2. diploma and scientific degrees · biomechanika i inżynieria rehabilitacyjna. tom 3, red. gzik...

Załącznik 3b: Autoreferat. Wiktoria Wojnicz

1

Autoreferat presenting description of acquisition and scientific achievements with specification of scientific achievement given in a series of single-topic publications

1. Name and Surname

Wiktoria Wojnicz (maiden name Makowska)

2. Diploma and scientific degrees

a) PhD in Mechanics

Lodz University of Technology, Mechanical Engineering Faculty

Date of PhD thesis defence: the 24th April 2009

PhD thesis: „Modelling and simulation of behaviour of skeletal muscle system

of the arm-forearm system”

Supervisor:

Professor Edmund Wittbrodt, Gdansk University of Technology

Reviewers:

Professor Jan Awrejcewicz, Lodz University of Technology

Professor Dagmara Tejszerska, Silesian University of Technology

PhD was awarded on the 19th February 2010.

b) MSc (ME) in Automation

State Academy of Light Industry of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine, 1999.

Speciality “Automation of technological processes and production” (result – get a first)

3. Information about work experience in scientific organization

01.07.2017 –

Senior Lecturer, Mechanics and Mechatronics Department, Mechanical Engineering Faculty, Gdansk University of Technology.

01.07.2009 – 30.06.2017

Assistant Professor, Mechanics and Strength of Material Department (Mechanics and Mechatronics Department since 01.09.2010), Mechanical Engineering Faculty, Gdansk University of Technology.

01.10.2008 – 30.06.2009

Assistant, Mechanics and Strength of Material Department, Mechanical Engineering Faculty, Gdansk University of Technology.

09.10.2006 – 30.09.2008

Technical clerk, Mechanics and Strength of Material Department, Mechanical Engineering Faculty, Gdansk University of Technology.


2

2003 – 2006

Contracts for teaching, Mechanics and Strength of Material Department, Mechanical Engineering Faculty, Gdansk University of Technology.

1999 – 2004

PhD Study, Mechanical Engineering Faculty, Gdansk University of Technology.

4. Specification of achievement according to the art. 16 of the par. 2 of the Law dated 14th March 2003 referring to the scientific degrees and scientific title and art degrees and title (Dziennik Ustaw 2016 position 882 with changes in Dzien-nik Ustaw 2016 position 1311)

a) Title of scientific achievement

Biomechanical models of the human musculoskeletal system

b) The scientific achievement presented as a list of the series of single-topic publications

Publications of Ministry of Science and Hight Education list:

[A1] Wojnicz W. (75%), Wittbrodt E., Analysis of muscles' behaviour. Part I. The computational model of muscle. Acta of Bioengineering and Biomechanics, Vol. 11, No.4, 2009, p. 15-21 (IF(2016) – 0.914, IF(2009) – 0,432, 15p.)

[A2] Wojnicz W. (75%), Wittbrodt E., Analysis of muscles' behaviour. Part II. The computational model of muscles' group acting on the elbow joint. Acta of Bioengineering and Biomechanics, Vol. 12, No.1, 2010, p. 3-10 (IF(2016) – 0.914, IF(2010) – 0,432, 15p.)

[A3] Wojnicz W. (75%), Wittbrodt E., Application of muscle model to the musculoskeletal model-ing. Acta of Bioengineering and Biomechanics, Vol. 14, No.3, 2012, s.29-39 (IF(2016) – 0.914, IF(2012) – 0.333, 15p.)

[A4] Olszewski H., Wojnicz W. (45%), Wittbrodt E., Method of skeletal system modelling. The Archive of Mechanical Engineering. Polish Academy of Sciences. Vol. LX, Nr 3. 2013, p. 335-346 (15p.)

[A5] Wojnicz W. (50%), Olszewski H., Wittbrodt E., Chosen aspects of skeletal systems modeling – numerical solid and shell models of femur part. Shell Structure – Theory and Applications. Vol.3., 2014, p. 359-362 (Web of Science, 15p.)

[A6] Wojnicz W. (70%), Olszewski H., Lipiński K., Wittbrodt W., Numerical Model of Femur Part. Dynamical Systems: Modelling, vol. 181, red. Awrejcewicz J., Springer Proceedings in Math-ematics & Statistics, 2016, p. 421-435 (Web of Science, 15p.)

[A7] Wojnicz W. (45%), Zagrodny B., Ludwicki M., Awrejcewicz J., Wittbrodt E., A two-dimen-sional approach for modelling of pennate muscle behaviour. Biocybernetics and Biomedical Engineering 37, 2017, p. 302-315 (IF(2016) – 1.031, 15p.)


3

Books:

[B1] Wojnicz W. (70%), Wittbrodt E., Modele dyskretne w analizie dynamiki mięśni szkieletowych układu ramię-przedramię (Discrete models in dynamic analysis of skeletal muscles of the arm-forearm system). Wydawnictwo Politechniki Gdańskiej, 2012, p. 1-212, ISBN 978-83-7348-424-5 (25p.)

[B2] Wojnicz W. (100%), Biomechaniczne modele układu mięśniowo-szkieletowego człowieka (Biomechanical models of the human musculoskeletal system). Wydawnictwo Politechniki Gdańskiej, 2018, p. 1-209, ISBN 978-83-7348-727-7 (25p.)

Chapters:

[C1] Wojnicz W. (80%), Wittbrodt E., Modelling of planar movement of upper limb. Dynamical Systems Applications. 12-th Conference on Dynamical Systems, Theory and Applications. 2013, p. 307-318 (5p.)

[C2] Wojnicz W. (45%), Zagrodny B., Ludwicki M., Awrejcewicz J., Wittbrodt E., Mathematical model of pennate muscle, Dynamical Systems: Mechatronics and Life Sciences (DSTA 2015), red. Awrejcewicz J., Kaźmierczak M., Mrozowski J., Olejnik P., Department of Auto-mation, Biomechanics and Mechatronics, Politechnika Łódzka, Łódź, 2015, p. 595-608 (5p.)

[C3] Wojnicz W. (75%), Wittbrodt E., Modelowanie zachowania układu mięśni (Modelling of mus-cle system behaviour). Biomechanika i Inżynieria Rehabilitacyjna. Tom 3, red. Gzik M., Lewandowska-Szumieł M., Pawlikowski M., Wychowański M., Akademicka Oficyna Wydawnictwa EXIT: Polska Akademia Nauk, 2015, p. 329-343 (5p.)

[C4] Wojnicz W. (100%), Modele biomechaniczne układów mięśniowo-szkieletowych (Biome-chanical models of the musculoskeletal systems). Chapter in „Od metody elementów skończonych do mechatroniki” (red. K.Kaliński & K.Lipiński), Wydawnictwo Politechniki Gdańskiej, Gdańsk, p. 93-104 (5p.)

c) Description of the scope of the scientific work presented to the evaluation

Scientific acquisition presented to the evaluation was developed over 2009-2017 time and was

created by taking part in Statutory Activities of the Mechanical Engineering Faculty of Gdansk

University of Technology and two research projects:

1. „Modelowanie w biomechanice: dynamika kończyny górnej, kończyny dolnej oraz odcinka

lędźwiowego kręgosłupa” (Modelling in biomechanics: dynamics of upper limb, lower limb and

lumbar part of spine) (ID: N N501 315639, Ministry of Science and Higher Education), 2010 –

2013, Mechanical Engineering Faculty of Gdansk University of Technology, supervisor -

Professor Edmund Wittbrodt (part – investigator).

2. „Modelowanie, analiza kinematyczno-dynamiczna i symulacyjna prototypu egzoszkieletu do

rehabilitacji osób z niepełnosprawnością ruchową kończyn dolnych” (Modelling, kinematic-

dynamic analysis and numerical analysis of the prototype of the exoskeleton for rehabilitation of

impaired lower limb) (ID: OPUS 9 No. 2015/17/B/ST8/01700, National Science Centre of Poland,

OPUS), 2016 – 2018, Mechanical Engineering Faculty of Lodz University of Technology,

supervisor - Professor Jan Awrejcewicz (part – consultant).

Scientific acquisition encompasses scientific areas referring to muscle biomechanics,

musculoskeletal system biomechanics, skeletal system biomechanics, gait biomechanics,


4

application of physiological signals (electromyography signals) to the verification of mechanical

models and designing the rehabilitation devices on the base of motor control principles.

Mathematical models were derived by applying the principles of mechanics, multibody dynamics and

finite element method (FEM).

The description of the acquisition is presented in the following five subchapters:

1. Biomechanical models of skeletal muscles (C1).

2. Biomechanical models of musculoskeletal systems (C2).

3. Biomechanical models of the skeletal system (C3).

4. Biomechanical gait models (C4).

5. Designing of rehabilitation devices (C5).

6. Application possibilities (C6).

C1. Biomechanical models of skeletal muscles

Striated skeletal muscles (called skeletal muscles) are the part of muscular system of the human

movement apparatus. Their task is to evoke voluntary contractions that allow performing planning

voluntary motions. Skeletal muscle proficiency depends closely on working of the human nervous

system and skeletal system [B2].

At the microscale level the skeletal muscle is composed of miofibrils, which can contract under the

stimulus transferred through the nervous motor paths, and muscle spindles that send information (to

the nervous system) about actual length and the contraction velocity of miofibrils. Within the

connection of miofibrils and tendon there are tendon sensors called Golgi organs. These sensors

send information (to the nervous system) about the stress occurring in this connection. Muscle

spindles and Golgi organs are components of the sensory system that transmits information (to the

central nervous system) about the states of components of the human movement apparatus. Basing

on this information, the nervous system activates chosen muscles through motor nervous paths and

surveys whether muscles’ contractions occur in an admissible range (without damage and

impairment). It is worth noticing that real muscle function (in live organism) and isolated muscle

function (that is separated from the nervous system influence) are completely different. That is why

the relationship between the muscle length, muscle contraction velocity and muscle force (defined

on the isolated muscles) cannot be treated as unique relationship [B2].

Modelling a behaviour of the muscle, one can use the Hill-type muscle model (or Hill-Zajac muscle

model). This approach implies that behaviour of the tendon and the belly is reduced to the muscle

insertion and the muscle force depends on the current muscle length and the level of muscle activa-

tion. Applying this approach, the influence of different mechanical properties of muscle fragments on

the muscle dynamics does not consider and this can lead to miscalculation of the muscle force pro-

duced by this muscle.

To identify the muscle mechanical properties, one should take into consideration its structure, i.e.

the fact that the muscle can be composed of: 1) one belly; 2) serially linked tendon and belly; 3)

serially linked tendon, belly and tendon. From the mechanics point of view each of these three

constructions has different mechanical properties that caused by the big difference between

mechanical properties of the tendon tissue (very stiff tissue) and mechanical properties of the belly


5

tissue (very flexible tissue). Moreover, the belly’s fragments have different level of stiffness and

contraction possibility [A1, A3, B1, B2].

It is worth keeping in mind that the range of researches that can be carried on living human (animal)

is very limited due to bioethical and moral constrains. That is why methods used to test a dead object

cannot be directly used to test a behaviour of the live body components (these methods can conduct

to irreversible changes in the organism tested) [B2].

The purpose of the researches developed in the scope of the first area „ Biomechanical models of

skeletal muscles” was creating original models of behaviour of striated skeletal muscle having fusi-

form structure and pennate structure. Original models were created by taking into consideration the

real muscle physiology and the fact that each muscle is a system composed of fragments having

different mechanical properties. It is worth underlying that proposed discretization of the muscle

structure (considering the fact that muscle in composed of several components) is author’s approach

in the muscle biomechanics.

The scope of my researches was focused on derivation of original mathematical models and their

numerical implementations (numerical models):

1) fusiform short muscle (3DOF model) (DOF means degree of freedom), fusiform middle muscle

(5DOF model) and fusiform long muscle (7DOF model) [A1, A3],

2) unipennate muscle [A7];

3) bipennate muscle [A7].

Presented models can be applied to model a behaviour of muscle with both tendons, muscle with

one tendon or muscle without tendon. Skeletal muscle behaviour is modelled by applying principles

of mechanics and rigid finite element method.

Innovatory modelling approach was presented as original discrete rheological models that were

derived on the base of the fusiform muscle treated as a 5 DOF system (this model was presented in

the PhD thesis). The behaviour of each muscle is modelled as a rheological system composed of

serially linked passive and active mass-elastic-damping fragments having different mechanical

properties. Each active fragment can contract (due to action of force element, which produces an

internal force). According to this approach, mechanical properties of the muscle are dependent on

the state of muscle function. Proposed approach is consistent with the muscle physiology, i.e. during

muscle overloading it is activated the nervous feedback that changes mechanical properties of this

muscle and leads to unloading of this muscle.

Mathematical models of new discrete rheological muscle models were derived in two forms:

1) system of differential equations (fusiform muscle model, unipennate muscle model and

bipennate muscle model);

2) the integro-differential equation describes the model reduced to the one coordinate that

describes the muscle insertion displacement, i.e. relatively movable point (fusiform muscle

model).

Proposed mathematical models were implemented into numerical models by creating own files

(scripts) in MATLAB software. To solve the system of differential equations and the integro-differen-

tial equation the Adams-Bashforth method was used. This method was implemented by creating

own file (script) [B1]. Presented models can be used to model a phenomenon of muscle force trans-

ferring through: 1) the tendon to the bone; 2) through the tendon-belly connection to the bone; 3) the


6

belly filaments to the bone. It is worth mentioning that proposed rheological muscle models were

used to model the behaviour of the human musculoskeletal systems (C2).

C1.1. Fusiform muscle modelling

Taking into consideration principles described in [B1], the behaviour of the fusiform muscle was

modelled by creating three basic muscle models: short fusiform muscle (the first type), middle

fusiform muscle (the second type) and the long fusiform muscle (the third type). Each of these types

was elaborated in two kinds [A3]. A geometry of the fusiform muscle was modelled as a system

composed of the following geometrical figures:

1) in the model of the short fusiform muscle each tendon is treated as a cylinder thus the belly is

treated as a barrel;

2) in the model of the middle fusiform muscle each tendon is treated as a cylinder, the lateral part

of the belly is treated as a truncated cone thus the middle part of the belly is treated as a barrel;

3) in the model of the long fusiform muscle each tendon is treated as a cylinder, the lateral parts

of the belly are treated as truncated cones (two parts on the left side and two parts on the right

sides) thus the middle part of the belly is treated as a barrel.

The first type describes the behaviour of the muscle composed of three fragments having different

mechanical properties. This is the 3DOF model presented in two kinds: the first kind is composed of

one active fragment and two passive fragments; the second one is composed of two active fragments

and one passive fragment. This model can be used to describe: 1) short muscle without tendon

(passive fragments can be used to describe the connection between the belly tissue and the bone

area); 2) short muscle with one tendon; 3) short muscle with two tendons. The mathematical model

of the first type is presented in two mathematical forms: 1) system of three differential equations

(3DOF); 2) single integro-differential equation that was formulated by reducing the 3DOF model to

the 1DOF model 1DOF (3DOF→1DOF) [A3].

The second type models the behaviour of the muscle composed of fives fragments having different


three active fragments and two passive fragments (presented in the PhD thesis); the second one is

composed of fours active fragments and one passive fragment. This model can be used to model:

1) the middle fusiform muscle without tendons; 2) the middle fusiform muscle with only one tendon;

3) the middle fusiform muscle with two tendons; 4) the middle fusiform impaired muscle that can

generate internal forces only in one, two or three active fragments. The mathematical model of the

second type is presented in two mathematical forms: 1) system of five equations (5DOF); 2) single

integro-differential equation (5DOF→1DOF) [A3].

The third type describes the behaviour of the muscle composed of seven fragments having different


five active fragments and two passive fragments; the second one is composed of six active frag-

ments and one passive fragment. This model can be used to describe: 1) the long fusiform muscle

without tendons; 2) the long fusiform muscle with only one tendon; 3) the long fusiform muscle with

two tendons; 4) the long fusiform impaired muscle that can generates internal (contractile) forces

only in one, two, three, four or five active fragments. The mathematical model of the third type is

presented in two mathematical forms: 1) system of seven equations (7DOF); 2) single integro-differ-

ential equation (7DOF→1DOF) [A3].


7

Proposed muscle models can be used to describe a behaviour of flat muscle, muscle composed of

several bellies, muscle having impaired/overloaded fragments. Parameters of muscle mechanical

properties can be estimated by applying the method of identification described in [A1]. Results of

numerical researches performed for different mechanical properties are given in [A3].

Numerical researches of fusiform muscle models were performed to estimate the influence of [A3]:

1) stiffness of lateral muscle fragments on muscle model behaviour (the force of real muscle is

transmitted to the skeletal system through lateral muscle fragments, that is why the stiffness of

these fragments has an impact on the value of this transmitted force);

2) degree of muscle model discretization on behaviour of the muscle model 3DOF, 5DOF and

7DOF (a behaviour of the muscle is described as a system composed of serially linked active

and passive fragments, that is why the number of these fragments influences on accuracy of

real muscle behaviour);

3) mathematical forms of muscle model on muscle model behaviour (to model a behaviour of

single muscle one should use the system of differential equations, thus to model a behaviour of

muscle system one needs to use an integro-differential equation).

The influence of mathematical form of muscle model was checked by comparing the results calcu-

lated from the model described by the system of differential equations with the results calculated

from the model described by the integro-differential equation.

Numerical researches had been performed on 54 numerical models of fusiform muscles. Taking into

consideration diverse mechanical properties of the tendons and the belly, stiff models were derived

(with respect to the eigenvalues) [B2]. To obtain a numerical solution of the differential equation

system or the integro-differential equation I should match a proper time step depending on the big-

gest eigenvalue of the system [A3].

The numerical researches of presented muscle models encompassed simulation of:

1) eccentric-concentric contraction,

2) isokinetic-isometric contraction,

3) step exertion of muscle.

To perform the eccentric-concentric contraction the external force and internal forces were given.

The model output was a collection of specific points’ displacements. To model an isokinetic-isometric

contraction the analytical function was given. This function described the isokinetic contraction (the

contraction with constant rate) in the first stage and the isometric contraction (the muscle insertion

is immobile) in the second stage. The model output was a contractile force of the muscle, i.e. the

force acting on the muscle insertion over this contraction. To model a step exertion of muscle the

analytical function (exponential one) of muscle insertion displacement was given. This function de-

scribed a very fast translation (close to the Heaviside’s function). The model output was a muscle

contraction force, i.e. force acting on the muscle insertion over testing contraction.

C1.2. Pennate muscle modelling

Pennate muscle behaviour was created for flat muscle in the range of small deformation by taking

into consideration the structure of pennate muscle meeting in the upper and lower human limb [B2].


8

In the pennate muscle loaded by external force Fext the muscle fibres exert the force Fm that causes

the displacement of the muscle insertion x and changes the pennation angle p [A7, C2].

In the paper [A7] two authors’ models were proposed:

1) unipennate muscle model (unipennate muscle model WW);

2) bipennate muscle model (bipennate muscle model WW).

The author’s unipennate muscle model is a 3DOF system. It is composed of three serially linked

mass-elastic-damping fragments (one active and two passive fragments).

The author’s bipennate muscle is a 5DOF model. It is composed of two unipennate muscle models

placed at the different angles and tightly linked at the common insertion.

The author’s unipennate muscle model and bipennate muscle model can be applied to solve the

following dynamic tasks by considering that t is a time variable:

1) considering that input data are the insertion displacement x(t) and external force Fext(t), one can

calculate the internal force generating in each unipennate muscle ��(�) (this force is produced

in the force element and it leads to the muscle fibre contraction with the force Fm(t)), the pennate

angles and deformations of muscle fragments.

2) considering that input data are the insertion displacement x(t) and internal force ��(�) producing

in each force element of unipennate muscle model, one can calculate the external force Fext(t),

the pennate angles and deformations of muscle fragments;

3) considering that input data are the external force Fext(t) and internal force ��(�) producing in each

unipennate muscle, one can calculate the displacement of insertion x(t), the pennate angle of

each unipennate muscle and deformations of muscle fragments.

C2. Biomechanical models of musculoskeletal systems

The human musculoskeletal system is a multibody structure composed of the muscular system and

skeletal system. The second one is a passive system thus the first one is an active system which

can produce internal forces. The cooperation between the muscular system and skeletal system is

continuously controlled by the nervous system that surveys the musculoskeletal system function

[C3]. The main problem referring to the discovery of cause-and-effect relationships occurring in the

musculoskeletal system is a lack of direct and non-invasive methods that can be used to estimate

the current forces exerted by the chosen alive muscles of the system examined. The main cause is

the fact that muscles are covered by the skin and there is a lack of non-invasive access to them.

Moreover, the muscular system function depends on the stimulation transmitted by the nervous

system. This stimulation adapts the limb muscular system for transmitted external load to perform a

given motor activity and avoid impairment of movement apparatus components at the same time

[B2]. From the mechanics point of view the human musculoskeletal system is a redundant system.

Assuming that muscle forces are unknown variables, one can define the unique solution of dynamical

task only in the case when mathematic optimization methods are applied. It is worth keeping in mind

that definition of cost function for this case is the problem since this function should reflect some

physiological features.

In the musculoskeletal system there are working single-joint and multi-joint muscles [B2, C1]. Single-

joint muscle affects the one joint, thus multi-joint muscle loads a several joints at the same time.


9

From the point of view of mechanics, the problem of multi-joint function is still an open problem: this

muscle produces additional moments at all influenced joints and changes the end stiffness of the

effector (limb).

The purpose of the researches developed in the scope of second area „ Biomechanical models of

musculoskeletal systems” was creation the original models of behaviour of the human limb treated

as a multibody system by taking into consideration rheological properties of the skeletal muscles

(C1) [A2].

The scope of my researches was focused on derivation of original five mathematical models of

[B2]:

1) planar 2DOF system (model 2DOF);




5) spatial system composed of one ball-and-socket joint (spherical model).

I created own files (scripts) in MATLAB software to implement mathematical models into numerical

ones. Mathematical models were created on the base of principles of mechanics, multibody

mechanics and rigid finite element method.

Using the Newton-Euler method, I derived original biomechanical models of the musculoskeletal

systems by assuming that each muscle force was acting in three-dimensional space. These models

can be used to solve direct and inverse dynamics task. To perform numerical researches the Adams-

Bashforth method was used. Each planar biomechanical model, which is used to solve the direct

dynamic task, was implemented in two numerical types:

1) without consideration of influence of blocking moments (this type can be applied to model move-

ment in the admissible range of motion);

2) with consideration of influence of blocking moments produced at the limit of range of motion (these

blocking moments maintain the system in admissible range of motion).

Model 2DOF describes the dynamics of planar motion of two movable segments connected with

each other by the hinge joint and forming the double-pendulum configuration OAB fixed to the

immobile basic segment O (base) [C1, B2]. This 2DOF system is described by two generalized

coordinates – angles 1 and 2. The 2DOF model is loaded by muscle force moments, external

moments (M1 and M2) and blocking moments. Modelling the function of two-joint muscle, two

methods were proposed [B2]:

1) the first method implies that two-joint muscle force influence as one muscle force (acton) and its

insertion is placed on the movable part thus the origin is located on the immobile part;

2) the second method implies that two joint muscle is modelled as a contractile element.

Model 4DOF describes the dynamics of the double-pendulum OAB fixed to the movable basic

segment O. This model is 4DOF system and it was derived on the base of the model 2DOF [B2].

The model 4DOF describes the behaviour of musculoskeletal system composed of two joints and

two segments by assuming that the first point (the point O) of the first segment performs a given

relative motion. The generalized coordinates are two angles (1 and 2) and the kinematics of the

point O described by the given time-dependent functions of two displacements (y0 and z0). This


10

model can be applied to describe the planar motion of two connected segments loaded by muscle

force moments, external moments (M1 and M2), blocking moments and moments influenced by a

given relative motion. For example, in the case of the upper limb, this relative motion can occur in

the glenohumeral joint due to the complex motion of the shoulder girdle joints. This model considers

the function of both one-joint and two-joint muscles.

Model 3DOF describes the dynamics of planar motion of three movable segments connected with

each other by two hinge joints and forming the triple-pendulum configuration OABD fixed to the

immobile basic segment O [B2]. This is a 3DOF system and it is described by three generalized

coordinates – three angles 1, 2 and 3. This model 3DOF is loaded by muscle force moments,

external moments (M1, M2 and M3) and blocking moments. The model 3DOF describes the action of

single-joint muscles, two-joint muscles and three-joint muscles (which position should be described

by inputting additional geometrical relationship).

Model 5DOF describes the dynamics of the triple-pendulum OABD fixed to the movable basic

segment O. This model is 5DOF system and it was derived on the base of the model 3DOF [B2].

The model 5DOF describes the behaviour of musculoskeletal system composed of two joints and

three segments by assuming that the first point (the point O) of the first segment performs a given

relative motion. The generalized coordinates are three angles (1, 2 and 3) and the kinematics of

the point O described by the given time-dependent functions of two displacements (y0 and z0). This

model can be applied to describe the planar motion of three connected segments loaded by muscle

force moments, external moments (M1, M2 and M3), blocking moments and moments influenced by

a given relative motion. This model describes the function of both one-joint and two-joint muscles. It

is possible to take into consideration a working of three-joint muscle, but this demands to apply the

additional geometrical relationships.

Spherical model describes the dynamics of the spherical pendulum OA that is fixed to the immobile

point O [B2]. The pendulum motion is described in the principal axes X’Y’Z’ which are rotating

towards the immobile axes XYZ placed at the fixed point O. The position of the spherical pendulum

is described by the Euler angles (there are generalized coordinates): precession angle , intrinsic

rotation angle and nutation angle . The spherical model describes the behaviour of the spatial

musculoskeletal system composed of single ball-and-socket joint. This model can be used to

describe the spherical (rotational) motions in the chosen joint (for example, in the glenohumeral joint)

exerted by moments of muscle forces, external moments and blocking moments. This model

considers only single-joint muscle function.

The choice of the biomechanical model (model 2DOF, model 3DOF, model 4DOF, model 5 DOF or

spherical model) depends on the type of the motion examined and the anatomical structure of the

system analysed. It is worth noticing that complex movements (that are performed by the human

limb) are the result of composition of basic motions: planar motions and spherical motions. Taking

into consideration the influence of muscle (modelled as original discrete rheological models), the

number of degree of freedom of the system examined is increased by: 1) 2DOF when the muscle

model 3DOF is considered; 2) 4DOF when the muscle model 5DOF is considered; 3) 6DOF when

the muscle model 7DOF is considered. The increase of the number of degree of freedom is caused

by the fact that the displacement of the muscle insertion and the joint angle of the segment (to which

this muscle is attached) has a functional relationship.

Proposed biomechanical models can be used to solve direct dynamical task and inverse dynamical

task. They also can be used to create a control system of the chosen muscular system. In the case

of solving of the direct dynamical task, in each time step one should ckeck: a) deformations of


11

muscles’ fragments and forces produced at the muscles’ insertions (the deformations and the forces

should have the values belonging to defined physiological ranges); b) motion of chosen system seg-

ments (kinematic data should belong to the physiological ranges of kinematic data). In the case of

violation of physiological range, one should change the values of internal forces produced in the

force elements of each muscle model or evoke an action of blocking moments. It is worth noticing

that search of solution of direct dynamical task is a reflexion of process of motion learning that hap-

pens in the real system (movement apparatus).

Proposed biomechanical models can be applied to analyse the behaviour of the chosen muscles of

the system examined and to estimate the share of these muscles in the performance examined. The

analysis consists in calculating the values of deformations of the chosen muscle fragments and de-

fining the type of muscle contraction by taking into consideration the following assumptions formu-

lated on the base of the muscle physiology [B2]:

1) the positive value of the contraction force (that is directed from the insertion (relatively movable

point) to the origin (relatively immobile point)) in the shorten muscle evidences that the con-

centric contraction is occurring and this muscle takes an active part in the performance;

2) the negative value of the contraction force in the shorten muscle evidences that the modelled

muscle behaviour is wrong (i.e. incompatible with the muscle physiology because the muscle

cannot be compressed);

3) the positive value of the contraction force in the muscle lengthening evidences that this muscle

actively counteracts to the external force that lengthens this muscle;

4) the negative value of the contraction force in the muscle lengthening evidences that this mus-

cle counteracts to the external force in a passive way (an external force lengthens the muscle

and this can cause the muscle overloading/damage);

5) the location of the muscle insertion and the origin (in the skeletal system) points out the func-

tion of this muscle, i.e. whether this muscle works as agonist or antagonist muscle.

In the case of upper limb, proposed biomechanical models can be applied to simulate [B2]:

1) basic planar motion of flexion-extension in the glenohumeral joint towards the transverse axis

placed in the middle of the humerus head (one can apply the model 2DOF / 3DOF that de-

scribes the motion in the sagittal plane of the body, while the elbow joint or wrist joint should

be fixed in the model 2DOF);

2) basic planar motion of abduction-adduction in the glenohumeral joint towards the sagittal axis

placed in the middle of humerus head (one can apply the model 2DOF / 3DOF that describes

the motion in the frontal plane of the body, while the elbow joint or wrist joint should be fixed in

the model 2DOF);

3) basic spherical motion of the internal rotation – external rotation in the gelnohumeral joint (one

can use the spherical model by considering the middle of the humerus head is a point O of the

coordinate system);

4) basic planar motion of flexion-extension in the elbow joint towards the transverse axis placed

in the middle of the elbow joint (one can apply the model 2DOF that describes the motion in

the sagittal plane of the body, while the arm should be immobile);

5) basic spherical motion of supination – pronation in the elbow joint (one can use spherical model

by assuming that the middle of the elbow joint is a point O of the coordinate system, while the

arm should be immobile and the wrist joint should be fixed);


12

6) composition of basic planar motions in sagittal plane towards the transverse axis placed in the

middle of glenohumeral joint: flexion-extension in the glenohumeral joint and flexion-extension

in the elbow joint (one can apply the model 2DOF);

7) composition of basic planar motions in the sagittal plane of the body towards the transverse

axis placed in the middle of elbow joint: flexion-extension in the elbow joint and the wrist joint

motion depended on the forearm position, i.e. flexion – extension in the wrist joint while the

forearm is pronated or radial deviation – ulnar deviation while the forearm is in a neutral posi-

tion (one can apply the model 2DOF, while the arm should be fixed);

8) composition of basic planar motions in the frontal plane towards the sagittal axis placed in the

middle of glenohumeral joint: abduction – adduction in the glenohumeral joint and flexion- ex-

tension in the elbow joint (one can use the model 2DOF);

9) composition of basic planar motions in the frontal plane towards the sagittal axis placed in the

middle of the elbow joint: the flexion-extension motion in the elbow joint and the motion in the

wrist joint depend on the forearm position, i.e. flexion – extension in the wrist joint while the

forearm is in a neutral position or ulnar deviation – radial deviation while the forearm is pro-

nated (one can apply the model 2DOF, while the arm should be immobile);

10) composition of basic planar motions in the transverse plane towards the long axes placed in

the middle of the glenohumeral joint: the arm is maximally adducted (placed at the right angle

towards the trunk) and one can perform the motion of flexion – extension in the elbow joint and

motion in the wrist joint (flexion-extension in the wrist joint while the forearm is in a neutral

position or ulnar deviation – radial deviation while the forearm is pronated) (the model 3DOF /

2DOF can be applied but the arm should be immobile);

11) complex planar motion in the sagittal plane when the middle of the humerus head is displacing

according to the given kinematic function and in the glenohumeral joint, elbow joint or/and wrist

joint planar flexion-extension motions are performed (one can apply the model 4DOF / 5DOF);

12) complex planar motion in the frontal plane when the middle of the humerus head is displacing

according to the given kinematic function and motions are performed in the glenohumeral joint

(abduction – adduction), elbow joint or/and wrist joint (planar flexion-extension) (one can apply

the model 4DOF / 5DOF).

In the case of lower limb, proposed biomechanical models can be used to simulate [B2]:

1) basic planar motion of flexion-extension in the hip joint towards the transverse axis placed in

the middle of the femur head (one can apply the model 2DOF / 3DOF that describes the

motion in the sagittal plane of the body, while the knee joint or ankle joint should be fixed in

the model 2DOF);

2) basic planar motion of adduction-adduction in the hip joint towards the sagittal axis placed in

the middle of the femur head (one can apply the model 2DOF / 3DOF that describes the motion

in the frontal plane of the body, while the knee joint or ankle joint should be fixed in the model

2DOF);

3) basic spherical motion of internal rotation – external rotation in the hip joint (one can use spher-

ical model by assuming that the middle of the hip joint is an origin of the coordinate system);


13

4) basic planar motion of flexion-extension in the knee joint towards the transverse axis placed in

the middle of the knee head (one can apply the model 2DOF that describes the motion in the

sagittal plane of the body);

5) basic spherical motion of internal rotation – external rotation in the knee joint while the knee is

flexed (one can use a spherical model by assuming that the middle of the knee joint is an origin

of the coordinate system; while the thigh joint should be immobile);

6) composition of basic planar motions in the sagittal plane towards the transverse axes placed

in the middle of the hip joint: the flexion – extension in the hip joint, the flexion – extension in

the knee joint and dorsiflexion – plantar flexion in the ankle joint (one can apply the model

3DOF);

7) composition of basic planar motions in the sagittal plane towards the transverse axes placed

in the middle of the knee joint: the flexion – extension in the knee joint and dorsiflexion – plantar

flexion in the ankle joint (one can apply the model 2DOF while the thigh should be immobile);

8) complex planar motion in the sagittal plane when the middle of the femur head is displacing

according to the given kinematic function and in the hip joint, knee joint or/and ankle joint planar

flexion-extension motions are performed (one can apply the model 4DOF / 5DOF);

9) complex planar motion in the frontal plane when the middle of the femur head is displacing

according to the given kinematic function and the motion of abduction – adduction is perform-

ing in the hip joint while the mobility in the knee joint is blocked and plantarflexed ankle joint is

performing planar motions (one can apply the model 4DOF).

Applying biomechanical models of the musculoskeletal system, the analysis comparting a behaviour

of healthy system with impaired one can be carried out. Considering the results of this analysis, it is

possible: 1) to diagnose the disease of the musculoskeletal system; 2) to elaborate the individual

program of rehabilitation; 3) to predict the effects of surgery (in the case when the muscle

attachments are fixed to the other places).

C3. Biomechanical models of the skeletal system

From the point of view of a spatial geometry and mechanical properties, the skeletal system of the

human movement apparatus is a very complex object [B2]. Its components are subjecting to the

structural and material changes/modifications under the mechanical load transferred and convolution

of electrochemical phenomena induced by this load. Those phenomena lead to creation such a

structure that can transfer the external load and internal load (this last one is an effect of

intersegmental interactions). To create a model of behaviour of skeletal system chosen component

one should solve a series of complex problems referring to non-linear geometry (structural features),

non-homogenous material properties (anisotropy of the real structure) and numerical methods used

for calculation. To put up the irregular geometry model, which imitates the real structure, one should

deal with the series of numerical problems induced by the creation of analytical description of non-

linear geometry of the system examined. Moreover, the problem referring to the mesh creating also

should be solved. One should perform the series of numerical researches of mesh models to obtain

stable solutions.

The purpose of the researches developed in the third area „Biomechanical model of skeletal

system” was creation of original FEM models of chosen fragment of skeletal system (femur bone).

The scope of my researches was focused on creation of:


14

1) solid model of the femur fragment;

2) models of fragment of trabecular bone modelled as regular scaffold;

3) models of fragment of trabecular bone modelled as irregular scaffold;

4) models of slice of femur fragment composed of trabecular regular scaffold;

5) models of slice of femur fragment composed of trabecular irregular scaffold.

Proposed numerical models were analysed by applying static load and assuming that bone tissue is

isotropic material working in the linear-elastic range. Numerical models were created in the ABAQUS

software.

Solid model of the femur fragment is composed of the proximal epiphysis of the left femur (femur

head, neck and greater trochanter) that was cut by the frontal and transverse plane of the body [A4,

B2]. This fragment is treated as a solid structure (i.e. in the macro scale level) that precisely describes

the real external surface, but the internal bone structure is treated as homogenous and solid

fulfilment. It is worth noticing that this approach deals with the problem of creation of mesh model

that should be a numerical stable model (since the external surface is a complex non-linear (curved)

spatial surface). Assuming that material is working in the linear-elastic space and both the boundary

conditions and external load are giving, this model can be only used in preliminary research because

only rough results can be carried out (this model does not take into consideration the influence of

the internal bone structure loaded by external force).

Models of fragment of trabecular bone modelled as regular scaffold was created in two types:

solid models and shell models [A5]. Each type was created in two kinds: 1) 2.5 mm scaffold (the

characteristic length was equal to 2.5 mm); 2) 5.0 mm scaffold (the characteristic length was equal

to 5.0 mm). The reason of creation of these models was the fact that filling the given volume with a

scaffold having smaller characteristic length one should use a larger computer capacity (the number

of degree of freedom of 2.5 mm scaffold is bigger than the number of degree of freedom of 5.0mm

scaffolds).The objective of this study was to verify which type of numerical model (solid or shell)

should be applied to model a structure of trabecular bone (that is a non-linear and thin-walled struc-

ture). To test the behaviour of proposed numerical models each model was loaded by: 1) compres-

sive force; 2) bending force; 3) torque moment. To define the value of the load it was assumed that

this load should cause the deformation of the structure (scaffold) in some defined range that excludes

the big deformation of the scaffold (e.g. in the case of the shell scaffold that is the thin-walled struc-

ture) and very small deformation (that is comparable with the numerical error caused by computer

rounding (truncation), e.g. in the case of solid scaffold). Each shell model was tested by assuming

two values of shell thickness: 0.1 mm and 0.2 mm. The FEM model of each shell model was created

by using STRI65 finite elements (six-node triangular thin shell elements) that impose the Kirchhoff

constraint numerically. The FEM model of each solid model was created by using: 1) C3D4H finite

elements (four-node linear tetrahedron hybrid solid element with linear pressure); 2) C3D10H finite

elements (ten-node non-linear tetrahedron hybrid solid element with constant pressure).

It is worth noticing that 2.5 mm scaffold allows describing a behaviour of trabecular bone in a more

proper way. However, having constrained computer capacity, one can only use the model with 5.0

mm scaffold to fit the bigger volume.

The first type of models of fragment of trabecular bone modelled as irregular scaffold was

created in two types [A6, B2]: irregular shell bar-connected scaffold and irregular solid bar-connected

scaffold. Proposed models were created by taking into consideration open-work structure of the bone


15

tissue that has some specific arrangement of the trabeculae in the fragment examined (proximal

epiphysis of the femur). This specific arrangement is called gothic arcs and it a result of remodelling

of the structure towards the principal directions of the mechanical load.

The second type of models of fragment of trabecular bone modelled as irregular scaffold was

created by taking into account a method described in [B2]. This method implies that in the proximal

epiphysis of the femur the trabecular bone structure creates arrangements of the gothic arcs that

are placed in the different principal directions in each bone fragment. It was assumed that the basic

element is a curved bar with circular cress section area (the diameter equals 2 mm). The

mathematical model of this curved bar is described by the spline function. Distinguishing two

predominant principal directions, two two-dimensional trabecular patterns were created: left part

directed at the 70o angle and the right part directed at the 90o angle. Disposing two two-dimensional

trabecular patterns parallel to each other and connecting them with the series of basic elements, a

three-dimensional trabecular pattern was created. To perform numerical researches two kinds of

irregular trabecular structure (placed in the proximal epiphysis of the femur) were considered: the

first fragment descried the structured arranged at the 70o angle and the second fragment – the

structured arranged at the 90o angle. To perform numerical analysis six FEM models of trabecular

bone were created: two solid models, two shell models, and two shell models with fortification placed

in the chosen plane. Numerical results were carried out by assuming: 1) zero initial conditions; 2)

boundary conditions implying fixed three translational degrees of freedom; 3) load imposed as

external compressive force that influenced in the Y axis direction and had the value equal to 0.1 N

(applying bigger values of the load force, a numerical instability occurred due to large deformations

of the FEM model components). Analysing results presented in [D2], the most deformable structure

and the most stiff structure were defined. Also, the influence of fortification used in the shell scaffolds

was set down.

Models of slice of femur fragment composed of trabecular regular scaffold were created in two

kinds [A6, B2]: 1) regular shell bar-connected scaffold covered by shell coat with the thickness

equalled 0.2 mm, this kind were developed in two types (the first shell model has a scaffold placed

at the 0o angle, the second shell model has a scaffold placed at the 45o angle) with the scaffold

thickness equalled to 0.2 mm; 2) regular solid bar-connected scaffold covered by solid coat with the

thickness equalled 0.5 mm, this kind were developed in two types (the first solid model has a scaffold

placed at the 0o angle, the second solid model has a scaffold placed at the 45o angle). Each of these

models has a scaffold with characteristic length equalled to 2.5 mm.

Analysing obtained results, it was concluded that the first shell model (trabecular scaffold is arranged

at the 0o angle) is more stiffer than the second shell model (trabecular scaffold is arranged at the 45o

angle) by imposing the same boundary condition (encastre boundary condition) and loading by the

same external uniformly distributed pressure that was equal to 80 MPa (this value was caused by

the weight of the body during one-leg standing position when the muscle force influencing on the

greater trochander was neglected). On the other hand, the opposite behaviour was obtained in the

case of solid models testing: the second solid model was more stiffer than the first solid model.

Analysing the stress field of presented models, it was deduced that the maximum reduced stress

was produced at the basis of neck-head area.

Models of slice of femur fragment composed of trabecular irregular scaffold was created by

assuming that the trabecular bone structure is coincidental with the principal directions of the

mechanical load. Two new models of slice of the femur fragment having trabecular and cortical area

were developed in two types [A6, B2]: 1) irregular shell bar-connected scaffold covered by shell coat;


16

2) irregular solid bar-connected scaffold covered by solid coat. Analysing the results of numerical

researches, it was concluded that the model of irregular shell scaffold is stiffer than the model of

irregular solid scaffold. Moreover, the bigger reduced stress was in the solid model. Analysing the

strain field results, it was noticed that the load transfer in the shell model was distributed along the

neck-head area. On the other hand, the deformation of the solid model was only occurred at the

basis of neck-head area with the deformation of the upper part of the model. Taking into

consideration these results, it can be stated that the strain field of shell irregular model is more similar

to the strain filed of real one.

In the presented scope I carried out the testing of influence of non-linear geometry and I created

numerical stable mesh models by assuming that material was working in the isotropic range. On the

base of numerical researches performed, it was concluded that:

1) irregular structure can transfer the larger load that the regular structure;

2) spatial arrangement of the trabecular scaffold (and the angle between curved bars) has a big

impact on the stiffness of this scaffold;

3) shell numerical models are more proper to model a behaviour of the real trabecular structure

(due to the way of mechanical load transferring); however, to perform the numerical analysis of

shell models one should have a huge computer capacity.

Proposed models can be used:

1) to model the behaviour of the trabecular bone fragment of the chosen long bone that is

transferring external dynamical load (during gat or running);

2) to model the artificial fragments that can be used to fill the trabecular bone loss during the

reconstruction of the human skeletal system;

3) to model the interaction in the bone-implant system that occurs during the alloplastic joint

application (stress-shielding phenomenon).

C4. Biomechanical gait models

From the point of view of mechanics, the human gait can be considered as a periodically lower limb

motions allowing to obtain changing double-support and single-support phase. The specific feature

of the gait is the weight transition over gait phases with maintenance of the stable posture at the

same time. The gait is the function that is controlled by the nervous system and caused due to

cooperation between muscular system and skeletal system. The brain controls activity of the

muscular system since the excitation of the muscles depends on the nervous feedback loop

transmitted through afferent paths [B2]. To define the muscle activation during the non-invasive

testing the surface electromyography (EMG) is applied. It allows defining the periods of activity of

surface muscles during the gait phases.

Applying kinematic data (measured by motion capture system) and kinetic data (measured by force

plate), it is possible to estimate the share of the body parts in the body propulsion that leads to the

shift of the body to the fore. It occurs in the final stage of the single support phase when the upper

part of the body is shifting to the lower limb that starts interacting with the support (during the normal

gait). On the base of kinematic data, one can define the function of each joint, i.e. whether the ankle

joint and knee joint are working as movable connections or fixed connections (stiffened joints).


17

The purpose of the researches developing in the four areas „Biomechanical models of the gait”

was deriving original models that describe the body behaviour during the normal gait and can be

used to create a control system of the external device (exoskeleton) used to help/improve the gait.

The scope of my researches was focused on creation of:

1) biomechanical multibody gait models (Model 6DOF and Model 7DOF) that can be used to

describe the normal (symmetrical) gait during the single support phase (open model) and double

support phase (closed model); method of verification of these biomechanical multibody gait

models;

2) multibody biomechanical models (6DOF system and 7DOF system) that can be used to model

the hanging case on the hinge joint fixed to the floor by assuming that elastic-damping elements

influence all hinge joints and external moments influence all segments of the model;

3) method for determination of functioning of chosen lower limb muscles during the normal gait.

Moreover, it was assumed that in each biomechanical model: 1) each joint (connecting two neigh-

bouring segments) is loaded by the moments originated from the influence of joint passive compo-

nents (modelled as serially linked elastic and damping elements); 2) the interaction between the foot

and the floor occurs at the initiation of the double support phase.

I derived biomechanical models by applying the Newton-Euler method. Proposed models can be

applied to the kinematic and dynamic analysis (to solve direct and inverse task of dynamics).

The first biomechanical model (Model 6DOF) describes a behaviour of the body as a planar 6DOF

system composed of six segments. The upper part of the body (head, neck, trunk and two upper

limbs) is modelled as a force concentrated in the centrum of gravity of this upper part [B2]. The

influence of this force is model as a load (force and moment of this force) transferred through the hip

joint, i.e. the supported lower limb. The second biomechanical model (Model 7DOF) describes a

behaviour of the body as a planar 7DOF system (dendroid system) composed of seven segments.

The upper part of the body (head, neck, trunk and two upper limbs) is modelled as one segment that

is connected to the hip joint (modelled as a hinge joint) [B2]. I created own files (scripts) in MATLAB

software to implement mathematical models (Model 6DOF and Model 7DOF) into numerical ones.

The verification of the proposed models was performed by solving the inverse dynamic task in the

sagittal plane of the body. The process of verification was done by comparing the vertical component

and horizontal component of the interaction force measured during the gait with the calculated ones

by applying the Model 6DOF and Model 7DOF [B2]. To perform a kinematic analysis the joint

moments and joint reaction forces were also estimated. Analysing the results of verification, the

following conclusions were formulated: 1) Model 6DOF allows to obtain the similar value of vertical

component of the interaction force during the single and double support phase; moreover, in the

middle single support phase the calculated horizontal component of the interaction force is very

similar to the measured one; 2) Model 7DOF allows to obtain a very similar value of vertical

component of the interaction force during the single and double support phase; however, the

calculated horizontal component of the interaction force is partly similar to the measured one. It is

worth noticing that the Model 6DOF and Model 7DOF should be applied with caution for asymmetric

gait analysis since proposed biomechanical models describe only the motion occurring in one plane

of the body (in sagittal plane). Applying the Model 6DOF and Model 7DOF to solve the inversion

dynamic task, one can calculate the values of external moments that should be produced by

actuators placed in joints of the exoskeleton used for lower limb rehabilitation. Moreover, one can


18

estimate data that should be used to design a mechanical construction and create a control system

to realize a given motion in the defined range of the stable motion.

The planar multibody models (Model 6DOF and Model 7DOF) can be used to model the hanging

case on the hinge joint fixed to the floor by inputting the values of parameters of elastic-damping

elements influencing at joints and external joints. This demands to solve a direct dynamic task by

assuming that a contact with the floor is keeping through one hinge joint (O point) [B2].

For the purpose to determine the function of chosen muscles the method for determination of

functioning of chosen lower limb muscles during the normal gait was proposed [B2]. The

method involves testing a symmetrical gait occurring in the sagittal plane of the body by registering

activity of four principal right leg muscles (Tibialis Anterior, Rectus Femoris, Gastrocnemius Medialis,

Biceps Femoris) at the same time. Proposed method involves defining the state of each joint of the

lower limb (ankle joint, knee joint and hip joint). The state of joint means defining whether this joint

is stiffened (blocked, i.e. it is working as fixed connection) or is realised (unblocked, it is working as

hinge joint). According to the proposed method, the state of the joint is defined by using kinematic

data and considering the influence of the gravitational field on the skeletal system. In the next step,

the muscle co-contraction phenomenon is deduced by analysing EMG data and functions of the

chosen muscles. The stage of load and stage of unload of all joints can be defined by analysing

kinematic data and joint moments calculated.

C5. Designing of rehabilitation devices

Rehabilitation devices are used to improve impaired motor functions that can be partly or completely

restored [B2]. The fundamental problem consists in estimation of cooperation between two systems:

the live body (component of the human movement apparatus) and a rehabilitation device. The type

of this synergy depends on the impairment degree of the live body, the motion stage and influence

of the external load (e.g. gravitational field). It is worth noticing that the principal function of the

rehabilitation device is to help perform motion and prepare the patient to perform self-dependent

motions.

The purpose of the researches developed in the scope of the fifth research area “Designing of

rehabilitation devices” was elaboration of original concept of designing of rehabilitation devices by

considering the motor control principles. According to the author’s approach, the problem of

designing of rehabilitation devices should be based on the prediction of behaviour of the system

rehabilitated by considering principles of muscle biomechanics, musculoskeletal biomechanics and

motor control. The scope of my researches was focused on developing own concept for

designing the device for rehabilitation of upper limb to perform planar motions.

The author’s concept describes theoretical principles of rehabilitation device modes used to perform

planar motions of upper limb [B2, C4]. Assumptions of this concept are following: to control a reha-

bilitation device one needs to obtain real-time data referring to state of the upper limb, state of the

rehabilitation device (working in the mode: assistance, guidance, guidance-assistance transition,

assistance-guidance transition), the level of synergy between the rehabilitation device and upper

limb rehabilitated, the stage of rehabilitation program and the patient condition. The upper limb con-

dition should be estimated on the base of surface electromyography data (measured on the chosen

muscles), kinematic data (describing the position of body segments) and kinetic data (joint moments

calculated on the base of analytical models). To analyse the statistical relationship between chosen

data one should apply the principles of motor control.


19

C6. Application possibilities

Scientific acquisition presented to the evaluation deals with problems referring to modelling of

behaviour of the human musculoskeletal components. Models were derived by using principles of

mechanics and considering chosen features of physiology of the system examined. Application

possibilities of the proposed solutions are following:

Biomechanical models of skeletal muscle (C1) can be used to model behaviour (contractions)

of real fusiform and pennate muscles. Presented approach for modelling allows estimating the

active component and passive component of muscle contraction force and the contractile force

generated by this muscle (this force is a difference between an active component and passive

component). It is worth noticing that proposed approach is an original one in the scope of muscle

biomechanics. It can be applied to solve direct and/or inverse dynamical task.

Biomechanical models of musculoskeletal system (C2) can be applied to model behaviour of

planar motion of two-segment or three-segment system and the spherical motion of one-

segment system. Proposed models take into consideration influence of muscles by considering

their functions as original models proposed in (C1). Presented biomechanical models can be

used to solve direct dynamical task, which reflects the process of motor performance learning,

and inverse dynamical task. Moreover, these models can be applied to elaborate the control

system of external device that will assist the motion performance or guide the given motion of

chosen components of the human lower/upper limb.

Biomechanical models of skeletal system (C3) can be used to model behaviour of trabecular

bone fragment and produce an artificial trabecular bone fragment for skeletal system

reconstruction.

Biomechanical gait models (C4) can be used to analyse normal gait (occurring in one plane)

and elaborate the control system of lower limb exoskeleton (external device that used to

assist/guide gait performance).

Proposed concept for designing of rehabilitation devices (C5) allows developing such a control

system that will chose the device proper mode in an intelligent way. It is worth underlying that

the choice of device mode should be based on the prediction of real system behaviour. This

prediction can be formulated by applying proposed biomechanical models of musculoskeletal

systems (C2) and principles of motor control that allow formulating statistical relationship

between kinematic, kinetic and surface electromyography data.

5. Description of other scientific-research achievements

5.1. Scientific activity developed after the PhD degree obtainment

A) Scientific publications:

Papers:

[W1] Zagrodny B., Ludwicki M., Wojnicz W. (31%), Mrozowski J., Awrejcewicz J., Cooperation of mono- and bi-articular muscles: human lower limb. Journal of Musculoskeletal and Neuronal Interactions, 2018, p. 1-7 (IF (2016) – 1.489, 25p.).


20

[W2] Bobrowski K., Wojnicz W. (40%), Lipiński K., Numerical analysis of mechanical properties of an infill structure used in 3D printings. Inżynieria Materiałowa Materials Engineering, Nr 1(221), 2018, p. 15-21 (13 p.).

Paper in press:

[W3] Wojnicz W. (70%), Zagrodny B., Ludwicki M., Syczewska M., J. Mrozowski, Awrejcewicz J., Approach for determination of functioning of lower limb muscles. Springer Proceedings in Mathematics & Statistics, 2018 (the paper will be put on Web of Science).

Chapters:

[D1] Wojnicz W. (80%), Wittbrodt E., Chosen aspects of muscle biomechanics. Dynamical Sys-tems, Nonlinear Dynamics and Control. 11–th Conference on Dynamical Systems, Theory and Applications, red. Awrejcewicz J. i in., 2011, p. 263-268 (the chapter in the reviewed book).

[D2] Wojnicz W. (75%), Wittbrodt E., FEM approach to modeling of an irregular trabecular struc-ture. Shell Structure – Theory and Applications. Vol.4, 2018, p. 519-522 (the chapter in the reviewed book).

Chapters:

[E1] Ludwicki M., Zagrodny B., Wojnicz W. (10%), Mrozowski J., Awrejcewicz J., Influence of additional loads on chosen gait parameters and muscles activity, Vibrations in Physical Sys-tems (VIBSYS 2016), vol. XXVII, ed. Cempel C., Dobry M.W., Stręk T., Poznan, 2016, p. 227-236 (5p.)

[E2] Morawska N., Wojnicz W. (50%), Stawicki M., Zastosowanie EMG do analizy wybranych ruchów kończyny górnej (Application of EMG for analysis of chosen movement of upper limb). Aktualne Problemy Biomechaniki, 11/2016, p. 103-108 (4p.)

Abstracts:

[F1] Olszewski H., Wojnicz W. (50%), Wittbrodt E., Musculo-skeletal model of upper and lower limb. Part I: chosen aspects of skeletal system modelling. International conference of the Polish Society of Biomechanics „BIOMECHANICS 2012”. Book of abstracts. Oficyna Wydawnictwa Politechniki Białostockiej, Białystok, 2012, p. 223-224.

[F2] Wojnicz W. (90%), Wittbrodt E., Application of musculo-skeletal model for design of upper limb rehabilitation systems. International conference of the Polish Society of Biomechanics „BIOMECHANICS 2014”. Book of abstracts. Wydawnictwo Politechniki Łódzkiej, Łódź, 2014, p. 245-246.

[F3] Wojnicz W. (30%), Lipiński K., A redundantly actuated 4RRR planar parallel manipulator and sensitivity of its trajectory inexactness to inertia parameters of its limb. 3rd Polish Congress of Mechanics and 21st International Conference on Computer Methods in Mechanics, Vol. 1, ed. M. Kleiber, T. Burczyński, K. Wilde, J. Górski, K. Winkelmann, Ł. Smakosz, Polish Society of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, Gdańsk, Politechnika Gdańska, 2015, p. 473-474.

[F4] Wojnicz W. (70%), Zagrodny B., Ludwicki M., Mrozowski J., Awrejcewicz J., Wittbrodt E., Biomechanical model for gait analysis in a sagittal plane, „BIOMECHANICS 2016”. Book of abstracts, Akademia Wychowania Fizycznego Józefa Piłsudzkiego w Warszawie, Biała Pod-laska, 2016, p. 311-312.

[F5] Zagrodny B., Ludwicki M., Wojnicz W. (8%), Awrejcewicz J., Cooperation of mono- and bi-articular muscles: human lower limb „BIOMECHANICS 2016”. Book of abstracts, Akademia Wychowania Fizycznego Józefa Piłsudzkiego w Warszawie, Biała Podlaska, 2016, p. 321-322.


21

[F6] Wojnicz W. (70%), Barański R., Wittbrodt E., Estimation of influence of upper limb stabili-zation on the isometric grip „BIOMECHANICS 2016”. Book of abstracts, Akademia Wychowania Fizycznego Józefa Piłsudzkiego w Warszawie, Biała Podlaska, 2016, p. 309-310.

[F7] Barański R., Wojnicz W. (25%), Moskała U., Best parameter for force grip estimation based on sEMG signal „BIOMECHANICS 2016”. Book of abstracts, Akademia Wychowania Fizycznego Józefa Piłsudzkiego w Warszawie, Biała Podlaska, 2016, p. 45-46.

[F8] Bobrowski K., Wojnicz W. (5%), Lipiński K., Analiza numeryczna własności mechanicznych wypełnienia wydruku 3D oraz tworzenie modelu uproszczonego. XIV Konferencja Naukowo-Techniczna Techniki Komputerowe w Inżynierii, 2016, 2p.

[F9] Bobrowski K., Wojnicz W. (5%), Lipiński K., Numerical modeling of 3D printout using line (1D) elements. XXIII International Symposium Research-Education-Technology. Stralsund, Host Hochschule Stralsund, 2017, p.15-22.

B) Summarized Impact Factory according to the list of Journal Citation Reports (JCR):

IF(2016) = 5.212

IF (according to the year of publishing) = 3.667 C) The number of cities publication according to the Web of Science (WoS): Sum of Times Cited = 16, without self citations = 7 Citing articles = 10, without self citations = 5 (Date of checking 05.04.2018) D) Hirsch Index according to the Web of Science (WoS): h-index = 3 (Date of checking 05.04.2018) E) Research project participation:

1. Implementation of research project (Investigator): N N501 315639; 3156/B/T02/2010/39, Ministry of Science and Higher Education; Gdansk University of Technology, Mechanical Engineering Faculty; Modelling in biomechanics: dynamics of upper limb, lower limb and lumbar part of spine (Modelowanie w biomechanice: dynamika kończyny górnej, kończyny dolnej oraz odcinka lędźwiowego kręgosłupa); 2010-2013; Supervisor - Prof. Edmund Wittbrodt; amount: 358 720 PLN

2. Implementation of research project (Consultant): OPUS 9 No. 2015/17/B/ST8/01700; National Science Centre of Poland; Lodz University of Technology, Mechanical Engineering Faculty; Modelling, kinematic-dynamic analysis and numerical analysis of the prototype of the exoskeleton for rehabilitation of impaired lower limb (Modelowanie, analiza kinematyczno-dynamiczna i symulacyjna prototypu egzoszkieletu do rehabilitacji osób z niepełnosprawnością ruchową kończyn dolnych); 2016-2018; Supervisor - Prof. Jan Awrejcewicz; amount: 999 600 PLN.


22

3. Implementation of devices acquirement project (Investigator, 50% share): No. 6572/IA/SP/2016 (30.05.2016), Ministry of Science and Higher Education; Gdansk University of Technology, Mechanical Engineering Faculty; Devices acquirement project to purchase scientific-research equipment being the big research infrastructure; Specific standing for mechanical and biomechanical testing of modern materials – biomaterials, implants, composites and difficult-to-cut materials (Stanowisko specjalistyczne do badań mechanicznych i biomechanicznych nowoczesnych materiałów - biomateriałów, implantów, kompozytów i materiałów trudnoskrawalnych); 2016-2018; Supervisor - Prof. Edmund Wittbrodt; amount: 4 949 000 PLN.

F) Scientific Award: Team Scientific Award (third-place award) of the Rector of Gdansk Technology University for 2012. G) International and National Scientific Conference attendance:

Attendance in conferences from 2009 :

2018 National Symposium „ANALIZA RUCHU – TEORIA I PRAKTYKA W ZASTOSOWANIACH KLINICZNYCH” (MOTION ANALYSIS – THEORY AND PRACTICE IN CLINICAL APPLICATIONS), Instytut „Pomnik - Centrum Zdrowia Dziecka” (Children’s Memorial Health Institute), Warsaw, one presentation “Metoda wyznaczania zależności między aktywnością wybranych mięśni kończyny dolnej a położeniem środka nacisku przy zadanej pozycji początkowej” (The method of determination a relationship between activity of lower limb chosen muscles and the centre of pressure displacement during the given initial posotion), co-authors: Zagrodny B., Ludwicki M., Syczewska M., Mrozowski J., Awrejcewicz J.

2017 International Conference „14-TH CONFERENCE ON DYNAMICAL SYSTEMS THEORY AND APPLICATIONS”, Lodz, one poster „Approach for determination of functioning of lower limb muscles”, co-authors: Zagrodny B., Ludwicki M., Syczewska M., J. Mrozowski, Awrejcewicz J.

2017 International Conference „SHELL STRUCTURES: THEORY AND APPLICATION”, Gdansk, one presentation „FEM approach to modeling of an irregular trabecular structure”, co-author: Wittbrodt E.

2017 Motor Control Summer School-XIV held on July 9-14, 2017 in The Casa de Retiros Vila Fátima, Florianopolis, Brazil, one poster „Concept of intelligent system for rehabilitation to improve motor coordination”, co-author: Wittbrodt E.

2017 National Symposium „ANALIZA RUCHU - TEORIA I PRAKTYKA W ZASTOSOWANIACH KLINICZNYCH” (MOTION ANALYSIS – THEORY AND PRACTICE IN CLINICAL APPLICATIONS), Instytut „Pomnik - Centrum Zdrowia Dziecka” (Children’s Memorial Health Institute), Warsaw, one presentation „Metoda wyznaczania aktywności mięśni biorących udział w realizacji chodu symetrycznego” (The method of estimation of activity of muscles engaging in symmetrical gait performance), co-authors: Zagrodny B., Ludwicki M., Goethel M.F., Mrozowski J., Awrejcewicz J.

2016 International Conference „BIOMECHANICS 2016”, Lodz, two presentations: „Biomechanical model for gait analysis in a sagittal plane”, co-authors: Zagrodny B., Ludwicki M., Mrozowski J., Awrejcewicz J., Wittbrodt E.; „Estimation of influence of upper limb stabilization on the isometric grip”, co-authors: Barański R., Wittbrodt E.

2015 International Conference „13-TH CONFERENCE ON DYNAMICAL SYSTEMS THEORY AND APPLICATIONS”, Lodz, two presentations: „Numerical Model of Femur Part” co-authors: Olszewski H., Lipiński K., Wittbrodt W.; „Mathematical model of pennate muscle”, co-authors: Zagrodny B., Ludwicki M., Awrejcewicz J., Wittbrodt E.

2015 International Conference „3-RD POLISH CONGRESS OF MECHANICS AND 21ST INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON COMPUTER METHODS IN MECHANICS”, Gdansk, cooperation in the preparation of abstract.


23

2014 International Conference „BIOMECHANICS 2014”, Lodz, one presentation „Application of musculo-skeletal model for design of upper limb rehabilitation systems”, co-author: Wittbrodt E.

2013 International Conference „12-TH CONFERENCE ON DYNAMICAL SYSTEMS THEORY AND APPLICATIONS”, Lodz, one presentation „Modelling of planar movement of upper limb”, co-author: Wittbrodt E.

2013 International Conference „SHELL STRUCTURES: THEORY AND APPLICATION”, Gdansk, one presentation „Chosen aspects of skeletal systems modeling – numerical solid and shell models of femur part”, co-authors: Olszewski H., Wittbrodt E.

2012 International Conference „BIOMECHANICS 2012”, Bialystok, one presentation „Musculo-skeletal model of upper and lower limb. Part I: chosen aspects of skeletal system modelling”, co-authors: Olszewski H., Wittbrodt E.

2011 International Conference „11-TH CONFERENCE ON DYNAMICAL SYSTEMS THEORY AND APPLICATIONS”, Lodz, one presentation „Chosen aspects of muscle biomechanics”, co-author: Wittbrodt E.

H) Participation in European programms and other international and national programmes

Participation in international scientific programmes:

1. ERASMUS+, Université de Lorraine École Nationale d’Ingénieurs de Metz, Francja, 19.11.2017 – 24.11.2017. “BIOCAD” course (12h): Lectures (Fundamentals of muscle phys-iology applied in biomechanics; Muscle biomechanics; Muscular system biomechanics; Funda-mentals of electromyography measurement); Tutorials (Estimation of COM by using Zatsiorky approach; Biomechanics of glenohumeral joint. Biomechanics of elbow joint; Dynamics of planar motion of the upper limb; Muscular system biomechanics: an application of static optimization technique to solve the muscle redundancy problem; Muscle biomechanics: rheological models of muscle).

2. ERASMUS+, Université de Lorraine École Nationale d’Ingénieurs de Metz, Francja, 12.11.2016 – 17.11.2016. “BIOCAD” course (12h): Lectures (Principles of muscle physiology used in biomechanics; Muscle biomechanics; Muscle system biomechanics; Principles of EMG and sEMG measurement); Tutorials (Biomechanics of glenohumeral joint; Biomechanics of el-bow joint; Dynamic equation of planar motion of elbow joint; Muscle system biomechanics - estimation of muscle share by using static optimization technique; Muscle biomechanics - rhe-ological models of muscle).

3. ERASMUS+, École Nationale d’Ingénieurs de Metz, Francja, 11.11.2015 – 19.11.2015. “BI-OCAD” course (12h): Lectures (Principles of muscle physiology used in biomechanics; Muscle biomechanics; Muscle system biomechanics; Biomechanics of humeral joint. Biomechanics of elbow joint; Principles of EMG and sEMG measurement); Tutorials (Dynamic equation of planar motion of elbow joint; Muscle system biomechanics: estimation of muscle share by using static optimization technique; Muscle biomechanics: rheological models of muscle).

4. ERASMUS+, École Nationale d’Ingénieurs de Metz, Francja, 29.11.2014 – 03.12.2014. Teaching programme (8h): Muscle biomechanics and modeling; Muscles system biomechan-ics and modeling; Skeletal system biomechanics and modeling; Measurements in biomechanics (sEMG analysis and capture motion analysis).

5. ERASMUS, École Nationale d’Ingénieurs de Metz, Francja, 07.12.2010 – 11.12.2010. Teaching programme (8h): Biomechanics of musculoskeletal system. Modelling and simula-tion of muscles’ system behaviour.


24

Participation in national scientific programmes

1. Conducting the author’s course „Symulacje komputerowe w biomechanice” (Computer sim-ulations in biomechanics) (8h), Postgraduate study „Symulacje komputerowe dla inżynierów” (Computer simulations for engineers), Faculty of Applied Physics and Mathematics, Gdansk University of Technology, Gdansk, spring semester 2017/2018 (in doing).

2. Conducting the author’s course „Symulacje komputerowe w biomechanice” (Computer sim-ulations in biomechanics) (8h), Postgraduate study „Symulacje komputerowe dla inżynierów” (Computer simulations for engineers), Faculty of Applied Physics and Mathematics, Gdansk University of Technology, Gdansk, spring semester 2016/2017.

3. Conducting the author’s course „Symulacje komputerowe w biomechanice” (Computer sim-ulations in biomechanics) (4h), Postgraduate study „Symulacje komputerowe dla inżynierów” (Computer simulations for engineers), Faculty of Applied Physics and Mathematics, Gdansk University of Technology, Gdansk, spring semester 2015/2016.

4. Seminar „ Chosen aspects of musculoskeletal system modelling and application of EMG to biomechanical analysis. Polish Society of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, Gdansk re-gion, Gdansk University of Technology, 05.12.2017.

I) Membership in international and national organisations and scientific society:

2017 Member of Biomechanics Section of Mechanics Committee of Polish Academy of Sciences (since 24.02.2017)

2016 Member of the Board of the Polish Society of Biomechanics (since 06.09.2016)

2016 Associate Member of Biomechanics Section of Mechanics Committee of Polish Academy of Sciences (since 06.09.2016)

2015 Member of Polish Society of Theoretical and Applied Mechanic (since 16.02.2015).

2006 Member of the Polish Society of Biomechanics

J) Scientific protectorship of PhD students as supervisor or co-supervisor:

Co-supervisor: Anna Kaczmarek-Peniašková MSc (ME), "Wpływ geometrii korpusu piły tarczowej na wartości krytycznych prędkości obrotowych" (Influence of geometry of circular saw body on critical values of rotational velocities) (co-supervisor since 05.07.17, Mechanical Engineering Faculty, Gdansk University of Technology).

K) Training in foreign and national scientific/academic institutions:

1. National scientific training (29.08.2016 – 10.03.2017): Department of Automation, Biomechanics and Mechatronics, Mechanical Engineering Faculty, Lodz University of Technology, Supervisor – Professor Jan Awrejcewicz, the scope of training encompassed the implementation of chosen tasks of research project OPUS 9 No. 2015/17/B/ST8/01700.

2. Foreign scientific training (9.07.2017 – 14.07.2017): Motor Control Summer School-XIV, The Casa de Retiros Vila Fátima, Florianopolis, Brazil, Organizer – Motor Control Lab, Department of Kinesiology, The Pennsylvania State University.

L) Reviewing of papers in international and national journals

Reviewing of scientific papers:

2018 – Vibrations in Physical Systems (international journal)

2017 – Aktualne Problemy Biomechaniki (national journal) (3 papers)


25

2016 – Discontinuity, Nonlinearity and Complexity (international journal)

2016 – Aktualne Problemy Biomechaniki (national journal)

2015 – Mechatronics (international journal)

2014 – Two-page abstracts of international conference “BIOMECHANICS 2014”

2014 – Ain Shams Engineering Journal (international journal)

2013 – Wydawnictwo Olsztyńskiej Wyższej Szkoły Informatyki i Zarządzania (national journal)

2013 – Acta of Bioengineering and Biomechanics (international journal)

2012 – Acta of Bioengineering and Biomechanics (international journal)

2012 – Differential Equations and Dynamical Systems (international journal)

2011 – Advances in Materials Science (international journal)

M) Other achievements I wrote the proposal for the project for the 39th competition of Ministry of Science and Higher Educa-tion (this proposal was accepted for funding) and three proposals to Polish National Science Centre („SYMFONIA 2”, „MAESTRO 6” and „OPUS 11”) (these proposals were not accepted for funding). I took part in elaboration of the proposal for devices acquirement to purchase scientific-research equipment being the big research infrastructure to Ministry of Science and Higher Education (this proposal was accepted for funding). I took also part in elaboration of international proposal COST (this proposal was not accepted for funding).

Supervisor of scientific training: Robert Barański, PhD, (AGH University of Science and Technology, Cracow), 02.11.2015 – 29.02.2016, Mechanics and Mechatronics Department, Mechanical Engineering Faculty, Gdansk University of Technology, the scope of scientific supervision: Modern methods of EMG data analysis.

Trainings confirmed by certificates:

2017.12: Technomex: application of 8-channels Noraxon TeleMyo DTS system for surface electromyography measurement.

2017.09: ZWICK/ROELL: biaxial testing machine application, testXpert II software and 2006/42/EG directive.

2014.10: TECHNOMEX: The city of Lodz – the most modern center of motion analysis in Poland. Lodz, Poland.

2013.07: Abaqus/CAE: Geometry Import and Meshing, Writing User Subroutines. Budsoft, Poznan, Poland.

2013.03: TECHNOMEX: Application of SEMG NORAXON system for surface electromyography registering and measurement, Gliwice, Poland.

2013.03: TECHNOMEX: Application of CONTEMPLAS TEMPLO system for motion capture analysis, Gliwice, Poland.

2012.09: Scientific Workshop. International Conference of the Polish Society of Biomechanics. Bialystok University of Technology, Bialystok, Poland.

2011.09: Strain gauges installation. Pracownia Tensometrii Elektrooporowej "TENMEX". Lodz, Poland.

2011.05: Innovation Course – MIMICS software. SOLVMED, Wisla, Poland.

2011.03: INSTRON – application of testing machine Instron 8503H1732. Gdansk, Poland.


26

2011.02: Introduction to Abaqus/Standart, Abaqus/Explicit and Abaqus/CAE. Budsoft, Poznan, Poland.

Biomechanics Lab developing:

1) Surface electromyography application;

2) Motion capture system “TEMPO CONTEMPLAS”.

5.2. Scientific activity developed before PhD degree obtainment

The scope of my scientific activity developed over 2000-2009 at Mechanical Engineering Faculty of Gdansk University of Technology encompassed presentations at seven conferences („BIOMECHANICS 2006”, Za-kopane; XIVth National Scientific Conference „BIOCYBERNETYKA I INŻYNIERIA BIOMEDYCZNA”, Czestochowa 2005; „MAJÓWKA MŁODYCH BIOMECHANIKÓW 2005”, Szczyrk; “BIOMECHANICS 2004”, Gdansk; „MAJÓWKA MŁODYCH BIOMECHANIKÓW 2004”, Szczyrk; „BIOMECHANICS 2003”, Poznan; XIIIth National Scientific Conference „BIOCYBERNETYKA I INŻYNIERIA BIOMEDYCZNA”, Gdansk 2003) and preparation of following publications:

[1] Wojnicz W., 2000: Modelowanie zachowania mięśnia szkieletowego poprzecznie prążkowanego (Mod-elling of behaviour of striated skeletal muscle). IIIrd Scientific Seminar, Środowiskowe Studium Doktoranckie „Współczesne technologie i konwersja energii”, Wydawnictwo Politechniki Gdańskiej, Gdansk, p. 223-230.

[2] Wojnicz W., 2001: Modelowanie zachowania mięśnia szkieletowego poprzecznie prążkowanego i czynności odruchowej przedramienia (Modelling of behaviour of striated skeletal muscle and the forearm activity). IVth Scientific Seminar, Środowiskowe Studium Doktoranckie „Współczesne technologie i kon-wersja energii”, Wydawnictwo Politechniki Gdańskiej, Gdańsk, p.175-184.

[3] Wojnicz W., 2002: Modelowanie i symulacja zachowania mięśnia szkieletowego poprzecznie prążkowanego oraz zespołu mięśni zginacz-prostownik w uproszczonym układzie ramię-przedramię (Modelling and simulation of behaviour of striated skeletal muscle and the flexor-extensor muscles in the reduced arm-forearm system). Vth Scientific Seminar, Środowiskowe Studium Doktoranckie „Współczesne technologie i konwersja energii”, Wydawnictwo Politechniki Gdańskiej, Gdańsk, p. 175-184.

[5] Wojnicz W., Wittbrodt E., 2003: Modelowanie i symulacja zachowania zespołu mięśni szkieletowych poprzecznie prążkowanych na przykładzie ruchów przedramienia w dwóch wymiarach (Modelling and simulation of behaviour of striated skeletal muscle system by considering the forearm motions in 2D space). XIIIth National Scientific Conference „Biocybernetyka i Inżynieria Biomedyczna”, Gdansk, Zakład Poligraficzny Politechniki Gdańskiej, vol. 1, p. 314-319.

[6] Wittbrodt E., Wojnicz W., 2003: Modelling and simulation of striated skeletal muscle and groups of mus-cles in arm-forearm system 2D. International Conference “BIOMECHANICS 2003”, Acta of Bioengineer-ing and Biomechanics, Vol. 6, Supplement 1, p. 551-556.

[7] Wojnicz W., Wittbrodt E., 2004: Modelowanie i symulacja zachowania mięśnia szkieletowego o różnych własnościach dynamicznych (Modelling and simulation of behaviour of skeletal muscle with different dy-namic states). National Conference „Majówka Młodych Biomechaników”, Zeszyty Naukowe Katedry Mechaniki Stosowanej Politechniki Śląskiej, Nr 24, p. 219-224.

[8] Wojnicz W., Wittbrodt E., 2004: Modelowanie zachowania mięśnia szkieletowego w stanie dynam-icznym (Modelling of behaviour of skeletal muscle in dynamic state). Proceedings of The International Conference BIOMECHANICS, Acta of Bioengineering and Biomechanics, Vol. 6, Supplement 1, p. 404-408.

[9] Wojnicz W., Wittbrodt E., 2004: Próba modelowania i optymalnego sterowania zespołem mięśni ram-ienia-przedramienia w stanie dynamicznym (An attempt of modelling and optimal control of behaviour of arm-forearm muscle system in dynamic stage). Proceedings of The International Conference BIOME-CHANICS, Acta of Bioengineering and Biomechanics, Vol. 6, Supplement 1, p. 409-413.


27

[10] Wojnicz W., Wittbrodt E., 2005: Modelowanie zachowania zespołu mięśni szkieletowych w układzie ramię-przedramię (Modelling of behaviour of skeletal muscle system of the arm-forearm system). Na-tional Conference „Majówka Młodych Biomechaników”, Zeszyty Naukowe Katedry Mechaniki Sto-sowanej Politechniki Śląskiej, Nr 27, p. 152-159.

[11] Wojnicz W., Wittbrodt E., 2005: Modelowanie zachowania zespołu mięśni szkieletowych ramienia-prze-dramienia i próba optymalnego sterowania tym układem (Modelling of behaviour of arm-forearm skeletal system and an attempt of optical control of this system). XIVth National Scientific Conference „Biocyber-netyka i Inżynieria Biomedyczna”, tom 1, Częstochowa, p. 160-165.

[12] Sobieszczyk S., Wojnicz W., Nowak B., 2006: A proposition of the computational model for the dynamic analysis of stress and strain distribution in the hip joint. Zeszyty Naukowe Katedry Mechaniki Stosowanej Politechniki Śląskiej, nr 26, s. 333-338.

[13] Sobieszczyk S., Wojnicz W., Nowak B., 2008: FEM approach to estimate the behaviour of biocomposite metal-surface coating systems. Advances in Materials Science, vol.8 (1), p. 166-172.

The scope of my scientific activity developed during my study at State Academy of Light Industry of Ukraine over 1997-1999 encompassed elaboration of methods and concepts of the devices applied for: 1) absolute temperature measurement by using semiconductor thermocouple and lower temperature by using the control heat canal; 2) measurement of biologic object temperature (thermal-noise device for temperature measurement, registration of the radiation spectrum of magnetic field of biologic objects, microwave analyser of electromagnetic radiation of biological objects); 3) estimation of protein concentration in food by using non-contact dielectric measurement. In my scientific activity I was a co-author of ten papers and four patents of Ukraine: 1) Skripnik J.O., Makowska W.J.: The method of absolute temperature measurement, patent of Ukraine Nr 28733 (publishing 16.10.2000); 2) Skripnik J.O., Makowska W.J.: The method of measurement of lower temperature and the device for this measurement, patent of Ukraine Nr 34604 (publishing 15.03.2001); 3) Skripnik J.O., Janenko O.P., Gołowko D.B., Makowska W.J.: The device for spectrum registration of electromagnetic field of biologic objects, patent of Ukraine Nr 47460 (publishing 15.07.2002); 4) Skripnik J.O., Makowska W.J.: Thermo-noise device for temperature measurement, patent of Ukraine Nr 48268 (publishing 15.08.2002).

5.3. Organizing activity developed after PhD degree obtainment

The scope of my organizing activity after PhD encompasses: 1) fulfilment of duty of the Head of Strength of Material Laboratory (Mechanical Engineering Faculty, Gdansk University of Technology) since 2009; 2) elaboration of documentation to apply for Approval Certificates of Polski Rejestr Stat-ków (Polish Register of Shipping) (for Material Strength Laboratory at Mechanical Engineering Fac-ulty of Gdansk University of Technology):

1) No. TT/83/710405/16 2016-2019,

2) No. TT/83/710405/13 2013-2016,

3) No. TT/83/710405/10 2010-2013,

4) No. TT/83/710405/07 2007-2010.

In the scope of my organizing activity I conducted testing referring to estimation of mechanical properties of construction elements: 2018 – 2 tests; 2017 – 8 tests; 2016 –13 tests; 2015 –14 tests; 2014 –12 tests; 2013 –12 tests; 2012 –16 tests; 2011 –9 tests; 2010 – 8 tests; 2009 –10 tests.


28

5.4. Teaching and populariser activity after PhD

A) Scientific supervisor of students:

Student scientific supervisor:

Natalia Morawska (chapter: Morawska N., Wojnicz W., Stawicki M., Zastosowanie EMG do analizy wybranych ruchów kończyny górnej (Application of EMG for analysis of chosen movement of upper limb). Aktualne Problemy Biomechaniki, 11/2016, p. 103-108 (4p.)).

The number of Master thesis (supervisor) - 7

The number of Bachelor thesis (supervisor) - 25

B) Conducting of author’s subjects:

1) Lab "Methods of material mechanical testing”;

2) Lectures and tutorials „Engineering Biomechanics” and „Biomechanics”;

3) Lectures, tutorials and Labs „Continuum Mechanics”.

C) Teaching

1) "Strength of Material I" and "Strength of Material II” (tutorials and labs; elaboration of chapters/instructions and research standings);

2) "Mechanics I", "Mechanics II", " Mechanics III" and " Analytical Mechanics" (tutorials).

2. diploma and scientific degrees · biomechanika i inżynieria rehabilitacyjna. tom 3, red. gzik...

Documents