Karl E Zelik

Dr. Karl E Zelik


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

14Years (2013-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 December 2016 in Journal of Experimental Biology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
KZKarl E Zelik
Karl E Zelik
Peter AdamczykPeter Adamczyk
Peter Adamczyk
Muscle–tendon units about the ankle joint generate a burst of positive power during the step-to-step transition in human walking, termed ankle push-off, but there is no scientific consensus on its functional role. A central question embodied in the biomechanics literature is: does ankle push-off primarily contribute to leg swing, or to center of mass (COM) acceleration? This question has been debated in various forms for decades. However, it actually presents a false dichotomy, as these two possibilities are not mutually exclusive. If we ask either question independently, the answer is the same: yes! (1) Does ankle push-off primarily contribute to leg swing acceleration? Yes. (2) Does ankle push-off primarily contribute to COM acceleration? Yes. Here, we summarize the historical debate, then synthesize the seemingly polarized perspectives and demonstrate that both descriptions are valid. The principal means by which ankle push-off affects COM mechanics is by a localized action that increases the speed and kinetic energy of the trailing push-off limb. Because the limb is included in body COM computations, this localized segmental acceleration also accelerates the COM, and most of the segmental energy change also appears as COM energy change. Interpretation of ankle mechanics should abandon an either/or contrast of leg swing versus COM acceleration. Instead, ankle push-off should be interpreted in light of both mutually consistent effects. This unified perspective informs our fundamental understanding of the role of ankle push-off, and has important implications for the design of clinical interventions (e.g. prostheses, orthoses) intended to restore locomotor function to individuals with disabilities.

1 June 2018 in Journal of Biomechanics
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
KZKarl E Zelik
Karl E Zelik
EHEric C. Honert
Eric C. Honert

18 May 2017 in Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MYMatthew B. Yandell
Matthew B. Yandell
BQBrendan T. Quinlivan
Brendan T. Quinlivan
DPDmitry Popov
Dmitry Popov
CWConor Walsh
Conor Walsh
KZKarl E Zelik
Karl E Zelik
Wearable assistive devices have demonstrated the potential to improve mobility outcomes for individuals with disabilities, and to augment healthy human performance; however, these benefits depend on how effectively power is transmitted from the device to the human user. Quantifying and understanding this power transmission is challenging due to complex human-device interface dynamics that occur as biological tissues and physical interface materials deform and displace under load, absorbing and returning power. Here we introduce a new methodology for quickly estimating interface power dynamics during movement tasks using common motion capture and force measurements, and then apply this method to quantify how a soft robotic ankle exosuit interacts with and transfers power to the human body during walking. We partition exosuit end-effector power (i.e., power output from the device) into power that augments ankle plantarflexion (termed augmentation power) vs. power that goes into deformation and motion of interface materials and underlying soft tissues (termed interface power). We provide empirical evidence of how human-exosuit interfaces absorb and return energy, reshaping exosuit-to-human power flow and resulting in three key consequences: (i) During exosuit loading (as applied forces increased), about 55% of exosuit end-effector power was absorbed into the interfaces. (ii) However, during subsequent exosuit unloading (as applied forces decreased) most of the absorbed interface power was returned viscoelastically. Consequently, the majority (about 75%) of exosuit end-effector work over each stride contributed to augmenting ankle plantarflexion. (iii) Ankle augmentation power (and work) was delayed relative to exosuit end-effector power, due to these interface energy absorption and return dynamics. Our findings elucidate the complexities of human-exosuit interface dynamics during transmission of power from assistive devices to the human body, and provide insight into improving the design and control of wearable robots. We conclude that in order to optimize the performance of wearable assistive devices it is important, throughout design and evaluation phases, to account for human-device interface dynamics that affect power transmission and thus human augmentation benefits.

15 March 2015 in Journal of Experimental Biology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
KZKarl E Zelik
Karl E Zelik
KTKota Z. Takahashi
Kota Z. Takahashi
GSGregory S. Sawicki
Gregory S. Sawicki
Measuring biomechanical work performed by humans and other animals is critical for understanding muscle–tendon function, joint-specific contributions and energy-saving mechanisms during locomotion. Inverse dynamics is often employed to estimate joint-level contributions, and deformable body estimates can be used to study work performed by the foot. We recently discovered that these commonly used experimental estimates fail to explain whole-body energy changes observed during human walking. By re-analyzing previously published data, we found that about 25% (8 J) of total positive energy changes of/about the body's center-of-mass and >30% of the energy changes during the Push-off phase of walking were not explained by conventional joint- and segment-level work estimates, exposing a gap in our fundamental understanding of work production during gait. Here, we present a novel Energy-Accounting analysis that integrates various empirical measures of work and energy to elucidate the source of unexplained biomechanical work. We discovered that by extending conventional 3 degree-of-freedom (DOF) inverse dynamics (estimating rotational work about joints) to 6DOF (rotational and translational) analysis of the hip, knee, ankle and foot, we could fully explain the missing positive work. This revealed that Push-off work performed about the hip may be >50% greater than conventionally estimated (9.3 versus 6.0 J, P=0.0002, at 1.4 m s−1). Our findings demonstrate that 6DOF analysis (of hip–knee–ankle–foot) better captures energy changes of the body than more conventional 3DOF estimates. These findings refine our fundamental understanding of how work is distributed within the body, which has implications for assistive technology, biomechanical simulations and potentially clinical treatment.

1 February 2022 in Applied Ergonomics
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
KZKarl E Zelik
Karl E Zelik
CNCameron Alexander Nurse
Cameron Alexander Nurse
MSMark C. Schall
Mark C. Schall
RSRichard F. Sesek
Richard F. Sesek
MMMatthew C. Marino
Matthew C. Marino
SGSean Gallagher
Sean Gallagher

25 November 2014 in European Journal of Applied Physiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
KZKarl E Zelik
Karl E Zelik
VSValentina La Scaleia
Valentina La Scaleia
Yury IvanenkoYury Ivanenko
Yury Ivanenko
FLFrancesco Lacquaniti
Francesco Lacquaniti