ArticleFrontiers in robotics and AI2022
Biomechanical knee energy harvester: Design optimization and testing.
Article in Frontiers in robotics and AI, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Toward an active exoskeleton with full energy autonomy.Frontiers in robotics and AI · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Biomechanical energy harvesters are designed to generate electrical energy from human locomotion (e.g., walking) with minimal or no additional effort by the users. These harvesters aim to carry out the work of the muscles during phases in locomotion where the muscles are acting as brakes. Currently, many harvesters focus on the knee joint during late swing, which is only one of three phases available during the gait cycle. For the device to be successful, there is a need to consider design components such as the motor/generator and the gear ratio. These components influence the amount of electrical energy that could be harvested, metabolic power during harvesting, and more. These various components make it challenging to achieve the optimal design. This paper presents a design of a knee harvester with a direct drive that enables harvesting both in flexion and extension using optimization. Subsequently, two knee devices were built and tested using five different harvesting levels. Results show that the 30% level was the best, harvesting approximately 5 W of electricity and redacting 8 W of metabolic energy compared to walking with the device as a dead weight. Evaluation of the models used in the optimization showed a good match to the system model but less for the metabolic power model. These results could pave the way for an energy harvester that could utilize more of the negative joint power during the gait cycle while reducing metabolic effort.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.