A method for evaluating the obstacle-crossing maneuverability of lower limb exoskeleton

Abstract

The present invention relates to a method for evaluating the obstacle-crossing maneuverability of a lower limb exoskeleton, which belongs to the field of exoskeleton robot technology and solves the current problem of the lack of exoskeleton obstacle-crossing maneuverability testing equipment and evaluation systems. The device includes: a base plate, a slide rail slider assembly, an intermediate adapter, a support column, a modular obstacle plate, and a sensor carrier. In the evaluation method, the ultimate obstacle crossing ability, stable obstacle crossing ability, and complex space traversal ability of the lower limb exoskeleton are tested respectively, and then the obstacle-crossing maneuverability of the lower limb exoskeleton is comprehensively evaluated. The height, angle, and spacing of the obstacle board wall of the present invention are adjustable, which is convenient for simulating various obstacle conditions and can provide stable support during the test.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of exoskeleton robots, and in particular to a method for evaluating the obstacle-crossing maneuverability of a lower limb exoskeleton. Background Art

[0002] As a collaborative robot, lower limb exoskeletons have become a hot area of ​​research and development at home and abroad in recent years. In typical complex and arduous mission operation scenarios such as military support and emergency rescue, improving the obstacle-crossing maneuverability of lower limb exoskeletons has become the key to their in-depth application in high-difficulty operations. However, the current exoskeleton obstacle-crossing maneuverability performance lacks both professional testing equipment and a systematic evaluation system, making it impossible to accurately quantify the obstacle-crossing maneuverability performance, which hinders its improvement. Summary of the Invention

[0003] In view of the above analysis, the present invention aims to provide a method for evaluating the obstacle-crossing maneuverability of lower limb exoskeletons, so as to solve the problem that there is currently a lack of exoskeleton obstacle-crossing maneuverability testing equipment and evaluation systems, which makes it impossible to accurately quantitatively evaluate the obstacle-crossing maneuverability performance.

[0004] On the one hand, the present invention provides a method for evaluating the obstacle-crossing maneuverability of a lower limb exoskeleton, which is evaluated by using a device for testing the obstacle-crossing maneuverability of a lower limb exoskeleton. The device for testing the obstacle-crossing maneuverability of a lower limb exoskeleton comprises: a base plate, a slide rail slider assembly, an intermediate adapter, a support column, a modular obstacle plate, and a sensor carrier; wherein the slide rail slider assembly is fixedly arranged on the base plate, the intermediate adapter is movably arranged on the slide rail slider assembly, the support column is arranged on the intermediate adapter, the modular obstacle plates are arranged on the support column to form an obstacle plate wall, and the height of the obstacle plate wall can be adjusted by adjusting the number of modular obstacle plates, the spacing between the obstacle plate walls can be adjusted by adjusting the position of the intermediate adapter on the slide rail slider assembly, and the inclination angle of the obstacle plate wall can be adjusted by adjusting the position of the intermediate adapter on the slide rail slider assembly and the angular position of the support column relative to the intermediate adapter; the sensor carrier is arranged on the support column;

[0005] The evaluation method comprises the following steps:

[0006] S1: Testing the lower limb exoskeleton's ultimate obstacle crossing capability, obtaining the maximum climbing height and maximum crossing width; testing the lower limb exoskeleton's stable obstacle crossing capability, obtaining the obstacle crossing height and average obstacle crossing speed; testing the lower limb exoskeleton's complex space navigation capability, obtaining the height level, difficulty level, and average navigation speed;

[0007] S2: Scoring is performed based on the seven numerical values ​​obtained in step S1, wherein each of the climbing limit height, crossing limit width, obstacle climbing height, obstacle climbing speed, and average crossing speed is scored, and each of the height level and difficulty level is scored;

[0008] S3: Using the weighted analysis method, a comprehensive score of the obstacle-crossing maneuverability of the lower limb exoskeleton is obtained based on the scores of the six scores obtained in step S2 and evaluated.

[0009] Furthermore, the test of the ultimate obstacle crossing capability in S1 specifically includes: S11: Testing the ultimate climbing height H of the lower limb exoskeleton max ; S12: Test the spanning width L of the lower limb exoskeleton max .

[0010] Furthermore, the test of stable obstacle crossing ability in step S1 is specifically as follows: S13: testing the ability to continuously cross the height and speed of 5 identical obstacle walls, and recording the highest obstacle wall height crossed as the obstacle height H avg , the corresponding average speed is the obstacle crossing speed V avg .

[0011] Furthermore, the test of complex space traversal ability in step S1 is specifically S14: testing the ability to sequentially traverse five obstacle walls with large height differences, obtaining the height level N, difficulty level M of the obstacle wall traversed, and the average traversal speed V of the five obstacles. thro .

[0012] Furthermore, step S2 specifically includes: S21: scoring of the ultimate obstacle crossing ability: scoring the ultimate obstacle crossing height H recorded in the test in step S11; max And the span limit width L max , using the distribution position percentage method, scoring is performed based on the position of the individual indicator parameters in the scoring reference range;

[0013] S22: Stable obstacle crossing ability scoring: Obstacle crossing height H recorded in step S12 avg and the average obstacle crossing speed V avg , using the distribution position percentage method, scoring is performed based on the position of the individual indicator parameters in the scoring reference range;

[0014] S23: Scoring of complex obstacle crossing ability: record the height level N and difficulty level M of the obstacle through the test, and use the table lookup method to obtain the difficulty score of the crossing; according to the average speed V thro , the score of the travel speed item is obtained by using the table lookup method.

[0015] Furthermore, there are two slide rail and slider assemblies, which are arranged in parallel and at intervals; each slide rail and slider assembly includes a slide rail and at least one slider; and the intermediate adapter is fixedly connected to the slider.

[0016] Furthermore, the supporting column includes a mounting plate, a side plate and a top plate; there are two side plates, which are arranged in parallel and spaced apart, and a slot is formed between the two side plates to limit the modular barrier plate.

[0017] Furthermore, a rotating shaft is provided on the mounting plate, and the rotating shaft is rotatably connected to the intermediate adapter.

[0018] Furthermore, the length of the modular barrier plate is greater than the distance between the two slide rails.

[0019] Compared with the prior art, the present invention can achieve at least one of the following beneficial effects:

[0020] (1) The present invention specifically designs a device for testing the obstacle-crossing maneuverability of lower-limb exoskeletons. This device can provide a test device with adjustable height, spacing, and angle of obstacle panels to meet diverse testing requirements. The device also features a simple structure, easy assembly, and user-friendly adjustment methods. This device can provide an efficient solution for testing and evaluating obstacle-crossing maneuverability, shortening the development cycle for lower-limb exoskeletons in challenging tasks.

[0021] (2) The method for evaluating the obstacle-crossing capability of the lower limb exoskeleton of the present invention can quantitatively evaluate the obstacle-crossing performance of the lower limb exoskeleton, provide a basis for optimizing the obstacle-crossing maneuverability and exoskeleton design at each R&D stage, shorten the R&D cycle, and reduce R&D costs.

[0022] In the present invention, the above-mentioned technical solutions can be combined with each other to achieve more preferred combinations. Other features and advantages of the present invention will be described in the following description, and some advantages will become apparent from the description or be learned through practice of the present invention. The objectives and other advantages of the present invention can be realized and obtained through the contents particularly pointed out in the description and drawings. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0023] The accompanying drawings are only used for the purpose of illustrating specific embodiments and are not to be considered as limiting the present invention. Throughout the drawings, the same reference symbols denote the same components.

[0024] Figure 1 A schematic diagram of the three-dimensional structure of a test device for the obstacle-crossing maneuverability of a lower limb exoskeleton;

[0025] Figure 2 Design explosion diagrams for the local structure of the test device;

[0026] Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram of the state of the test device in the extreme obstacle crossing ability test item;

[0027] Figure 4 This is a schematic diagram of the state of the test device in the stable obstacle crossing ability test item;

[0028] Figure 5 This is a schematic diagram of the state of the test device in the complex obstacle traversal ability test;

[0029] Figure 6 A schematic diagram of a method system for evaluating the obstacle-crossing maneuverability of a lower limb exoskeleton;

[0030] Figure 7 This is a schematic diagram of the extreme obstacle crossing ability test method;

[0031] Figure 8 This is a schematic diagram of the stable obstacle crossing ability test method;

[0032] Figure 9 Schematic diagram of the complex obstacle traversal ability testing method.

[0033] Reference numerals:

[0034] 1-base plate; 2-slide rail assembly; 3-intermediate adapter; 4-support column; 5-modular barrier plate; 6-sensor carrier;

[0035] 201- linear guide rail; 202- slider; 301- intermediate adapter; 401- support column; DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0036] The preferred embodiments of the present invention will be described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings, wherein the accompanying drawings constitute a part of the present invention and are used together with the embodiments of the present invention to illustrate the principles of the present invention, but are not used to limit the scope of the present invention.

[0037] Example 1

[0038] A specific embodiment 1 of the present invention, as Figure 1 As shown, a device for testing the obstacle-crossing maneuverability of a lower-limb exoskeleton is disclosed, which mainly includes: a base plate 1, a slide rail and slider assembly 2, an intermediate adapter 3, a support column 4, modular obstacle plates 5, and a sensor carrier 6. The slide rail and slider assembly 2 is fixedly mounted on the base plate 1, the intermediate adapter 3 is movably mounted on the slide rail and slider assembly 2, the support column 4 is rotatably mounted on the intermediate adapter 3, and the modular obstacle plates 5 are mounted on the support columns 4. The number of modular obstacle plates 5 can be adjusted according to test needs. The sensor carrier 6 is mounted on the support column 4 and is used to mount sensors.

[0039] According to the technical solution of the present invention, the height, direction and spacing of the obstacle wall can be adjusted at will according to the test needs, and functions such as speed measurement can also be realized.

[0040] Specifically, there are two slide rail slider assemblies, which are arranged in parallel and spaced apart. Figure 2 Each slide rail and slider assembly includes a slide rail and at least one slider capable of reciprocating on the slide rail. Both slide rail and slider assemblies have the same number of sliders. The slide rail and slider can employ conventional structures in the prior art. Depending on the test requirements, the slide rail can be a linear slide rail, a circular slide rail, or an S-shaped slide rail.

[0041] The structure of the intermediate adapter is as follows Figure 2 As shown, it is a rectangular block structure. The bottom of the intermediate adapter is provided with a groove for the protrusion on the top of the slider to engage. The intermediate adapter is also provided with multiple fixing holes, which are fixed to the slider via screws. The intermediate adapter is also provided with a through hole for the pin or rotating shaft to pass through.

[0042] Support columns 4, used to mount and secure the modular barrier panels, comprise a mounting plate, side panels, and a top panel. Two side panels are spaced parallel to each other, with a slot formed between them for the modular barrier panels to pass through. Pin holes are provided on the mounting plate, their positions corresponding to the through-holes in the intermediate adapter. A rotational shaft is positioned within the pin hole and inserted into the through-hole in the intermediate adapter, achieving a rotatable connection with the intermediate adapter.

[0043] Modular barrier panels are standard components, and a series of modular barrier panels of different sizes and models can be manufactured for use. Modular barrier panels are preferably made of wood, steel, or plastic. The number of modular barrier panels can be adjusted according to test requirements. Each model of modular barrier panel has the same size. During testing, the modular barrier panel can be snapped into the slot between the two side panels of the support column 4. By adjusting the number and model of modular barrier panels, the height of the barrier panel wall can be adjusted.

[0044] The length of the modular barrier plate is greater than the distance between the two rails, allowing its ends to fit into the slots between the two side panels of the support column 4. When the length of the modular barrier plate is perpendicular to the rails, its ends extend outward from either side of the support column 4. When the length of the modular barrier plate is tilted to its maximum angle relative to the rails, its ends remain securely fastened in the slots of the support column 4.

[0045] In some preferred embodiments, the modular barrier plate can be a plate with adjustable length, for example, it can be split or truss-type. In this solution, the two ends of the modular barrier plate are set as structures that are compatible with the slots of the support columns 4, and after being fixed in the slots, it cannot move horizontally relative to the slots. When it is necessary to tilt the length direction of the modular barrier plate relative to the slide rail, loosen the fixed connection between the modular barrier plate and the intermediate adapter, and move the slider on one side of the slide rail. At this time, the support columns 4 on both sides automatically rotate under the drive of the modular barrier plate, so that the slots of the support columns 4 on both sides always remain relative, and at the same time, the length of the modular barrier plate will adaptively change to an appropriate length. After the adjustment is completed, tighten the screws on the modular barrier plate and the intermediate adapter to fix the two.

[0046] Furthermore, adjacent modular barrier plates have different inclination angles relative to the slide rails. In this way, more testing requirements can be met.

[0047] The assembly and specific adjustment of the test device are as follows:

[0048] Barrier wall spacing adjustment method: The barrier wall can be translated by using the slider 202 and the translation axis X along the slide rail 201. The specific assembly sequence is to fix the slider 202 to the slide rail 201 with screws, and then fix the intermediate adapter 301 to the slider 202, and then fix the support column 4 to the intermediate adapter 301, and then fix the slider by limiting the position of the slide rail countersunk hole with bolts. Measure the distance starting from the first slider, and determine the positions of the second slider, the third slider, the fourth slider... and the nth slider in turn according to the spacing between the barrier walls. Perform the same operation on the opposite side slider, the intermediate member, and the support column 4 to adjust the spacing between the barrier walls. Figure 3 、 Figure 4 shown.

[0049] Method for adjusting the inclination of the barrier wall: The inclination of the barrier wall is achieved by rotating the support column 4 relative to the intermediate adapter 301. The specific assembly sequence is as follows: the support column 4 is rotated clockwise or counterclockwise by a certain angle relative to the intermediate adapter 3 according to the test plan, and then the support column 4 and the intermediate adapter 3 are fixedly connected by screws or bolts. After the opposite support column 4 is rotated in the opposite direction, it is then fixedly connected to the intermediate adapter 3. According to the inclination angle of the barrier wall in the test plan, the rotation angles of the second support column 4, the third support column 4, the fourth support column 4... and the nth support column 4 are determined in sequence. The opposite support column 4 is first adjusted to its position on the slide rail, and then rotated in the opposite direction. After completion, the modular barrier panel is inserted to obtain a barrier wall with the target inclination angle.

[0050] Height adjustment method of barrier panel wall: Modular barrier panels and supporting columns 4 are connected to form a barrier panel wall. The height of the barrier panel wall is increased by vertically splicing the number of modular barrier panels 5. The height of the barrier panel wall is flexibly combined with the number of modular barrier panels and the width of the barrier panels. The specific assembly sequence is to insert the first modular barrier panel into the slots of the two supporting columns, and then align the lower edge of the second modular barrier panel along the upper edge of the first modular barrier panel, and then plug in cumulatively until the target barrier panel wall height is reached. Similarly, the second, third, fourth, and nth barrier panels are spliced ​​in sequence. In this way, the barrier panel wall of the desired height can be obtained, such as Figure 5 shown.

[0051] Speed ​​measurement function loading method: The sensor is loaded into the sensor carrier 6 for loading. Usually, the four supporting columns on the outer edge of the device are equipped with time sensors, and the remaining supporting columns in the middle are equipped with speed sensors.

[0052] According to the technical solution of Example 1 of the present invention, by adjusting the rotation angle of the supporting column 4, the distance between the sliders, the number of modular obstacle plates 5, and the installation of speed sensors and other operations, the direction adjustability of the obstacle plate wall, the spacing adjustability of the obstacle plate wall, the height adjustability of the obstacle plate wall, and speed measurement functions can be achieved.

[0053] Example 2

[0054] Another specific embodiment of the present invention is as follows Figure 6-Figure 9 As shown, a method for evaluating the obstacle-crossing maneuverability of a lower limb exoskeleton is disclosed. The device for testing the obstacle-crossing maneuverability of a lower limb exoskeleton in Example 1 is used for evaluation. The evaluation is carried out around the extreme obstacle-crossing ability, stable obstacle-crossing ability, and complex space traversal ability. The specific testing method includes the following steps:

[0055] S1: Testing the lower limb exoskeleton's ultimate obstacle crossing capability, obtaining the maximum climbing height and maximum crossing width; testing the lower limb exoskeleton's stable obstacle crossing capability, obtaining the obstacle crossing height and average obstacle crossing speed; testing the lower limb exoskeleton's complex space navigation capability, obtaining the height level, difficulty level, and average navigation speed;

[0056] S2: Scoring is performed based on the seven numerical values ​​obtained in step S1, wherein each of the climbing limit height, crossing limit width, obstacle climbing height, obstacle climbing speed, and average crossing speed is scored, and each of the height level and difficulty level is scored;

[0057] S3: Using the weighted analysis method, a comprehensive score of the obstacle-crossing maneuverability of the lower limb exoskeleton is obtained based on the scores of the six scores obtained in step S2 and evaluated.

[0058] Among them, in step S1, the ultimate obstacle crossing capability is mainly reflected in the longitudinal burst capability of climbing over longitudinal obstacles and the lateral burst capability of crossing over lateral obstacles, which are described by two indicators: the maximum longitudinal climbing height and the maximum lateral crossing width. Therefore, the ultimate obstacle crossing capability test in step S1 specifically includes: S11: Testing the lower limb exoskeleton climbing over the ultimate height H max ; S12: Test the lower limb exoskeleton across the maximum width L max .

[0059] Among them, see Figure 3 (a) and Figure 7 Step S11 is specifically as follows: the lower limb exoskeleton obstacle climbing limit height test scheme is based on 0.2m, and each level increases by 0.2m. When the human-machine ability reaches the upper limit and cannot pass, remove the last modular obstacle board, and choose to increase the level by 0.1m for testing. When the human-machine ability reaches the upper limit and cannot pass, remove the last 0.1m modular obstacle board, and choose to increase the level by 0.05m for testing until the human-machine ability reaches the upper limit and cannot pass. The highest obstacle board wall height that can be climbed is recorded, which is the lower limb exoskeleton climbing limit height H. max .

[0060] See also Figure 3 (b) and Figure 7 Step S12 is as follows: the lower limb exoskeleton obstacle crossing limit width test scheme is based on 0.2m, and each level increases by 0.2m. When the human-machine ability reaches the upper limit and cannot pass, the obstacle width is increased by 0.1m and retested. If it fails again, it continues to increase by 0.05m and retest until it fails. The width of the widest obstacle that can be crossed is recorded, which is the lower limb exoskeleton crossing limit width L max .

[0061] In step S1, the stable obstacle crossing capability is mainly reflected in the ability to cross obstacle walls of the same height stably and at high speed, wherein the first obstacle wall and the fifth obstacle wall are provided with a constant distance of 1.0 m. In this embodiment 2, the height and speed of continuously crossing five identical obstacles are used for description, i.e., the obstacle crossing height and obstacle crossing speed.

[0062] like Figure 4 、 Figure 8 As shown, step S1 also includes S13: testing the height and speed of crossing 5 identical obstacle walls in succession; specifically, the test plan takes 0.2m as the base height, and increases by 0.2m at each level. When the human-machine capability reaches the upper limit and cannot pass, the obstacle height is increased by 0.1m for testing. If it fails again, it continues to increase by 0.05m for testing until it fails. The highest obstacle wall height crossed is recorded as the obstacle height H avg The corresponding average speed is the obstacle crossing speed Vavg .

[0063] In step S1, the ability to traverse complex obstacles is mainly reflected in the ability to sequentially traverse five obstacle walls with large height differences. The greater the sum of the obstacle wall heights, the greater the traversal level and ability, and the greater the difference in obstacle wall heights, the greater the difficulty of traversal. The sum of the obstacle wall heights is defined as the obstacle wall height level. For example, a level 5 obstacle wall represents a total height of 5 obstacle walls of 5m. The height difference between the five obstacle walls in each level is defined as the difficulty level. The definition model of height level-difficulty level is as follows. The complex spatial obstacle height model matrix is ​​as follows:

[0064] ;

[0065] ;

[0066] ;

[0067] In the above model, N represents the sum of the height data of the five obstacle walls. The numerical value of this indicator is equal to the obstacle height level. H represents the height data set of different obstacle walls... h1 represents the height of the first obstacle wall of the complex obstacle, h2 represents the height of the second obstacle wall of the complex obstacle, h3 represents the height of the third obstacle wall of the complex obstacle, h4 represents the height of the fourth obstacle wall of the complex obstacle, and h5 represents the height of the fifth obstacle wall of the complex obstacle. Figure 5 、 Figure 9 As shown, step S1 also includes S14: testing the ability to sequentially cross five obstacle walls with large height differences, obtaining the height level N, difficulty level M of the obstacle wall, and the speed V1-V2 of crossing the five obstacles respectively. 5， And according to the speed V1-V5 of passing through the five obstacles, calculate the average speed V thro Specifically, the test plan is based on the highest difficulty level of level 1 height. Each time a successful crossing is made, the height level increases by 1 level and the difficulty level increases by 2 levels. When the climbing ability reaches the upper limit of the human-machine, the height level of the obstacle wall remains unchanged and the difficulty level decreases by 1 level. The test is carried out until the test is passed. The height level N, difficulty level M of the obstacle wall climbed, the speed V1-V5 of each obstacle, and the average speed V of the crossing are recorded. thro .

[0068] See also Figure 6In step S2, the test results of the three abilities in step S1 are scored individually. The individual scores for extreme obstacle crossing ability and stable obstacle crossing ability (i.e., individual scores for climbing over the maximum height, crossing over the maximum width, obstacle crossing height, and obstacle crossing speed) are scored using the position percentage method, while the individual scores for complex obstacle crossing ability (i.e., individual scores for crossing difficulty and crossing speed) are scored using a table lookup method. The specific scoring method is as follows:

[0069] S21: Scoring of ultimate obstacle crossing ability: The maximum height H that can be crossed through the test record max And the span limit width L max , using the distribution position percentage method, scoring is performed based on the position of the single indicator parameter in the scoring reference range, that is, comparing the single extreme obstacle ability indicator parameter with the indicator parameter of the market product to obtain the performance score of the existing product. Among them, the recommended scoring reference range for climbing height is (0m -2.28m), and the recommended scoring reference range for spanning width is (0m -2.83m). The scoring reference range in the position percentage system can be dynamically updated or adjusted based on the product parameters in the current market, but the scoring range for similar collaborative robots should ensure the consistency of the parameter range. Climbing limit height and spanning limit width are high-quality indicators. The calculation formula for the single indicator score is as follows, where d x Represents the individual scores of various indicators (maximum height, maximum width):

[0070] ;

[0071] Among them, PERCENTRANK is the distribution position percentile function.

[0072] S22: Stable obstacle crossing ability scoring: record the height H of the obstacle wall crossed through the test avg and the average obstacle crossing speed V avg , using the distribution position percentage method, scoring is performed based on the position of the single indicator parameter in the scoring reference range, that is, comparing the stable obstacle crossing ability indicator parameter with the indicator parameter of the market product to obtain the performance score of the existing product. The recommended obstacle height score reference range is (0.15m-1.067m), and the average speed score reference range is (0.56m / s-7.56m / s). The score reference range in the position percentage system can be dynamically updated or adjusted based on the product parameters in the current market, but the scoring range for similar collaborative robots should ensure the consistency of the parameter range. The maximum obstacle crossing height and the average obstacle crossing speed are high-quality indicators, and the single indicator score is the percentage obtained by the PERCENTRANK.EXC function multiplied by 100. The formula for calculating the single indicator score is as follows, where d x Represents the individual scores of various indicators (obstacle crossing height, obstacle crossing speed):

[0073] ;

[0074] S23: Scoring of complex obstacle crossing ability: Record the height level N and difficulty level M of the obstacle crossed in the test, and use Table 1 (i.e., the crossing difficulty score table) to query the crossing difficulty score; use the average crossing speed V in the test record to calculate the crossing difficulty score. thro , comprehensively refer to Table 2 (i.e., the travel speed score table) to query the travel speed score. Tables 1 and 2 can be adjusted according to technology research and development and product parameter iteration:

[0075] Table 1: Difficulty score table for complex obstacle crossing

[0076] ;

[0077] Table 2: Complex obstacle crossing speed score table

[0078] ;

[0079] Step S3 specifically includes: S31: assigning weights to individual indicators; S32: calculating the total score of the obstacle maneuverability according to the individual indicator weights in step S31 and the six individual scores obtained in step S2.

[0080] In step S31 , weights are assigned to the six scores obtained in step S2 with reference to a mature weight analysis method in the prior art.

[0081] In the order relationship analysis, the obstacle maneuverability data index set {, ,…} are arranged in a sequence relationship according to the importance weight of the indicators, namely:

[0082] ;

[0083] in, Represents the i-th index after forming the order relation, That is the indicator with the lowest importance weight (that is, the mth indicator), and the evaluation index is defined at the same time and The importance ratio between (Right now ), The reference for the assignment is shown in Table 3. The weight coefficients corresponding to the sorted indicators Calculated by the following formula:

[0084] ;

[0085] ;

[0086] in, Indicates the weight of the least important indicator (i.e. the mth indicator), according to and The recursive relationship is used to calculate the weight of each indicator from m to 2. In the formula, and The importance ratio between The reference for the value assignment is shown in Table 3.

[0087] Table 3: Reference table for order relation assignment

[0088] ;

[0089] In S32, the product of the individual score of each indicator and the weight of the indicator is the final score of the individual item. The total score of the obstacle maneuverability ability is equal to the sum of the individual scores. That is, the total score of the obstacle maneuverability ability is calculated as follows:

[0090] ;

[0091] D 越障性能总分 represents the lower limb exoskeleton obstacle-crossing mobility score, d x represents the score of each indicator in the scoring reference range (i.e. the score obtained in step S2), Indicates the weight coefficient corresponding to each indicator. It should be noted that each weight calculated in the order relationship analysis is the weight after the order relationship is formed according to the importance weight of the indicator. Therefore, the actual weight of each indicator needs to be reversed one by one according to the order relationship. For example, the third indicator After sorting, it is in the second position , then the weight coefficient of this indicator is

[0092] According to D 越障性能总分 The obstacle-crossing maneuverability of the lower limb exoskeleton is evaluated and divided into five levels: below 40 is level one; between 40-55 is level two; between 55-70 is level three; between 70-85 is level four; and between 85-100 is level five.

[0093] The lower limb exoskeleton obstacle maneuverability test and evaluation method of this embodiment is used to quantitatively evaluate the performance of the lower limb exoskeleton during the product development cycle and the performance evaluation stage, promote the improvement of the lower limb exoskeleton obstacle maneuverability performance, shorten the development cycle and reduce development costs.

[0094] The data provided in this embodiment are only for illustrative purposes and are not intended to limit the present method. The following uses two sets of data from actual tests and evaluations to further illustrate Example 2 of the present invention.

[0095] Example 1

[0096] The model parameters of this lower limb exoskeleton are Carbon01.

[0097] In step S1 , the obtained limit height is: 1.45m, the limit width is: 1.1m, the obstacle height is: 1.0m, the obstacle speed is: 6m / s, the difficulty of passing is: height level 10 and difficulty level 16, and the passing speed is: 2.0m / s.

[0098] In step S2, the scores obtained by calculating the maximum height are: 63.6, the maximum width is: 38.87, the obstacle height is: 93.72, the obstacle speed is: 79.37, the difficulty of passing is: 97, and the passing speed is: 60.

[0099] In step S3, the weights of various indicators are calculated based on the custom order relationship. The maximum height is 0.2638, the maximum width is 0.2198, the obstacle height is 0.2198, the obstacle speed is 0.1221, the difficulty of crossing is 0.0872, and the speed of crossing is 0.0872.

[0100] The final total score of the Carbon01 lower limb exoskeleton obstacle maneuverability was 69.30 points, and the lower limb exoskeleton obstacle maneuverability level was level three.

[0101] Example 2

[0102] The model parameters of this lower limb exoskeleton are Auto02;

[0103] In step S1, the obtained limit height is: 1.70m, the limit width is: 1.5m, the obstacle height is: 1.0m, the obstacle speed is: 6.5m / s, the difficulty of passing is: height level 10 and difficulty level 18, and the passing speed is: 1.5m / s.

[0104] In step S2, the scores obtained by calculating the maximum height are: 74.56, the maximum width is: 53.00, the obstacle height is: 93.72, the obstacle speed is: 85.98, the difficulty of passing is: 99, and the passing speed is: 40.

[0105] In step S3, the weights of various indicators are calculated based on the custom order relationship. The maximum height is 0.2638, the maximum width is 0.2198, the obstacle height is 0.2198, the obstacle speed is 0.1221, the difficulty of crossing is 0.0872, and the speed of crossing is 0.0872.

[0106] The final total score of Auto02's lower limb exoskeleton obstacle maneuverability was 74.54 points, and the lower limb exoskeleton obstacle maneuverability level was level four.

[0107] The above description is only a preferred specific embodiment of the present invention, but the scope of protection of the present invention is not limited thereto. Any changes or substitutions that can be easily thought of by any technician familiar with this technical field within the technical scope disclosed by the present invention should be covered by the scope of protection of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for evaluating the obstacle-crossing maneuverability of a lower limb exoskeleton, using a device for testing the obstacle-crossing maneuverability of a lower limb exoskeleton, characterized in that: The device for testing the obstacle-crossing maneuverability of a lower limb exoskeleton comprises: a base plate, a slide rail slider assembly, an intermediate adapter, a support column, a modular obstacle plate, and a sensor carrier; wherein the slide rail slider assembly is fixedly arranged on the base plate, the intermediate adapter is movably arranged on the slide rail slider assembly, the support column is arranged on the intermediate adapter, the modular obstacle plates are arranged on the support column to form an obstacle plate wall, and the height of the obstacle plate wall can be adjusted by adjusting the number of the modular obstacle plates, the spacing between the obstacle plate walls can be adjusted by adjusting the position of the intermediate adapter on the slide rail slider assembly, and the inclination angle of the obstacle plate wall can be adjusted by adjusting the position of the intermediate adapter on the slide rail slider assembly and the angular position of the support column relative to the intermediate adapter; the sensor carrier is arranged on the support column; The evaluation method comprises the following steps: S1: Testing the lower limb exoskeleton's ultimate obstacle crossing capability, obtaining the maximum climbing height and maximum crossing width; testing the lower limb exoskeleton's stable obstacle crossing capability, obtaining the obstacle crossing height and average obstacle crossing speed; testing the lower limb exoskeleton's complex space navigation capability, obtaining the height level, difficulty level, and average navigation speed; S2: Scoring is performed based on the seven numerical values ​​obtained in step S1, wherein each of the climbing limit height, crossing limit width, obstacle climbing height, obstacle climbing speed, and average crossing speed is scored, and each of the height level and difficulty level is scored; S3: Using the weighted analysis method, a comprehensive score of the obstacle-crossing maneuverability of the lower limb exoskeleton is obtained based on the scores of the six scores obtained in step S2 and evaluated.

2. The method for evaluating the obstacle-crossing maneuverability of a lower limb exoskeleton according to claim 1, wherein: The test of the ultimate obstacle crossing capability in S1 specifically includes: S11: Testing the lower limb exoskeleton to climb over the ultimate height H max ; S12: Test the lower limb exoskeleton across the maximum width L max .

3. The method for evaluating the obstacle-crossing maneuverability of a lower limb exoskeleton according to claim 2, wherein: The test of stable obstacle crossing ability in step S1 is specifically as follows: S13: testing the height and speed of 5 identical obstacle walls that can be crossed continuously, and recording the highest obstacle wall height crossed as the obstacle height H. avg , the corresponding average speed is the obstacle crossing speed V avg .

4. The method for evaluating the obstacle-crossing maneuverability of a lower limb exoskeleton according to claim 3, wherein: The test of complex space traversal ability in step S1 is specifically as follows: S14: testing the ability to sequentially traverse five obstacle walls with large height differences, obtaining the height level N, difficulty level M, and average traversal speed V of the obstacle wall traversed. thro .

5. The method for evaluating the obstacle-crossing maneuverability of a lower limb exoskeleton according to claim 4, wherein: Step S2 specifically includes: S21: Scoring of the ultimate obstacle crossing ability: Scoring the ultimate obstacle crossing height H recorded in the test in step S11 max And the span limit width L max , using the distribution position percentage method, scoring is performed based on the position of the individual indicator parameters in the scoring reference range; S22: Stable obstacle crossing ability scoring: Obstacle crossing height H recorded in step S12 avg and the average obstacle crossing speed V avg , using the distribution position percentage method, scoring is performed based on the position of the individual indicator parameters in the scoring reference range; S23: Scoring of complex obstacle crossing ability: record the height level N and difficulty level M of the obstacle through the test, and use the table lookup method to obtain the difficulty score of the crossing; according to the average speed V thro , the score of the travel speed item is obtained by using the table lookup method.

6. The method for evaluating the obstacle-crossing maneuverability of a lower limb exoskeleton according to claim 1, wherein: There are two slide rail and slider assemblies, which are arranged in parallel and at intervals; each slide rail and slider assembly includes a slide rail and at least one slider; the intermediate adapter is fixedly connected to the slider.

7. The method for evaluating the obstacle-crossing maneuverability of a lower limb exoskeleton according to claim 6, wherein: The supporting column includes a mounting plate, a side plate and a top plate; there are two side plates, which are arranged in parallel and spaced apart, and a slot is formed between the two side plates to limit the modular barrier plate.

8. The method for evaluating the obstacle-crossing maneuverability of a lower limb exoskeleton according to claim 7, wherein: A rotating shaft is provided on the mounting plate, and the rotating shaft is rotatably connected to the intermediate adapter.

9. The method for evaluating the obstacle-crossing maneuverability of a lower limb exoskeleton according to claim 8, wherein: The length of the modular barrier plate is greater than the distance between the two slide rails.

Images