17.01.2013 Views

Chapter 2. Prehension

Chapter 2. Prehension

Chapter 2. Prehension

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Appendix D - Prosthetic and Robotic Hands 405<br />

greater servicing is required. Most important however is the lack of<br />

sensory feedback, other than auditory and visual clues, requiring a<br />

high level of concentration. Proportional myoelectric control have<br />

additional advantages over digial myoelectric control, and these<br />

include better control of force and speed, and less muscular effort<br />

expended. A disadvantage of proportional myoelectric control is that<br />

currently the circuits are larger. However, it operates on a very low<br />

threshold EMG signal, and therefore operates with less muscle effort<br />

and continues to run until the muscles are completely relaxed.<br />

Stein and Walley (1983) found that tasks with a myoelectric<br />

prosthesis took twice as long as a hook and five times as long as with<br />

a normal hand. Yet 60% of below-elbow amputees preferred to use the<br />

myoelectric prosthesis compared to a conventional prosthesis. Yet,<br />

although the subjects were able to accomplish the tasks faster with the<br />

hook vs the hand, extreme body movements had to be used due to the<br />

harnessing, such as rotating the trunk in order to rotate a heavy object.<br />

With the myoelectric prosthesis users, this was not observed.<br />

However, in a survey of 33 patients on proportional versus digital<br />

control, Sears and S haperman ( 199 1) found the proportional<br />

myoelectric hand to be quicker than a hook and digital myoelectric<br />

hand, with the amount of effort reduced. Patients rated it low for its<br />

weight and bulkiness, but felt that it appeared more natural during use.<br />

Former digital hand wearers gave the proportional myoelectric hand<br />

the highest performance ratings, but the lowest rating on convenience.<br />

Since the user can control speed and force, it was felt that there was<br />

better control over fastenings in dressing, better dexterity in using<br />

pencil, better control in using tools, and noticed difference in ability to<br />

hold fragile objects.<br />

Two other external control mechanisms have been used. One is<br />

servo-control, where the hand opening is proportional to a<br />

transducer’s motion. The transducer is controlled mechanically, with<br />

very little froce and excursion. The other is switch control. It is similar<br />

to servo-control, in that some minimal force and excursion capability<br />

is required from a remaining body part. For example, a shoulder<br />

flexion of 1.3 cm excursion can be used to activate the switch (Peizer,<br />

198 1).<br />

D.<strong>2.</strong>2 Split hook<br />

As a prosthetic device, the split hook is strong, lightweight,<br />

simple, functional and reliable (Law, 1981). It has functional shapes<br />

(narrow tips, flat gripping surfaces, specialized tool-holding grips),

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!