A novel approach to quantify the assistive torque profiles generated by passive back-support exoskeletons

Madinei, Saman; Kim, Sunwook; Park, Jang-Ho; Srinivasan, Divya; Nussbaum, Maury A.

doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2022.111363

Cited by 16 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, it ignores the bending of the back and the resulting force distribution. Moreover, estimating the lumbosacral torques could provide better insight into the influence of the exos on low-back muscles (Abdoli-Eramaki et al, 2007 ; Lamers et al, 2018 ; Madinei et al, 2022 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Benchmarking commercially available soft and rigid passive back exoskeletons for an industrial workplace

Mohamed Refai,

Moya-Esteban,

van Zijl

et al. 2024

Wearable Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Low-back pain is a common occupational hazard for industrial workers. Several studies show the advantages of using rigid and soft back-support passive exoskeletons and exosuits (exos) to reduce the low-back loading and risk of injury. However, benefits of using these exos have been shown to be task-specific. Therefore, in this study, we developed a benchmarking approach to assess exos for an industrial workplace at Hankamp Gears B.V. We assessed two rigid (Laevo Flex, Paexo back) and two soft (Auxivo Liftsuit 1.0, and Darwing Hakobelude) exos for tasks resembling the workplace. We measured the assistive moment provided by each exo and their respective influence on muscle activity as well as the user’s perception of comfort and exertion. Ten participants performed four lifting tasks (Static hold, Asymmetric, Squat, and Stoop), while their electromyography and subjective measures were collected. The two rigid exos provided the largest assistance during the Dynamic tasks. Reductions in erector spinae activity were seen to be task-specific, with larger reductions for the two rigid exos. Overall, Laevo Flex offered a good balance between assistive moments, reductions in muscle activity, as well as user comfort and reductions in perceived exertion. Thus, we recommend benchmarking exos for intended use in the industrial workplace. This will hopefully result in a better adoption of the back-support exoskeletons in the workplace and help reduce low-back pain.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Benchmarking commercially available soft and rigid passive back exoskeletons for an industrial workplace

Mohamed Refai,

Moya-Esteban,

van Zijl

et al. 2024

Wearable Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The BackX exoskeleton incorporates passive torque-generating mechanisms around the hip to support the trunk extensor muscles during activities that involve bending and lifting. BackX offers a significant reduction in the load on the lower back, with maximum net torques of 24.8 Nm during flexion, thereby enhancing ergonomic safety ( Madinei et al, 2022 ). Its design features adjustable support settings, including two modes (instant vs. standard) and two levels of support (low vs. high).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparative study of biomechanical assessments in laboratory and field settings for manual material handling tasks using extractor tools and exoskeletons

Shakourisalim,

Wang,

Beltran Martinez

et al. 2024

Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To enhance physical capabilities of workers who regularly perform physically demanding tasks involving heavy lifting and awkward postures, various tools and occupational exoskeletons can be used. Most of the studies aiming to explore the efficiency of these tools and exoskeletons have been performed in confined and controlled laboratory spaces, which do not represent the real-world work environment. This study aimed to compare the outcome of biomechanical assessment of using a back support exoskeleton and assistive tools (Lever and Jake) in the procedure of a high demanding manual material handling task versus the results found by performing the same task in a laboratory. Ten able-bodied participants and ten able-bodied utility workers performed the same manhole removal task in-lab and in-field, respectively, with the aid of an exoskeleton and Lever and Jake tools. Muscle activity and Rapid Entire Body Assessment (REBA) scores were recorded using surface electromyography and inertial measurement units, respectively and compared between in-lab and in-field trials. The field experiments indicated significant differences (p < 0.05) in normalized muscle activity across most muscles when compared to laboratory data. These results revealed how muscle activity is affected by the controlled lab setting compared to real-world field conditions. However, REBA scores indicate similar ergonomic implications regardless of the utilization of exoskeletons or tools. These findings underscore that real-world field assessments are crucial for evaluating ergonomic risks and effects of occupational exoskeletons and tools to account for environmental factors and workers’ skills in ergonomic evaluations of this nature.

show abstract

“…For upper-body exoskeletons, evaluating their supportive effect involves measuring generated joint torques, such as in the shoulder, to reduce workload [32]. Analyzing assistive torque profiles aids in understanding how to choose an appropriate profile based on task requirements and user anthropometry, contributing to the evaluation of exoskeleton benefits [33].…”

Section: Problem Analysis and Requirementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lessons Learned from Investigating Robotics-Based, Human-like Testing of an Upper-Body Exoskeleton

Klankers,

Rudloff,

Mohammadi

et al. 2024

Applied Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Assistive devices like exoskeletons undergo extensive testing not least because of their close interaction with humans. Conducting user studies is a time-consuming process that demands expert knowledge, and it is accompanied by challenges such as low repeatability and a potential lack of comparability between studies. Obtaining objective feedback on the exoskeleton’s performance is crucial for developers and manufacturers to iteratively improve the design and development process. This paper contributes to the concept of using robots for objective exoskeleton testing by presenting various approaches to a robotic-based testing platform for upper-body exoskeletons. We outline the necessary requirements for realistically simulating use cases and evaluate different approaches using standard manipulators as robotic motion generators. Three approaches are investigated: (i) Exploiting the anthropomorphic structure of the robotic arm and directly placing it into the exoskeleton. (ii) Utilizing a customized, direct attachment between the robot and exoskeleton. (iii) Attaching a human arm dummy to the robot end effector to simulate a more realistic interface with the exoskeleton. Subsequently, we discuss and compare the results against the aforementioned requirements of a systematic testing platform. Our conclusion emphasizes that achieving objective and realistic testing necessitates highly specialized hardware, algorithms, and further research to address challenging requirements.

show abstract

A novel approach to quantify the assistive torque profiles generated by passive back-support exoskeletons

Cited by 16 publications

References 29 publications

Benchmarking commercially available soft and rigid passive back exoskeletons for an industrial workplace

Benchmarking commercially available soft and rigid passive back exoskeletons for an industrial workplace

A comparative study of biomechanical assessments in laboratory and field settings for manual material handling tasks using extractor tools and exoskeletons

Lessons Learned from Investigating Robotics-Based, Human-like Testing of an Upper-Body Exoskeleton

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About