This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
International Journal of Advanced Robotic Systems Customizable Rehabilitation Lower Limb Exoskeleton System Regular Paper
Abstract Disabled people require assistance with the motion of their lower limbs to improve rehabilitation. Exoskeletons used for lower limb rehabilitation are highly priced and are not affordable to the lowerincome sector of the population. This paper describes an exoskeleton lower limb system that was designed keeping in mind that the cost must be as low as possible. The forward kinematic system that is used must be a simplified model to decrease computational time, yet allow the exoskeleton to be adjustable according to the patient’s leg dimensions. Keywords Lower limb exoskeleton, rehabilitation, customizable
1. Introduction
The 21st century has seen the realization of wearable robots. From their first introduction into the industrial workplace in the 1960s (Craig, 2005), robots have developed at an incredible rate and now encompass almost every aspect of modern society. Wearable robots are defined as “a mechatronic system that is designed
around the shape and function of the human body, with segments and joints corresponding to those of the person it is externally coupled with” (Mohammed and Amirat, 2008). A bio‐mechatronic system is needed for such wearable robots, which is the integration of biology, mechanical, electronic and computer engineering, as shown in Figure 1 (Naidu et al., 2012). Due to technological developments, robotic exoskeleton systems have evolved from rudimentary prototypes with limited application to highly sophisticated devices. These systems have the ability to enhance the performance of humans and enable disabled individuals to perform actions according to the Activities of Daily Living (ADL). There are approximately 250 000 cases of spinal cord injuries per annum in the United States of America alone (Koslowski, 2009). Severe trauma to the spinal cord may result in paraplegia or tetraplegia. Paraplegia is the loss of motor function in the lower extremities, usually with retained upper limb functions. Damage to the central nervous system or spinal cord injuries may result in such a loss of upper or lower limb motor functions (Stokes, 2010). An exoskeleton structure is required for
www.intechopen.com Int J Adv Robotic Sy, 2012, Vol. 9, 152:2012
individuals wlower limbsimplementat
Figure 1. Bio‐M
The concept enhancementHowever, it wbecame a readevelopment“HARDIMANby General Eand outer excontrol schemhas been m(MohammedHybrid Assisgeneration, amodern techn HAL‐5 was dTsukuba, Japstrength augHAL‐5 is a ftwo control and “cybernecontrol schemdetection forscheme is usno viable EMpredefined m BLEEX is a developed byBerkley, in capabilities oa highly sensensors on tthe operatorthe interactiexoskeleton (
who have losts. Such an ion of the low
Mechatronics in
of using an t has been awas only receality. One of t of poN”. This full bElectric Co. in xoskeleton whme (Pons, 200major developd and Amiratstive Limb (Hand Berkley’snology.
designed by rpan. The HALgmentation anfull body exosschemes, na
etic robot contme utilizes elr augmentatiosed for repetitMG signals. motions for a s
lower limb ry researchers an effort to
of the operatonsitive controlhe exoskeleto. However, thion force be(Kazerooni, 20
t their motor injury coul
wer limb exosk
tegration conce
exoskeleton around for huently that powthe first cont
owered exobody exoskelethe 1960s, co
hich operated 08). In the laspment in exot, 2008). SystHAL), which is BLEEX, disp
researchers atL‐5 was aimednd rehabilitatskeleton whicamely “Bio‐cytrol” (Sanaki, lectromyograpon operation. tive activities This draws specific operat
robotic exoskeat the Univero improve tor. BLEEX is cl system whicon to predict here are no setween the o005).
functions in d result in keleton.
pt
for protectioundreds of ywered exoskeletributions to eoskeletons eton was desigmprising an ion a master/sst five years toskeleton systems such asis now in the play cutting
t the Universid at meeting tion requiremch is controlleybernetic con2006). The forphy (EMG) siThe latter conor when thereon a databastor (Inc, 2011).
eleton which rsity of Califothe load beacontrolled throch uses data fthe movemensensors measuoperator and
their the
on or years. etons early was gned inner slave there tems s the fifth edge
Hip abduction/adduction and internal rotation do not play a significant role during the walking cycle (Hian Kai et al., 2009), and were omitted from the design. The design developed is seen in Figure 3, which permitted walking in a straight line. This straight line walking means that the hip, knee and ankle joints permit articulation of the limbs in the sagittal plane (Naidu et al., 2011b).
Figure 3. Lower limb design
The ranges of motion for the joints are constrained such that hyper‐extension and hyper‐flexion do not occur. These ranges are tabulated in Table 1 (Naidu et al., 2011b). Mechanical stops at the extremities act as a failsafe in the event of an electrical or software failure from the safety switches. Lower operational limits can be entered on a graphics user interface (GUI) should a patient need rehabilitation at lower angles.
Table 1. Joint range of motion
Both the hip and knee DOF were actuated, while the ankle joint was designed to be passive. A torsion spring mounted at the ankle was used to return the foot plate to a neutral position during the swing phase of the walking cycle. Data from clinical gait analysis (Riener et al., 2002) were evaluated to determine the joint torques for the actuated DOF. For a 100 kg system, the torque requirement for hip extension was 80 Nm. The torque required for knee extension during stair climbing was 140 Nm and 50 Nm during walking. Actuators were
selected such that the maximum torque was met, which allows for the operator to be raised or lowered from a seated position. Electric linear actuators from Phoenix Mecano’s LZ60 range were selected as they offered high speed/load capabilities and a less bulky design than direct mounted rotational actuators.
3. Customizable Kinematic Model
A kinematics analysis was undertaken for the lower limb exoskeletons. The Denavit‐Hartenberg (D‐H) convention was incorporated for assigning the reference frames. The transformation matrix shown in Equation (1), represents joint i relative to joint i‐1. The exoskeletons are rigid serial mechanisms, which allow for the end‐effecter to be represented relative to the fixed base frames (Craig, 2005).
Where: ��−1=distance from ��−1 to �� about ��−1 �� =angle from ��−1 to �� about ��−1 �� =angle from ��−1 to �� about ��� �� =distance from ��−1 to �� along �� The lower limbs have identical kinematic chains, thus the fixed reference frame was defined at the hip, and the transformation matrices relating the ankle to the reference frame were found. These matrices can be seen in Equations (2) ‐ (4), which have been derived from Equation (1) (Naidu et al., 2011b).
��� � � ��1 ��1 0 0�1 �1 0 00 0 1 00 0 0 1
� (2)
��� � � �1 0 0 �10 1 0 00 0 1 00 0 0 1
� (3)
��� � ��� ��� 0 ���� �� 0 00 0 1 00 0 0 1
� (4)
The forward kinematics of the exoskeleton leg were obtained using Equation (5) (Craig, 2005). This kinematics model relates the end‐effector to the origin of the base frame, which is represented by the GH joint.
Several invewhich the Dsuperior arouDLS methodvector of thechange in Matrix is terms of the represented bend‐effector exoskeleton. represented
and
The iterationJacobian andkinematics. The JacobianThis will resand n = 4.
The change i2004).
J’, λ and I factor and ifactor compresult of sing The multipliproduces a computationerror value iand the targThe algorithFigure 4. Thevalue which then iterativangles are uerror value is The inverse verified throuseen in Figurwhich used depicts the m
nematic Model
erse kinematiDamped Leaund singularid implements e mechanism(Buss, 2004).
in the form ofend‐effector, by the first thris consideredThis positioby S (Equat
d .
n of small angd results in a
n is representult in an m x
in can be d
Δϑ =(inv
represent theidentity matrpensates the gularities (Na e
ication of thsquare ma
of the inveris the differenet position. Thm of the De iteration prois initially c
vely solved aupdated. Thiss reduced to a
kinematics wugh simulationre 5, was moda random numaximum ran
s (Naidu et al.,
ic iterative mast Squares (ities and comthe Jacobian
m and is requ
f Equation 1 arelative to three rows of thd to be the on of the endtion 6) and
gle changes islinear derivat
ted by Equatix n matrix; in
etermined by
v(J’J + λ2I)*J’)*e
e Jacobian trarix respectivecomputationaet al., 2008).
e Jacobian watrix which rse of this mnce between tThis is updateDLS method ocess is depenalculated. Theand the errors process is rdesired tolera
were derivedns on Matlab®delled with thumber generange of motion
2012)
methods exist(DLS) metho
mplex designs.n of the positiuired to solve
and the X ,Y anhe base framee last column.foot part of
d‐effector wilis a function
s a function otion of the inv
ion 7 (Buss, 2this model m
Equation 8 (B
error
anspose, damly. The damal problems
with its transallows for
multiplication. the initial posed in the iterais illustrated
ndent on the ee angle changr value and repeated untilance.
d analytically ®. The worksphe use of Matlation method, n for each leg
t, of od is The ional e the
nd Z e, are . The f the ll be n of
(6)
f the verse
004). m = 3
(7)
Buss,
(8)
mping mping as a
spose the The
sition ation. d in error ge is joint l the
and pace, lab®, and
. For
simuand
Figumeth
Thethe Theleg visuincluupri
Figu
4. C
Instare whicalcrele
ulation purposL2 = 430 mm f
ure 4. Flowcharthod
plane in Figuanterior of th workspace d(blue), while
ual reference udes the jointight and in a s
ure 5. Range of m
Control Archite
ructions suchperformed onich calculates ulated or inpvant microcon
ses, limb lengtfor the thigh an
Errocurr
Wh
Δ� =λ²I)
Up
Upd
t illustrating the
ure 5 represenhe model facindepicts the ran the stance leonly. The fult ranges both seated position
motion for lowe
ecture
h as joint chann a GUI. Thethe relevant kputted joint anntrollers whic
ths were set tond shank respe
or = target –ent position
hile error > value
=(inv(J’J + )*J’)*error
date error
date theta
e iteration proce
nts the sagittang the positivnge of motioneg (green) is ll scope of thfor motion wn.
er limbs
nges or co‐ore data is senkinematic calcngles are thech will carry o
o L1 = 500 mmectively.
ess of the DLS
al plane, withve x direction.n of the swingincluded for
he workspacewhile standing
rdinate pointsnt to Matlab®culations. Then sent to theout the motor
indicated on the GUI. An undershoot was observed by the hip joint, which is possibly due to the load on the actuators that damped the chance of an overshoot. The operation of the biological leg and previous lower limb exoskeletons were researched. The mechanical properties of the biological leg were correlated to the design and development of the exoskeleton legs to allow rehabilitation in the sagittal plane. The objectives explained in the introduction were achieved. The integration of the electronic system to control and operate the mechanical system was explained in the paper. Safety implementation of the system was integrated mechanically, electronically and by means of software. The research has developed a prototype system that allows for the rehabilitation of a person’s lower limbs, which came to a total cost of under US$ 3,000.Satisfactory results were obtained to allow future work to be performed on the system.
6.1. Future Work
The actuators that were used in the prototype system had a low torque and speed which could be increased to allow rehabilitation of people with greater weight. Higher torque actuators that have a low weight ratio would be more beneficial, but would increase the cost. The prototype system could be improved and expanded for different types of applications. Adaptive control architecture could be implemented into the GUI model that will take into account the weight of the person. These variables could be determined by sensors placed on the exoskeleton lower limb system. The designed lower limb exoskeleton system will allow for rehabilitation in an up‐right position. Investigation of a lower limb rehabilitation system in a seated position could be considered, with the use of an impedance control system.
7. References
[1] Buss, S.R. (2004), ʺIntroduction to Inverse Kinematics with Jacobian Transpose, Pseudoinverse and Damped Least Squares methodsʺ, IEEE Journal of Robotics and Automation, 17 April 2004.
[2] Craig, J.J. (2005), Introduction to Robotics ‐Mechanics and Control 3rd ed. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall.
[3] Hian Kai, K., Missel, M., Craig, T., Pratt, J.E., Neuhaus, P.D. (2009), ʺDevelopment of the IHMC Mobility Assist Exoskeleton”, IEEE International Conference in Robotics and Automation (ICRA 2009), pp. 2556‐2562.
[4] Inc., C. (2011). “Hybrid Assistive Limb”, Available: http://www.cyberdyne.jp/english/index.html, 18 May 2011
[5] Kazerooni, H., Racine, J.‐L., Lihua, H., Steger, R. (2005), ʺOn the Control of the Berkeley Lower Extremity Exoskeleton (BLEEX),ʺ IEEE International Conference of Robotics and Automation (ICRA 2005), pp. 4353‐4360.
[6] Koslowski, H.M. (2009), ʺSpinal Cord Injury: Functional Outcomes in 2009 and Beyond,ʺ Northeast Florida Medicine, vol. 60, pp. 32‐35.
[7] Mohammed, S. and Amirat, Y. (2008), ʺTowards intelligent lower limb wearable robots: Challenges and perspectives ‐ State of the artʺ, IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics, 2008, pp. 312‐317.
[8] Na, M., Yang, B., and Jia, P. (2008), ʺImproved damped least squares solution with joint limits, joint weights and comfortable criteria for controlling human‐like figures.,ʺ IEEE Conference on Robotics, Automation and Mechatronics, pp. 1090‐1095.
[9] Naidu, D., Stopforth, R., Bright G., Davrajh, S. (2011a), ʺA 7 DOF exoskeleton arm: Shoulder, elbow, wrist and hand mechanism for assistance to upper limb disabled individuals,ʺ AFRICON, 2011, Livingstone, Zambia; IEEE, pp. 1‐6, 13‐15 Sept. 2011
[10] Naidu, D., Cunniffe, C., Stopforth, R., Bright, G., Davrajh, S. (2011), “Upper and Lower exoskeleton limbs for Assistive and Rehabilitative Applications”, 4th Conference of Robotics and Mechatronics (RobMech), Pretoria, South Africa, November 2011
[11] Naidu, D., Stopforth R., Davrajh S., Bright G. (2012), “A Portable Passive Physiotherapeutic Exoskeleton”, International Journal of Advanced Robotic Systems, InTech, Vol 9
[12] Pons, J.L. (2008), “Wearable Robots: Biomechatronic Exoskeletons”, Chichester, West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2008.
[13] Riener, R., Rabuffetti, M., Frigo, C. (2002), ʺStair ascent and descent at different inclinationsʺ, Gait & Posture, vol. 15, pp. 32‐44.
[14] Sankai, Y. (2006), ʺLeading Edge of Cybernics: Robot Suit HAL,ʺ International Joint Conference (SICE‐ICASE 2006), pp. 1‐2.
[15] Stopforth, R., Bright, G., Davrajh, S., Walker, A., (2011), ʺImproved communication between manufacturing robots, ʺSouth African Journal of Industrial Engineering, vol. 22, pp. 99 ‐ 107.
[16] Stroke, N. I. o. N. D. a. (2010), “NINDS Brachial Plexus Injuries Information Page”, Available: http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/brachial_plexus/brachial_plexus.htm, 31 May 2010.