| Literature DB >> 31546816 |
Ethan J Weathersby1, Clement J Gurrey2, Jake B McLean3, Benjamin N Sanders4, Brian G Larsen5, Ryan Carter6, Joseph L Garbini7, Joan E Sanders8.
Abstract
The purpose of this research was to create a thin ferrous polymer composite to be used as a target for inductive sensing in limb prosthetics. Inductive sensors are used to monitor limb-to-socket distance in prosthetic sockets, which reflects socket fit. A styrene-ethylene-ethylene/propylene-styrene (SEEPS) polymer was mixed with iron powder at three concentrations (75, 77, 85 wt%), and thin disk-shaped samples were fabricated (0.50, 0,75, 1.00 mm thickness). For 85 wt% samples of 0.50 mm thickness, which proved the best combination of high signal strength and low target volume, inductive sensor sensitivity ranged from 3.2E5 counts/mm at 0.00-1.00 mm distances to 7.2E4 counts/mm at 4.00-5.00 mm distances. The application of compressive stress (up to 425 kPa) introduced an absolute measurement error of less than 3.3 μm. Tensile elasticity was 282 kPa, which is comparable to that of commercial elastomeric liners. Durability testing in the shoe of an able-bodied participant demonstrated a change in calibration coefficient of less than 3.8% over two weeks of wear. The ferrous polymer composite may facilitate the development of automatically adjusting sockets that use limb-to-socket distance measurement for feedback control.Entities:
Keywords: adjustable socket; amputee; inductive sensor; limb-to-socket distance; prosthesis; residual limb; transtibial
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31546816 PMCID: PMC6767675 DOI: 10.3390/s19184041
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Schematic showing one configuration for inductive sensing in prosthetic sockets. An antenna is positioned in the socket and a target in the liner. In this example there is an air gap between the socket and liner. Distance between sensor and target is indicated with a blue arrow.
Figure 2Ferrous polymer construct being removed from its mold.
Figure 3Testing jig for the evaluation of sensitivity. The sensor antenna is mounted within the arm connected to the height gauge. The sample material is affixed to the table.
Figure 4Schematic of testing configuration to evaluate response under compressive stress.
Figure 5Sample ready for durability testing.
Figure 6Iron concentration test results. (a) Calibration test results for three samples at each iron concentration are shown. (b) Slope of calibration curve (Δcounts/Δmm) at different distance ranges from the target for constructs with different iron concentrations. Three samples were tested for each concentration—85 wt%, 77 wt%, and 75 wt%. 1.00 mm thickness samples. (Supplementary Materials)
Figure 7Performance of 85 wt% constructs of varying thickness. Results for each of three samples at each thickness are shown. (Supplementary Materials)
Material properties of developed construct compared with commercial elastomeric liners.
| Material Property | Construct (85 wt%, 0.50 mm-Thick) (Median (Range)) | Elastomeric Liners (Range from [ |
|---|---|---|
| Compressive Elasticity (kPa) | 448 (418–487) | 96–458 |
| Tensile Elasticity (kPa) | 282 (267–313) | 124–309 * |
| Poisson Ratio | 0.4947 (0.4945–0.4949) | 0.4929–0.4999 |
* Only for liners whose tensile stiffness was not dominated by its fabric backing material, as described in [23].
Figure 8Durability test results for different wear times. (Supplementary Materials)