Robolink MQP
Robolink MQP
CPS2
Advisor:
Taskin Padir
Submitted By:
Cassiopia Hudson
Gabriel Morell-Pacheco
1 Acknowledgments
The team would like to extend our thanks to several people who helped make this project
possible:
James Fleming, for his expertise on the Cyber Physical Systems project, and
Thomas Angelotti and Patrick Morrison, for opening the ECE shop to us.
2 Abstract
The goal of this project is to utilize the igus Robolink arm five degree of freedom
modular robot arm, to complete useful tasks for persons with no or limited mobility. These tasks
include driving the joystick of a wheelchair, flipping a light switch, and turning the pages of a
book. This is done through designing and building a modular interface for mounting the
Robolink arm onto an existing wheelchair project and implementing a universal control interface
in the software for future expansion of tasks and control methods.
3 Table of Contents
1
Acknowledgments ................................................................................................................... 2
Abstract .................................................................................................................................... 3
Table of Figures....................................................................................................................... 5
Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 7
6.1
6.2
6.3
Background ........................................................................................................................... 10
7.1
7.2
Methodology .......................................................................................................................... 15
8.1
8.2
8.3
8.3.1
8.3.2
8.4
8.4.1
8.4.2
8.4.3
Controller ............................................................................................................................... 19
8.4.4
8.4.5
8.5
Completion of Tasks.................................................................................................................... 23
8.5.1
8.5.2
9.2
9.3
Controller ..................................................................................................................................... 30
9.4
9.5
9.6
9.6.1
9.6.2
9.6.3
10 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................. 39
10.1
Goal Completion........................................................................................................................ 39
10.1.1
10.1.2
Design Specifications........................................................................................................... 40
10.2
10.3
Future Recommendations......................................................................................................... 41
11 Bibliography .......................................................................................................................... 43
12 Appendix ................................................................................................................................ 48
12.1.1
12.1.2
12.1.3
4 Table of Figures
Figure 1: Wheelchair with Joystick and Desk ................................................................................ 9
Figure 2: Robolink Cable Box ...................................................................................................... 10
Figure 3: igus Robolink arm ......................................................................................................... 11
Figure 4: FLASH Humanoid Robot.............................................................................................. 11
Figure 5: Robolink Fishtail Robot ................................................................................................ 12
Figure 6: Gripper with "Fingers" Tied .......................................................................................... 16
Figure 7: Mounting Fixture ........................................................................................................... 17
Figure 8: Mounting Structure........................................................................................................ 18
Figure 9: Raspberry Pi .................................................................................................................. 19
5
5 Table of Tables
Table 1: Similar Project Comparison ............................................................................................ 14
Table 2: Returns and Updates Rolling Average ........................................................................... 24
Table 3: Logic for Determining Wheelchair Speed ...................................................................... 24
Table 4: Example of Use............................................................................................................... 26
Table 5: Configuration 1 Necessary Force ................................................................................... 36
Table 6: Configuration 2 Necessary Force ................................................................................... 37
6 Introduction
Tasks such as drinking from a glass of water, preparing a meal, or doing housework are
daily activities most people can perform without much difficulty. For a person with limited
mobility, these Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) can be difficult, or even
impossible, without help or supervision. A disability statistics report written in 2000 that focused
on the use of mobility devices in the United States outlines that 1.7 of the 6.8 million Americans
who need assistive devices, need wheelchairs or scooters to help them with mobility [19]. More
than two thirds of these people (68.1 percent) also need assistance with at least one IADL [19].
Wheelchair mounted robotic arms have been developed since the early 1990s to help conquer
this problem [19].
The purpose of this project is to establish control of a wheelchair mountable modular
robotic arm to complete tasks useful for a person with no or limited mobility. The igus
Robolink is a five degree-of-freedom (DOF) modular robotic arm that is mounted to augment the
person's ability to complete tasks. The goals of this project are to utilize the Robolink to drive the
joystick of a wheelchair, flip a light switch, and turn the page of a book.
The arm also needed to be mobile, so an interface needed to be developed to draw power
from the wheelchairs power supply, and the Robolink needed to be controlled by a portable
small board or laptop.
One goal of this project involved experimenting with passive end effectors to avoid using
power and pneumatics to control a gripper, so a passive end effector needed to be developed. The
passive end effector needed to be modular and easily replaceable, while versatile enough to
complete multiple task specifications.
7 Background
7.1 igus Robolink Applications
The Robolink system was made by igus and was released in 2011. It is composed of a
set of lightweight plastic joints, metal tubes, drive units, cables and end attachments that are
meant to work together to produce an infinite variety of low cost and low maintenance robot
arms.
The Robolink system (Figure 3: igus Robolink arm) has a large number of example
applications ranging from swimming robots, to pick and place industrial robots, to humanoid
robots. The team found a few good examples of the Robolink system in use in humanoid robotics,
all of which extend the maximum number of DOF afforded by the Robolink via complex
grippers and hands.
http://robot.wpi.edu/wiki/index.php/Robolink
10
The most impressive of these is the Flexible LIREC Autonomous Social Helper (FLASH) from
the Wrocaw University of Technology, which has seven DOF per arm and incorporates two
arms [21]. The Robolink arms on FLASH are purposed to express emotions by means of
gesticulation [21]. It is mounted on a self-balancing platform similar to a Segway, shown in
Figure 4: FLASH Humanoid Robot.
2
3
http://www.igus.com.sg/wpck/default.aspx?Pagename=robolink_articulatedarm&C=SG&L=en
http://www.flash.lirec.ict.pwr.wroc.pl/
11
Another humanoid, Humanoid Robot A1 (ADAM), has six DOF and two arms as well.
Both are some of the more complex examples of Robolink applications. On the other end of the
spectrum is a swimming robot from the German Research Center for Artificial Intelligence
(DFKI GmbH) that uses a Robolink joint to actuate a mechanical fish tail to propel a robot
through water seen below in Figure 5: Robolink Fishtail Robot. The research conducted suggests
that the Robolink arm used in our project is the only instance of Robolink currently being used
for assistive robotics.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ajf4Ob-BGk&list=PL07B939DF7512B3B4
12
Many previous assistive wheelchair mounted robotic arms have used joysticks to control
the arm, but alternative control methods have been explored. One of the first arms by Exact
Dynamics used a combination of a camera and a touch screen interface that allows a human to
control the arm [40]. Touch screens have been used in robotic arms but more recently the use of
brain signal processing has been a focus of research. This enabled the use of assistive arms that
do not require physical input from the user, such as the movement of a hand to utilize a joystick,
so that the arm could be used by persons with no mobility. As the field has progressed, arms
have been getting smaller and lighter, with the weight of current generation arms being less than
half of the first iterations. The Robolink arm being used by the team is recent and weighs 10.3 kg
(arm, cable box, and mounting hardware). As well as being light, the Robolink arm the team is
using is highly compact even compared to other Robolink implementations. The standard stepper
motors used to drive the cables have been replaced with a custom drive module, which is far
smaller.
As seen in Table 1: Similar Project Comparison, many existing assistive robotic arms use
a gripper, one of the projects goals involved implementing a passive end effector to keep
complexity down. This goal is to prove that a well designed and thought out passive end effector
is as useful in performing a range of tasks as one that is specialized.
In order for the end effector to be effective, the system needs a workspace that allowed it
to perform its task. As seen in Table 1: Similar Project Comparison, the baseline minimum
number of degrees of freedom for an assistive robotic arm is five. Any fewer degrees and the
reach of the arm is limited and starts to have difficulty performing tasks due to not being able to
reach points in space. The Robolink configuration being used for this project has five, which
allows for versatile reach and task performance while keeping complexity down.
The reach of existing robotic arms has historically been approximately a meter with
variances of 20%. In the wheelchair configuration being used the reach of the Robolink arm is
1.187 meters, which is on the higher end of historical reaches.
13
Robolink
PerMMA (Personal
Mobility and Manipulation
Appliance)
DORA (Door Opening
Robotic Arm)
iARM (Assistive Robotic
Manipulator)
Developed By:
igus
Systems Research
Institute (AIST)
2013
Control:
Brain Signals,
Arm:
Size:
(Compact (1)
to Bulky (5))
End
Effector:
Number of
Weight can
lift
to Many (5))
(Payload):
Degrees
Extension:
of
Freedom:
10.3 kg
Passive
N/A
1.187 m
5.897 kg
Gripper
0.454 kg
0.914 m
5.000 kg
Gripper
1.000 kg
1.070 m
5.700 kg
Gripper
1.500 kg
0.900 m
2.500
0.830
kg/arm
m/arm
Joystick
Ref:
[16]
2010
Joystick
[13]
[48]
Japan
Sugano Lab
Waseda
Joystick,
2010
University
Kinova
University,
University of
2010
Joystick
Joystick, Brain
2009
Screen
Pittsburgh
UMass Lowell
Touch Screen,
Brain Interface
Carnegie Mellon
2009
Joystick
2x
Gripper
Exact Dynamics
2009
Southern Florida
2008
[44]
[18]
[20]
[26]
[34]
[30]
Gripper
N/A
1.245 m
9.000 kg
Gripper
1.500 kg
0.900 m
13.750 kg
Gripper
4.500 kg
1.082 m
[1]
Gripper
1.500 kg
0.800 m
[40]
Joystick, or
Single Button
[46]
13.063 kg
Keypad,
University of
Robotic Manipulator)
Developed:
Weight of
Intelligent
WMRA (Wheelchair
Year
Brain Signals
[31]
[14]
[15]
Touch Screen
Exact Dynamics
~1992
Camera
8 Methodology
The goal of this project is to utilize the igus Robolink arm to drive a wheelchair, flip a
light switch, and turn the page of a book. The teams approach to the project involved
understanding the igus arm, its capabilities, and constraints. Design solutions for making the
arm mobile included mounting the arm on the wheelchair, interfacing with the wheelchairs
power supply, investing in a joystick to control the chair, and designing a custom passive end
effector for the Robolink.
The team utilized the Xbox controller code to move the fingers over the different joysticks of
the controllers to determine if the control was precise enough to move a joystick. The results
showed that the arm could be used to control a joystick.
The second proof of concept experiment revolved around finding possible mounting
positions for the Robolink on the wheelchair based on the workspace of the arm. Taking into
account the design specification that the end effector needed to reach both the wheelchairs
joystick on the end of the right armrest and the desk attached to the left armrest, the team
measured the workspace of the arm from different mounting configurations. The conclusion was
that the most appropriate place to mount the arm was on the back of the wheelchair, with the arm
coming over the right shoulder of the chair.
16
explained in the proof of concept experiment above, the workspace of the arm with respect to
both the joystick and desk needed to be accommodated.
8.3.2 Passive End Effector
Another important design constraint involved not utilizing the igus gripper as the end
effector. This decision was made in an attempt to save space by not mounting pneumatics to
control it. A simpler solution was necessary, in the form of a passive end effector. This end
effector needed to be modular, easy to remove and replace the existing gripper. This end effector
also needed to be versatile enough to work for multiple tasks including joystick driving.
17
The first design version involved utilizing the mounting fixture and 1 steel square pipes.
The pipes would be bent to an L-shape to attach to the mounting fixture. An L-shaped aluminum
plate would be machined to attach to and support the cable box. For extra support, nylon
mounting straps would attach the box to the headrest.
This first design was evaluated to be too complex. A second version of the design also
utilized the empty mounting fixture at the base of the chair, but consisted of only 80/20
Aluminum parts. Several pieces of 1 in. 80/20 pipe and several brackets were utilized to screw
directly into the back plate of the box. The box was mounted several inches off center such that
the arm came directly over the right shoulder. The mounting fixture with the back plate of the
box attached can be seen below in Figure 8: Mounting Structure.
18
The remaining options for controlling the Robolink were laptops. The team investigated
purchasing a small laptop to control the system. The small laptop would have been ideal because
it would have been lightweight and compact, while supporting the EposManager. This small
laptop was ordered used and was found to have issues with the boot drive. The team determined
that it was not worth it to devote any more time to it, and moved to the Lenovo ThinkPad laptop
5
http://images.bit-tech.net/content_images/2013/03/raspberry-pi-case-competition-update/pi1l.jpg
19
provided by WPI. A ThinkPad labeled Amazon was the computer utilized for controlling the
wheelchair. The team was assigned a ThinkPad labeled Nile. The Nile laptop's software
installation was 32-bit, which is required to run the EposManager, while the Amazon laptop's
existing software installation was 64-bit, and could not be used for the Robolink.
8.4.4 Wheelchair Joystick
The highest priority task involved driving the joystick of the wheelchair with the igus
arm. The biggest challenge to this accomplishment was the lack of a joystick to work with, since
the original joystick had been disassembled and determined inadequate for the application. The
team needed to purchase a joystick with both directional control and a button to be used as an
emergency stop. Options included game system controllers, such as Xbox, GameCube, or Wii.
Proof of concept experiments showed promise with the GameCube controllers grey joystick.
These game controllers were all potentially clumsy to mount on the chair, however, so
arcade joysticks were explored next. A simple arcade joystick held much potential; it was cost
efficient and the proper size to mount on the wheelchair. It can be seen in Figure 10: Simple
Arcade Joystick. Three concerns were raised with this option, though. The ball on the end of the
joystick would be difficult to push around, and the joystick was digital not analog, which was
necessary to control the speed of the wheelchair, and there were not buttons available.
https://www.sparkfun.com/products/9182
20
The team then researched industrial joysticks, which were deemed to provide high
compatibility with the team's vision for an end effector. They were an ideal size for being
manipulated. They provided analog control, which was necessary for fine tuned wheelchair
control, and some were USB compatible, which would make working with Robot Operating
System (ROS) straightforward. The main downfall of the industrial joysticks was cost. A CTI
Electronics industrial joystick was ordered for the wheelchair. It can be seen in Figure 11: CTI
Electronics Industrial Joystick.
The team soon discovered that an emergency stop button would be necessary. A McMaster-Carr
turn-to-reset Emergency Stop button was ordered and mounted on the back of the cable box to
cut power to the Robolink, shown in Figure 12: Emergency Stop Button.
http://www.ctielectronics.com/OEM-Analog-Industrial-Joysticks/Inductive-Industrial-Joystick.php#N24
21
22
23
values are determined to be in the extremes. The function that returns and updates the rolling
average can be seen below in Table 2: Returns and Updates Rolling Average.
def _ij_y_avg(self):
# this function returns the rolling weighted average for
#the Y values of the joystick value timeline
return average(self.y_timeline,weights=WEIGHTS)
def _ij_x_update(self,val):
# This function updates the Value Timeline of the X values
#by removing the last one and adding the latest as the first
self.x_timeline.pop()
self.x_timeline.insert(0,val)
def _ij_y_update(self,val):
# This function updates the Value Timeline of the Y values
# by removing the last one and adding the latest as the first
self.y_timeline.pop()
self.y_timeline.insert(0,val)
The logic for determining the wheelchairs speed based on the joystick values can be seen below
in Table 3: Logic for Determining Wheelchair Speed.
24
else:
# we are in the extremes and it's terrible here
# so we get the current rolling average
a = ijO._ij_x_avg()
print a
# if the rolling average is above the rolling floor we set it to our max mapped
value
# if the rolling average is under the rolling floor we set it to our negative max
mapped value
if a > ROLLING_FLOOR:
x_map = ROLLING_MAP
elif a < -ROLLING_FLOOR:
x_map = -ROLLING_MAP/2
The Robolink control code is composed of two classes that speak to existing Robolink
driver functionality. The first class is the CommandMessage class, which is initialized with the
following arguments:
'positions' : a list of position values
'timeinterval': a list of time intervals
'controller': a controller to modify
defaulting to the standard 'RobolinkControl' class
'reset': whether or not to expose a reset parameter
defaults to True
'steps': a list of arbitrary steps to execute
'backsteps': a list of steps to execute when being run in reverse
25
The second class is the Robolink Command Acceptor, which opens a ROS subscriber to
wait for and execute commands. It is initialized with a dictionary of CommandMessage instances.
Upon initialization it returns a list of available commands that it is listening for on the subscriber.
Upon receiving a command via a publisher it proceeds to run it until completion.
8.5.2.3 Example of Use
A command can be simple or override default behavior as needed. Two examples are
shown in Table 4: Example of Use with the command acceptor being initialized after defining
the CommandMessages. The first defines a set of points in space to iterate to. The second defines
a set of angles that the arm should replay.
26
reset=False
),
'morecomplex': CommandMessage(
positions = [(-8,5,0,89,0),(-8,4,0,90,0),(-8,2,0,88,0),(-8,0,0,87,0),(-8,-1,0,85,0),],
method=None,
reset=True,
method_sub_map=METHOD_SUB_MAP_JOINTS,
control_mode=JOINT_VELOCITY,
DRO=['drive_stop','drive_fwd','drive_back'],
backsteps=[0,1,2]
),
}
cmdacceptor = CommandAcceptor(cmddict)
There are a large number of default settings that can be overridden in order to perform tasks
beyond the default scope.
27
28
29
9.3 Controller
Overall, the Lenovo ThinkPad laptops worked well for this application. Working with
both Amazon and Nile on the mobile wheelchair was clumsy, but given that the EposManager
could not work on Amazon, it was necessary to use both laptops.
30
back and forth between two points in space would never yield the exact same result. The arm
would move to approximately the same point in space but up to a half inch away from its
previous location. In an attempt to improve on the repeatability the team ensured that the drive
cables were did not have slack and were appropriately tightened. This in turn lowered the margin
of error but not enough to be satisfactorily repeatable due to another issue the team noticed;
when the power for the arm was cycled, the repeatability of tasks suffered due to the fact that the
arm drooped slightly then took the new position on power up as its default position. The team
attempted to work around this by accounting for the droop before power down so that the arm
would be in its default position even with the droop occurring. However, this wasn't ideal for a
deployed setup with an actual person occupying the chair.
The team also had to work around the fact that moving to a position outside of the driving
range while the end effector was still over the joystick would force the end effector to be caught
on the joystick and put massive strain on the arm as it attempted to move. This was mitigated by
adding a flag to the command message and having the arm move to a safe point above the
joystick before continuing on to the next task.
Part of the issue with repeatability was the feedback mechanism used by the command
acceptor. The Robolink arm feedback topic returned integers for angles instead of other number
types. When the end of arm was over forty-five centimeters away from the rotating joint, the
resolution for a degree is just under a centimeter, which was not accurate enough.
Circumference of end effector tube:
Margin of error:
member to cause pain or injury, a motor axle for one of the degrees of freedom bent and needed
replacement. This incident provided valuable information to the team; the arm was potentially
good for an immobile person, as it would break before causing injury, and the force at the end
effector was very low.
This made the team wonder if there would be enough force to flip a light switch. To
measure the force to flip a light switch, the team utilized a force gauge, hooking the end over the
light switch. The team had access to two switches in Atwater Kent; old switches which required
a force of 3 lbf to flip, and new switches which required a force of 2 lbf to flip. Flipping a switch
on or off took the same amount of force.
The team conducted an initial experiment with the Robolink arm on the wheelchair
utilizing the Xbox controller code. The team first placed the wheelchair directly facing a
standard height light switch. The first problem presented itself; the arm was not long enough to
reach the wall in front of the chair with the footrest of the chair in its down position, seen below
in Figure 19: Light Switch With Chair Facing Wall.
32
The team corrected this by moving the chair at an approximate 45-degree angle with
respect to the wall, and utilizing the rotational DOF at Joint 0 of the arm to place the end effector
near the light switch seen in Figure 20: Light Switch with Chair at 45-Degree Angle. The arm
was then moved to a position such that Joint 2 was at an approximate 150-degree angle with the
end effector on the light switch. This was done in hopes that the weight of the arm would assist
in forcing the switch down. Both joints were driven to push downward on the switch
simultaneously.
This resulted in the end effector simply staying on the light switch. When the wheelchair
was pulled back from the wall, the end effector was approximately 7 in. lower than the light
switch on the wall. This shows that the arm was attempting to force the switch down but was not
exerting enough force to flip the switch. The result was the same for both the old and new
switches. The team was concerned, as a repeat of the above incident was not desirable and could
potentially result in another broken motor axle.
33
This prompted the team to perform a calculation of force exerted by the end effector
assuming the arm was pointed directly upward. The nominal torque for the motor was multiplied
by the gear ratio to get the output torque from the motors. This was then divided by the radius of
the motor wheels to find the force exerted after the motor wheels, F1. This force was then
multiplied by the radius of the rope in the joint divided by the link length to get the force at the
end of the joint, F2. This process was repeated until the force at the end effector was found.
From motor:
End of Link 1:
End of Link 2:
34
Though this calculation only accounted for one position and was therefore not entirely
accurate, it showed the minimal force the end effector could exert. This made sense, as it was not
enough force to hurt a person in the chair or flip a light switch, but it was enough to move the
high quality joystick. The Robolink utilized for this project used small Maxon Motors to make
the system more mobile, but were not as strong as the stepper motors igus generally uses for
the Robolink.
The team performed calculations with the Jacobian matrix for the Robolink system to
prove that the motors could not provide enough torque in multiple configurations. The
force/torque relation,
and moments on the end effector, was utilized for these calculations. The team assumed no force
in the y-plane and that the moments were considered negligible. The forces in the x and z planes
were calculated using trigonometry and can be seen in Figure 21: Forces on a Light Switch.
35
Where:
[ ]
For sets of joint angles, the output torque was compared to the normal torque and stall
torque for the motors. For the configuration described above, with the arm at a 45-degree angle
to the wall Table 5: Configuration 1 Necessary Force was generated, where i, the angle between
Link 1 and Link 2, was in range of 40-70 degrees, and j, the angle between Link 2 and Link 3,
was in range of 120-150 degrees.
Configuration: [45, i, 0, j, 0]
2 lbf Force
3 lbf Force
None
None
None
None
This data illustrated that the teams suspicions were true; no combination of joint angles
would reach and flip the light switch in this configuration. The team decided to work with
another arm configuration, seen in Table 6: Configuration 2 Necessary Force, where k, the
36
rotation from the shoulder, was in range of 60-120 degrees, seen below in Figure 22: Light
Switch With Chair at 90-Degree Angle.
2 lbf Force
3 lbf Force
This configuration was much more promising than the first, as it utilized the motion of a
stronger joint than the end effector. In the case of a standard height light switch, this
37
configuration would still not work, since k would need to be much closer to 90 degrees. The arm
could potentially have enough force to flip a lower light switch.
The team suspects that the Robolink would be capable of flipping other kinds of light
switches, such as rocker switches like the one shown below in Figure 23: Rocker Light Switch.
http://www.homecontrols.com/Leviton-LevNet-Self-Powered-Wireless-Light-Switch-Single-Rocker-LVWSS0SD0x
38
10 Conclusion
10.1 Goal Completion
10.1.1
Task Specifications
Some of the tasks specifications for this project were met. The arm was able to safely
drive the wheelchair using the industrial joystick with its custom end effector even with caveats.
However, the arm was unable to flip a standard height light switch due to the lack of necessary
force at the tip. The team was unable to test the opening of a book on the desk, however the team
tested the viability of the workspace that would ultimately be used to open the book and the
reach of the arm in that workspace.
39
10.1.2
Design Specifications
The design specifications for this project were all met. The arm needed to be mounted on
the wheelchair. The 80/20 Aluminum structure fulfilled this requirement while keeping in the
modular spirit of the project. The whole Robolink system needed to be mobile on the wheelchair.
This was achieved by interfacing the arm with the wheelchairs power supply and utilizing
laptops to control the system. A passive end effector was 3D printed to interact with the joystick.
40
The simple mounting design of the arm conforms to the design qualities of the existing
hardware and is pleasing to the eye. The design consists of non-abrasive materials, such as the
80/20 Aluminum shown in Figure 25: 80/20 Extruded Aluminum, with smoothed edges to
improve the quality and safety of the arm. All wiring is away from the occupant and moving
parts of the chair, keeping the look clean and safe. The passive end effector designed for this
project is also pleasing to the eye, made of 3D printed red plastic (which can be recycled),
matching the red headrest of the wheelchair.
41
9 http://www.bastiansolutions.com/blog/index.php/2013/06/12/innovative-robotic-end-of-arm-tool/#.UhzpIWRoQx8
42
11 Bibliography
1. Alqasemi, Redwan M., and Rajiv V. Dubey. "Chapter 3: A 9-DoF Wheelchair-Mounted
Robotic Arm System: Design, Control, Brain-Computer Interfacing, and
Testing." Advances in Robot Manipulators. Ed. Ernest Hall.,
2010. Http://www.Intechopen.com/books/advances-in-Robot-manipulators/a-9-DofWheelchair-Mounted-Robotic-Arm-System-Design-Control-Brain-Computer-Interfacingand-Testing Intech. Web. 2013.
2. Alqasemi, Redwan M., et al. "Analysis, Evaluation and Development of WheelchairMounted Robotic Arms." www.smpp.northwestern.edu. July 1 2005.Web.
<http://www.smpp.northwestern.edu/ICORR2005/proceedingsCD/pdffiles/papers/ThP01
_33.pdf>.
3. Chung, Cheng-Shiu MS, and Rory A. PhD Cooper. "Literature Review of WheelchairMounted Robotic Manipulation: User Interface and End-User Evaluation". RESNA
Annual Conference 2012. 2012.http://resna.org/conference/proceedings/2012/StudentScientific/Robotics/LIT
ERATUREREVIEWOFWHEELCHAIRMOUNTEDROBOTICMANIPULATION.html. Print.
4. Deyle, Travis. "Telescoping Robot Arm for Wheelchair - Mounted Object
Retrieval." www.hizook.com. Aug 16 2010.Web.
<http://www.hizook.com/blog/2010/08/16/telescoping-robot-arm-wheelchair-mountedobject-retrieval>.
5. dfkvideo. "Entwicklung eines Antribskonzepts dr das Robotergelenk
Robolink." www.youtube.com. Ed. Praxissemester-Arbeit am Robotics Innovation Center
des DFKI. Sep 23 2010.Web. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ajf4ObBGk&list=PL07B939DF7512B3B4>.
6. E. Chaves, B. S., et al. "Clinical Evaluation of a Wheelchair Mounted Robotic
Arm". Teachnology & Disability: Research, Design, Practice & Policy. June 19, Atlanta,
GA. Web.
43
44
17. igus GmbH. "igus robolink robot modules applications and references."
www.youtube.com.Web.
<http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL07B939DF7512B3B4>.
18. "Jaco | Rehab Edition." www.kinovarobotics.com. 2012.Web.
<http://kinovarobotics.com/products/jaco-rehab-edition/>.
19. Kaye, H. S., Kang, T. and LaPlante, M.P. (2000). Mobility Device Use in the United
States. Disability Statistics Report, (14). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of
Education, National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research.
20. "Kinova JACO Robot Manipulator (Research
Edition)." www.robotshop.com. 2013.Web. <http://www.robotshop.com/kinovatechnology-jaco-robot-manipulator-academic-edition-2.html>.
21. LIRECWRUT. "FLASH Mobile Dexterous Social Robot, LIREC,
WRUT." www.youtube.com. Mar 6 2012.Web. University of Technology, Poland.
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8kf14SZkaQ&list=PL07B939DF7512B3B4>.
22. Malte. "Humanoid robot A1: robolink arms." www.mtahlers.de. July 19 2010.Web.
<http://www.mtahlers.de/index.php/robotik/humanoider-torso/robolink-arme>.
23. Natasha. "Robotic Arm Developed By Columbia University, Can Be Controlled By
Facial Muscles." webmuch.com. May 2013.Web. <http://webmuch.com/robotic-armdeveloped-by-columbia-university-can-be-controlled-by-facial-muscles/>.
24. Neergaard, Lauran. "Paralyzed man uses brain-powered robot arm to
touch." www.nbcnews.com. Oct 10 2011.Web.
<http://www.nbcnews.com/id/44843896/ns/health-mens_health/t/paralyzed-man-usesbrain-powered-robot-arm-touch/#.UZz1gopDuKk>.
25. Ostrovsky, Gene. "DORA Robot Arm a New Accessory for
Wheelchairs." www.medgadget.com. Nov 24 2009.Web.
<http://www.medgadget.com/2009/11/dora_robot_arm_a_new_accessory_for_wheelchai
rs.html>.
26. "PerMMA - Personal Mobility & Manipulation Appliance." www.cmu.edu.Web.
<http://www.cmu.edu/qolt/AboutQoLTCenter/PressRoom/ces-2012/permma.html>.
45
46
37. Schwartz, Ariel. "The Jaco Robotic Arm Can Scratch Your Back, Hands Out
Drinks." www.fastcompany.com. Jan 23 2011.Web.
<http://www.fastcompany.com/1720283/jaco-robotic-arm-can-scratch-your-back-handout-drinks>.
38. Sherer, Kyle. "Wheelchair-mounted robotic arm controlled by thought
alone." www.gizmag.com. Feb 10 2009.Web. <http://www.gizmag.com/brain-controlwheelchair-robotic-arm/10954/>.
39. Tremblay, Ty and Taskin Padir. Modular Robot Arm Design for Physical Human-Robot
Interaction. Systems, Man and Cybernetics (SMC), 2013 International Conference on.
Manchester, UK.
40. Tsuia, Katherine M., et al. ""I Want That": Human-in-the-Loop Control of a WheelchairMounted Robotic Arm." robotics.cs.uml.edu. 2011.Web.
<http://robotics.cs.uml.edu/fileadmin/content/publications/2011/2011-JAAB-tsui-et-alfinal.pdf>.
41. TullyFoote. "Documentation - ROS Wiki." www.ros.org. July 18, 2013 2013.Web.
<http://www.ros.org/wiki/>.
42. Vieru, Tudor. "Robotic Arms Inprove Life for Wheelchair
Users." news.softpedia.com. Nov 26 2009.Web.
<http://news.softpedia.com/news/Robotic-Arms-Improve-Life-for-Wheelchair-Users127981.shtml>.
43. "Visual Control Interface for Manus ARM." robotics.cs.uml/edu.Web.
<http://robotics.cs.uml.edu/research/current-research/visual-control-interface-for-manusarm/>.
44. Wang, Wei, and Yuki Suga. "Human in Loop Integration of an Arm Mounted Wheelchair
Robot Based on RT Middleware." 2010.Web.
<http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5756822&tag=1>.
45. Wang, Hongwu, et al. "Performance Evaluation of the Personal Mobility and
Manipulation Appliance (PerMMA)." Medical engineering & physics.0 Web.
46. "Wheel chair robot project." www.sugano.mech.waseda.ac.jp.Web.
<http://www.sugano.mech.waseda.ac.jp/project/wheelchair/index.html>.
47
47. "Woman Users Her Thought to Control Robot to Feed Chocolate - Amazing New
Technology news." www.youtube.com. Dec 17 2012.Web.
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7H_M8-dBHc>.
48. . " RAPUDARobotic Arm for Persons with Upperlimb DisAbilities." www.youtube.com. July 27 2010.Web.
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=yqOUexGKusg#!>.
12 Appendix
12.1.1
To mount the arm simply slide the 80/20 square pipes into the mounting fixture at the
back of the CPS chair. The masking tape should line up with the fixture
Attach the Emergency Stop Button to the open dual lock tape on cable box
If Robolink joints are in their marked startup positions (should point straight
out), the software limitations will be correct
Running code:
https://github.com/robolink
Run roscore
Run roscore
48
12.1.2
Was the spare (6th) motor, never used due to broken sensor
Was the motor for the yellow cable (Joint 3), was found bent on 5/28/13 with
cable pulled out of metal fastener
Was the motor for the black cable (Joint 1), axle bent when the code crashed
while mounted on the CPS chair - the motors continued to run and end effector
pressed on the leg of the teammate seated in CPS chair. While not enough force
was exerted to injure the team member, the motor axle bent. After this, the
emergency stop button was added
Repair consisted of cutting the cable and knotting on a new piece such that the knot
remains on the wheel through the range of motion
49
The knot was a strong sailors knot, sewn through several times (green thread), and
super-glued
Current status:
o
50
12.1.3
Presentation Slides
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64