Home Search Collections Journals About Contact us My IOPscience

A magnetorheological damper-based prosthetic knee (MRPK) and sliding mode tracking

control method for an MRPK-based lower limb prosthesis

This content has been downloaded from IOPscience. Please scroll down to see the full text.

2017 Smart Mater. Struct. 26 045030

(http://iopscience.iop.org/0964-1726/26/4/045030)

View the table of contents for this issue, or go to the journal homepage for more

Download details:

IP Address: 130.88.106.7
This content was downloaded on 18/04/2017 at 20:10

Please note that terms and conditions apply.

You may also be interested in:

A novel four-bar linkage prosthetic knee based on magnetorheological effect: principle, structure,
simulation and control
Lei Xu, Dai-Hua Wang, Qiang Fu et al.

Design and control of a prosthetic leg for above-knee amputees operated in semi-active and active
modes
Jinhyuk Park, Gun-Ha Yoon, Je-Won Kang et al.

Optimal design of a magnetorheological damper used in smart prosthetic knees

Fei Gao, Yan-Nan Liu and Wei-Hsin Liao

Principle and validation of modified hysteretic models for magnetorheological dampers

Xian-Xu Bai, Peng Chen and Li-Jun Qian

Semi-active vibration control in cable-stayed bridges under the condition of random wind load
G Heo and Jeon Joonryong

A novel self-powered MR damper: theoretical and experimental analysis

Guan Xinchun, Huang Yonghu, Ru Yi et al.

Harmonic analysis of an MR damper

W H Liao and C Y Lai

Design and energetic evaluation of a prosthetic knee joint actuator with a lockable parallel spring
J Geeroms, L Flynn, R Jimenez-Fabian et al.

Design and testing of a regenerative magnetorheological actuator for assistive knee braces
Hao Ma, Bing Chen, Ling Qin et al.
 Smart Materials and Structures

Smart Mater. Struct. 26 (2017) 045030 (14pp) https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-665X/aa61f1

A magnetorheological damper-based
prosthetic knee (MRPK) and sliding mode
tracking control method for an MRPK-based
lower limb prosthesis
Qiang Fu1, Dai-Hua Wang1,2,3, Lei Xu1 and Gang Yuan1,2
1
Precision and Intelligence Laboratory, Department of Optoelectronic Engineering, Chongqing University,
Chongqing 400044 People’s Republic of China
2
Key Laboratory of Optoelectronic Technology and Systems of the Ministry of Education of China,
Chongqing University, Chongqing 400044 People’s Republic of China

E-mail: dhwang@cqu.edu.cn

Received 3 November 2016, revised 16 February 2017

Accepted for publication 21 February 2017
Published 20 March 2017

Abstract
Based on a two-bar linkage and a magnetorheological damper (MRD) with a double-ended
structure and shearing operation mode of the magnetorheological fluid, an MRD-based
prosthetic knee (MRPK) is realized. Utilizing the developed MRPK, an MRD-based lower limb
prosthesis (MRLLP) is developed, modeled, and simulated in this paper, to analyse the effects of
hysteresis of the integrated MRD on the swing angle of the shank of the MRLLP. Based on this,
a sliding mode tracking control (SMTC) method for controlling the swing angle of the shank of
the MRLLP is proposed to suppress hysteresis, along with a robustness analysis. Utilizing the
SMTC method, co-simulations on controlling the swing angle of the shank of the MRLLP are
carried out in ADAMS and Simulink. The simulation results show that the root mean square
error (RMSE) of the swing angle of the shank of the MRLLP produced by the SMTC method is
80% less than that from the computed torque plus PD (CT+PD) control method. Therefore, the
SMTC method is effective in suppressing hysteresis of the MRD. Furthermore, when the
MRLLP is disturbed, the RMSE of the swing angle of the shank of the MRLLP produced by the
SMTC method is 67% less than that from the CT+PD control method. Therefore, the SMTC
method has strong robustness to random disturbance. A rapid control prototype of the MRLLP
system and a corresponding experimental test system are established. On the established
experimental test system, experiments are carried out on control of the swing angle of the shank
of the MRLLP via the SMTC method. The results are compared with those from the ON/OFF
and the CT+PD control methods. The experimental results show that the MRPK has controllable
joint torque, and can be used to imitate the natural swing of a human knee joint. Additionally, the
RMSE of the controlled swing angle of the shank of the MRLLP produced by the SMTC method
is 34% less than that produced by the CT+PD control method and is 37% less than that from the
ON/OFF control method.

Keywords: prosthetic knee, magnetorheological damper, lower-limb prosthesis, sliding mode

control, hysteresis, tracking control

(Some figures may appear in colour only in the online journal)

3
Author to whom any correspondence should be addressed.

0964-1726/17/045030+14$33.00 1 © 2017 IOP Publishing Ltd Printed in the UK

Smart Mater. Struct. 26 (2017) 045030
1. Introduction
Lower-limb prostheses (LLPs), as important rehabilitative
tools for amputees, can be used not only to restore amputees’
motion functions but also to partially repair their impaired
psychologies. LLPs mainly consist of prosthetic knees (PKs),
the appropriate transfemoral sockets, connection tubes, and
prosthetic feet. Depending on the integrated actuators
employed, PKs are classified as passive [1], active [2–7], and
semi-active [9–18]. Passive PKs with uncontrollable devices
cannot imitate the natural swing of a human knee joint [1]. To
imitate this natural swing, active PKs with hydraulic actuators
[2], pneumatic actuators [3], and DC motors [4–6] have been
researched over the last couple of decades. However, active
PKs have complex structures with high power consumption.
Additionally, due to the active force introduced into them by
their integrated active actuators, the stability of the controllers
of active PKs should be taken into account [8]. To overcome
such drawbacks, researches have been carried out on semi-
active PKs, which are equipped with pneumatic/hydraulic
dampers with adjustable valves [9], and on electrorheological
and magnetorheological (ER/MR) devices based on the ER/
MR effects [10–18].
As semi-active devices, MR dampers/brakes (MRD/
MRB) have continuous controllable damping forces with
rapid response and low power consumption [19–23]. Conse-
quently, MRD-based and MRB-based PKs (MRPKs) have
continuous controllable knee torques with rapid response and
low power consumption. Therefore, MRPKs have been stu-
died in depth. Herr and Wilkenfeld [11] designed an MRPK
based on an MRB, and designed its open-loop controller
utilizing finite-state machine control. Based on this, Thorar-
insson et al [12] analysed the influence of the MRB’s design
parameters (e.g., the applied electrical current, electrical
resistance, material properties, and geometric shape) on the
knee torque of the MRPK. However, the device cannot track
the reference knee trajectories because of the finite-state
control method. To track the reference knee trajectories,
feedback controls of MRPKs have been proposed and applied
[13–18]. Carlson et al [13] designed an MRPK utilizing an
MRD with a single-ended structure, and designed a PD
controller to track the reference trajectory. By combining a
DC motor with an MRD, Park et al [14] designed an MRPK
operable in both semi-active and active modes, and designed
the corresponding computer torque plus PD (CT+PD) con-
troller for controlling the swing of its shank. Kim and Oh [15]
designed an MRPK with an MR brake and a CT+PD con-
troller for controlling the swing of its shank. In addition, the
control gains of the controller can be adjusted via an inter-
active learning control. Nandi et al [16] designed a PD con-
troller for an MRPK to track the reference trajectory
generated from the central pattern generator model. By inte-
grating a four-bar mechanism and an MRD, Xu et al [17]
designed a four-bar linkage MRPK using a PD controller.
Ekkachai and Nilkhamhang [18] designed an MRPK using a
neural network controller to predict the swing angle of the
shank. The above mentioned MRPKs are controlled in the
swing phase without considering the effects of hysteresis of
2
Q Fu et al
the integrated MRDs on the swing angle of the MRPKs. By
ignoring hysteresis of the integrated MRDs, a delay will occur
in the damping force changes, resulting in insufficient
damping force to control the swing angle of the MRPKs.
Consequently, the tracking errors of the swing angles of the
MRPKs will be enlarged.
In this paper an MRPK with a single axis is realized,
aiming to imitate the natural swing of a human knee joint,
with low power consumption, based on a two-bar linkage and
an MRD with a double-ended structure and a shearing
operation mode of the MR fluid. Utilizing the developed
MRPK, an MRD-based lower limb prosthesis (MRLLP) is
developed, modeled, and simulated. Based on this, and aim-
ing to suppress the effects of hysteresis of the MRD on the
swing angle of the shank of the developed MRLLP, a sliding
mode tracking control (SMTC) method of controlling the
swing angle of the shank of the MRLLP is proposed, along
with a robustness analysis. Utilizing the SMTC method, co-
simulations on controlling the swing angle of the shank of the
MRLLP are carried out in ADAMS and Simulink. A rapid
control prototype (RCP) MRLLP and a corresponding
experimental test system are established. On the established
experimental test system, experiments are carried out to
control the swing angle of the shank of the MRLLP via the
SMTC method.
2. MRPK and MRPK-based lower limb prosthesis
2.1. Principle and structure of the MRPK
Figures 1(a) and (b) show the structural principle and a
photograph of the developed MRPK, respectively. Observing
figure 1(a), the MRPK consists of a two-bar linkage and an
integrated MRD. The two-bar linkage includes upper and
lower link rods connected to each other by a hinge. The two
ends of the integrated MRD are individually attached to the
upper and lower link rods by hinges. The thigh connector on
the upper link rod connects to the prosthetic sockets, and the
shank connector on the lower link rod connects to the con-
nection tube.
Figure 2 shows a structural diagram and a photograph of
the developed MRD integrated into the MRPK shown in
figure 1. Observing figure 2, the MRD with its double-ended
structure operates in the shear mode of the MR fluid. The
MRD mainly consists of a piston rod, an outer cylinder, and
an inner cylinder. The inner cylinder, which comprises an
upper lid, a lower lid, four magnetic disks, and three bobbins
with wound coils, is fixed into the outer cylinder. The MR
fluid fills the fluid gaps between the inner cylinder and the
piston rod. The driving current through all coils forms a flux
path along the upper magnetic disk, the fluid gap, the piston
rod, the fluid gap again, the lower magnetic disk, the outer
cylinder, and the upper magnetic disk. The four magnetic
disks, piston rod, and outer cylinder must be made from a soft
steel with a high magnetic permeability, and the other com-
ponents are made from nonmagnetic materials. When the
piston rod moves in the inner cylinder, the viscosity of the
Smart Mater. Struct. 26 (2017) 045030 Q Fu et al

Figure 1. MRPK: (a) the principle, and; (b) the photograph.

Figure 2. Integrated MRD: (a) the structural diagram, and; (b) the photograph. [editor to authors: in 2(b), the topmost label should read
‘piston rod’ and not ‘rob’.]

3
Smart Mater. Struct. 26 (2017) 045030
Table 1. Structural parameters and material properties of the
developed MRD for the MRPK.
Parameter Symbol Value
Radius of piston rod Rr 0.009 m
Height of magnetic disk Ld/2 0.01 m
Fluid gap width Lg 0.001 m
Radius of inner cylinder Rci 0.016 m
Radius of outer cylinder Rco 0.02 m
Number of turns of the coil N 100
Material (bobbin) H68 cuprum
Material (other parts) 20# steel
MR fluid between the rod and the cylinder increases as the
current in the coils increases, which increases the resistance to
the motion of the piston rod. The structural parameters of the
developed MRD are listed in table 1.
2.2. Configuration of the MRLLP
The PK should be used to construct the lower limb prosthesis
with a suitable transfemoral socket, connection tube, and
prosthetic foot. Therefore, based on the developed MRPK, an
MRLLP and its control system should be established for
control of the MRPK. Figure 3 shows the structural principle
and a photograph of the developed MRLLP based on the
MRPK, installed on a test platform for prosthetic knees [24].
The structural parameters of the developed MRLLP are listed
in table 2. As shown in figure 3, the MRLLP consists of the
developed MRPK, a transfemoral socket, a connection tube, a
prosthetic foot, and an angle sensor AS1. Observing
figure 3(a), the upper and lower link rods of the MRPK are
attached to the transfemoral socket and the connection tube,
respectively. The other end of the connection tube is attached
to the prosthetic foot. The prosthetic shank of the MRLLP is
composed of the lower link rod of the MRPK and the con-
nection tube. Observing figure 3(b), the transfemoral socket
of the MRLLP is acted on by the thigh simulation mechanism
(TSM) of the test platform, and the MRLLP is installed on the
test platform through the TSM. According to [24], the TSM
on the test platform is a link rod imitating the human thigh.
The angle sensor AS1 (type: WDD35S2) is coaxially attached
to the knee joint of the MRPK to sense the swing angle of the
shank.
2.3. Control system of the MRLLP
Figures 4(a) and (b) show a schematic diagram of the MRLLP
with its control system and a block diagram of the controller
with the CT+PD control method, respectively. As shown in
the dashed line rectangle on the right-hand side of figure 4(a),
the control system of the MRLLP consists of a signal con-
ditioning circuit for angle sensor AS1, D/A and A/D con-
verters, a current driver for the integrated MRD, a motion
planner, and a controller. The controller adjusts the driving
current (I ) to the MRD according to the signals obtained from
the angle sensor and the motion planner, to allow the swing
4
Q Fu et al
angle of the shank of the MRLLP to follow a reference tra-
jectory of the shank swing generated from the motion planner.
Existing MRLLPs are usually controlled by utilizing the
CT+PD control method, which includes an inner loop and an
external feedback loop [14, 15]. In order to model and ana-
lyze the shortcomings of an MRLLP with a CT+PD control
method, a block diagram of the controller with the CT+PD
control method for the MRLLP is presented in figure 4(b). As
shown, the external feedback loop calculates the output of the
PD controller according to the difference e between the swing
angle q2 and reference angle q 2d of the shank. Applying the
computed torque module, the inner feedback loop calculates
the nonlinear terms in the dynamic model of the MRLLP
according to the swing angle q1 of the thigh and the swing
angle q2 of the shank. The inverse model of the MRD cal-
culates the desired driving current according to the sum of the
outputs of the PD controller and computed torque module.
3. Modeling and analysing on the MRLLP
3.1. Dynamic modeling
The dynamic model is the key to designing the controller for
the MRLLP. Generally, the MRLLP must ensure the safety of
above-knee amputees during the stance phase and allow them
to assume a natural posture during the swing phase. There-
fore, the dynamic models of the MRLLP differ in their stance
and swing phases. According to [25], during the stance phase,
the stability of the LLPs can be ensured through the self-
regulation of the above-knee amputee. Therefore, in this
paper, the dynamic model of the MRLLP during the swing
phase only will be discussed.
Observing figure 3(a), the MRLLP can be simplified as a
double pendulum model in the sagittal plane, in which the
hip, knee, and ankle joints are simplified as hinges A, B, and
C, respectively. The link rod BCD of the MRPK is attached to
the link rod AC, and the thigh is simplified as link rod ABD
with a mass center of p1 . The shank is simplified as link rod
BF with a mass center of p2 . The fixed hinge F is used to
connect the shank and foot. The torque on hinge B can be
adjusted by varying the damping force of the integrated
MRD. Consequently, the swing angle of link rod BF can be
controlled by changing the torque on hinge B. According to
the Lagrange kinetic equation, the dynamic model of the
MRLLP shown in figure 3 can be expressed as
⎧ t1 - t2 = M11q1̈ + M12 q2̈ + C1 + G 1
⎨ (1 )
⎩ t2 = M21q1̈ + M22 q2̈ + C2 + G 2
where t1 and t2 are the torques supplied to hinges A and B; q1
and q2 are the angles relative to the vertical direction of link
rods ABD and BF; M11, M12 , M21, and M22 are the components
of the inertia matrix; C1 and C2 are the Coriolis/centripetal
forces of link rods ABD and BF, respectively; and G1 and G 2
are the gravitational forces of link rods ABD and BF,
respectively. According to the Lagrange kinetic equation, M11,
Smart Mater. Struct. 26 (2017) 045030 Q Fu et al

Figure 3. MRLLP: (a) the structural principle, and; (b) the photograph, showing (1) thigh simulation mechanism (TSM); (ed: the TSM is not
the transfemoral socket, as you wrote here. Please check that my editing is correct.) (2) MRLLP; (3) MRPK; (4) connection tube and
prosthetic foot, and; (5) angle sensor AS1.

Table 2. Structural parameters of the developed MRLLP. relative to the cylinder; K and C are the stiffness and damping
coefficients of the MRD; z is the hysteresis operator; and μ is
Parameter Symbol Value
the scaling value of the MRD. According to [26], m is given
Thigh mass m1 1.02 kg by
Shank mass m2 2.36 kg
Length from hip to center of thigh lc1 0.3591 m m = aI b (4 )
Thigh length l1 0.4591 m where I is the driving current to the MRD, and α and β are the
Length from knee to center of shank lc2 0.163 75 m parameters related to the structure of the MRD.
According to the Bouc–Wen model [22], the hysteresis
operator z is given by
M12 , M21, M22 , C2, and G 2 are given by
z = - gz ∣ x ∣∣ z ∣n - 1 - jx ∣ z ∣n + dx (5 )
M11 = I1 + m1lc1 + m 2 l1
2 2
where g , j, d , and n are the parameters of the hysteresis
M12 = M21 = m 2 l1lc2 cos (q1 - q2 )
operator. These parameters can adjust the scale and shape of
M22 = I2 + m 2 lc2 2 the hysteresis loop.
C2 = - m 2 l1lc2 sin (q1 - q2 ) q 1 According to equations (1)–(5), we have
2

G 2 = m 2 lc2 g sin q2
where l1 and l2 are the lengths of link rods ABD and BF,
respectively; lc1 and lc2 are the distances from hinges A and B
to p1 and p2 , respectively; I1 and I2 are the moments of inertia
of link rods ABD and BF, respectively; m1 and m 2 are the
masses of link rods ABD and BF, respectively; and g is the
gravitational constant, which is equal to 9.8 m s−2.
According to figure 1, the torque t2 generated by the
MRD can be expressed as
t2 = FD d
where d is the force arm of the damping force of the MRD FD
to hinge B.
According to the Bouc–Wen model [22], the damping
force of the MRD is expressed as
FD = Kx + Cx + mz
where x and x are the distance and speed of the piston rod
(Kx + Cx + aI b z) d (q1, q2) = M21q1̈ + M22 q2̈ + C2 + G 2
(6 )
Equation (6) is the dynamic model of the MRLLP. The
left-hand side of equation (6) is the torque that the MRD
applies on hinge B; the first and second terms on the right-
hand side are the inertia moments produced by link rods ABD
and BF, respectively; the last two terms on the right-hand side
are the torques on hinge B produced by the Coriolis/cen-
(2 ) tripetal and gravitational forces.
3.2. Analysing the MRLLP with the CT+PD control method
3.2.1. Modeling the developed MRD and the ideal damper.
To analyse the effects of hysteresis of the MRD on the swing
(3 ) angle of the shank of the MRLLP, the concept of the ideal
damper (ID) is introduced. The ID differs from the MRD in
that it has no hysteresis, and accordingly its damping force is

5
Smart Mater. Struct. 26 (2017) 045030 Q Fu et al

Figure 4. Control system of the MRLLP: (a) the schematic diagram of the developed MRLLP with the control system, and; (b) the block
diagram of the controller with the CT+PD control method.

not affected by hysteresis. Therefore, the effects of hysteresis

on the damping force can be identified by comparing the
damping forces of the MRD and ID. Subsequently, the effects
of hysteresis on the swing angle of the shank of the MRLLP
can be identified according to equation (6).
The damping force of the ID can be imitated by the
Bingham model, which is described as

FD¢ = Kx + Cx + rI b sign (x) (7)

where K and C are the stiffness and damping coefficients of

the ID, respectively; r and b are the parameters related to the
structure of the ID; and sign denotes the sign function. When
the velocity of the piston rod x is greater than 0 m s−1, sign (x )
is equal to 1, and when the velocity of the piston rod x is less
than 0 m s−1, sign (x ) is equal to −1. Otherwise, sign (x ) is
equal to zero. Figure 5. Measured damping force versus velocity relationships of
the developed MRD with driving currents of 0.2 A, 0.6 A, 1.0 A,
To identify the model parameters of the MRD and ID, the 1.5 A, and 2.0 A under a 1.0 Hz sinusoidal displacement excitation
MRD shown in figure 2(b) was experimentally tested on a with an amplitude of 0.01 m.
shock absorber test system (MTS 849 from MTS System
Corporation, shown in [22]) and excited by a 1.0 Hz
sinusoidal displacement excitation with amplitude of of the equivalent models of the MRD and ID are listed in
0.01 m. Figure 5 shows the measured damping force versus table 3.
velocity relationships of the MRD with driving currents of Under a 1.0 Hz sinusoidal displacement excitation with
0.2 A, 0.6 A, 1.0 A, 1.5 A, and 2.0 A under the sinusoidal an amplitude of 0.01 m, the simulated damping force versus
displacement excitation. From the fitting of measured velocity relationships according to the equivalent models
damping forces of the MRD shown in figure 5, the parameters (equations (3) and (7)) of the MRD and ID with driving

6
Smart Mater. Struct. 26 (2017) 045030
Table 3. Parameters of the equivalent models of MRD and ID.
Parameter Symbol Value
Stiffness coefficient of the damper K 0 N m−1
Damping coefficient of the damper C 50 N s m−1
Coefficient of shear stress of the MRD a 145
Coefficient of shear stress of the MRD b 1.3
and ID
Coefficient of shear stress of the ID r 95
Coefficient of hysteresis g 2000 (N m)−1
Coefficient of hysteresis j 2000 (N m)−1
Coefficient of hysteresis d 2000 N m−1
Coefficient of hysteresis n 2
Figure 6. Simulated damping forces versus velocities relationships
by the equivalent models of MRD and ID with driving currents of
0.2 A, 0.6 A, 1.0 A, 1.5 A, and 2.0 A under a 1.0 Hz sinusoidal
displacement excitation with amplitude of 0.01 m.
currents of 0.2 A, 0.6 A, 1.0 A, 1.5 A, and 2.0 A, the
parameters of which are listed in table 3, are shown in
figure 6. Observing figure 6, it is clear that the simulated
damping forces of the equivalent model of the MRD are less
than those of the ID due to hysteresis as velocity approaches
0 mm s−1.
3.2.2. Effects of hysteresis of the MRD on the swing angle of
the shank of the MRLLP. Observing equation (6), the swing
angle q2 of the shank will increase as swing angle acceleration
q2̈ decreases, due to the decreased damping force of the MRD.
Utilizing the co-simulation model shown in figure 10 in
section 4.3.1, the time histories of the swing angles of the
shanks of the MRLLP and ID-based LLP (IDLLP) with a
driving current of 0.3 A are shown in figure 7. Observing
figure 7, the swing angles of the shank of the MRLLP in the
swing phase (0.7–1 s) are larger than those of the IDLLP. This
indicates that the damping force simulated by the equivalent
model of the MRD is insufficient to resist the swing of the
shank due to hysteresis.
Disregarding hysteresis of the MRD, the controllers of
the MRLLPs are usually established via the CT+PD control
method as shown in figure 4(b). According to figure 4(b), the
7
Q Fu et al
Figure 7. Simulated time histories of swing angles of the shanks of
the MRLLP and IDLLP with a driving current of 0.3 A.
control algorithm for the MRLLP with the CT+PD control
method is given by
d
I = (M22 a-1 (zd )-1 (q2̈ - Kd e - Kp e - M22-1
´ (M21q1̈ - C2 - G 2 - (Kx + Cx) d )))-b (8 )
where Kp and Kd are the control gains which are positive real
numbers, and e (=q2 - q 2d ) is the control error.
Figures 8(a) and (b) show simulated time histories of the
swing angles and corresponding control errors of the shanks
of the MRLLP and IDLLP in the swing phase controlled by
the CT+PD control method for the control gains Kp and Kd of
400 and 40, respectively. As shown in figure 8(a), compared
with the swing angle of the shank of the MRLLP, the swing
angle of the shank of the IDLLP follows the reference
trajectory with less error. Observing figure 8(b), the
maximum absolute error (MAE) of the swing angle of the
shank of the IDLLP is about 2.3°, and the root mean square
error (RMSE) of the swing angle is about 1°. However, the
MAE of the swing angle of the shank of the MRLLP is
about 16° and the RMSE of the swing angle is about 5.7°.
The reason is that the damping force of the MRD is less
than the desired damping force for tracking control, due to
hysteresis.
4. SMTC method and numerical simulations
4.1. SMTC method
As discussed above, when the developed MRLLP is con-
trolled by utilizing the CT+PD control method, hysteresis of
the integrated MRD should reduce the generated damping
force, enlarging the swing angle q2 of the shank. To reduce
the effect of hysteresis, an SMTC method for controlling the
developed MRLLP is proposed, as shown in figures 3 and
4(a). The dashed line rectangle in figure 9 shows a block
diagram of the controller with the proposed SMTC method
for the developed MRLLP. As shown in figure 9, the SMTC
Smart Mater. Struct. 26 (2017) 045030 Q Fu et al

uncontrollable nonlinear forces, which can be expressed as

F = M21q1̈ - C2 - G 2 - (Kx + Cx) d (10)

Defining the error function s of the SMC as

s = e + le (11)

where e is the control error, which is given by

e = q2 - q 2d

[ed: delete indent here.] and observing equation (11),

control error e will exponentially approach 0° when s = 0/s.
According to the SMC method, the reaching law is
written as

s = - esign (s) - xs (12)

where e and x , which are the positive real numbers, are the
control gains. The first term on the right-hand side of
equation (12) is a discontinuous term ensuring that the error s
will approach 0/s over a finite period.
Observing equations (9)–(12), we have

M22-1aI b D = r - M22-1F (13)

where M22-1F is the nonlinear torque on the knee joint gen-

erated by the unit inertia moment of link rod BF, and is
compensated by the computed torque module shown in
figure 9; and r is the output of the SMC as shown in figure 9,
which can be expressed as
d
r = q2̈ - le - esign (s) - xs (14)

Considering that
Figure 8. Simulated time histories of the swing angle and
u = M22-1aI b (15)
corresponding tracking error of the shanks of the MRLLP and
IDLLP with the CT+PD control method in the swing phase: (a) the
tracking trajectories, and; (b) the tracking errors.
[ed: delete indent here.] equation (13) can be rewritten as

uD = r - M22-1F (16)

method includes an inner feedback loop and an external By estimating D and F as D̂ and F̂, the control law u of
feedback loop. The external feedback loop calculates the the SMTC method is expressed as
output r of the SMC according to the difference e between the
-1
swing angle q2 and the reference angle q 2d of the shank. By u = Dˆ (r - M22-1F
ˆ) (17)
applying the computed torque module, the inner feedback
According to equation (15), the driving current to the
loop calculates the nonlinear terms in equation (6) according
MRD is expressed as
to the swing angle q1 of the thigh and the swing angle q2 of the
shank. The inverse model of the MRD calculates the driving I = (M22 a-1u)-b (18)
current according to the sum of the outputs of the SMC and
computed torque module.
According to equation (6), we have
4.2. Robustness of the SMTC method

q2̈ = M22-1aI b D + M22-1F (9 ) When x > 0 m s-1, both z and d are positive and con-
tinuously bounded, and then D is a continuous bounded
where D (=zd ) is the torque applied by the hysteresis function. Therefore, we have
operator to the knee joint, which is a positive definite boun-
ded function; and F is the torque generated by other 0  Dmin < D < Dmax (19)

8
Smart Mater. Struct. 26 (2017) 045030 Q Fu et al

Figure 9. Block diagram of the controller with the proposed SMTC method for the developed MRLLP as shown in figures 3 and 4(a).

Figure 10. Co-simulation model of the developed MRLLP: (a) the rigid model in ADAMS, and; (b) the feedback control model in Simulink.

Defining D̂ as where h is positive, then

1 ⎡
Dˆ = (Dmin Dmax ) 2 (20) (
ss  ⎣M22-1 F -
D ˆ
Dˆ
F ) s + ( - 1) (q̈ - le) s
D
Dˆ
d
2

D 2⎤
where Dmin and Dmax are the upper and lower boundaries of
D, then
-
Dˆ
ks ⎦ - M22-1 (F - Fˆ ) s + ( - 1)
D
Dˆ
D
Dˆ
d
- h ∣s ∣  -h ∣s ∣
D 2
´ (q2̈ - le) s - ks (24)
Dˆ
g -1  g
D
(21)
Dˆ

1
According to equations (22)–(24), when Dmin  D 
where g = ( ).
Dmax
Dmin
2
Dmax and the sliding mode condition given by inequality (24)
is satisfied, the error function s will converge to 0/s at a
According to equations (9) and (12), we have convergence rate greater than h . Therefore, the SMTC method
is robust.
⎡ ⎤
s = ⎣M22-1 F - ( D ˆ
Dˆ
F )+( D
Dˆ
d
)
- 1 (q2̈ - le) ⎦
D
- (esign (s) + ks) (22) 4.3. Numerical simulation
Dˆ

To analyse the performance of the SMTC method in reducing

If the control gain e satisfies the following equation
control errors caused by hysteresis, the tracking performances
of the MRLLP via the SMTC method and the CT+PD control
e  M22-1 ( Dˆ
D
F -F
ˆ + 1-
) ( Dˆ
D ) (q ̈
d
2 - le) - ks method are compared. To analyse the robustness of the
SMTC, the tracking performances of the disturbed MRLLP
Dˆ
+h via the SMTC method and the CT+PD control method are
D compared.
(23)

9
Smart Mater. Struct. 26 (2017) 045030
Figure 11. Simulation model of the proposed SMTC method
established in Simulink. [ed: the module caption should read
‘computed torque’.]
Figure 12. Time history of the swing angle generated by the TSM of
the test platform for prosthetic knees for a gait cycle time of 1 s.
4.3.1. Co-simulation model. Figure 10 shows the co-
simulation model of the MRLLP established in ADAMS
and Simulink. Figure 10(a) shows the established rigid model
of the MRLLP in ADAMS according to the structure shown
in figure 3. Figure 10(b) shows the established feedback
control model of the MRLLP in Simulink, which consists of
the rigid model of the MRLLP as shown in figure 10(a) with
structural parameters as listed in table 2, the simulation model
of the SMTC controller, the inverse model of the MRD given
by equation (18), and the equivalent model of the MRD given
by equations (3)–(5). For comparison, the co-simulation
model utilizing the equivalent model of the ID is also
simulated.
Figure 11 shows the established simulation model of the
SMTC controller based on equation (16) in Simulink. As
shown in figure 11, the simulation model includes the
computed torque module and the SMC module. The former is
used to calculate the nonlinear torque F according to
equation (9), and the latter is used to restrain control errors
according to equation (13). The control gains e, l , and x are
10, 25, and 40, respectively.
Under simulation, a swing motion with a frequency of
1 Hz, as shown in figure 12, is applied to hinge A of the rigid
10
Q Fu et al
Figure 13. Simulated time histories of the swing angles and tracking
errors of the shank of the MRLLP using the SMTC method and the
CT+PD control method in the swing phase: (a) the tracking
trajectories, and; (b) the tracking errors.
model of the MRLLP as shown in figure 10(a) by fitting the
hip trajectories of a healthy walking human.
4.3.2. Tracking errors of the MRLLP caused by hysteresis of
the MRD. Figures 13(a) and (b) show the simulated time
histories of the swing angle and error respectively of the
shank of the MRLLP via the SMTC method in the swing
phase. For comparison, the simulated time histories of the
swing angle and error of the shank of the MRLLP via the CT
+PD control method in the swing phase are also shown in
figures 13(a) and (b), respectively. As shown in figure 13(a),
compared to that via the CT+PD control method, the swing
angle via the SMTC method follows the reference trajectory
with less error. As shown in figure 13(b), the MAE of the
swing angle of the shank of the MRLLP produced by the
SMTC method is about 2.7°, and the RMSE is about 0.9°. In
contrast, the MAE of the swing angle of the shank of the
MRLLP produced by the CT+PD control method is about
Smart Mater. Struct. 26 (2017) 045030
Figure 14. Simulated swing angle of the shank of the MRLLP
disturbed by a random signal with a mean value of 0° and a square
error of 0.04°.
Figure 15. Simulated time histories of the swing angles and tracking
errors of the shank of the disturbed MRLLP using the SMTC method
and the CT+PD control method in the swing phase: (a) the tracking
trajectories, and; (b) the tracking errors.
11
Q Fu et al
Figure 16. Test system: (1) test platform for prosthetic knees; (2)
HJSM with angle sensor AS2; (3) TSM; (4) MRLLP; (5) host
computer; (6) real-time simulation system, and; (7) current driver.
16°, and the RMSE is about 5.7°. Therefore, the SMTC
method can effectively suppress hysteresis of the MRD.
4.3.3. Tracking errors of the MRLLP disturbed by the noise of
the sensing signals. Sensing signals are always disturbed by
the noise of the sensors and transmission circuits. To verify
the robustness of the proposed SMTC method, a random
signal with a mean value of 0° and a square error of 0.04° is
added to the sensing swing angle signals of the shank of the
MRLLP in the simulation. Figure 14 shows the simulated
swing angle of the shank of the disturbed MRLLP.
Figures 15(a) and (b) show the simulated time histories
of the swing angle and error of the shank of the disturbed
MRLLP via the SMTC method in the swing phase. For
comparison, the simulated time histories of the swing angle
and error of the shank of the disturbed MRLLP via the CT
+PD control method in the swing phase are also shown in
figures 15(a) and (b). Observing figure 15(a), the swing angle
of the shank of the disturbed MRLLP via the SMTC method
follows the reference trajectory with little error. However,
there is a significant error between the swing angle of the
shank of the MRLLP via the CT+PD control method and the
reference trajectory. Observing figure 15(b), the MAE of the
swing angle of the shank of the disturbed MRLLP produced
by the SMTC method is about 10°, and the RMSE is about
3.3°. In contrast, the MAE of the swing angle of the shank of
the disturbed MRLLP produced by the CT+PD control
method is 35°, and the RMSE is 10.2°. Both are larger than
those produced by the SMTC method. Therefore, the
robustness of the SMTC method to uncertain bounded
disturbance is stronger than that of the CT+PD control
method.
Smart Mater. Struct. 26 (2017) 045030 Q Fu et al

Figure 17. Experimental time histories of the swing angle and Figure 18. Experimental time histories of the swing angle and
tracking error of the shank of the MRLLP via the SMTC method. tracking error of the shank of the MRLLP via the OFF control
method.
5. Experiments and results

5.1. Experimental setup

Figure 16 shows a photograph of the rapid control prototype

(RCP) of the MRLLP system and the corresponding exper-
imental test system, based on a real-time simulation system
(DS1103, dSPACE GmbH). Observing figure 16, the RCP of
the MRLLP system comprises the developed MRLLP, the
current driver (type: KH-10A), and the real-time simulation
system. The real-time simulation system is used to establish
the controllers via the proposed SMTC, CT+PD control, and
ON/OFF control methods, as well as providing the control
signals for the current driver according to the sensing angle
signals and the reference trajectory. The current driver is used
to control the damping force of the MRD according to the
signals from the controllers.
The experimental test system comprises a test platform Figure 19. Experimental time histories of the swing angle and
for prosthetic knees and a real-time simulation system. The tracking error of the shank of the MRLLP via the ON control
test platform is composed of a hip joint simulation mechanism method.
(HJSM), a TSM and an angle sensor (AS2, type: WDD35S2)
[24]. The HJSM and TSM individually include a DC motor, a Figure 17 shows the time histories of the swing angle and
screw, and a corresponding controller. The AS2 is coaxially error of the shank of the MRLLP via the SMTC method. As
attached to the hip joint so as to sense its swing angle signals. shown in figure 17, the time history of the swing angle cor-
The MRLLP is attached to the test platform via the TSM, as responds well with the reference trajectory after one period.
shown in figure 3(b). The real-time simulation system is used The MAE of the swing angle of the shank is 15° and the
to process the sensing angle signals from the AS1 on the RMSE of the swing angle of the shank is 5.7°.
MRLLP and from the AS2 on the HJSM, as well as send the Figures 18 and 19 show the time histories of the swing
processed angle signals to the controller of the MRLLP. angles and errors of the shank of the MRLLP via the ON
When experiments are performed, the TSM generates the
(I = 2 A) and OFF (I = 0 A) control methods, respectively.
swing of the thigh for the MRLLP. The time history of the As shown in figure 18, the swing angles of the shank of the
swing angle of the TSM with a gait cycle time of 1 s is shown MRLLP via the OFF control method exceed the reference
in figure 12. angles. The MAE of the swing angle of the shank is 20° and
the RMSE is about 9°. The reason is that the MRD cannot
5.2. Experimental results and analysis
provide an efficient damping force because of the small
driving current supplied to it via the OFF control method. In
Experiments on control of the swing angle of the shank of the contrast, as shown in figure 19, the swing angles of the shank
MRLLP with the SMTC, ON/OFF control (2 A/0 A driving of the MRLLP via the ON control method are smaller than the
currents), and CT+PD control methods are carried out. reference angles. The MAE of the swing angle of the shank is

12
Smart Mater. Struct. 26 (2017) 045030
Figure 20. Experimental time histories of the swing angle and
tracking error of the shank of the MRLLP via the CT+PD control
method.
25° and the RMSE is about 12.5°. The reason is that the
damping force of the MRD is larger than the required
damping force because of the large driving current supplied to
it via the ON control method.
Figure 20 shows the experimental time histories of the
swing angle and error of the shank of the MRLLP via the CT
+PD control method. As shown in figure 20, the time history
of the swing angle of the shank of the MRLLP follows the
reference trajectory with considerable error. The MAE of the
swing angle of the shank is 22°, and the RMSE of the swing
angle of the shank is about 8.5° when the MRLLP is steadily
controlled.
According to the above analyses, the experimental results
show that the SMTC method has the smallest control error.
The RMSE of the swing angle of the MRLLP produced by
the proposed SMTC is 34% less than that produced by the CT
+PD control method, and is 37% less than that produced by
the ON/OFF control method.
6. Conclusion
In this paper, an MRD with a double-ended structure and a
shearing operation mode for the magnetorheological fluid is
designed and developed for integration into an MRPK. Based
on a two-bar linkage and the developed MRD, the MRPK is
realized. Utilizing the developed MRPK, an MRLLP is
developed and modeled. Based on the established model, the
effect of hysteresis of the integrated MRD on the swing angle
of the shank of the MRLLP is simulated and analysed. On
these bases, an SMTC method for controlling the swing angle
of the shank of the MRLLP is proposed along with a
robustness analysis. Utilizing the proposed SMTC method,
co-simulations on control of the swing angle of the shank of
the MRLLP are carried out in ADAMS and Simulink. The
simulation results show that the RMSE of the swing angle of
the shank of the MRLLP using the proposed SMTC method is
80% less than when using the CT+PD control method.
13
Q Fu et al
Therefore, the SMTC method is effective at suppressing
hysteresis of the MRD. Additionally, when the sensing angle
signal of the MRLLP is disturbed, the RMSE of the swing
angle of the shank of the disturbed MRLLP using the pro-
posed SMTC method is 67% less than when using the CT
+PD control method. Therefore, the proposed SMTC method
is more robust than the CT+PD control method. Based on
these results, an RCP of the MRLLP and a corresponding
experimental test system are established. On the established
experimental test system, the swing angle control experiments
on the MRLLP via the SMTC, ON/OFF, and CT+PD control
methods are carried out. The experimental results show that
the MRPK has a controllable joint torque for controlling the
swing angle of the shank of the MRLLP, and can be used to
imitate the natural swing of a human knee joint. In addition,
the RMSE of the swing angle of the shank of the MRLLP
using the SMTC method is 34% less than that using the CT
+PD control method, and is 37% less than that using the ON/
OFF control methods. In conclusion, the SMTC method
proposed in this paper is an effective, simple, and realizable
method with strong robustness and high accuracy, and it can
control the swing angle of the shank of the MRLLPs.
Acknowledgments
This work has been partly supported by LPMT, CAEP (Grant
No. 2015-01-001), the National Natural Science Foundation
of China (Grant No. 51675070), and the Fundamental
Research Funds for the Central Universities (Project No.
CDJZR12 12 00 05).
References
[1] Kaufman K R, Levine J A, Brey R H, Iverson B K,
McCrady S K, Padgett D J and Joyner M J 2007 Gait and
balance of transfemoral amputees using passive mechanical
and microprocessor-controlled prosthetic knees Gait &
Posture 26 489–93
[2] Wang T K, Ju M S and Tsuei Y G 1992 Adaptive control of
above knee electro-hydraulic prosthesis Journal of
Biomechanical Engineering 114 421–4
[3] Waycaster G, Wu S K and Shen X 2011 Design and control of
a pneumatic artificial muscle actuated above-knee prosthesis
Journal of Medical Devices 5 787–9
[4] Sup F C and Withrow T J 2009 Preliminary evaluations of a
self-contained anthropomorphic transfemoral prosthesis
IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics 14 667–76
[5] Kapti A O and Yucenur M S 2006 Design and control of an
active artificial knee joint Mech. Mach. Theory 41 1477–85
[6] Wolf E J, Everding V Q, Linberg A A, Czerniecki J M and
Gambel C J M 2013 Comparison of the power knee and
C-Leg during step-up and sit-to-stand tasks Gait & Posture
38 397–402
[7] Kalanovic V D 2000 Feedback error learning neural network
for trans-femoral prosthesis IEEE Trans. Rehabil. Eng. 8
71–80
[8] Lui Z W, Awad M I, Abouhossein A, Dehghani-Sanij A A and
Messenger N 2015 Virtual prototyping of a semi-active
transfemoral prosthetic leg Journal of Engineering in
Medicine 229 350–61
Smart Mater. Struct. 26 (2017) 045030
[9] Orendurff M S, Segal A D, Klute G K, McDowell M L,
Pecoraro J A and Czerniecki J M 2006 Gait efficiency using
the C-Leg Journal of Rehabilitation Research and
Development 43 239–46
[10] Jin D, Zhang X and Yao L 1995 Influence of adjustable
frictional moments on gait patterns of a prosthetic knee with
controllable moment Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Systems
vol 1 (Vancouver, Canada: Man and Cybernetics)
pp 509–12
[11] Herr H and Wilkenfeld A 2003 User-adaptive control of a
magnetorheological prosthetic knee Industrial Robot: An
International Journal 30 42–55
[12] Thorarinsson E T, Jonsdottir F and Palsson H 2006 Finite
element analysis of a magnetorheological prosthetic knee
Proc. of the 6th Biannual NordDesign 2006 Conf.
(Reykjavik, Iceland) pp 382–92
[13] Carlson J D, Matthis W and Toscano J R 2001 Smart
prosthetics based on magnetorheological fluids Proc. of the
SPIE 8th Annual Symp. on Smart Structure and Materials
2001: Industrial and Commercial Applications of Smart
Structures Technologies vol 4332(Newport Beach, CA)
pp 308–16
[14] Park J, Yoon G H, Kang J W and Choi S B 2016 Design and
control of a prosthetic leg for above-knee amputees operated
in semiactive and active modes Smart Mater. Struct. 25
275–96
[15] Kim J H and Oh J H 2001 Development of an above knee
prosthesis using MR damper and leg simulator Proc of the
2001 IEEE Int. Conf. on Robotics and Automation vol 4
(Seoul, Korea) pp 3686–91
[16] Nandi G C, Ijspeert A J, Chakraborty P and Nandi A 2009
Development of adaptive modular active leg (AMAL)
using bipedal robotics technology Robot. Auton. Syst. 57
603–16
[17] Xu L, Wang D H, Fu Q, Yuan G and Hu L Z 2016 A novel
four-bar linkage prosthetic knee based on
14
Q Fu et al
magnetorheological effect: principle, structure, simulation
and control Smart Mater. Struct. 25 115007 (12pp)
[18] Ekkachai K and Nilkhamhang I 2016 Swing phase control of
semi-active prosthetic knee using neural network predictive
control with particle swarm optimization IEEE Transactions
on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering 24
1169–78
[19] Wang D H and Wang T 2009 Principle, design and modeling
of an integrated relative displacement self-sensing
magnetorheological damper based on electromagnetic
induction Smart Mater. Struct. 18 7566–79
[20] Wang D H and Liao W H 2005 Semiactive controllers for
magnetorheological fluid dampers J. Intell. Mater. Syst.
Struct. 16 983–93
[21] Wang D H and Bai X X 2013 A magnetorheological damper
with an integrated self-powered displacement sensor Smart
Mater. Struct. 22 2896–912
[22] Wang D H and Liao W H 2011 Magnetorheological fluid
dampers: a review of parametric modeling Smart Mater.
Struct. 20 23001–34
[23] Guo H T and Liao W H 2010 Design and control of
multifunctional magnetorheological actuators for assistive
knee braces Proc. of SPIE Conf. on Active and Passive
Smart Structures and Integrated Systems vol 7643(San
Diego, USA, Mar 08–11) Art No. 764310 pp 1–11
[24] Xu L, Wang D H, Fu Q and Yuan G 2013 A bio-inspired test
system for bionic above-knee prosthetic knees Proc. of
SPIE: Conf. on Active and Passive Smart Structures and
Integrated Systems vol 8688(San Diego, USA, March
10–14) Art No. UNSP 868828 pp 1–14
[25] Andrysek J, Naumann S and Cleghorn W L 2004 Design
characteristics of pediatric prosthetic knees IEEE
Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation
Engineering 12 368–78
[26] Mao M 2011 Adaptive magnetorheological sliding seat system
for ground vehicles Thesis of Doctor University of Maryland