Method and Test Course for the Evaluation of Industrial Exoskeletons

Ralfs, Lennart; Hoffmann, Niclas; Weidner, Robert

doi:10.3390/app11209614

Cited by 11 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 34 publications

(40 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The data used in this study was extracted from a dataset collected between November 21, 2021 and February 28, 2022 in the biomechanical laboratory at the Chair for Production Technology at the University of Innsbruck. The whole dataset consists of nine different tasks performed by volunteers in the industrial test course for the evaluation of exoskeletons designed by Ralfs et al ( 2021 ) using two active back-support exoskeletons (Japet’s Japet.W – JAP and German Bionic’s Cray X – CRAY) and three passive exoskeletons (HUNIC’s SoftExo Lift – HUN, N-Ippin’s Rakunie – RAK, and hTRIUS’ BionicBack – HTRI) (see Table 1 and Figure 1 ). Additionally, exoskeletons supporting the upper extremities were tested in this data collection.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a more recent development, the use of exoskeletons in production and logistics has grown rapidly in the past few years (Weidner et al, 2020 ; Hoffmann et al, 2021 ). Exoskeletons are externally wearable mechanical systems designed to provide physical support of users (de Looze et al, 2016 ; Ralfs et al, 2021 ), helping the user perform movements or stabilize postures (Weidner and Hoffmann, 2020 ) and, thus, aiming to reduce workplace causes of MSD (Fox et al, 2019 ). Occupational exoskeletons can be classified as active and passive devices which are often also referred to as powered and nonpowered exoskeletons (de Looze et al, 2016 ; Fox et al, 2019 ; Crea et al, 2021 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of back-support exoskeletons with different functional mechanisms on trunk muscle activity and kinematics

et al. 2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Musculoskeletal disorders constitute the leading work-related health issue. Mechanical loading of the lower back contributes as a major risk factor and is prevalent in many tasks performed in logistics. The study aimed to compare acute effects of exoskeletons with different functional mechanisms in a logistic task. Twelve young, healthy individuals participated in the study. Five exoskeletons with different functional mechanisms were tested in a logistic task, consisting of lifting, carrying, and lowering a 13 kg box. By using electromyography (EMG), mean muscle activities of four muscles in the trunk were analyzed. Additionally, kinematics by task completion time and range of motion (RoM) of the major joints and segments were investigated. A main effect was found for Musculus erector spinae, Musculus multifidus, and Musculus latissimus dorsi showing differences in muscle activity reductions between exoskeletons. Reduction in ES mean activity compared to baseline was primarily during lifting from ground level. The exoskeletons SoftExo Lift and Cray X also showed ES mean reduction during lowering the box. Prolonged task duration during the lifting phase was found for the exoskeletons BionicBack, SoftExo Lift, and Japet.W. Japet.W showed a trend in reducing hip RoM during that phase. SoftExo Lift caused a reduction in trunk flexion during the lifting phase. A stronger trunk inclination was only found during lifting from the table for the SoftExo Lift and the Cray X. In conclusion, muscle activity reductions by exoskeleton use should not be assessed without taking their designed force paths into account to correctly interpret the effects for long-term injury prevention.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of back-support exoskeletons with different functional mechanisms on trunk muscle activity and kinematics

et al. 2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similarly to Section 3.4 , an experimental evaluation of the (active) prototype needs to be conducted to assess the usability and again verify if the exoskeleton reduces the strain on the body. This can be done by analyzing, for example, the metabolic cost, individual and overall muscle activations, or joint reaction forces (Bae, 2013 ; Zhou et al, 2017 ; Knott and Bengler, 2018 ; Tröster et al, 2018 ; Gull et al, 2020 ; Ralfs et al, 2021 ; Zheng et al, 2021 ). Furthermore, the comfort level can be estimated by analyzing the forces acting directly on the user (Shao et al, 2014 ; Shourijeh et al, 2017 ).…”

Section: Development Of the Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The evaluation of exoskeletons is a well-researched topic, as seen in recent publications about projects such as those published in Germany like Ralfs et al ( 2021 ). There are many standardized methods to choose from for future designers.…”

Section: Development Of the Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exoskeletons: A challenge for development

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The development of exoskeletons is currently a lengthy process full of challenges. We are proposing a framework to accelerate the process and make the resulting exoskeletons more user-centered. The needed accomplishments in science are described in an effort to lay the foundation for future research projects. Since the early 2000s, exoskeletons have been discussed as an emerging technology in industrial, medical, or military applications. Those systems are designed to support people during manual tasks. At first, those systems lacked broad acceptance. Many models found their niches in ongoing developments and more diverse systems entering the market. There are still applications that are in dire need of such assistance. Due to the lack of experience with body-worn robotics, the development of such systems has been shaped by trial and error. The lack of legacy products results in longer development times. In this paper, a process to generate a framework is presented to display the required research to enable future exoskeleton designers. Owing to their proximity to the user’s body, exoskeletons are highly complex systems that need sophisticated subsystems, such as kinematic, control, interaction design, or actuators, to be accepted by users. Due to the wide variety of fields and high user demands, a synchronized multidisciplinary effort is necessary. To achieve this, a process to develop a modular framework for exoskeleton design is proposed. It focuses on user- and use-case-centered solutions for matching kinematics, actuation, and control. To ensure the usefulness of the framework, an evaluation of the incorporated solutions is required.

show abstract

“…For this reason, the selection of different support curves ( Figure 7 ) will be demonstrated using simplified examples. The presented examples vary according to their characteristics (e.g., dynamics) and variation parameters (e.g., tool use, work height, and spatial orientation) ( Ralfs et al, 2021 ).…”

Section: Practical Application Examplementioning

confidence: 99%

Framework for qualifying exoskeletons as adaptive support technology

2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The fifth industrial revolution and the accompanying influences of digitalization are presenting enterprises with significant challenges. Regardless of the trend, however, humans will remain a central resource in future factories and will continue to be required to perform manual tasks. Against the backdrop of, e.g., societal and demographic changes and skills shortage, future-oriented support technologies such as exoskeletons represent a promising opportunity to support workers. Accordingly, the increasing interconnection of human operators, devices, and the environment, especially in human-centered work processes, requires improved human-machine interaction and further qualification of support systems to smart devices. In order to meet these requirements and enable exoskeletons as a future-proof technology, this article presents a framework for the future-oriented qualification of exoskeletons, which reveals potential in terms of user-individual and context-dependent adaptivity of support systems. In this context, a framework has been developed, allowing different support situations to be classified based on elementary functions. Using these support function dependencies and characteristics, it becomes possible to describe adaptive system behavior for human-centered support systems such as exoskeletons as a central aspect. For practical illustration, it is shown for an exemplary active exoskeleton using the example of user-individuality and context-specificity how the support characteristics of exoskeletons in the form of different support characteristics can bring about a purposeful and needs-based application for users and can contribute valuably to design future workplaces.

show abstract

Method and Test Course for the Evaluation of Industrial Exoskeletons

Cited by 11 publications

References 34 publications

Effects of back-support exoskeletons with different functional mechanisms on trunk muscle activity and kinematics

Effects of back-support exoskeletons with different functional mechanisms on trunk muscle activity and kinematics

Exoskeletons: A challenge for development

Framework for qualifying exoskeletons as adaptive support technology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About