## 3 Results
Where \(E\)—the energy required to drive the wheelchair wheel—roller of the reversing interlock module, \(\Delta E\)—the difference between the energy required to drive in the DH direction and the DS direction, \(F_{d}\)—the clamping force of the roller of the reversing interlock module, DH—the direction of rotation with increased rigidity of the flexible roller of the reversing interlock module, DS—direction of rotation with reduced stiffness of the flexible roller of the reversing interlock module, 1—flexible roller of the reversing interlock module with marked rib geometry, 2—wheel of the wheelchair, PI—critical point of balancing energy intensity for DH and DS directions. Figure 10: Plots of the change in energy \(E\) required to drive the wheel of a wheelchair frictionally coupled to the flexible roller of the reversing lock module as a function of the clamping force \(F_{d}\) of the roller. Where \(E\)—the energy required to drive the wheelchair wheel—roller of the reversing interlock module, \(\Delta E\)—the difference between the energy required to drive in the DH direction and the DS direction, \(F_{d}\)—the clamping force of the roller of the reversing interlock module, DH—the direction of rotation with increased rigidity of the flexible roller of the reversing interlock module, DS—direction of rotation with reduced rigidity of the flexible roller of the reversing lock module, 1—flexible roller of the reversing interlock module, \(\Delta E\)—the difference between the energy required to drive in the DH direction and the DS direction, \(F_{d}\)—the clamping force of the roller of the reversing interlock module, DH—the direction of rotation with increased rigidity of the flexible roller of the reversing interlock module, DS—direction of rotation with reduced rigidity of the flexible roller of the reversing lock module, 1—flexible roller of the reversing lock module with marked rib geometry, 2—wheelchair wheel. In view of the above observation, it is necessary to analyze the effect of the number of ribs in the flexible roller of the reversing interlock module on the level of energy reduction \(\Delta E\). Based on this, the subsequent stages of the study compared the average energy demand resulting from the interaction between the roller of the reversing interlock module and the wheelchair wheel for the DH and DS directions (Figure 12). This study was performed for rollers having the following numbers of ribs: 8 (E8), 10 (E10), 12 (E12), 14 (E14), 16 (E16) and 18 (E18). Tests showed that the smallest difference in energy consumption \(\Delta\)E was measured for the number of ribs E8 was 0.12 \(\pm\) 0.08 J, which represented a reduction in energy consumption of 1.81%. This small difference is attributed to the sparse distribution of ribs, which caused the roller to deform significantly even at low clamping forces \(F_{d}\), producing an effect similar to that shown at point P1 in Figure 10. Within the examined range of rib numbers (8-18), a linear relationship was observed between the increase in energy reduction and the increase in the number of ribs in the flexible roller. Additionally, as shown by the analysis of the percentage difference in energy intensity reduction \(\Delta E_{DH-DS}\) for the DS rotation direction compared to DH, the number of ribs from 8 to 12 forms one group. In this group, the maximum reduction of 6.33% was achieved with 10 ribs (E10). Conversely, for rollers with 14 to 18 ribs, all variants exceeded the 8% energy intensity reduction threshold. Within this group, the highest value was recorded for the roller with 14 ribs (E14), which achieved an 11.38% reduction in energy consumption.