack generates. But the researchers were
concerned that the shifting load might force the wearer to use more energy in walking,
much as a bicycle dynamo puts a greater strain on a cyclist. So they measured the metabolic
rates of their test subjects by looking at how much oxygen they consume.

2.2.2 Power And Efficiency

The pack, which weighs about 20-38 kg depending how much power you need, generated
up to 7.4 watts of power when tested on a treadmill. That's enough to keep your GPS locator
and a head-lamp running indefinitely in the wilderness - potentially useful for soldiers or
rescue workers. They could even take a break now and then without losing power, as
surpluss energy is stored in lightweight batteries.

2.3 KNEE DEVICE FOR ENERGY HARVESTING

When comparing the above discussed energy harvesting devices, it has many disadvantages.
The Knee device overcomes the problem found in above two cases. The following section
gives the detailed design and power generation method of knee devices

2.3.1 Walking Biomechanics

To effectively harvest energy from walking, it is necessary to first understand walking

mechanics and the underlying muscle function. During walking at a constant speed on level
ground, no net mechanical work is performed on the body since there is no net change in
kinetic energy (i.e. speed) or potential energy (i.e. slope of the ground). This means that
equal amounts of positive and negative work are being performed on the body by all
sources. While muscles are the only source of positive work, there are other sources of
negative work in addition to muscle. These include air resistance, damping within the shoe
sole and movement of soft tissue. The first two are known to be small during walking; it is
believed that muscles must perform a substantial fraction of the required negative work.

College Of Engineering ,Chengannur

Biomechanical Energy Harvesting 8

Muscles do not act on the environment directly. Instead, muscles act on the body's skeleton
which functions as a system of levers to perform the required power. As a consequence,
positive and negative muscle power is seen externally as positive and negative joint power.
Fig. 1 presents net joint power data, calculated using inverse dynamics for the human knee
measured during walking at a moderate speed (subject mass = 58 kg; speed = 1.3 m/s; step
frequency = 1.8 Hz. . For the angle plot, 180 degrees is full knee extension and knee flexion
is<180 degrees. Positive angular velocity is motion in the knee extension direction. Positive
joint moment is a net knee extensor torque. The area under the power curve, the integral
with respect to time, is mechanical work. The bottom plot is rectified and filtered EMG
signals from knee flexor and extensor muscles. EMG stands for electro myogram and is a
measure of the electrical potential generated by muscles when they are active. Note that the
EMG signals precede the negative and positive joint moments because there is a delay
between when a muscle is activated and when it begins to generate force. Mechanical power
outputs at all leg joint scan be much greater when walking faster, during activities like knee
bends or in heavier people.

While there must be an equal amount of positive and negative work performed by all
sources, this is not true of any joint. The knee, for example, primarily generates negative
power during walking making it a good candidate for generative braking. Fig (2.5)
illustrates three main negative joint power regions. During stance flexion, the muscles that
act to extend the knee are active producing an extensor moment. However, the knee is
flexing as the leg accepts the weight of the rest of the body, resulting in negative joint
power. There is also negative joint power production during the swing flexion phase due to
the extensor knee moment. The activity of the muscles responsible for this extensor moment
is not shown in Fig (2.5). The third region, and the most important one for our current
purpose, occurs during the latter half of swing extension. Knee joint power is negative due
to the flexor torque produced by the knee flexors to slow down the extending knee prior to
heel-strike.

Due to the complexity of muscle function, measured negative joint power is not necessarily
a consequence of negative muscle power. Many muscles cross each joint and each muscle
can cross multiple joints. At any one time, negative power at one joint may be due to the
coordination of net positive muscle power production that is distributed throughout the leg.
Attempting to harvest energy at these times will interfere with the coordination and result in

College Of Engineering ,Chengannur

Biomechanical Energy Harvesting 9

a net increase in positive muscle power and metabolic cost. In addition to the power
generating muscle fibres, muscles have elastic elements such as tendons. This provides a
mechanism to store and return elastic energy saving on positive muscle fibre power
production. Regions of negative joint power may actually be times at which elastic energy
is being stored and attempting to harvest energy will increase the total amount of positive
work and metabolic cost. In short, regions of negative joint power are best viewed as
potential regions for energy harvesting and determining their appropriateness requires
experimentation. We focused on the swing phase extension because a) there is a large
amount of negative joint power performed, b) the knee flexors, which act also to extend the
hip, are lengthening because the knee is extending and the hip is flexing suggesting that
they are indeed performing negative work, and c) The energy harvester acts as a rotary
damper element in which the reaction torque is proportional to the angular velocity. This
property favours energy harvesting during the end of swing phase where the angular
velocity is large, allowing efficient power generation with a miniature generator and small
gear ratio gear train.

Fig(2.5).Typical walking mechanics and muscle activity. Subject mass=58 kg; speed=1.3 m/s; step

frequency=1.8 Hz [1]

College Of Engineering ,Chengannur

Biomechanical Energy Harvesting 10

2.3.2 Energy Harvesting Methods

In light of the distinct functions of muscle, we distinguish between two general methods of
harvesting energy: parasitic and mutualistic. For parasitic energy harvesting, the electricity
is harvested at the expense of metabolic energy of the user. In this method, the energy is
harvested during the periods when muscles normally perform positive work, causing
muscles to perform more positive work than they would otherwise. On the other hand,
mutualistic energy harvesting is accomplished by selectively harvesting energy at times and
in locations when muscles normally decelerate the body. Rather than braking entirely with
muscles, a generator would perform some of the required negative work converting the
mechanical energy of the body into electrical power. In this manner, mutualistic energy
harvesting would be similar to regenerative braking in hybrid cars.

Fig (2.6).Biomechanical energy harvester.(A) harvester are worn in both legs.(B) mechanical design [2]

It is a challenge, however, to produce substantial electricity from walking. Most energy

harvesting research has focused on generating electricity from the compression of the shoe
sole, with the best devices generating 0.8 W.A noteworthy departure is a spring-loaded
backpack that harnesses the vertical oscillations of a 38-kg load to generate as much as 7.4
W of electricity during fast walking. This device has a markedly low “cost of harvesting”
(COH),a dimensionless quantity defined as the additional metabolic power in watts required
to generate 1 W of electrical power

(1)

College Of Engineering ,Chengannur

Biomechanical Energy Harvesting 11

Where Δ refers to the difference between walking while harvesting energy and walking
while carrying the device but without harvesting energy. The COH for conventional power
generation is simply related to the efficiency with which (i) the device converts mechanical
work to electricity and (ii) muscles convert chemical energy into positive work

(2)

The backpack’s device efficiency is about 31%, and muscle’s peak efficiency is about 25%,
yielding an expected COH of 12.9. But the backpack’s actual COH of 4.8 ± 3.0 (mean ±SD)
is less than 40% of the expected amount. Its economy appears to arise from reducing the
energy expenditure of walking with loads. No device has yet approached the power
generation of the backpack without the need to carry a heavy load.

We propose that a key feature of how humans walk may provide another means of
economical energy harvesting. Muscles cyclically perform positive and negative mechanical
work within each stride. Mechanical work is required to redirect the body’s centre of mass
between steps and simply to move the legs back and forth. Even though the average
mechanical work performed on the body over an entire stride is zero, walking exacts a
metabolic cost because both positive and negative muscle work require metabolic energy.
Coupling a generator to leg motion would generate electricity throughout each cycle,
increasing the load on the muscles during acceleration but assisting them during
deceleration. Although generating electricity during the acceleration phase would exact a
substantial metabolic cost, doing so during the deceleration phase would not, resulting in a
lower COH than for conventional generation. An even lower COH could be achieved by
selectively engaging the generator only during deceleration, similar to how regenerative
braking generates power while decelerating a hybrid car. Here, “generative braking”
produces electricity without requiring additional positive muscle power. If implemented
effectively, metabolic cost could be about the same as that for normal walking, so energy
would be harvested with no extra user effort.

We developed a wearable, knee-mounted prototype energy harvester to test the generative

braking concept. Although other joints might suffice, we focused on the knee because it

College Of Engineering ,Chengannur

Biomechanical Energy Harvesting 12

performs mostly negative work during walking. The harvester comprises an orthopaedic
knee brace configured so that knee motion drives a gear train through a one-way clutch,
transmitting only knee extension motion at speeds suitable for a dc brushless motor that
serves as the generator. For convenient testing, generated electrical power is then dissipated
with a load resistor rather than being used to charge a battery. The device efficiency,
defined as the ratio of the electrical power output to the mechanical power input, was
empirically estimated to be no greater than 63%, yielding an estimated COH for
conventional generation of 6.4. A potentiometer senses knee angle, which is fed back to a
computer controlling a relay switch in series with the load resistor, allowing the electrical
load to be selectively disconnected in real time. For generative braking, we programmed the
harvester to engage only during the end of the swing phase, producing electrical power
while simultaneously assisting the knee flexor muscles in decelerating the knee. We
compared this mode against a continuous-generation mode that harvests energy whenever
the knee is extending. We could also manually disengage the clutch and completely
decouple the gear train and generator from knee motion. This disengaged mode served as a
control condition to estimate the metabolic cost of carrying the harvester mass, independent
of the cost of generating electricity.

Energy-harvesting performance was tested on six male subjects who wore a device on each
leg while walking on a treadmill at 1.5 m/ s .We estimated metabolic cost using a standard
respirometry system and measured the electrical power output of the generator. In the
continuous-generation mode, subjects generated 7.0 ± 0.7 W of electricity with an
insignificant 18 ± 24 W (P = 0.07) increase in metabolic cost over that of the control
condition. In the generative-braking mode, subjects generated 4.8 ± 0.8 W of electricity
with an insignificant 5 ± 21 W increase in metabolic cost as compared with that of the
control condition (P = 0.6). For context, this electricity is sufficient to power 10 typical cell
phones simultaneously. The results demonstrate that substantial electricity could be
generated with minimal increase in user effort.

The corresponding COH values highlight the advantage of generative braking (Fig. 4).
Average COH in generative braking was only 0.7 ± 4.4; less than 1 W of metabolic power
was required to generate 1 W of electricity. This is significantly less than the COH of 6.4
expected for conventional generation (P = 0.01). The COH in continuous generation, 2.3 ±
3.0, was also significantly lower than that for conventional generation (P = 0.01), indicating

College Of Engineering ,Chengannur

Biomechanical Energy Harvesting 13

that the former mode also generated some of its electricity from the deceleration of the
knee. The difference between the two modes, 2.2 ± 0.7 W of electricity, came at a
difference in metabolic cost of 13 ± 12 W (P = 0.05). A COH taken from the average ratio
of these differences yields 5.7 ± 6.2, which is nearly the same as that expected of
conventional generation (P = 0.4). This indicates that continuous generation of power at the
knee during walking produces electricity partially by conventional generation with a high
COH and partially by generative braking with a very low COH. But generative braking,
with less than one-eighth the COH of conventional generation, benefits almost entirely from
the deceleration of the knee.

Fig(2.7).Theoretical advantages of generative braking during cyclic motion, comparing the back-and-forth
motion of the knee joint without power generation (A) against a generator operating continuously (B) and
against a generator operating only during braking (C). Each column of plots shows the rate of work performed
by muscles (work rate) and the electricity (elect. power) generated over time, as well as the average metabolic
power expended by the human and the resulting average electrical power (ave. power bar graphs). In (B) and
(C), work rate is compared against that for (A), denoted by dashed lines, and average power is shown as the
difference (Δ ave. power) with respect to (A) [3]

College Of Engineering ,Chengannur

Biomechanical Energy Harvesting 14

Fig. (2.8) . Biomechanical energy harvester. (A) The device has an aluminium chassis (green) and generator
(blue) mounted on a customized orthopedic knee brace (red), totalling 1.6-kg mass, with one worn on each leg.
(B) The chassis contains a gear train that converts low velocity and high torque at the knee into high velocity
and low torque for the generator, with a one-way roller clutch that allows for selective engagement of the gear
train during knee extension only and no engagement during knee flexion. (C) The schematic diagram shows
how a computer-controlled feedback system determines when to generate power using knee-angle feedback,
measured with a potentiometer mounted on the input shaft. Generated power is dissipated in resistors. Rg,
generator internal resistance; RL, output load resistance; E(t), generated voltage. [3]

This preliminary demonstration could be improved substantially. We constructed the

prototype for convenient experimentation, leading to a control condition about 20% more
metabolically costly than normal walking: The disengaged clutch mode required an average
metabolic power of 366 ± 63 W as compared with 307 ± 64 W for walking without wearing
the devices. The increase in cost is due mainly to the additional mass and its location,
because the lower a given mass is placed, the more expensive it is to carry. Although the
current increase in metabolic cost is unacceptably high for most practical implementations,
revisions to improve the fit, weight, and efficiency of the device can not only reduce the
cost but also increase the generated electricity. A generator designed specifically for this
application could have lower internal losses and require a smaller, lighter gear train.
Commercially available gear trains can have much lower friction and higher efficiency, in
more compact and lightweight forms. Relocating the device components higher would
decrease the metabolic cost of carrying that mass .A more refined device would also benefit
from a more form-fitting knee brace made out of a more lightweight material such as carbon
fiber.

College Of Engineering ,Chengannur

Biomechanical Energy Harvesting 15

Several potential applications are especially suited for generative braking. These include
lighting and communications needs for the quarter of the world’s population who currently
live without electricity supply. Innovative prosthetic knees and ankles use motors to assist
walking, but battery technology limits their power and working time. Energy harvesters
worn on human joints may prove useful for powering the robotic artificial joints. In
implantable devices, such as neurostimulators and drug pumps, battery power limits device
sophistication, and battery replacement requires surgery. A future energy harvester might be
implanted alongside such a device, perhaps in parallel with a muscle, and use generative
braking to provide substantial power indefinitely. Generative braking might then find
practical applications in forms very different from that demonstrated here.

2.3.3 Device Design

The biomechanics of walking presented four main challenges for designing a device to
harvest energy from the motion of the knee joint. The first challenge was to determine an
effective mechanism for converting biomechanical power into electrical power. This
generator had to be worn on the body so it needed to be small and lightweight. The second
design challenge was to determine a mechanism for converting the knee joint power into a
form suitable for efficient electrical power generation. As described in the previous section,
knee joint power is intermittent, bi-directional and has particular speed and torque
characteristics. The third challenge was to optimize the system parameters in order to
maximize the electrical power generation without adversely affecting the walking motion.
At any given point in the walking cycle, there is only a certain amount of mechanical power
available for harvesting from the knee—attempting to harvest too much power will cause
the user to limp or stop walking while harvesting too little results in less electrical power
generated. The final design challenge was to determine a mechanism for selectively
engaging power generation during swing extension to harvest energy using generative
braking.

To meet these design challenges, our device operated about the knee to take advantage of
the large amount of negative work that muscles perform about this joint (Fig 2). It used a
one-way clutch to transmit only knee extensor motions, a spur gear transmission to amplify
the angular speed, a brushless DC rotary magnetic generator to convert the mechanical
power into electrical power, and a control system to determine when to open and close the

College Of Engineering ,Chengannur

Biomechanical Energy Harvesting 16

power generating circuit based on measurements of knee angle. A customized orthopedic

knee brace supported the hardware and distributed the device reaction torque over a large
leg surface area. For convenient experimentation, the control system resided on a desktop
computer and resistors dissipated the generated electrical power. The device was efficient
and the control system was effective at selectively engaging power generation.
Consequently, people were able to generate substantial amounts of electrical power with
little additional effort.

Fig (2.9) The Biomechanical energy harvester comprises an aluminium chassis and generator mounted on
customized knee brace [1]

2.3.4 Mechanical Design Of Harvester

At the end of swing phase, knee angular velocity is less than 100 rpm, and the peak knee
joint torque is around 20 N m (Fig. 1). The energy harvester accepts the input to generate
electrical power and generates enough reaction torque to match the joint torque normally
produced by muscles. The matching of the joint torque and the harvester braking torque is
critical since too much braking torque will interfere the normal walking and too small
torque will not assist the knee flexors enough. The correct torque is achieved by a properly
designed mechanical system. The mechanical system consists of a chassis and a
transmission. The input shaft accepts the knee motion at 1:1 ratio through a single hinge
knee brace. A roller clutch on the input shaft couples the harvester with knee motion during

College Of Engineering ,Chengannur

Biomechanical Energy Harvesting 17

knee extension phase, and decouples the harvester from knee motion during the knee
flexion phase.

The normal knee joint mechanical power is computed as:

(1)

Where Pk is the knee joint mechanical power, M K is the knee joint torque from inverse
dynamics; ωK is the knee angular velocity.

After feeding through the roller clutch, the input angular velocity to the gear train is zero
during knee flexion phases.

The angular velocity is then amplified by the gear train before being applied to the
generator.

(2)

Where rt is the transmission gear ratio. The gear train will spin the generator at a speed of

ωg and the generator will convert the input mechanical power into electrical power. The
generated voltage is computed by the following equation

(3)

Where Kg is the back electromotive force (EMF) constant which gives the voltage per unit
of rotational velocity. This design parameter of generator depends on the total number of
turns in the armature winding, the number of parallel paths, the number of poles, and the
magnetic flux per pole. A generator with more coils, poles, and stronger flux density
normally gives a larger Kg. For a motor, the speed constant is the reciprocal of the back
EMF constant.

When connecting a load to the generator, there will be current I in the complete circuit

(4)

College Of Engineering ,Chengannur

Biomechanical Energy Harvesting 18

Where Rg is terminal resistance of the generator .Rl is the external load we connect to the
generator. Vl is the output voltage of the generator. The output electrical power is

(5)

The power dissipated by the generator is computed as

(6)

When generating electrical power, the generator produces a

reaction torque that acts on the gear train,

(7)

Where Km is the torque constant which equals to the back EMF constant.

The reaction torque is amplified by the gear train before being applied to the input shaft and
knee joint. The reaction torque applied to the joint is

(8)

Where ηt is the efficiency of the gear train. The mechanical power absorbed by the
harvester is the product of the reaction torque and the knee angular velocity,

(9)

The efficiency of the harvester is the ratio between the generated electrical energy and
required mechanical energy,

(10)

For the energy harvester, we want to maximize the electrical power output of (5) and the
mechanical to electrical efficiency of (10) while producing a reaction torque (8) matching
the joint torque normally produced by muscles at the end of swing phase. The design
parameters are gear ratio r, output resistance Rl , the speed constant Kg , and the terminal
resistance Rg . Regardless of the choice of gear ratio and output resistance, a generator with
a smaller speed constant and a smaller terminal resistance will result in higher power output

College Of Engineering ,Chengannur

Biomechanical Energy Harvesting 19

and higher efficiency. However, reducing the speed constant and the terminal resistance
means an increase in the weight of the generator. There is a trade-off between the weight
and the preferred generator parameters. We selected a motor with a speed constant of 258
rpm/v, the terminal resistance Rg = 1.03Ω, and a mass of 110 g. After choosing the
generator, we found the output resistance and the gear ratio to maximize the efficiency and
match the reaction torque with the knee joint torque. Through simulation, we found an
optimal combination of gear ratio as 113:1 and output resistance of 5Ω such that the
electrical power output and mechanical to electrical efficiency are maximized. We
considered the friction of the gear train but neglected the inertia of the transmission and the
generator.

Fig(2.10) Control signals based on knee angle and angular velocity [2]

College Of Engineering ,Chengannur

Biomechanical Energy Harvesting 20

2.3.5 Control System Design

In order to achieve generative braking, we designed a control system that selectively

engages/disengages power generation during a gait cycle. The control system consists of a
potentiometer that measures knee angle, an algorithm that generates the control commands,
and an electrical switch that accepts the control command to open/close the circuit between
the generator and resistors. When the circuit is closed, the harvester produces a braking
torque that acts on the knee joint. The control system is implemented on Simulink, compiled
using Real Time Workshop and executed at 1 KHz using Real Time Windows Target on a
desktop computer. This allows for rapid prototyping of the control system. Data acquisition
of the potentiometer data and the control commands to the switch is accomplished by an
A/D and D/A board through the computer.

The potentiometer mounted on the input shaft measures knee joint angle in real time. The
knee joint angle signal is first filtered by a low-pass filter, and then differentiated to get the
angular velocity. The control algorithm uses knee angle and angular velocity to distinguish
different phases of the gait cycle. The logic of the control algorithm is as the following:

(1). If the angular velocity goes across zero upward and the knee angle is small, it is the
start of swing phase knee extension (Point A on Fig.2.10).

(2). If the angular velocity goes across zero upward and the knee angle is large, it is that
start of stance phase knee extension (Point C on Fig. 2.10).

(3). If the angular velocity goes across zero downward between stance phase knee extension
and swing phase knee extension, it is the start of the pre-swing knee flexion (Point B on Fig.
2.10).

(4). If the angular velocity goes across zero downward between swing phase knee extension
and stance phase knee extension, it is the start of stance phase knee flexion (Point D on Fig.
2.10).

Since we target the end of swing phase to harvest electrical power, the power generation
engagement signal is generated by adding a 70-90 ms delay to the detected start of swing
phase knee extension, which is approximately when knee flexor muscles normally become
active to brake knee extension. The disengagement signal is generated by adding a delay to
the start of the stance phase flexion. Instead of turning off energy harvesting at the

College Of Engineering ,Chengannur

 Biomechanical Energy Harvesting 21

beginning of the stance phase, we keep the harvester on during the stance flexion phase to
allow the generator to harvest the kinetic energy remaining in the transmission and the
generator inertia from the swing phase knee extension. This does not generate extra
resistance for the stance flexion phase since the harvester is decoupled from knee motion
during knee flexion by the roller clutch.

An example result of the control system is shown in Figure. The results indicate that the
control system effectively engages power generation at the middle of the swing extension
phase and disengages at the end of stance flexion phase. Human subject testing
demonstrates that the control system is robust with respect to the variation in knee profile
between subjects. The control system correctly engaged/disengaged power generation for
over 50,000 gait cycles without a failure.

2.3.6 Experimental Results

We operated the harvester in there modes: disengaged mode, continuous generation mode
and generative braking mode. In disengaged mode, the roller clutch is manually disengaged
so that the transmission is never in motion. This mode serves as a control condition for
human subject experiments to account for any physiological changes that result from
carrying the added mass independent of physiological changes resulting from energy
harvesting. In the continuous generation mode, energy harvesting is not selective as the
power generation circuit is always completed. In the generative braking mode the control
system selectively engages and disengages power generation to target the negative work
region at the end of walking swing phase.

Ergometer testing served two purposes. One was to evaluate the harvester efficiency of
converting mechanical power to electrical power, which was used later to determine the
relationship between the amount of generated electrical power and the metabolic cost. The
other purpose was to determine the amount of braking torque produced by the harvester.

College Of Engineering ,Chengannur

Biomechanical Energy Harvesting 22

Fig(2.11) Test ergometer for the efficiency evaluation [2]

We designed a test ergometer to drive the harvester with a specified kinetic profile. The
kinetic profile was set as the average knee angle measured during our human subject trials.
By measuring the angular velocity, reaction torque and electrical power generation, we
calculated the efficiency as the ratio between the generated electrical power and the input
mechanical power. To determine the reaction torque produced by friction, the inertia of the
generator and gear train, we performed a test under an open switch condition where no
electrical power was generated. Typical measurements of velocity, torque, computed
mechanical power, and measured electrical power in generative braking, continuous
generation, and open switch modes are shown in figure. The harvester has an efficiency of
63% in continuous generation mode and 56% in generative braking mode. The efficiency in
generative braking mode is lower because the harvester spends a greater amount of time
dissipating mechanical energy without producing electrical power. To determine the
sensitivity of the calculated efficiency to the variation of knee kinematics, we scaled the
input angular velocity profile by ±10% and found only small changes in the efficiency (<
3%).

College Of Engineering ,Chengannur

Biomechanical Energy Harvesting 23

3. CONCLUSION & FUTURE SCOPE

While future versions of this technology may prove useful to the general public for
powering their portable devices, people whose lives depend on portable power will embrace
it most quickly. For example, energy harvesting to trickle charge batteries in current
computerized and motorized prosthetic limbs will allow amputees to walk further and faster
while enabling an increase in sophistication of future devices by alleviating some of
batteries’ limitations. The key principles are considerably more general than the current
embodiment-energy harvesters that operate about body joints and selectively engage power
generation have the potential to improve the quality of life for the user without increasing
their effort.

College Of Engineering ,Chengannur

Biomechanical Energy Harvesting 24

4. REFERENCES

[1] J. Maxwell Donelan, Veronica Naing and Qingguo Li,”Biomechanical Energy

Harvesting” Locomotion Lab, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada.,Sep 2009

[2] Q. Li, V. Naing, J.A. Hoffer, D.J. Weber, A.D. Kuo and J. M. Donelan, " Biomechanical
Energy Harvesting: Apparatus and Method," 2008 IEEE International Conference on
Robotics and Automation Pasadena, CA, USA, May 19-23, 2008.
[3] J. M. Donelan, Q. Li, V. Naing, J. A. Hoffer, D. J. Weber and A. D. Kuo,
“Biomechanical Energy Harvesting: Generating Electricity During Walking with Minimal
User Effort” . Science Vol 319 8 February 2008.

[4] A. L. Hof, H. Elzinga, W. Grimmius, and J. P. Halbertsma, "Speed dependence of

averaged EMG profiles in walking," Gait & Posture, vol. 16, pp. 78-86, Aug 2002.

[5] T. Starner and J. A. Paradiso, "Human generated power for mobile electronics," in
Low-power electronics design, C. Piguet, Ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2005.

[6] Paradiso, J.A. and T. Starner, “Energy scavenging for mobile and wireless
electronics”. IEEE Pervasive Computing, 2005. 4(1): p. 18-27.

[7] J. M. Donelan, Q. Li, V. Naing, J. A. Hoffer, D. J. Weber, and A. D. Kuo,

"Biomechanical energy harvesting: generating electricity during walking with minimal user
effort," Science, vol. 319, pp. 807-10, Feb 8 2008.

[8] http://www.technovelgy.com

[9] http://www.tutor4physics.com

[10] http://www.engadget.com

College Of Engineering ,Chengannur