Robotic telemanipulator for laparoscopy

Neisius, B.; Dautzenberg, P.; Trapp, R.; Bueß, G

doi:10.1109/iembs.1995.579640

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 2 publications

(1 reference statement)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, the height of the parallel linkage could be reduced by shortening the vertical links of the linkage. Similarly, the footprint of the PLRCM mechanism could be reduced by damping the linkage to the operating table ( [8]) and making the xYz stage smaller or even passive. The overhead design of the HISAR arm appears to be preferable from a purely ergonomic viewpoint.…”

Section: Intrusivenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

<title>Comparison of two manipulator designs for laparoscopic surgery</title>

et al. 1995

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two kinematically dissimilar robots for laparoscopic surgery have been designed and built through a collaborative effort between IBM Research and the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. The two mechanisms represent two distinct design approaches and a number of different engineering design decisions. In this paper we will describe the mechanical design and kinematic structure of the two robots and report on the results of laboratory evaluations of the two mechanisms. The two systems will be compared in terms of safety, ergonomics, ease of control, accuracy, and mechanical stiffness. In each of the categories we will attempt to separate the impact of the particular design decisions made in the construction of each mechanism from the more general issue of the fundamental potential and limitations of each of the design approaches towards satisfying the particular design criterion. Based on our experience, we offer some conclusions and recommendations regarding the design of surgical robots for laparoscopy.

show abstract

Section: Intrusivenessmentioning

confidence: 99%