1. Active Ankle/Foot Orthotic Client: Dr. Robert Pryzbelski Advisor: Professor Brenda Ogle Team Members: Jessica Hause - Co-leader Erin Main - Co-leader Joshua White - Communicator Anthony Schuler - BWIG Emily Andrews - BSAC

2. Presentation Outline Problem Statement Background Summary of PDS Current Orthotics Design Alternatives Spring Joint Material Design Matrix Future Work References

3. Problem Statement Orthotic for patients with neuropathies affecting gait Actively enhances forefoot propulsion Increases proprioception and balance Supports ankle weakness

4. Background Neuropathy Stroke Charcot-Marie Tooth Multiple Sclerosis Plantar & Dorsiflexion Foot Drop Normal Gait

6. Summary of PDS Stability and support Aids propulsion Weight-bearing Under $300 Universal vs. custom-fit Light, strong and durable Thermoplastics, biopolymers, nano- fibers, neoprene

7. Current Orthotics

8. Spring Design Thermoplastic 90° angle Leaf spring in sole aids propulsion

9. Joint Design Thermoplastic Two pieces connected by joint Tamarack joint assists plantar and dorsiflexion

10. Material Design Memory material High energy return Material assists plantar flexion and dorsiflexion

11. Design Matrix Cost (0.3) Balance/ Stability (0.05) Propulsion/ Push-off (0.25) Material (0.25) Foot Clearance (0.15)Total Spring $500 (0.6) Ankle Brace (0.3) Spring with rounded toe (0.75) Thermoplastic with lining (0.75) Molded at 90 degrees (0.45) 2.85 Joint $400 (0.9) Stirrup (0.25) 3/4 cut, Tamarack joint (1.25) Thermoplastic with lining (1) Joint assists with dorsiflexion (0.75) 4.15 Material $700 (0.3) Stirrup (one- sided) (0.2) Energy return material (1.5) Carbon nanofiber (1.75) Memory material (0.9) 4.65

12. Future Work Continue biomechanics research Perform gait analysis Finalize design Build prototype Perform prototype testing

13. References http://www.footankle.com/ankle-foot.htm http://www.firsttoserve.com/Catalog- Orthotics/Lower_Extremity/Custom_Ankle_Foot_Orthotic_AFO/ http://www.dafo.com/index.cfm?pageID=2143 http://leedergroup.com/ http://www.beckerorthopedic.com/tamarack/t5.jpg http://www.ottobock.com/cps/rde/xbcr/SID-3F574DD1- 5FE72259/ob_com_en/Bedienungsanleitung_28U11_WalkOn.pdf http://www.bostonpedorthic.com/orthotics.asp http://www.germes- online.com/direct/dbimage/50066106/Leaf_Spring.jpg http://www.springhouston.com/ http://www.doereport.com/enlargeexhibit.php?ID=842 http://www.germes- online.com/direct/dbimage/50066106/Leaf_Spring.jpg https://secure.roycemedical.com/images/products/AFOLeafSpring.jpg http://www.mda.org/publications/fa-cmt.html http://sprojects.mmi.mcgill.ca/gait/normal/walk.gif

14. Spring Design (Pros and Cons) Pros Cost efficient Ankle stability Durable Cons Over-coverage can cause excessive heat Poor propulsion Bulky Restricted range of motion

15. Joint Design (Pros and Cons) Pros Cost Propulsion Foot clearance Cons Bulky Poor breath ability Inflexible sole

16. Material Design (Pros and Cons) Pros Lightweight Flexible Propulsion Foot clearance Durable Cons Poor stability and support Cost Availability of materials