Abstract

Statements about stability often lack expressiveness due to inaccurate terminology or poor coupling with modelled archetypes. In this article different types of stability and necessary assumptions are recapitulated, and their validity is checked in real systems. Although basic principles of human locomotion can be well explained by simple mathematical models and deeper understanding is gained, more complex models are necessary to verify and improve these theories. The motion we found in human walking as well as in simple walking robots cannot be described by limit cycles. Although they show chaotic motion with regard to kinematic parameters, they maintain the general goals of keeping the center of mass (CoM) above the ground and travelling forward constantly. Most stability concepts cannot answer the basic question of stability, therefore suggestions for more applicable concepts are formulated. Verf.-Referat