Analysis of Human–Exoskeleton System Interaction for Ergonomic Design

Abstract

Objective

Lower-limb exoskeleton systems are defined as gait training or walking-assisting devices for spinal cord injury or hemiplegic patients. Crutches, straps, and baffles are designed to protect subjects from falling. However, skin abrasions occur when the interaction forces are too large. In this study, the interaction forces between the human body and an exoskeleton system named the AIDER were measured to confirm whether the design was ergonomic.

Background

The AIDER system is a wearable lower-limb exoskeleton. It secures a subject by binding on the waist, thighs, shanks, and feet.

Method

Eight healthy subjects participated in the study. The interaction forces of the waist strap, thigh baffles, shank baffles, and crutch handles were measured by pressure sensors. Ten repetitions were completed in this study. After one repetition, custom comfort questionnaires were completed by the subjects.

Results

Although a few of the peak values of the maximum intensities of pressure between the hands and crutch handles reached the minimum value of the pain–pressure threshold (PPT), the average pressure intensities were much smaller than the PPT value.

Conclusions

The results indicated that the mechanical structure and control strategy of the AIDER must be improved to be more ergonomic in the future.

Keywords

exoskeleton AIDER system spinal cord injury interaction force questionnaires ergonomic

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bass

M. J.

Phillips

L. G

. (2007). Pressure sores. Current Problems in Surgery, 44, 101–143. https://doi.org/10.1067/j.cpsurg.2006.12.007

Behrman

A. L.

Harkema

S. J

. (2000). Locomotor training after human spinal cord injury: A series of case studies. Physical Therapy, 80, 688–700. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/80.7.688

Calhoun

C. L.

Schottler

Vogel

L. C

. (2013). Recommendations for mobility in children with spinal cord injury. Topics in Spinal Cord Injury Rehabilitation, 19, 142–151. https://doi.org/10.1310/sci1902-142

Cho

Kim

Jung

Lee

. (2012). Analysis and evaluation of a combined human-exoskeleton model under two different constraints condition. Proceedings of the International Summit on Human Simulation, St. Pete Beach, FL, USA. 23–25.

De Rossi

S. M. M.

Vitiello

Lenzi

Ronsse

Koopman

Persichetti

Vecchi

Ijspeert

A. J.

van der Kooij

Carrozza

M. C

. (2011). Sensing pressure distribution on a lower-limb exoskeleton physical human-machine interface. Sensors, 11, 207–227. https://doi.org/10.3390/s110100207

Ditunno

P. L.

Patrick

Stineman

Ditunno

J. F

. (2008). Who wants to walk? Preferences for recovery after SCI: A longitudinal and cross-sectional study. Spinal Cord, 46, 500–506. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.sc.3102172

Fransson-Hall

Kilbom

. (1993). Sensitivity of the hand to surface pressure. Applied Ergonomics, 24, 181–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-6870(93)90006-U

Hassan

Kadone

Suzuki

Sankai

. (2014). Wearable gait measurement system with an instrumented cane for exoskeleton control. Sensors, 14, 1705–1722. https://doi.org/10.3390/s140101705

Hidler

J. M.

Wall

A. E

. (2005). Alterations in muscle activation patterns during robotic-assisted walking. Clinical Biomechanics, 20, 184–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2004.09.016

10.

Karelis

A. D.

Carvalho

L. P.

Castillo

M. J.

Gagnon

D. H.

Aubertin-Leheudre

. (2017). Effect on body composition and bone mineral density of walking with a robotic exoskeleton in adults with chronic spinal cord injury. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 49, 84–87. https://doi.org/10.2340/16501977-2173

11.

Kirshblum

S. C.

Burns

S. P.

Biering-Sorensen

Donovan

Graves

D. E.

Jha

Johansen

Jones

Krassioukov

Mulcahey

M. J.

Schmidt-Read

Waring

. (2011). International standards for neurological classification of spinal cord injury (revised 2011). The Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine, 34, 535–546. https://doi.org/10.1179/204577211X13207446293695

12.

Kolakowsky-Hayner

S. A.

Crew

Moran

Shah

. (2013). Safety and feasibility of using the Ekso™ bionic exoskeleton to aid ambulation after spinal cord injury. Journal of Spine, 4.

13.

Lee

W. C.

Zhang

Mak

A. F

. (2005). Regional differences in pain threshold and tolerance of the transtibial residual limb: Including the effects of age and interface material. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 86, 641–649. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2004.08.005

14.

Lenzi

Vitiello

Rossi

S. M. M. D.

Persichetti

Giovacchini

Roccella

Vecchi

Carrozza

M. C

. (2011). Measuring human–robot interaction on wearable robots: A distributed approach. Mechatronics, 21, 1123–1131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechatronics.2011.04.003

15.

McKight

P. E.

Najab

. (2010). Kruskal‐Wallis test. The Corsini Encyclopedia of Psychology, 1.

16.

National Spinal Cord Injury Statistical Center (NSCISC) . (2019). Facts and figures at a glance. University of Alabama at Birmingham. Retrieved April 26, 2019, from https://www.nscisc.uab.edu/

17.

Parent

Mac-Thiong

J.-M.

Roy-Beaudry

Sosa

J. F.

Labelle

. (2011). Spinal cord injury in the pediatric population: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Neurotrauma, 28, 1515–1524. https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2009.1153

18.

Pons

J. L

. (2008). Wearable robots: Biomechatronic exoskeletons. John Wiley & Sons.

19.

Pons

J. L

. (2010). Rehabilitation exoskeletal robotics. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine, 29, 57–63. https://doi.org/10.1109/MEMB.2010.936548

20.

Raab

Krakow

Tripp

Jung

. (2016). Effects of training with the ReWalk exoskeleton on quality of life in incomplete spinal cord injury: A single case study. Spinal Cord Series and Cases, 2, 15025. https://doi.org/10.1038/scsandc.2015.25

21.

Rathore

Wilcox

Ramirez

D. Z. M.

Loureiro

Carlson

. (2016, August). Quantifying the human-robot interaction forces between a lower limb exoskeleton and healthy users [Conference session]. In 2016 38th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC), IEEE. 586–589.

22.

Rocon

Ruiz

A. F.

Raya

Schiele

Pons

J. L.

Belda‐Lois

J. M.

Poveda

Vivas

M. J.

Moreno

J. C

. (2008). Human–robot physical interaction. In Wearable robots: Biomechatronic exoskeletons (pp. 127–163). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

23.

Rolke

Andrews Campbell

Magerl

Treede

R.-D

. (2005). Deep pain thresholds in the distal limbs of healthy human subjects. European Journal of Pain, 9, 39–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpain.2004.04.001

24.

Suzuki

Mito

Kawamoto

Hasegawa

Sankai

. (2007). Intention-based walking support for paraplegia patients with robot suit HAL. Advanced Robotics, 21, 1441–1469.

25.

Tamez-Duque

Cobian-Ugalde

Kilicarslan

Venkatakrishnan

Soto

Contreras-Vidal

J. L

. (2015). Real-time strap pressure sensor system for powered exoskeletons. Sensors, 15, 4550–4563. https://doi.org/10.3390/s150204550

26.

Wilcox

Rathore

Morgado Ramirez

D. Z.

Loureiro

R. C. V.

Carlson

. (2016). Muscular activity and physical interaction forces during lower limb exoskeleton use. Healthcare Technology Letters, 3, 273–279. https://doi.org/10.1049/htl.2016.0063

27.

World Health Organization . (2013). Spinal cord injury: As many as 500 000 people suffer each year. World Health Organization. Retrieved March 20, 2019, from https://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2013/spinal-cord-injury-20131202/en/

28.

Yandell

M. B.

Zelik

K. E

. (2016). Transforming how we physically integrate exoskeletons [Paper presentation]. 40th Annual Meeting of the American Society of Biomechanics, USA, Raleigh.

29.

Yue

Cheng

Chen

Deng

Lin

. (2017, August). Design of a wearable sensing system for a lower extremity exoskeleton [Conference session]. In 2017 IEEE International Conference on Mechatronics and Automation (ICMA). China, Hong Kong.464–468.