Limits...
Introduction and testing of an alternative control approach for a robotic prosthetic arm.

Griggs L, Fahimi F - Open Biomed Eng J (2014)

Bottom Line: An experimental 4DOF robotic arm was used as the platform for testing the proposed control approach.The two control methodologies, joint control and Cartesian control, were tested on five able-bodied human subjects.Improvement of one control methodology over the other was measured by the time it took for the subjects to complete a simple motor task.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering University of Alabama in Huntsville, Huntsville, 35899 Alabama, USA.

ABSTRACT
Commercially available robotic prosthetic arms currently use independent joint control. An alternative controller involving only control of the hand in a Cartesian frame rather than controlling each joint independently is proposed and tested. An experimental 4DOF robotic arm was used as the platform for testing the proposed control approach. As opposed to joint control, Cartesian control requires the solution to the inverse kinematics problem. The inverse kinematics solution was developed for the robotic arm using the extended Jacobian method. The two control methodologies, joint control and Cartesian control, were tested on five able-bodied human subjects. Improvement of one control methodology over the other was measured by the time it took for the subjects to complete a simple motor task. The timed trial results indicated that Cartesian control was both more intuitive and more effective than joint control. So, the results suggest that much improvement can be achieved by using the proposed Cartesian control methodology.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

GUI for the version 2 of the Cartesian control approach.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4231378&req=5

Figure 5: GUI for the version 2 of the Cartesian control approach.

Mentions: The third control approach is the version 2 of the Cartesian control, in which the user directly specifies the inertial speed components of the hand in the diagonal (simultaneous forward-backward and left-right), and up-down directions separately. The GUI that accepts the user inputs is shown in Fig. (5). In version 2 of the proposed Cartesian control, the user selects a diagonal inertial direction for the hand to position the hand directly above the object. He/she sets linear speed components for the motion using the numerical inputs in the GUI, and clicks ``Update Speed Input.'' When the user is satisfied with the new position of the arm, he/she clicks on ``Pause,'' and selects Up-Down direction for the motion. The user switches between the directions as he/she wishes until the hand is positioned around the object for grasping.


Introduction and testing of an alternative control approach for a robotic prosthetic arm.

Griggs L, Fahimi F - Open Biomed Eng J (2014)

GUI for the version 2 of the Cartesian control approach.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4231378&req=5

Figure 5: GUI for the version 2 of the Cartesian control approach.
Mentions: The third control approach is the version 2 of the Cartesian control, in which the user directly specifies the inertial speed components of the hand in the diagonal (simultaneous forward-backward and left-right), and up-down directions separately. The GUI that accepts the user inputs is shown in Fig. (5). In version 2 of the proposed Cartesian control, the user selects a diagonal inertial direction for the hand to position the hand directly above the object. He/she sets linear speed components for the motion using the numerical inputs in the GUI, and clicks ``Update Speed Input.'' When the user is satisfied with the new position of the arm, he/she clicks on ``Pause,'' and selects Up-Down direction for the motion. The user switches between the directions as he/she wishes until the hand is positioned around the object for grasping.

Bottom Line: An experimental 4DOF robotic arm was used as the platform for testing the proposed control approach.The two control methodologies, joint control and Cartesian control, were tested on five able-bodied human subjects.Improvement of one control methodology over the other was measured by the time it took for the subjects to complete a simple motor task.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering University of Alabama in Huntsville, Huntsville, 35899 Alabama, USA.

ABSTRACT
Commercially available robotic prosthetic arms currently use independent joint control. An alternative controller involving only control of the hand in a Cartesian frame rather than controlling each joint independently is proposed and tested. An experimental 4DOF robotic arm was used as the platform for testing the proposed control approach. As opposed to joint control, Cartesian control requires the solution to the inverse kinematics problem. The inverse kinematics solution was developed for the robotic arm using the extended Jacobian method. The two control methodologies, joint control and Cartesian control, were tested on five able-bodied human subjects. Improvement of one control methodology over the other was measured by the time it took for the subjects to complete a simple motor task. The timed trial results indicated that Cartesian control was both more intuitive and more effective than joint control. So, the results suggest that much improvement can be achieved by using the proposed Cartesian control methodology.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus