P15001: Soft Ankle-Foot Orthotic
/public/

Build Preparation

Table of Contents

Phase Planning

Build Preparation Shared Vision

Our vision for week two is to finalize the design and begin building of the following components:

The completion of these components will lead to assembly and integration of our subsystems from MSDI in phase 5.

Our team also plans to validate received components as well as the printed circuit board design.

Return To Top

End State Shared Vision

Required Deliverables
The best case scenario is that we have a prototype of an untethered system with the gait monitoring system. If this is not completed with full functionality, then we will present a system with partial functionality. In this situation, explanations and proposed design changes will be provided. The worst case scenario will be presenting a final prototype with functioning pieces but not have a fully integrated system.
Bill of Materials
We will deliver a Bill of Materials (BOM) which lists all of the materials included in the final prototype.
Detailed documentation of design
We will have the current design along with changes made during the building and testing of MSD II. In addition to this, we will have recommended design changes for future models as well as tips to help with the build process.
Supporting test data and documentation
We will have test documentation supporting all of the engineering requirements. If we are unable to achieve full functionality, then we will test what is possible and provide documentation about the procedures that will be used to test the rest of the functionality.
User’s guide for operation
We will have a user’s guide for operation. This will include the following:
Application of the Active Ankle Foot Orthotic (AAFO)
Recharge and refill information
Washing information
How to retrieve data from the gait monitoring system
Basic trouble shooting


Showcase at Imagine RIT
Best Case Scenario: We will demonstrate our working prototype to the public using a team member as the volunteer. Specifically, we will have the volunteer walk on flat ground as well as on the stairs. This variation in terrain will help show the full functionality of our device. Throughout the day, two team members will present at the booth at all times and we will rotate between volunteers every two hours. Alongside the demo, we will display our team poster on our table which further explains the background of the project, design features, and testing and simulation results. Next to our poster, we will have a monitor that plays a video to further display prototype functionality as well as two air muscles for the public to see and touch. Lastly, our team will hand out project overview sheets which include a QR code to direct visitors to our EDGE site.
User Input
We will look for user feedback in, ideally, two ways. The first way will be to get input from students and faculty on the RIT campus. During this initial subject testing, our team will gain feedback on our qualitative engineering requirements, such as comfort, ease of application, and aesthetics. Following this testing, we plan to revisit the Physical Therapy Clinic at Nazareth College and speak to clients with Foot Drop. At the very least, we would like to have them try on the orthotic and get their feedback on overall design and wearibility.

Return To Top

Imagine RIT Shared Vision

The following document displays the team's vision for Imagine RIT. Overall, it summarizes our team’s vision for Imagine RIT and presents different scenarios of readiness as well as our elevator speech.

Best Case Scenario:
We will demonstrate our working prototype to the public using a team member as the volunteer. Specifically, we will have the volunteer walk on flat ground as well as on the stairs. This variation in terrain will help show the full functionality of our device. Throughout the day, two team members will present at the booth at all times and we will rotate between volunteers every two hours. Alongside the demo, we will display our team poster on our table which further explains the background of the project, design features, and testing and simulation results. Next to our poster, we will have a computer that plays a video to further display prototype functionality as well as two air muscles for the public to see and touch. Lastly, our team will hand out project overview sheets which include a QR code to direct visitors to our Edge site.
Moderate Case Scenario:
In this scenario, our team will demonstrate a working prototype to the public with a team member as the volunteer; however, we will only be able to demonstrate the prototype on flat ground because our booth is not near stairs. Alongside our demonstration, we will still include our team poster as well as project overview sheets and two air muscles. Additionally, we will not include a video in our presentation in this scenario due to lack of table space for a computer or because of technically difficulties.
Worst Case Scenario:
The worst case scenario would be that we are unable to get our prototype to work properly. In this case, we would display our prototype on the table as well as our poster that summarizes our progress and our predicted theoretical analysis, simulations and feasibility test results, and CAD models. The main focus in this situation will be on what was learned and how our group plans to address the remaining address.
Elevator Speech
Our senior design project is an active ankle foot orthotic. This is an assistive walking device that is utilized by individuals with Foot Drop condition. Foot Drop is a neurological disorder which impairs the ability of an individual to dorsiflex the foot (i.e. point the toes upward) and is often a side effect of a stroke, ALS, Multiple Sclerosis, or a peroneal nerve injury. Current AFO’s are bulky, rigid, and disrupt the user’s natural gait by providing assistance at all times, regardless of need. An active AFO will provide users with assistance only during appropriate times in the gait cycle through the use of an air muscle. This timing will be determined using a Heelstrike sensor to measure gait and a distance sensor to distinguish terrain. The air muscle will be filled with compressed air from an air tank; this will make the AFO untethered, a feature that has not been completed by a senior design team at RIT. This device is not a replacement for medical treatment- it is simply a device to assist someone with walking.

Return To Top

MSDI Business

MSD I Action Items
MSD I Postmortem
MSD I Improvement Plan
Return To Top

MSDII Project Plan

MSD II Working Timeline

Return To Top

MSDII Test Plan

Working MSDII Test Plan
Test Number Test Plans
1 Ankle-foot Force Analysis
2 Power Analysis
3 Ease of Application Test
4 Survey of Orthotic Aesthetics
5 Ingress Protection
6 CAIR Capacity
7 Noise Test
8 Corrosion Test
9 Sub-Terrain Test
10 Recording Gait Test
11 Wearability Test
12 Slow Motion Deflection
13 Strap Analysis
14 Extended Use Test
15 Attachment Fatigue
16 Air Leak Test

Return To Top

Problem Tracking

Working Problem Tracking
Return To Top

Failure Modes

Working Failure Modes
Return To Top

Engineering Fruition Plan

Engineering Fruition Plan
Return To Top

Updated Bill of Materials


Return To Top

Electrical Build

Schematics

Schematic (left), Top Layout(Center) and Bottom Layout(Right)

Electrical Prototype


Tested Systems

Soldered Systems

Unsoldered Systems

Mechanical Build

Component Housing Redesign

Motivation

There were multiple changes that needed to be made to the component housing that houses the sensors.
Component housing redesign

Associated Documents

O-Ring Gland Size Calculations
Return To Top

Muscle Attachment Redesign

Motivation

Because of machining capabilities and materials available, some slight changes were made to the plugs that attach the McKibbon muscle to the AFO. However, none of these changes had a significant impact on the functionality of the McKibbon muscle or the AFO.
Assembly (left), Upper Plug (Center) and Base(Right)
The prototype components as well as the upper muscle assembly can be seen in the figures below:
Upper Plug (Left), Upper Base (Center) and Lower Plug (Right)
Upper Muscle Assembly

Associated Documents

Base Drawing
Upper Plug Drawing
Return To Top

Lower Attachment Redesign

Motivation

After completing initial lower attachment force lift tests, our team decided that it would be best to incorperate a lift mechanism that would better allow users to apply and remove the AFO easily. In the original design, the fishing line was at a fixed location right above the adjustable strap, making it hard to users to access the strap. Additionally, our team was concerned with the fishing line stretching over time. The new design incorperates an A-shaped thin strap. This strap is more durable than the fishing line and its design allows users to easily access the velcro strap ontop of the foot. <b>
Lower Attachment: A-Shaped Thin Strap

Feasibility Test
The reason for this test is to find:

Results:
Observations-


Trial Force (lbs)
1 10.5
2 10
3 10.5
4 11
5 11
6 10.5
7 10.5
8 10.5
9 11
10 11
Average 10.6


Conclusion:


Next Steps:

Lower Attachment Strap Redesign Feasibility Test

Build Preparation Review

The review was conducted in week 2 based on this agenda
Phase 2 Meeting notes

Return To Top


Home Planning & Execution Problem Definition Systems Design Subsystems Design Detailed Design Gate Review
MSD I
Build Preparation Build & Test Integrate & Assemble System Validation System Verification Final Review
MSD II