HiBSO Hip Exoskeleton: Toward a Wearable and Autonomous Design

Baud, Romain; Ortlieb, A.; Olivier, Jeremy; Bouri, Mohamed; Bleuler, Hannes

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-59972-4_14

Cited by 11 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The HiBSO (hip ball screw orthosis) exploits a ball screw in each leg for transmitting the force from a DC motor [17]. At the end of the ball screw is a strap that passes the actuation movement to the thigh (see Figure 4b).…”

Section: Hip Exoskeletonmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, this wearable robot is equipped with a passive actuator that enables the user to move in the abduction-adduction direction, resulting in user comfort. The HiBSO (hip ball screw orthosis) exploits a ball screw in each leg for transmitting the force from a DC motor [17]. At the end of the ball screw is a strap that passes the actuation movement to the thigh (see Figure 4b).…”

Section: Hip Exoskeletonmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(a) exoskeleton developed by Giovacchini et al[16]; (b) HiBSO (hip ball screw orthosis)[17]; (c) PH-EXOS[18]; (d) Exosuit[19].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Overview: Types of Lower Limb Exoskeletons

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Researchers have given attention to lower limb exoskeletons in recent years. Lower limb exoskeletons have been designed, prototype tested through experiments, and even produced. In general, lower limb exoskeletons have two different objectives: (1) rehabilitation and (2) assisting human work activities. Referring to these objectives, researchers have iteratively improved lower limb exoskeleton designs, especially in the location of actuators. Some of these devices use actuators, particularly on hips, ankles or knees of the users. Additionally, other devices employ a combination of actuators on multiple joints. In order to provide information about which actuator location is more suitable; a review study on the design of actuator locations is presented in this paper. The location of actuators is an important factor because it is related to the analysis of the design and the control system. This factor affects the entire lower limb exoskeleton’s performance and functionality. In addition, the disadvantages of several types of lower limb exoskeletons in terms of actuator locations and the challenges of the lower limb exoskeleton in the future are also presented in this paper.

show abstract

Section: Hip Exoskeletonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Hip Exoskeletonmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Overview: Types of Lower Limb Exoskeletons

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The majority of these exoskeletons are fastened directly to the user's body and work together 'in seamless integration with the user's residual musculoskeletal system and sensorymotor control loops' to assist him/her 'with minimal cognitive disruption and required compensatory motion' [21]. Table 1 compiles different examples of lower-limb exoskeletons such as HAL, Exo-Legs, HiBSO [22], ExoLite [23] and HULC, and their characteristics including model, target users, size, the context of application, weight, battery life, speed, stair-climbing function, autonomy, body weight limit or whether it incorporates any accessories. The majority of the examples have a standard size, i.e., not adaptable to the user's physical characteristics; they cannot support more than 80 kg, and they tend to be over 12 kg.…”

Section: Concept and Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although there exist hardware kill switches, there do not necessarily exist software kill switches. Having a hardware [22] protective stop may protect the physical safety of the user but may not protect the user from interferences with other rights, like data protection for example [53]. While the art.…”

Section: Kill Switches Design and Data Protectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Progressive Intertwinement Between Design, Human Needs and the Regulation of Care Technology: The Case of Lower-Limb Exoskeletons

Fosch‐Villaronga

Özcan

2019

Int J of Soc Robotics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The adoption of robot technology is accelerating in healthcare settings. Care robots can support and extend the work of caregivers in assisting patients, elderly or children. Typical examples of such systems are 'cognitive therapeutic robots,' 'physical rehabilitation robots,' 'assistive and lifting robots.' Although these robots might reduce the workload of care workers, and be a cost-efficient solution against healthcare system cuts, the insertion of such technologies may also raise ethical, legal and societal concerns concerning users. In this article, we describe some of these concerns, including cognitive safety, prospective liability, and privacy. We argue that the current regulatory framework for care robot technology is ill-prepared to address such multidisciplinary concerns because it only focuses on physical safety requirements, whereas it disregards other issues arising from the human-robot interaction. We support the idea that design plays a significant role in shaping the technology to meet the needs of the users and the goals set by the regulation. To illustrate practical challenges, in this article we consider as an example the case of lower-limb exoskeletons. This example helps illuminate the overarching idea of the article, that is, that regulation, design, and human needs need to intertwine and mutually shape each other to serve the solutions these technologies proclaim.

show abstract

A Systematic Review of Low-Cost Actuator Implementations for Lower-Limb Exoskeletons: a Technical and Financial Perspective

Slucock

2022

J Intell Robot Syst

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A common issue with many commercial rehabilitative exoskeletons and orthoses are that they can be prohibitively expensive for an average individual to afford without additional financial support. Due to this a user may have limited to the usage of such devices within set rehabilitation sessions as opposed to a continual usage. The purpose of this review is therefore to find which actuator implementations would be most suitable for a simplistic, low-cost powered orthoses capable of assisting those with pathologic gait disorders by collating literature from Web of Science, Scopus, and Grey Literature. In this systematic review paper 127 papers were selected from these databases via the PRISMA guidelines, with the financial costs of 25 actuators discovered with 11 distinct actuator groups identified. The review paper will consider a variety of actuator implementations used in existing lower-limb exoskeletons that are specifically designed for the purpose of rehabilitating or aiding those with conditions inhibiting natural movement abilities, such as electric motors, hydraulics, pneumatics, cable-driven actuators, and compliant actuators. Key attributes such as technical simplicity, financial cost, power efficiency, size limitations, accuracy, and reliability are compared for all actuator groups. Statistical findings show that rotary electric motors (which are the most common actuator type within collated literature) and compliant actuators (such as elastic and springs) would be the most suitable actuators for a low-cost implementation. From these results, a possible actuator design will be proposed making use of both rotary electric motors and compliant actuators.

show abstract

HiBSO Hip Exoskeleton: Toward a Wearable and Autonomous Design

Cited by 11 publications

References 12 publications

Overview: Types of Lower Limb Exoskeletons

Overview: Types of Lower Limb Exoskeletons

The Progressive Intertwinement Between Design, Human Needs and the Regulation of Care Technology: The Case of Lower-Limb Exoskeletons

A Systematic Review of Low-Cost Actuator Implementations for Lower-Limb Exoskeletons: a Technical and Financial Perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About