We present the design and development of the fluid-driven, wearable, Soft Poly-Limb (SPL), from the Greek word polys, meaning many. The SPL utilizes the numerous traits of soft robotics to enable a novel approach in providing safe and compliant mobile manipulation assistance to healthy and impaired users. This wearable system equips the user with a controllable additional limb that is capable of complex three-dimensional motion in space. Similar to an elephant trunk, the SPL is able to manipulate objects using a variety of end effectors, such as suction adhesion or a soft grasper, as well as its entire soft body to conform around an object, able to lift 2.35 times its own weight. To develop these highly articulated soft robotic limbs, we provide a novel set of systematic design rules, obtained through varying geometrical parameters of the SPL through experimentally verified finite element method models. We investigate performance of the limb by testing the lifetime of the new SPL actuators, evaluating its payload capacity, operational workspace, and capability of interacting close to a user through a spatial mobility test. Furthermore, we are able to demonstrate limb controllability through multiple user-intent detection modalities. Finally, we explore the limb's ability to assist in multitasking and pick and place scenarios with varying mounting locations of the SPL around the user's body. Our results highlight the SPL's ability to safely interact with the user while demonstrating promising performance in assisting with a wide variety of tasks, in both work and general living settings.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BogueR, BogueR. Exoskeletons and robotic prosthetics: a review of recent developments. Ind Robot Int J Robot Res Appl, 2009; 36:421–427.
2.
GopuraRA, KiguchiK, BandaraDSV. A brief review on upper extremity robotic exoskeleton systems. In: 2011 6th International Conference on Industrial and Information Systems. Kandy, Sri Lanka, August 16, 2011, pp. 346–351.
3.
PariettiF, AsadaHH. Supernumerary Robotic Limbs for aircraft fuselage assembly: body stabilization and guidance by bracing. In 2014 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. (ICRA), Hong Kong, China, 2014, pp. 1176–1183.
4.
VatsalV, HoffmanG.Wearing your arm on your sleeve: studying usage contexts for a wearable robotic forearm. In 2017 26th IEEE International Symposium On Robot and Human Interactive Communication, Lisbon, Portugal, 2017, pp. 974–980.
5.
KurekDA, AsadaHH. The MantisBot: design and impedance control of supernumerary robotic limbs for near-ground work. In 2017 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. (ICRA), Singapore, 2017, pp. 5942–5947.
6.
PariettiF, ChanKC, HunterBet al., Design and control of supernumerary robotic limbs for balance augmentation. In 2015 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. (ICRA), Seattle WA, 2015, pp. 5010–5017.
7.
HussainI, SalviettiG, SpagnolettiG, et al.A soft supernumerary robotic finger and mobile arm support for grasping compensation and hemiparetic upper limb rehabilitation. Rob Auton Syst, 2017; 93:1–12.
8.
WuFY, AsadaHH. “Hold-and-manipulate” with a single hand being assisted by wearable extra fingers. Proc IEEE Int Conf Robot Autom, 2015; 2015:6205–6212.
9.
TizianiL, HartA, CahoonT, et al.Empirical characterization of modular variable stiffness inflatable structures for supernumerary grasp-assist devices. Int J Rob Res, 2017; 36:1391–1413.
10.
WuFY, AsadaHH. Implicit and intuitive grasp posture control for wearable robotic fingers: a data-driven method using partial least squares. IEEE Trans Robot, 2016; 32:176–186.
11.
GuterstamA, PetkovaVI, EhrssonHH. The illusion of owning a third arm. PLoS One, 2011; 6:1–11.
12.
TsakirisM, CarpenterL, JamesD, et al.Hands only illusion: multisensory integration elicits sense of ownership for body parts but not for non-corporeal objects. Exp Brain Res, 2010; 204:343–352.
13.
SalviettiG, HussainI, CioncoloniD, et al.Compensating hand function in chronic stroke patients through the robotic sixth finger. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng, 2017; 25:142–150.
14.
PariettiF, AsadaHH. Independent, voluntary control of extra robotic limbs. In 2017 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. (ICRA), Singapore, 2017, pp. 5954–5961.
HochbergLR, BacherD, JarosiewiczB, et al.Reach and grasp by people with tetraplegia using a neurally controlled robotic arm. Nature, 2012; 485:372–375.
17.
AjoudaniA, GodfreyS, BianchiM, et al.Exploring teleimpedance and tactile feedback for intuitive control of the Pisa/IIT SoftHand. IEEE Trans Haptics, 2014; 7:203–215.
18.
MaheuV, ArchambaultPS, FrappierJ, et al.Evaluation of the JACO robotic arm: clinico-economic study for powered wheelchair users with upper-extremity disabilities. IEEE Int Conf Rehabil Robot, 2011; 2011:4–6.
19.
BassilyD, GeorgoulasC, GüttlerJ, et al.Intuitive and adaptive robotic arm manipulation using the leap motion controller. In ISR/Robotik 2014; 41st International Symposium on Robotics, Munich, Germany, 2014, pp. 78–84.
20.
VermaS, KhannaM, TripathiVNet al.Occurrence of polymelia in a female child. J Clin Imaging Sci, 2013; 3:18.
21.
TubbsRS, DittyB, BosmiaANAN, et al.Ischiopagus and diprosopus in India: two pairs of conjoined twins perceived as incarnations of Hindu deities. J Relig Health, 2015; 54:87–92.
22.
HanleyEN, StanitskiCL. Incomplete congenital duplication of a lower extremity. A case report. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 1980; 62:479–481.
23.
BisnetoENF., Congenital deformities of the upper limbs. Part II: failure of formation and duplications. Rev Bras Ortop (English Ed.), 2013; 48:3–10.
24.
Al SadaM, KhamisM, KatoA, et al.Challenges and opportunities of supernumerary robotic limbs. In Proceedings of the CHI 2017 Workshop on Amplification and Augmentation of Human Perception, Denver, CO, 2017.
25.
del-AmaAJ, KoutsouAD, MorenoJCet al., Review of hybrid exoskeletons to restore gait following spinal cord injury. J Rehabil Res Dev, 2012; 49:497.
26.
PolygerinosP, CorrellN, MorinSAet al.Soft robotics: review of fluid-driven intrinsically soft devices; manufacturing, sensing, control, and applications in human–robot interaction. Adv Eng Mater, 2017; 19:e201700016.
27.
RusD, TolleyMT. Design, fabrication and control of soft robots. Nature, 2015; 521:467–475.
28.
LaschiC, MazzolaiB, CianchettiM. Soft robotics: technologies and systems pushing the boundaries of robot abilities. Sci Robot, 2016; 1:eaah3690.
29.
CarmelM, MajidiC. Soft robotics: a perspective—current trends and prospects for the future. Soft Robot, 2014; 1:5–11.
30.
SimpsonCS, OkamuraAM, HawkesEW. Exomuscle: an inflatable device for shoulder abduction support. In 2017 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. (ICRA), Singapore, 2017, pp. 6651–6657.
31.
DingY, KimM, KuindersmaS, et al.Human-in-the-loop optimization of hip assistance with a soft exosuit during walking. Sci Robot, 2018; 3:eaar5438.
32.
PolygerinosP, LyneS, WangZ, et al.Towards a soft pneumatic glove for hand rehabilitation. In 2013 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Tokyo, Japan, 2013, pp. 1512–1517.
33.
SridarS, QiaoZ, MuthukrishnanN, et al.Development of a soft-inflatable exosuit for knee rehabilitation. In 2017 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. (IROS), Vancouver, BC, 2017, pp. 1–6.
34.
OguntosinV, HarwinWS, KawamuraS, et al.Development of a wearable assistive soft robotic device for elbow rehabilitation. In 2015 IEEE International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics. (ICORR), Singapore, 2015, pp. 747–752.
35.
ParkYL, ChenBR, Pérez-ArancibiaNOet al.Design and control of a bio-inspired soft wearable robotic device for ankle-foot rehabilitation. Bioinspir Biomim, 2014; 9:16007.
36.
XiloyannisM, CappelloL, BinhKD, et al.Design and preliminary testing of a soft exosuit for assisting elbow movements and hand grasping. In Converging Clinical and Engineering Research on Neurorehabilitation II: proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on NeuroRehabilitation (ICNR2016), October18–21, 2016, Segovia, Spain (Ibáñez J, González-Vargas J, Azorín JM, Akay M, Pons JL, Eds), volume 15, Springer International Publishing, 2017, pp. 557–561.
37.
PolygerinosP, WangZ, OverveldeJTB, et al.Modeling of soft fiber-reinforced bending actuators. IEEE Trans Robot, 2015; 31:778–789.
38.
KluteGK, CzernieckiJM, HannafordB., McKibben artificial muscles: pneumatic actuators with biomechanical intelligence. In 1999 IEEE/ASME International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics (Cat. No. 99TH8399), Atlanta, GA, 1999, pp. 1–6.
39.
NiiyamaR, RusD, KimS. Pouch Motors: printable/inflatable soft actuators for robotics. In 2014 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), Hong Kong, China, 2014, pp. 6332–6337.
40.
LiS, VogtDM, RusD, et al.Fluid-driven origami-inspired artificial muscles. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2017; 114:13132–13137.
41.
McMahanW, JonesBA, WalkerID. Design and implementation of a multi-section continuum robot: Air-Octor. In 2005 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Edmonton, Alta, Canada, 2005, pp. 2578–2585.
42.
CalistiM, GiorelliM, LevyG, et al.An octopus-bioinspired solution to movement and manipulation for soft robots. Bioinspir Biomim, 2011; 6:36002.
43.
WalkerID, DawsonDM, FlashT, et al.Continuum robot arms inspired by cephalopods. SPIE Conf Unmanned Gr Veh Technol, 2005; 5804:303–314.
44.
GodageIS, Medrano-CerdaGA, BransonDTet al.Dynamics for variable length multisection continuum arms. Int J Rob Res, 2016; 35:695–722.
45.
AnsariY, MantiM, FaloticoE, et al.Towards the development of a soft manipulator as an assistive robot for personal care of elderly people. Int J Adv Robot Syst, 2017; 14:1729881416687132.
46.
GiannacciniME, XiangC, AtyabiA, et al.Novel design of a soft lightweight pneumatic continuum robot arm with decoupled variable stiffness and positioning. Soft Robot, 2018; 5:54–70.
47.
SananaS., Soft Inflatable Robots for Safe Physical Human Interaction. Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie Mellon University, 2013.
48.
HawkesEW, BlumenscheinLH, GreerJDet al.A soft robot that navigates its environment through growth. Sci Robot, 2017; 2:1–8.
49.
BestCM, GillespieMT, HyattP, et al.A new soft robot control method: using model predictive control for a pneumatically actuated humanoid. IEEE Robot Autom Mag, 2016; 23:75–84.
50.
OhtaP, ValleL, KingJ, et al.Design of a lightweight soft robotic arm using pneumatic artificial muscles and inflatable sleeves. Soft Robot, 2018; 5:204–215.
51.
CianchettiM, RanzaniT, GerboniG, et al.STIFF-FLOP surgical manipulator: mechanical design and experimental characterization of the single module. In 2013 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Tokyo, Japan, 2013, pp. 3576–3581.
52.
MarcheseAD, RusD. Design, kinematics, and control of a soft spatial fluidic elastomer manipulator. Int J Rob Res, 2015; 35:840–869.
53.
RobertsonMA, PaikJ. New soft robots really suck: vacuum-powered systems empower diverse capabilities. Sci Robot, 2017; 2:1–12.
54.
YeohOH., Some forms of the strain energy function for rubber. Rubber Chem Technol, 1993; 66:754–771.
55.
MoseleyP, FlorezJM, SonarHAet al.Modeling, design, and development of soft pneumatic actuators with finite element method. Adv Eng Mater, 2016; 18:978–988.
56.
NguyenPH, SridarS, ZhangW, et al.Design and control of a 3-chambered fiber reinforced soft actuator with off-the-shelf stretch sensors. Int J Intell Robot Appl, 2017; 1:342–351.
57.
ConnollyF, WalshCJ, BertoldiK. Automatic design of fiber-reinforced soft actuators for trajectory matching. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2017; 114:51–56.
58.
Bishop-MoserJ, KotaS. Design and modeling of generalized fiber-reinforced pneumatic soft actuators. IEEE Trans Robot, 2015; 31:536–545.
59.
SuzumoriK, IikuraS, TanakaH. Development of flexible microactuator and its applications to robotic mechanisms. Proc 1991 IEEE Int Conf Robot Autom, 1991; 2:1622–1627.
60.
HawkesEW, ChristensenDL, OkamuraAM. Design and implementation of a 300% strain soft artificial muscle. In 2016 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), Stockholm, Sweden, 2016, pp. 4022–4029.
61.
RobertsonMA, SadeghiH, FlorezJMet al.Soft Pneumatic Actuator Fascicles for High Force and Reliability. Soft Robot, 2017; 4:23–32.
62.
PlagenhoefS, EvansFG, AbdelnourT. Anatomical data for analyzing human motion. Res Q Exerc Sport, 1983; 54:169–178.
63.
KierWM, SmithKK. The biomechanics of movement in tongues and tentacles. J Biomech, 1983; 16:292–293.
64.
CharlesJP, CappellariO, SpenceAJet al.Musculoskeletal geometry, muscle architecture and functional specialisations of the mouse hindlimb. PLoS One, 2016; 11:e0147669.
65.
AgarwalG, BesuchetN, AudergonB, et al.Stretchable materials for robust soft actuators towards assistive wearable devices. Sci Rep, 2016; 6:34224.
66.
ConnollyF, PolygerinosP, WalshCJet al.Mechanical programming of soft actuators by varying fiber angle. Soft Robot, 2015; 2:26–32.
67.
GodageIS, GuglielminoE, BransonDTet al.Novel modal approach for kinematics of multisection continuum arms. IEEE Int Conf Intell Robot Syst, 2011; 10:1093–1098.
68.
WebsterRJ, JonesBA. Design and kinematic modeling of constant curvature continuum robots: a review. Int J Rob Res, 2010; 29:1661–1683.
69.
ZhangW, PolygerinosP., Distributed planning of multi-segment soft robotic arms. In American Control Conference (ACC 2017), Milwaukee, WI, June 2018.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
