From Rii
(Created page with "{{DISPLAYTITLE:<span style="display:none">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</span>}} = A Continuum Exoskeleton for Upper Extremity = September 2010 to present [[image:note_bulb.png|text-bottom|...") |
m |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
[[File: Research_Exoskeleton2010_1.jpg|thumb|400px|The compliant continuum shoulder exoskeleton: (1) an upper arm sleeve, (2) a flexible continuum joint brace, (3) a body vest, (4) a set of guiding cannulae, and (5) an actuation unit. The actual system is pictured in the inset (a).]] | [[File: Research_Exoskeleton2010_1.jpg|thumb|400px|The compliant continuum shoulder exoskeleton: (1) an upper arm sleeve, (2) a flexible continuum joint brace, (3) a body vest, (4) a set of guiding cannulae, and (5) an actuation unit. The actual system is pictured in the inset (a).]] | ||
| - | + | Exoskeleton research attracted a lot of attentions in the past decades. Numerous exoskeleton systems were developed for upper and lower limbs for military and medical purposes. These exoskeleton systems either aim at augmenting a healthy wearer’s physical capabilities with robotic actuation or to allow rehabilitation for neuromuscular defects after stroke or injury. | |
| + | Despite their different applications in military or medicine, many existing exoskeleton systems yet followed one similar design approach: using different control and sensing schemes, rigid kinematic chains are actuated to mobilize an attached human wearer. The use of rigid links in an exoskeleton might be justified in applications for strength augmentation to undertake excessive external loads and shield the wearer. But the use of rigid links introduced drawbacks such as bulkiness, high inertia, and most importantly the difficulty of maintaining kinematic compatibility between exoskeleton and human anatomy. In a clinical setting for rehabilitation where one exoskeleton consisting of rigid links is shared by multiple patients, it is even more difficult to guarantee the on-site adjustments performed by therapists can make the rigid exoskeleton fit each individual patient perfectly. Hence design approaches of using non-rigid components could be explored. | ||
| + | |||
| + | This project | ||
{|style="margin: 1em auto 1em auto;" | {|style="margin: 1em auto 1em auto;" | ||
<videoflash type="youku">XNTE3MDI4NzAw|590|480</videoflash> | <videoflash type="youku">XNTE3MDI4NzAw|590|480</videoflash> | ||
|} | |} | ||
Revision as of 13:17, 21 February 2013
A Continuum Exoskeleton for Upper Extremity
September 2010 to present
This work was supported by Program for New Century Excellent Talents in University (the NCET Program).
Exoskeleton research attracted a lot of attentions in the past decades. Numerous exoskeleton systems were developed for upper and lower limbs for military and medical purposes. These exoskeleton systems either aim at augmenting a healthy wearer’s physical capabilities with robotic actuation or to allow rehabilitation for neuromuscular defects after stroke or injury.
Despite their different applications in military or medicine, many existing exoskeleton systems yet followed one similar design approach: using different control and sensing schemes, rigid kinematic chains are actuated to mobilize an attached human wearer. The use of rigid links in an exoskeleton might be justified in applications for strength augmentation to undertake excessive external loads and shield the wearer. But the use of rigid links introduced drawbacks such as bulkiness, high inertia, and most importantly the difficulty of maintaining kinematic compatibility between exoskeleton and human anatomy. In a clinical setting for rehabilitation where one exoskeleton consisting of rigid links is shared by multiple patients, it is even more difficult to guarantee the on-site adjustments performed by therapists can make the rigid exoskeleton fit each individual patient perfectly. Hence design approaches of using non-rigid components could be explored.
This project
