Roberts 2014

International Journal of Humanoid Robotics
Vol. 11, No. 2 (2014) 1450018 (26 pages)

°c World Scienti¯c Publishing Company
DOI: 10.1142/S0219843614500182
Anthropometric Robotic Hand for Pressurized Glove

Torque Measurement¤
Dustyn P. Roberts, Jack Poon, Daniella Patrick and Joo H. Kim†

Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering,
New York University, Brooklyn, New York, USA
Int. J. Human. Robot. 2014.11. Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
by MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY on 01/03/15. For personal use only.
†
joo.h.kim@nyu.edu
Received 30 May 2012

Accepted 6 December 2013
Published 5 June 2014
While robotic hands have been developed for tasks such as manipulation and grasping, their
potential as tools for evaluation of engineered products particularly compliant structures
that are not easily modeled
has not been broadly studied. In this research, a low-cost
anthropometric robotic hand is introduced that is designed to characterize glove sti®ness in a
pressurized environment. The interaction with the compliant pressurized glove provides unique
performance requirements and design constraints. The anthropometric robotic hand was
designed to mimic the human hand in a con¯guration corresponding to the neutral position in
zero gravity, including the transverse arch, longitudinal arch, and oblique °exion of the rays.
The resulting robotic hand also allows for realistic donning and do±ng of the prototype glove,
its pressurization, and torque testing of individual joints. Solid modeling and 3D printing
enabled the rapid design iterations necessary to work successfully with the compliant pressure
garment. An instrumentation and data processing method was used to calculate the required
actuator torque at each ¯nger's knuckle joint. The performance of the robotic hand was ex-
perimentally demonstrated with a prototype spacesuit glove at di®erent levels of pressure,
followed by a statistical repeatability analysis. The reliable measurement method validated the
pressure-induced sti®ening. The resulting robotic design and testing method provide an ob-
jective and systematic way of evaluating the performance of compliant gloves.
Keywords: Anthropometric; biomimetic design; neutral con¯guration; pressurized glove; robotic

hand; sti®ness; torque.
1. Introduction
The ¯rst mechanical hands were built as parts of automatons in the 18th century by
Swiss, French, and German designers, and actuated by intricate arrangements of
cams, springs, and levers. The ¯rst computer-operated mechanical manipulator
MH-1 was developed in 1961 to explore the feasibility of direct relations between a
*A preliminary version of this paper appeared in the Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on
Robotics and Automation (ICRA) 2012 (St. Paul, Minnesota, USA).
†Corresponding author.
1450018-1
D. P. Roberts et al.
computer and the physical world.1 Two-¯ngered manipulators like this, three-
¯ngered manipulators like the BarrettHand from Barrett Technology2 and others,3–5
and four-¯ngered manipulators like the H2 Compliant Hand by Meka Robotics and
others,6–19 are indeed functional end-e®ectors.20 In fact, a four-¯ngered hand (with
one ¯nger used as a thumb) can handle 99% of the parts that a human hand can
handle.8 While these manipulators may be anthropomorphic in some ways, they are
not considered anthropometric because they operate with less than ¯ve digits.
Tomovic and Boni developed the ¯rst ¯ve-¯ngered robotic hand by in 1962.21
Since then, dozens of robotic hands have been developed with di®erent constraints,
goals and actuation schemes.22,23 Some of these ¯ve-¯ngered hands are °uid driven,
like RAPHaEL from Virginia Tech, a pneumatic hand by Ye and Li,24 the Shadow
robot hands driven by air muscles,25 the FRH-4 hand driven by °exible °uidic
actuators,26 a hand driven by miniature hydraulic actuators,27 and the ECF hand
that uses electro-conjugate °uid (a °uid that produces a jet °ow when subjected to
high DC voltage) for actuation.28 However, the overwhelming majority have been
electrically driven.29–49
Several researchers designed novel mechanisms for robotic hands that performed
like the human hand without precisely mimicking its size and shape.50,51 For example,
the series of hands developed by the Shadow Robot Company25 were designed to
provide the full range of movements of the human hand without letting human sizing
constraints reduce the dexterity of the system. With similar design objectives,
researchers at the German Aerospace Research Center (DLR) developed a robust
robotic hand that could withstand impacts.46,52 Their hand had a total of 19 degrees of
freedom (DOFs), could move the ¯ngers independently to grasp various objects, and
its ¯ngers could exert a force of up to 30 N at the ¯ngertips. The HIRO hands were
developed to provide high-precision force representation at the ¯ve ¯ngertips of a
haptic interface robotic hand.39,47 Other researchers focused on speci¯c hand move-
ments and operations, like the DART Hand that was built with the primary objective
of typing on a computer keyboard.53 Rosheim built the Omni Hand for NASA's
robotic surrogate that was built to assist astronauts in space station maintenance,
construction and expansion.54 Then in 1999, Robonaut Hand was introduced for
space-based operations and approximated the size, kinematics and required strength
of a suited astronaut's hand.55–58 This ¯ve ¯ngered, 14-DOF, high-cost robot was the
¯rst of its kind designed with the ability to function in the vacuum of space.
Many researchers have designed robotic hands for general dexterous manipulation
tasks to be used in industrial settings or incorporated into prostheses (or both, as
claimed by several researchers42,59). Creation of the Anthrobot29 dexterous hand was
motivated by the need for end-e®ectors that could cope with unstructured environ-
ments. The NTU hand30,60 was an e®ort to improve on the under-actuated, coupled
tendon-driven robots61 by creating an uncoupled con¯guration so each joint of each
¯nger was individually driven. The Gifu hand series and KH Hand type S31–33,38,62,63
have been developed since 1996 to create a standard robot hand that could be used to
study grasping and dexterous manipulation. The RCH-1 hand35 was developed in
1450018-2
Robotic Hand for Torque Measurement
part to give humanoid robots more emotional expression ability. Researchers at the
University of Bologna are developing the UB Hand 336,37 to reduce the mechanical
complexity of end-e®ectors while maintaining dexterity. The small size of the iCub, a
humanoid robot designed to match the dimensions of a 2.5-year-old human child,
created challenging size requirements for its dexterous hand.40 The developers of the
NAIST Hand 243,44 moved the actuators out of the hand area and made the hand
separable from the actuation units to allow for easier maintenance and incorporation
of larger motors. Finally, a hand introduced by Isahara et al.45 included ¯ngertips
that could hyperextend at the distal interphalangeal (DIP) joints just like in human
¯ngers to enable more realistic grasping scenarios.
Few robotic hands have been developed to mimic form as well as function of the
human hand. A truly anthropometric hand would o®er signi¯cant advantages in
several situations. These include settings where a robotic hand is needed to interact
with or within the same environment as the human hand, where a biomimetic design
is aesthetic as well as functional.64,65 Interacting with the environment includes
working with handles, tools, consoles, or objects already designed for human hands.
The ideal example of operating within any environment accessible to a human hand
is an anthropometric, dexterous robotic hand, which has been the goal of researchers
and prosthetic device designers for many years. One example is the ACT Hand
designed to mimic both the active and passive dynamics of a human hand.66,67 This is
a working physical model of the human hand and could be used by neuro- and
plastic-surgeons to test new surgical reconstruction techniques for impaired hands or
to study the complex neural control of human hand movements.
Unsurprisingly, the most advanced anthropometric designs have been in the ¯eld
of prosthetics. Design of prosthetic hands has evolved in parallel with design of
robotic hands for research and industrial purposes, and a growing number of these
prosthetic hands are now commercially available, including the hand integrated with
the Luke Arm by DEKA Research and Development and others.68–70 In 2005,
DARPA began two inter-related programs: Revolutionizing Prosthetics 2007, led by
DEKA, to deliver an advanced prosthetic arm integrating the world's best existing
technology, and Revolutionizing Prosthetics 2009, led by John Hopkins University's
Applied Physics Laboratory, to deliver a neurally-controlled arm and hand pros-
thesis ready for FDA approval and clinical trials in four years.71,72 Another pros-
thetic hand, the SmartHand by Controzzi et al., is an anthropometric 16-DOF,
4-degree-of-mobility prosthetic hand that can be used by transradial amputees.59,73
It weighs 530 g, but is able to lift a 10 kg suitcase, and under certain conditions stably
grasp up to 3.6 kg cylindrical objects. In 2010, Controzzi et al. introduced the next
iteration of this prosthetic hand with forearm modularity that would enable di®erent
levels of amputation to be covered.74,75 Derivatives of these hands with intrinsic
(IH2) and extrinsic (EH1) actuators are commercially available with up to 16
DOFs.59 Another company, Touch Bionics, introduced the i-LIMB Hand in 2007 and
more recently in 2010 the i-LIMB Pulse, two high-end prosthetic hands that are
compact in size but limited to 6 DOFs.
1450018-3
While the majority of these robotic hands were developed for manipulation, very
few hands have been designed to test products. Although several methods exist to
characterize torque at robotic joints76 and torque sensing is becoming more common
in robotic and prosthetic hands,49,75,77,78 it has not been associated with evaluation of
the performance of the robotic hands in relation to their intended function. In 2008,
the DLR/HIT Hand II was introduced,49 with three DOFs and four joints in each
¯nger that were each equipped with three strain gauge-based joint torque sensors,
three joint position sensors, and a tiny six dimensional force/torque sensor (20 mm in
diameter and 16 mm in height) for the ¯ngertip. Jeong et al.48 developed an infrared
light emitting diode-based tactile ¯ngertip sensor that could independently measure
the normal and tangential forces between the hand and an object. This small, low-
cost sensor helped prevent slippage in robotic hand gripping through the sensor's
feedback. Although Schmidt et al.79 demonstrated the use of an anthropomorphic

robot built for NASA for spacesuit mobility research which could measure concur-
rent joint position and torque for the shoulder, elbow, hip and knee of a pressurized
spacesuit, the robot did not have hands and therefore the glove ¯nger torques were
not evaluated. Additionally, while the sti®ness or required actuations for structural
and mechanical systems can be predicted using computer models, their interactions
with compliant structures like textiles are generally not predictable. This is partially
due to the lack of material properties information and computer-aided design (CAD)
tools for compliant textiles such as gloves. In the case of a pressurized glove, the
problem of predictability is exacerbated.
The main objective of this research was to create a low-cost anthropometric
robotic hand for testing the torque requirements of a pressurized glove at the
metacarpal phalangeal (MCP) joints. The oblique °exion of the rays and transverse
and longitudinal arches of the neutral hand con¯guration were preserved in the
design, which allowed for donning and do±ng of a prototype spacesuit glove as well
as for biomimetic hand motion and interaction with the glove once the glove was
pressurized. The interaction of the robotic hand with the uncertain and varying
dimensions and shapes of the pressurized glove were addressed through an iterative
design process. The torque measurement protocol represents the ¯rst practical and
repeatable method for classifying the sti®ness of a glove at di®erent levels of pressure.
In the next section, the performance requirements and constraints of the given
problem will be introduced. Then the design, fabrication and instrumentation
method of the robotic hand will be described, followed by the mechanical analysis
and data processing method. Finally, the functionalities of the robotic hand will be
demonstrated experimentally using a prototype pressurized glove.
2. Performance Requirements and Design Constraints

The development of the robotic hand was shaped by several unique functional
requirements and design constraints. The functional focus of the robotic hand was the
actuation of the four MCP joints to mimic human knuckle function. The practical
1450018-4
focus was the ability to measure torque in each of these joints to characterize glove
sti®ness. A thumb was included but was not actuated. Actuation of the MCP joints
through mechanical feedthroughs was not an option given the sealed environment
needed to maintain positive pressure inside the glove. Since the robotic hand needed to
function at 131 kPa absolute (or 30 kPa gauge) pressure,80 we chose electrical actu-
ation through a sealed connector.
Several anthropometric parameters were relevant to the robotic hand design. A
range of motion (ROM) for the MCP joint in each ¯nger from 0 (full extension) to
90 (°exion) was required. Because of the prototype glove size, the dimensions of the
robotic hand were based on a 95% male hand size as per NASA-STD-3000.81 Oblique
°exion of the rays and longitudinal and transverse arches of the palm were also
required characteristics to further mimic the performance and con¯guration of the
human hand in the neutral position the naturally relaxed position where no active
actuation is applied
it assumes in zero gravity.82 These requirements were as-
sociated with the usual design practice for spacesuit gloves that were generally based
on the neutral human hand con¯guration. In addition, even an ungloved human
hand naturally assumes longitudinal and transverse arches during ¯nger °exion. By
meeting these requirements, the robotic hand design became consistent with the un-
deformed glove con¯guration, which resulted in valid calculation of the actuation
torque against the sti®ness of the pressurized glove.
In addition, the robotic hand needed to allow for donning and do±ng of a pressure
garment glove. This required the ability to seal the glove around the robotic hand at
0 kPa gauge pressure as well as to allow the robotic hand to function as the glove
changed overall shape and dimension as it was pressurized. The outer dimensions and
shape of the robotic hand needed to be consistent with those of a human's so that
donning and do±ng of the glove could be accomplished. Finally, due to contractual
obligations, development with a low cost and rapid design cycle
from conceptual
design through integration and testing
was required.
3. System Description
Based on the requirements and constraints described previously, the iterative me-
chanical design and fabrication of a low-cost anthropometric robotic hand are de-
scribed here. We then describe the method of instrumentation and current sensing
for actuator torque characterization where the design and fabrication constraints are
taken into account.
3.1. Mechanical design

Three-dimensional CAD models were created in SolidWorks for all the components
of the hand before they were fabricated or printed. The four ¯ngers were modeled as
solid linkages and the longitudinal arch of the hand83,84 was preserved by modeling
the linkages with slightly °exed proximal interphalangeal (PIP) and DIP joints to
1450018-5
Transverse arch MCP joint

PIP joint
Longitudinal arch
DIP joint
IP joint
Fig. 1. Structure of hand in the neutral position indicating the transverse arch (solid line) and
longitudinal arch (dashed line) of the left hand, as well as the MCP, PIP and DIP joints of the second
digit. The ¯rst digit (thumb) has an MCP joint and one interphalangeal joint (IP) (¯gure adapted from
Ref. 83).
achieve the neutral hand con¯guration (Fig. 1). The neutral position represents the
no-torque human hand con¯guration in space with zero or micro gravity. Along with
the transverse arch and oblique °exion of the rays (described below), this assured
the digits would converge as they were °exed at the MCP joints. These features
were designed to mimic those of a human hand to enable biomimetic motion, realistic
donning/do±ng of the glove and valid torque measurements in reference to the un-
deformed glove con¯guration. The unique indented design of the bases of the
second and ¯fth digits allowed for a smooth, anthropometric transition between
the ¯ngers and palm (Fig. 2). This feature was critical for donning and do±ng the
pressure garment glove, and unique when compared with other robotic hands that
include a wide palmar region to accommodate intrinsic electronic and mechanical
components.75
FRONT SIDE FRONT SIDE

VIEW VIEW VIEW VIEW
Fig. 2. The left and right images show the detail of the ¯fth digit (pinky ¯nger) and second digit (index
¯nger) designs, respectively. The central ¯gure shows how the base shape of these digits allows them to
integrate with the palm, with ovals indicating the region where there is a smooth transition from ¯nger to
palm geometry.
1450018-6
FRONT
VIEW
SIDE
VIEW
Fig. 3. Details of (L) fourth and (R) third digits in neutral con¯guration.
The bases of the ring and middle ¯ngers were rounded to allow for rotation
through the full 90 ROM (Fig. 3). The hole at the base of each digit accommodated
a rod that acted as the MCP joint °exion/extension axis, and a hole distal to this
accommodated a rod that served as a connection point for the ring terminal at the
end of the cable that actuated the ¯nger.

The four ¯nger linkages were integrated with a palm to form a system with one
active DOF (°exion/extension) at the MCP joint of each ¯nger (Fig. 2) and passive
ad/abduction at each MCP joint to allow for accommodation of the pressurized glove
shape. The passive ad/abduction was made possible by incorporating clearance in
the MCP joint designs. The dimensions of a 95% male human hand81,85–87 were used
along with measurements taken from a plastic cast of a 95% male hand in the neutral
con¯guration to determine relevant dimensions. The robotic hand was designed
to test a particular prototype glove sized to ¯t a male hand with measurements that
fell within plus or minus one standard deviation (SD) of the given mean 95%
dimensions.87
The oblique °exion of the rays (Fig. 4-L) was one of several features of the human
hand that the robotic hand was required to mimic to enable biomimetic motion and
4 3
2
5
Palmar arch
75° Transverse axis

1
Fig. 4. Oblique °exion of the rays and other features of the human hand. In both images, the curved solid
line indicates the palmar arch, and the dashed lines indicate the rays. (L) The transverse axis and palmar
arch are indicated, as well as the acute angle the transverse axis forms with the third ray. The numbers of
the digits are also indicated (¯gure adapted from Ref. 83). (R) Oblique °exion of the rays achieved in part
by creating angular and linear o®sets for the second, fourth and ¯fth digits relative to the third digit.
1450018-7
ρ=203mm
center of curvature
Fig. 5. The radius of curvature of the transverse arch of the robotic hand is partially responsible for the
convergence of the robotic hand ¯ngers in 90 of °exion.
valid torque measurements. The available data on 95% male human hands were
used to create an angular and linear o®set following the palmar arch for the second,
fourth and ¯fth digits relative to the third digit to create this oblique °exion
(Fig. 4-R). The transverse axis corresponds to the MCP joint articulations and forms
an acute angle with the third ray.
Another biomimetic aspect of the design based on the neutral hand con¯guration
was the transverse arch of the palm (Figs. 1 and 5). This unique geometry83,84
allowed the ¯ngers to converge as they were °exed. This was another one of several
features of the human hand that the robotic hand was required to mimic to enable
biomimetic motion and valid torque measurements while interacting with the pres-
surized glove. The anthropometric data for human hands and the plastic hand cast
were used to calculate an approximate uniform radius of curvature of the trans-
verse arch as follows:
¼ 203 ðmmÞ: ð1Þ
As a result, all the ¯ngers converged when the MCP joints were °exed by 90 a
valid characteristic that is consistent with the human hand.
In general, solid modeling software for compliant textiles does not exist, and the
dimensions of pressurized gloves are variable and unpredictable. The uncertainty in
glove dimensions results in di®erent ¯ts for di®erent human hands, and similar
situations can occur for robotic hands. Here, an iterative design process was used to
resolve these issues. To assign the dimensions of the robotic hand, initial approx-
imations for the design parameters H (height of robotic hand from glove mounting
ring to the third MCP joint) and L ¼ ðL2 ; L3 ; L4 ; L5 Þ (the length of each robotic digit
from MCP axis to tip) were made based on available anthropometric data81,85,86 and
1450018-8
glove finger
crotch
l finger
L
human finger
δ
crotch lhand
ε
H h
Fig. 6. Relationship between glove outline, human hand shape and robotic hand dimensions.
glove dimensions (Fig. 6). However, most available anthropometric data used
landmarks such as the crotch between ¯ngers, the ¯ngertip, and the wrist crease to
dictate ¯nger length lfinger ¼ ðl2 ; l3 ; l4 ; l5 Þ and hand length lhand with no indication of
where the center of rotation of the MCP joint was relative to these dimensions.
Additionally, to address the necessary interaction with the compliant pressure
garment glove, an initial measurement of the ¯nger crotch between digits three and
four was made relative to the glove mounting ring (Fig. 8) on an unmanned glove
pressurized to 30 kPa. This was equivalent to the sum of the parameters ± ¼
ð1 ; 2 ; 3 Þ (distance between the glove ¯nger crotch with respect to the human hand
¯nger crotch), " ¼ ð"2 ; "3 ; "4 ; "5 Þ (distance between the human hand MCP joint
locations with respect to the ¯nger crotches), and h (the ideal height of the third
MCP joint of the human hand inside the pressurized glove with respect to the glove
mounting ring). After the initial approximation, values for the design parameters H
and L were determined through an iterative design process (Fig. 7) to adjust the
robotic hand H to the ideal h and adjust ¯nger length as follows:
L ¼ lfinger þ ": ð2Þ
These iteratively determined ¯nger lengths were checked against the given L for 95%
male hands given in the one reference that did include ¯nger tip to MCP joint center
link lengths87 and to make sure they fell within 1.0 SD of the mean value. This
iteration was necessary because even though the glove was designed for a 95% male
hand, there was still variability at each ¯nger length within the 95% category as
demonstrated by large SDs at each ¯nger. Additionally, the robotic hand needed to
represent a human hand in neutral posture, so absolute ¯nger lengths from the
literature could not be used because of the °exion at the PIP and DIP joints inherent
in the neutral hand posture.
The iterative process was terminated when, at 90 of °exion and 30 kPa, the
robotic digits were near the inside of the prototype glove ¯ngertips without exerting
force on them, and H was adjusted so there was no residual volume on the dorsal side
of the robotic hand.
1450018-9
START
Design, fabricate, and

assemble support structure
Design, fabricate, and

assemble hand components
Update
H, L
Does no
glove fit?
yes
Does L fall within 1 SD of no

published dimensions?
yes
Instrumenta on design
and func onal tes ng at
0, 7, 14, 21, and 30 kPa
END
Fig. 7. Design process °ow chart. The SD data for 95% male ¯nger dimensions was obtained from Ref. 87.
The MCP joints of each ¯nger were each assigned a dedicated actuator so the
¯ngers could be actuated concurrently or independently. Servomotors were chosen
for their simplicity, small size, low cost and built-in capability to function over a
ROM that encompassed the range required by the ¯ngers. Cable actuation was used
to transmit torque from the actuators to the ¯ngers. This is common in anthropo-
metric applications when there is no physical room to actuate joints at the actual
joint axis.88 To address the unknown nonlinear sti®ness behavior of the pressurized
glove and to incorporate a safety factor of at least four into the available data from
the Astronaut Glove Challenges in 2007 and 2009,89 the minimum actuator capacity
was calculated as 0.46 Nm. From the design speci¯cations, the Hitec HS-7950TH
standard-size digital servomotors were chosen and installed into the system (Fig. 8).
We designed the support structure to accommodate mounting the motors and the
various interface requirements of the glove, electrical connection and pneumatic
ports (Fig. 8). The base plate contained ports for a Conec IP67 pressure-proof 15 pin
D-sub plug connector and two standard 1/4" NPT push-to-connect tube ¯ttings. A
motor plate was mounted to the base plate through mounting blocks in blind holes
from the inside to minimize possible air leakage locations. Surrounding this motor
plate, a cylinder was mounted to the base plate through a 1.6 mm silicone gasket and
secured by fasteners in 12 locations around its circumference.
Between the motor plate and the hand, an L-shaped plate and adjustable
mounting block (see also Fig. 10) were incorporated to modify the location of the
hand relative to the glove mounting ring. Once the radial o®set of the hand was set
1450018-10
MCP joint
palm
adjustable moun ng block
wrist ring
distal cable guide
gimbal ring
glove moun ng ring
motor plate
forearm cylinder
servo motors
pressure feedthroughs
electrical feedthrough
base plate
Fig. 8. Robotic hand components with critical interfaces. Cables are not shown. Aluminum forearm
cylinder is shown transparent for visibility.
using washers as spacers between the motor plate and the L-shaped plate, the hand
was adjusted in the axis of the forearm cylinder. Setscrews in the adjustable
mounting block were used to secure the axial location of the hand such that when the
glove was donned, mounted and pressurized, the robotic ¯ngers were approximately
1 mm from bottoming out in the ¯ngertips of the glove at 90 °exion as previously
described. The wrist ring and gimbal ring (Fig. 8) represent the approximate loca-
tions and sizes of two steel rings incorporated into the prototype spacesuit glove.
We used cable-driven actuation to link the action of the motor to the action of the
¯nger, which is a common approach in robotic hand design.8,59,66,75 However, unlike
other robotic hands that use cables for °exion and torsion springs in the DIP, PIP
and MCP joints to return to extension in a passive manner, a 1.2 mm diameter cable
was used that could function in tension and compression to actively control both
°exion and extension. This simpli¯ed the kinematic and kinetic model by removing
the variable of angle-dependent spring torque that would otherwise have been re-
quired (details in Sec. 4.1). In addition, compared with other robotic hands that use
active °exion and extension,25,46,48,49 our design allows for the bulk of the actuation
system to be located outside the hand and ¯nger region
a necessary requirement
for glove ¯tting, donning/do±ng and testing. The ends of the cables were secured
with heavy-duty steel ring terminals and integrated into pivoting joints near the base
of each ¯nger (Fig. 9) and end of each motor lever arm. Clearance ¯ts90 between the
¯nger base holes and mounting pins, and the ring terminals and pivot pins, were
designed to minimize friction. The cables were routed through cable sheaths secured
1450018-11
Fig. 9. Pivoting cable attachment joints near base of robotic digits.
at each end by features in the 3D-printed hand and the distal cable guide. The cable
sheaths also protected both the robotic hand components and the inside of the glove
from the moving cables during actuation.
The design of the robotic hand allowed for relatively easy donning and do±ng of
the pressure garment glove. A second inner cotton glove and baby powder were also
used to decrease friction between the hardware and textiles of the pressure garment.
Another 1.6 mm silicone gasket was used between the mounting ring, pressure gar-
ment glove °ange, and forearm cylinder to further seal the interface.
3.2. Fabrication
The structural parts were fabricated out of aluminum (Fig. 10). A Dimension Elite
3D Printer (Stratasys Ltd., Minnesota, USA) was used to print the hand components
out of ABS plastic. The low material cost and rapid 3D printing time was critical in
realizing the design iterations necessary to work successfully with the uncertain and
varying dimensions of the compliant pressure garment. The method of 3D printing
was also critical in realizing the anthropometric shape of the hand and ¯ngers by
allowing for shapes and features that would have been nearly impossible to machine
by traditional means.
3.3. Sensing and instrumentation

In this research, electric current sensing to characterize ¯nger actuator torque was
chosen for its low cost and the ability to implement it outside the volume of the robotic
hand in the pressurized glove. Since torque in DC motors is related to current through:
motor ¼ ki; ð3Þ
1450018-12
Fig. 10. Robotic hand hardware (L) Back (C) Side (R) Front.
where is motor torque (Nm), k is the motor torque constant (Nm/A) and i is the
current (A), motor torque can be determined through current sensing when the torque
constant is known. If the motor directly drives a robotic joint, the motor torque is
analogous to the robotic joint torque. If the motor indirectly drives the robotic joint,
torque can be derived through kinematic relationships. Each digit of the robotic hand
was driven by a separate motor to allow for independent current measurements. To
implement low side current sensing, we used a ¯xed resistor in series with the ground
wire of each servomotor and used Ohm's law:
V ¼ iR; ð4Þ
where R was a 1 ¯xed current sensing resistor (part PWR221T-30-1R00F from
Bourns Inc.) and V was the analog voltage (V). This analog voltage was sampled at the
junction of each servo motor ground wire and corresponding current sensing resistor
and was read through one of several 10-bit analog-to-digital converters built into the
microprocessor on the Arduino Mega2560 open-source electronics prototyping plat-
form (Fig. 11).
Potentiometers were used to manually control the position of the servomotors
linked through the cable sub-assemblies to the ¯ngers. The range of each potenti-
ometer was mapped to the 0–90 range of each ¯nger in custom Arduino code.
Time (milliseconds), motor lever arm position for each motor (microseconds
of pulse width), and analog voltage at the junction of each servo motor ground
1450018-13
Robo c Hand with Glove
Fingers
cables
Servomotors
7.4 V External Pressure

Power Supply Gauge
Poten ometers
Emergency Open/Close Pressure
Release Valve Valve Gauge
Arduino Mega
1Ω
Needle Valve
USB connec on
to computer Compressor
and Tank
Fig. 11. Block diagram of experimental setup.
wire and corresponding current sensing resistor were written to the serial port
through a USB connection to the Arduino Mega2560 at the frequency of approxi-
mately 25 Hz.
4. Mechanical Analysis and Data Processing

The actuator torque at the MCP joint of each robotic digit was formulated by
processing the raw data acquired. To analyze the function of the robotic hand, a
simpli¯ed mechanical model was used with a torque testing protocol to calculate a
representative measure of sti®ness for each ¯nger.
4.1. Mechanical model

The torque constant for the servomotors at 7.4 V was determined from the speci¯-
cations as 0.537 Nm/A. This was used along with the sensed current to determine
representative motor torque. The angular position of the motor lever arm 1 was
determined from the pulse width (in microseconds) assigned to the motor by the
angular location of the potentiometer. Then the cable force Fcable for the non-
deformable sti® cable at each ¯nger was determined as follows:
motor ¼ ki ¼ Fcable d1 sin 1 ; ð5Þ
where d1 was the distance from the motor axis to the cable terminal pivot joint
(Fig. 12). Due to the small mass and length of the motor lever arm and its low
acceleration during operation, its contribution to the system dynamics at this stage
1450018-14
finger
θ2
τ finger
Fcable d 2
cable
θ1
Fcable τ motor
motor lever arm d1
Fig. 12. Mechanical model of torque transfer from motor to robotic ¯nger.
of the mechanical work transmission was considered negligible. This cable force was
then translated into actuator-induced ¯nger torque ( finger Þ by the distance between
the cable connection and the MCP joint axis d 2 and the angular position of the ¯nger
from the established model:
finger ¼ Fcable d 2 sin 2 : ð6Þ
Note that only the contribution of the cable force was considered in this term, so
the mass and inertial properties of the ¯nger itself are not relevant. Finally, the
¯nger torque was calculated in terms of only measured constants and acquired
data:

d 2 sin 2
finger ¼ ki: ð7Þ
d1 sin 1
WD-40 lubricant was used along the cable itself and its connection points, as well
as between the ¯ngers and steel pins on which the ¯ngers rotate. The inner surface
of the cable housing was smooth and designed for low friction motion, and the
ROM of the ¯ngers was such that the cable remained close to vertical during all
testing. Since the coe±cient of friction between lubricated steel on steel is very low
(between 0.029–0.12 depending on the lubricant90), and since all ¯ngers had
similar construction and therefore similar low friction characteristics, the contri-
bution of friction to the system torque was not included in the model. Repeat-
ability of the torque calculations, and therefore the repeatability of any
contribution of low friction to the torque calculations, was systematically assessed
as described below.
1450018-15
4.2. Data processing for torque calculation

A low-cost yet reliable instrumentation method of comparing the sti®ness of the test
glove at di®erent pressures was developed based on actuation of the robotic MCP
joints with servomotors. Each ¯nger of the prototype glove was tested at 0, 7, 14, 21
and 30 kPa. The procedure to calculate the representative torque from experimental
values was as follows:
(1) A potentiometer was used to move a robotic ¯nger from full extension (0 ) to full
°exion (90 ) in approximately 0.25 s and to maintain that position for a set time
duration (4 s) to obtain steady-state current data.
(2) The time (milliseconds), motor lever arm position (microseconds of pulse
width), and analog voltage at the junction of each servo motor ground wire
and corresponding current sensing resistor were read and recorded through a
serial port terminal application (CoolTerm) at the frequency of approximately
25 Hz.
(3) This signal was conditioned with custom MATLAB code that smoothed the
analog voltage levels. A threshold was set above the steady state noise level such
that any data point that fell below the threshold was replaced with the average of
the readings immediately before and after that point.
(4) The analog voltage level was mapped from an integer value between 0 and 1023
to a voltage between 0 and 5 V, yielding a resolution between units of 4.9 mV.
This was converted to instantaneous current using Ohm's law as described in
Sec. 3.3.
(5) To determine a representative current for the duration of the °exion cycle, the
instantaneous current data was integrated over the time duration within the
MATLAB code, and then divided by the time duration. This resulted in the
mean value for the trial.
(6) This representative current was multiplied by the torque constant to calculate a
representative motor torque.
(7) This representative motor torque was converted to representative ¯nger torque
using the model kinematics (Fig. 12).
The passive thumb was ¯xed during testing in a con¯guration that allowed for a full
ROM in the index and middle ¯ngers without collision with the pressurized but non-
actuated thumb.
4.3. Repeatability analysis

Repeatability of the measurements was analyzed by evaluating the coe±cient of
variation (COV) over several trials. Reproducibility of the ¯nger torque measure-
ments was assessed for each robotic ¯nger in the test glove at 30 kPa and 7.4 V. Each
¯nger was moved through a °exion-extension cycle (as described in Sec. 4.2) three
times with a pause of approximately 1 s between cycles. The COV is often used as a
measure of repeatability when the sample size is low,91 where COV equals the SD
1450018-16
divided by the mean as follows:

COVð%Þ ¼ 100: ð8Þ

The mean in this case was the average of the representative ¯nger torque measure-
ments at 30 kPa in each ¯nger.
5. Experimental Demonstration
The robotic hand design and instrumentation method were experimentally demon-
strated using a prototype spacesuit glove. The robotic hand was used to °ex digits
two through ¯ve following the previously described protocol (Fig. 13).
5.1. Required actuator torque results

The key ¯nding regarding glove sti®ness was that representative ¯nger torque in-
creased as the glove was pressurized from ambient (0 kPa gauge pressure) through
30 kPa. As pressurized gloves take on more pressure, they become sti®er, and our
results quantify this qualitative intuition (Fig. 14). This feature is also consistent
with the test results for other pressurized spacesuit components.79 These experi-
mental results demonstrated the reliable performance of the proposed design and the
validity of its instrumentation method.
Additionally, as can be seen in each graph in Fig. 14, the ¯nger torque reached a
plateau between 21 and 30 kPa in each of the four ¯ngers after relatively large
increases in torque between each of the preceding pressure levels. This was because
Fig. 13. Prototype spacesuit glove during testing with robotic hand in°ated to 30 kPa (L) with digits two
through ¯ve in extension at 0 (C) with ¯fth digit in °exion at 90 (R) with digits two through ¯ve in
°exion at 90 .
1450018-17
1.0 1.0
Fourth Digit Torque (Nm)

FiŌh Digit Torque (Nm)
0.5 0.5
0.0 0.0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Glove Pressure (kPa) Glove Pressure (kPa)
1.0 1.0
Second Digit Torque (Nm)

Third Digit Torque (Nm)
0.5 0.5
0.0 0.0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Glove Pressure (kPa) Glove Pressure (kPa)
Fig. 14. Representative ¯nger torque versus pressure during robotic hand glove testing for each digit.
the increase in pressure between 21 and 30 kPa was not accompanied by signi¯cant
volumetric changes relative to the other incremental increases that would have
a®ected the representative torque measurements (Fig. 15). Also, the lower torque
required by the ¯fth ¯nger in the ¯nal stage is because it is the only digit that was not
in between two others, so there was less passive resistance. The webbing between the
¯ngers of the gloves was only medial to this digit, while digits 2–4 had medial and
lateral webbing that made achieving full independent °exion more di±cult.
One limitation of the sti®ness testing protocol is that it cannot characterize
torque in static postures, but rather through a dynamic range. Because of the nature
Fig. 15. Prototype spacesuit glove during in°ation from 0 (L) through 30 kPa (R).
1450018-18
Table 1. Repeatability of ¯nger torque measurements (Nm) from

repeated °exion/extension cycles at 30.0 kPa.
Fifth digit Fourth digit Third digit Second digit

Mean 0.758 0.883 0.898 0.758
SD 0.133 0.062 0.117 0.097
COV 18% 7% 13% 13%
of the current usage of the servomotors, the method of torque estimation by current
sensing external to the motor did not allow a direct association between ¯nger angle
and torque. Additionally, bending a ¯xed robotic ¯nger at the MCP joint may not be
the best way to characterize practical glove sti®ness, since most human tasks that
require °exion at the MCP joint also require some degree of °exion at the PIP and
DIP joints. It is likely that such compliance at the PIP and DIP joints would reduce
the torque required at the MCP joint over the same ROM. Both of these limitations
will be addressed in future work. Nevertheless, the calculated torque values are
consistent (under proper adjustments of the boundary conditions) with the manual
experimental results,89 which demonstrates the validity of the proposed design and
method.
5.2. Repeatability
Repeatability of representative ¯nger torque measurement was con¯rmed in each
¯nger of the test glove by calculating the COV. The COV is often used as a measure
of repeatability when the sample size is low, as in this case. The COV ranged from 7%
for the fourth digit to 18% in the ¯fth digit (Table 1).
A low COV represents high reliability. The COVs in these tests con¯rm reliability
at levels similar to those in other published research.91
6. Conclusion
In this research, the development of a low-cost anthropometric robotic hand to
characterize glove sti®ness in a pressurized environment was introduced. The robotic
hand was designed to address the unique performance requirements and constraints
such that its interaction with the compliant pressurized glove mimicked that of
human hand. The low cost of the hardware components makes this evaluation tool
accessible (relative to existing robotic hands) to designers developing pressurized
glove technology. Additionally, given the high costs and long development times
characteristics of existing robotic hands and prosthetics, this low cost, rapid proto-
typed, purpose-built hand provides a novel contribution to the ¯eld. The anthro-
pometric features of the robotic hand included the oblique °exion of the rays and
transverse and longitudinal arches of the neutral hand con¯guration, as well as
human-scale dimensions of a 95% male hand. Donning/do±ng of a prototype
spacesuit glove, its pressurization, and torque testing were also enabled through the
1450018-19
unique design and fabrication methods. An instrumentation and data processing

method was used to calculate the required actuator torque at each ¯nger's MCP
joint. The performance of the robotic hand was experimentally demonstrated with a
spacesuit glove for di®erent levels of pressures followed by statistical repeatability
analysis, which showed reliably that the required torque for each ¯nger increased
with increasing glove pressure. The design and method provide an objective and
systematic way of evaluating pressurized glove performance and comparison. Future
research will include an actuated thumb, more DOFs in each ¯nger, concurrent
sensing of position and torque for dynamic modeling or characterization at multiple
static con¯gurations, and take into account the compliance of soft tissue in actual
human ¯ngers. The proposed approach will provide foundations for biomimetic de-
sign of advanced robotic hands and prostheses.
Acknowledgments
This research was supported by the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Admin-
istration (NASA) under grant NNX11CG24P and by a National Science Foundation
Graduate Research Fellowship to D. Roberts under Grant No. DGE-1104522.
The authors would like to gratefully acknowledge Theodore Southern and Nikolay
Moiseev of Final Frontier Design for providing the prototype spacesuit glove for
testing.
References
1. H. A. Ernst, MH-1, a computer-operated mechanical hand, in Proc. Spring Joint
Computer Conf. (San Francisco, California, 1962), pp. 39–51.
2. W. Townsend, The Barretthand grasper programmably °exible part handling and
assembly, Indus. Robot: An Int. J. 27 (2000) 181–188.
3. A. Namiki, Y. Imai, M. Ishikawa and M. Kaneko, Development of a high-speed multi-
¯ngered hand system and its application to catching, in Proc. IEEE/RSJ Int. Conf.
Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), Vol. 3 (IEEE Press, Las Vegas, NV, USA, 2003),
pp. 2666–2671.
4. T. Okada, Object-handling system for manual industry, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man and
Cybernet. 9 (1979) 79–89.
5. T. Kang, H. Choi and M. Kim, Development of anthropomorphic robot hand SKK robot
hand I, KSME Int. J. 17 (2003) 230–238.
6. S. C. Jacobsen, J. E. Wood, D. F. Knutti and K. B. Biggers, The UTAH/M.I.T. dextrous
hand: Work in progress, The Int. J. Robot. Res. 3 (1984) 21–50.
7. S. Jacobsen, E. Iversen, D. Knutti, R. Johnson and K. Biggers, Design of the Utah/M.I.T.
dextrous hand, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Robotics and Automation (ICRA) (IEEE Press,
San Francisco, California, USA, 1986), pp. 1520–1532.
8. Y. Matsuoka, The mechanisms in a humanoid robot hand, Autonomous Robots 4 (1997)
199–209.
9. H. Hashimoto, H. Ogawa, M. Obama, T. Umeda, K. Tatuno and T. Furukawa, Devel-
opment of a multi-¯ngered robot hand with ¯ngertip tactile sensors, in Proc. IEEE/RSJ
International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) (IEEE Press, Tokyo,
Japan, 1993), pp. 875–882.
1450018-20
10. B. M. Jau, Dexterous telemanipulation with four ¯ngered hand system, in Proc. IEEE
Int. Conf. Robotics and Automation (ICRA) (IEEE Press, Nagoya, Aichi, Japan, 1995),
pp. 338–343.
11. J. Butterfass, M. Fischer, M. Grebenstein, S. Haidacher and G. Hirzinger, Design and
experiences with DLR hand II, in Proc. World Automation Congress (IEEE Press,
Albuquerque, NM, USA, 2004), pp. 105–110.
12. J. P. Gazeau, S. Zehloul, M. Arsicault and J. P. Lallemand, The LMS hand: Force
and position controls in the aim of the ¯ne manipulation of objects, in Proc. IEEE
Int. Conf. Robotics and Automation (ICRA) (IEEE Press, Seoul, Korea, 2001),
pp. 2642–2648.
13. B. Choi, S. Lee, H. R. Choi and S. Kang, Development of anthropomorphic robot hand
with tactile sensor: SKKU hand II, in Proc. IEEE/RSJ Int. Conf. Intelligent Robots and
Systems (IROS) (IEEE Press, Beijing, China, 2006), pp. 3779–3784.
14. K. Kaneko, K. Harada and F. Kanehiro, Development of multi-¯ngered hand for life-size
humanoid robots, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Robotics and Automation (ICRA) (IEEE
Press, Rome, Italy, 2007), pp. 913–920.
15. H. Kaminaga, J. Ono, Y. Shimoyama, T. Amari, Y. Katayama and Y. Nakamura, An-
thropomorphic robot hand with hydrostatic cluster actuator and detachable passive wire
mechanism, in Proc. 9th IEEE-RAS Int. Conf. Humanoid Robots (IEEE Press, Paris,
France, 2009), pp. 1–6.
16. A. M. Dollar and R. D. Howe, The highly adaptive SDM hand: Design and performance
evaluation, The Int. J. Robotics Res. 29 (2010) 585–597.
17. S. S. Ohol and S. R. Kajale, Biomimetic approach for design of multi¯ngered robotic
gripper (MRG) & its analysis for e®ective dexterous grasping, in Proc. Int. Conf. Machine
Learning and Computing (Darwin, Australia, 2009), pp. 213–221.
18. E.-H. Kim, S.-W. Lee and Y.-K. Lee, A dexterous robot hand with a bio-mimetic
mechanism, Int. J. Precision Eng. Manuf. 12 (2011) 227–235.
19. C. Borst, M. Fischer, S. Haidacher, H. Liu and G. Hirzinger, DLR hand II: Experiments
and experience with an anthropomorphic hand, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Robotics and
Automation (ICRA), Vol. 1 (IEEE Press, Taipei, Taiwan, 2003), pp. 702–707.
20. M. T. Mason and J. K. Salisbury, Robot Hands and the Mechanics of Manipulation (The
MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA, 1985).
21. R. Tomovic and G. Boni, An adaptive arti¯cial hand, IRE Trans. Automatic Control 7
(1962) 3–10.
22. A. Bicchi, Hands for dexterous manipulation and robust grasping: A di±cult road toward
simplicity, IEEE Trans. Robot. Automat. 16 (2000) 652–662.
23. L. Birglen and C. M. Gosselin, Geometric design of three-phalanx underactuated ¯ngers,
J. Mech. Des. 128 (2006) 356–364.
24. Z. Ye and D. Li, Principle and mechanical analysis of a pneumatic underactuated bionic
hand, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Robotics and Biomimetics (ROBIO) (IEEE Press, Guilin,
China, 2009), pp. 432–436.
25. Shadow Robot Company, Developments in dextrous hands for advanced robotic appli-
cations, in Proc. World Automation Congress (IEEE Press, Albuquerque, NM, USA,
2004), pp. 123–128.
26. I. Gaiser, S. Schulz, A. Kargov, H. Klosek, A. Bierbaum, C. Pylatiuk, R. Oberle, T.
Werner, T. Asfour, G. Bretthauer and R. Dillmann, A new anthropomorphic robotic
hand, in Proc. 8th IEEE-RAS Int. Conf. Humanoid Robots (IEEE Press, Daejeon, South
Korea, 2008), pp. 418–422.
27. A. Kargov, T. Asfour, C. Pylatiuk, R. Oberle, H. Klosek, S. Schulz, K. Regenstein, G.
Bretthauer and R. Dillmann, Development of an anthropomorphic hand for a mobile
1450018-21
assistive robot, in Proc. 9th Int. Conf. Rehabilitation Robotics (IEEE Press, Chicago, IL,
USA, 2005), pp. 182–186.
28. A. Yamaguchi, K. Takemura, S. Yokota and K. Edamura, A robot hand using electro-
conjugate °uid, Sensors Actuators A: Phys. 170 (2011) 139–146.
29. K. J. Kyriakopoulos, J. van Riper, A. Zink and H. E. Stephanou, Kinematic analysis
and position/force control of the Anthrobot dextrous hand, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man,
Cybernet. Part B: Cybernet. 27 (1997) 95–104.
30. Li-Ren Lin and Han-Pang Huang, Integrating fuzzy control of the dexterous National
Taiwan University (NTU) hand, IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron. 1 (1996) 216–229.
31. T. Mouri, T. Endo and H. Kawasaki, Review of Gifu hand and its application, Mech.
Based Des. Struct. Mach. 39 (2011) 210–228.
32. H. Kawasaki, T. Komatsu, K. Uchiyama and T. Kurimoto, Dexterous anthropomorphic
robot hand with distributed tactile sensor: Gifu hand II, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf.
Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (IEEE Press, Tokyo, Japan, 1999), pp. 782–787.
33. H. Kawasaki, T. Mouri and S. Ito, Toward next stage of kinetic humanoid hand, in Proc.
World Automation Congress (IEEE Press, Albuquerque, NM, USA, 2004), pp. 129–134.
34. I. Yamano, K. Takemura and T. Maeno, Development of a robot ¯nger for ¯ve-¯ngered
hand using ultrasonic motors, in Proc. IEEE/RSJ Int. Conf. Intelligent Robots and
Systems (IROS) (IEEE Press, Las Vegas, NV, USA, 2003), pp. 2648–2653.
35. S. Roccella, M. C. Carrozza, G. Cappiello, P. Dario, J. J. Cabibihan, M. Zecca, H. Miwa,
K. Itoh and M. Marsumoto, Design, fabrication and preliminary results of a novel an-
thropomorphic hand for humanoid robotics: RCH-1, in IEEE/RSJ Int. Conf. Intelligent
Robots and Systems (IROS), Vol. 1 (IEEE Press, Sendai, Japan, 2004), pp. 266–271.
36. F. Lotti, P. Tiezzi, G. Vassura, L. Biagiotti, G. Palli and C. Melchiorri, Development of
UB hand 3: Early results, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Robotics and Automation (ICRA)
(IEEE Press, Barcelona, Spain, 2005), pp. 4488–4493.
37. F. Lotti, P. Tiezzi, G. Vassura, L. Biagiotti and C. Melchiorri, UBH 3: An anthropo-
morphic hand with simpli¯ed endo-skeletal structure and soft continuous ¯ngerpads, in
Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Robotics and Automation (ICRA), Vol. 5 (IEEE Press, New
Orleans, LA, USA, 2004), pp. 4736–4741.
38. T. Mouri, H. Kawasaki and K. Umebayashi, Developments of new anthropomorphic
robot hand and its master slave system, in Proc. IEEE/RSJ Int. Conf. Intelligent Robots
and Systems (IROS) (IEEE Press, Edmonton, Canada, 2005), pp. 3225–3230.
39. H. Kawasaki and T. Mouri, Design and control of ¯ve-¯ngered haptic interface opposite
to human hand, IEEE Trans. Robot. 23 (2007) 909–918.
40. N. G. Tsagarakis, G. Metta, G. Sandini, D. Vernon, R. Beira, F. Becchi, L. Righetti, J.
Santos-Victor, A. J. Ijspeert, M. C. Carrozza and D. G. Caldwell, iCub: The design and
realization of an open humanoid platform for cognitive and neuroscience research, Adv.
Robot. 21 (2007) 1151–1175.
41. W. Zhang, D. Zhao, Q. Chen and D. Du, Linkage under-actuated humanoid robotic hand
with control of grasping force, in Proc. 2nd Int. Asia Conf. Informatics in Control,
Automation and Robotics (IEEE Press, Wuhan, China, 2010), pp. 417–420.
42. R. Mahmoud, A. Ueno and S. Tatsumi, Dexterous mechanism design for an anthropo-
morphic arti¯cial hand: Osaka City University hand I, in 10th IEEE-RAS Int. Conf.
Humanoid Robots (IEEE Press, Nashville, TN, USA, 2010), pp. 180–185.
43. Y. Kurita, Y. Ono, A. Ikeda and T. Ogasawara, Human-sized anthropomorphic
robot hand with detachable mechanism at the wrist, Mech. Mach. Theory 46 (2011)
53–66.
44. Y. Kurita, Y. Ono, A. Ikeda and T. Ogasawara, NAIST hand 2: Human-sized anthro-
pomorphic robot hand with detachable mechanism at the wrist, in Proc. IEEE/RSJ Int.
1450018-22
Conf. Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) (IEEE Press, St. Louis, MO, USA, 2009),
pp. 2271–2276.
45. H. Ishihara, N. Hirose, S. Funaoka, K. Morita and T. Miyake, Proposal of anthropo-
morphic hand with passive warped ¯ngertip, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. on Mechatronics
and Automation (IEEE Press, Beijing, China, 2011), pp. 1219–1224.
46. M. Grebenstein, M. Chalon, G. Hirzinger and R. Siegwart, Antagonistically driven ¯nger
design for the anthropomorphic DLR hand arm system, in Proc. 10th IEEE-RAS Int.
Conf. Humanoid Robots (IEEE Press, Nashville, TN, USA, 2010), pp. 609–616.
47. T. Endo, H. Kawasaki, T. Mouri, Y. Doi, T. Yoshida, Y. Ishigure, H. Shimomura, M.
Matsumura and K. Koketsu, Five-¯ngered haptic interface robot: HIRO III, in Proc. 3rd
Joint Eurohaptics Conf. Symp. Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Tele-
operator Systems (IEEE Press, Salt Lake City, UT, USA, 2009), pp. 458–463.
48. D.-H. Jeong, J.-U. Chu and Y.-J. Lee, Development of KNU hand with infrared LED-
based tactile ¯ngertip sensor, in Proc. Int. Conf. Control, Automation and Systems (IEEE
Press, Seoul, Korea, 2008), pp. 1156–1161.

49. H. Liu, K. Wu, P. Meusel, N. Seitz, G. Hirzinger, M. H. Jin, Y. W. Liu, S. W. Fan, T. Lan
and Z. P. Chen, Multisensory ¯ve-¯nger dexterous hand: The DLR/HIT hand II, in Proc.
IEEE/RSJ Int. Conf. Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) (Nice, France, 2008), pp.
3692–3697.
50. H. Kocabas, Gripper design with spherical parallelogram mechanism, J. Mech. Des. 131
(2009) 1–9.
51. J. S. Dai and D. Wang, Geometric analysis and synthesis of the metamorphic robotic
hand, J. Mech. Des. 129 (2007) 1191–1197.
52. S. Wolf and G. Hirzinger, A new variable sti®ness design: Matching requirements of the
next robot generation, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Robotics and Automation (ICRA) (IEEE
Press, Pasadena, CA, USA, 2008), pp. 1741–1746.
53. N. Thayer and S. Priya, Design and implementation of a dexterous anthropomorphic
robotic typing (DART) hand, Smart Mater. Struct. 20 (2011) 1–12.
54. M. E. Rosheim, In the footsteps of Leonardo, IEEE Robot. Automat. Magaz. 4 (1997) 12–
14.
55. C. S. Lovchik and M. A. Diftler, The robonaut hand: A dexterous robot hand for space, in
Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Robotics and Automation (ICRA) (IEEE Press, Detroit, MI, USA,
1999), pp. 907–912.
56. W. Bluethmann, R. Ambrose, M. Diftler, S. Askew, E. Huber, M. Goza, F. Rehnmark, C.
Lovchik and D. Magruder, Robonaut: A robot designed to work with humans in space,
Autonom. Robots 14 (2003) 179–197.
57. F. Rehnmark, W. Bluethmann, J. Mehling, R. O. Ambrose, M. Diftler, M. Chu and
R. Necessary, Robonaut: The \short list" of technology hurdles, Computer 38 (2005)
28–37.
58. T. B. Martin, R. O. Ambrose, M. A. Diftler, R. Platt and M. J. Butzer, Tactile gloves for
autonomous grasping with the NASA/DARPA Robonaut, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf.
Robotics and Automation (ICRA) (IEEE Press, New Orleans, LA, USA, 2004), pp. 1713–
1718.
59. C. Cipriani, M. Controzzi and M. C. Carrozza, The Smarthand transradial prosthesis,
J. Neuroeng. Rehab. 8 (2011) 1–13.
60. L.-R. Lin and H.-P. Huang, Mechanism design of a new multi¯ngered robot hand, in
Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Robotics and Automation (ICRA) (IEEE Press, Minneapolis, MN,
USA, 1996), pp. 1471–1476.
61. D. Che and W. Zhang, A dexterous and self-adaptive humanoid robot hand: GCUA hand,
Int. J. Human. Robot. 8 (2011) 73–86.
1450018-23
62. H. Kawasaki, K. Nakayama, T. Mouri and S. Ito, Virtual teaching based on hand ma-
nipulability for multi-¯ngered robots, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Robotics and Automation
(ICRA) (IEEE Press, Seoul, Korea, 2001), pp. 1388–1393.
63. H. Kawasaki, T. Furukawa, S. Ueki and T. Mouri, Virtual robot teaching in the assembly
work environment for multi-¯ngered robots, in Proc. World Automation Congress (IEEE
Press, Hawaii, HI, 2008), pp. 1–7.
64. C. M. Harris, Biomimetics of human movement: Functional or aesthetic? Bioinspiration
Biomimet. 4 (2009) 1–7.
65. S. Roccella, Design and development of ¯ve-¯ngered hands for a humanoid emotion
expression robot, Int. J. Human. Robot. 4 (2007) 181.
66. M. Vande Weghe, M. Rogers, M. Weissert and Y. Matsuoka, The ACT hand: Design of
the skeletal structure, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Robotics and Automation (ICRA) (IEEE
Press, New Orleans, LA, USA, 2004), pp. 3375–3379.
67. A. D. Deshpande, J. Ko, D. Fox and Y. Matsuoka, Anatomically correct testbed hand
control: Muscle and joint control strategies, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Robotics and
Automation (ICRA) (IEEE Press, Kobe, Japan, 2009), pp. 4416–4422.
68. A. Kargov, H. Breitwieser, H. Klosek, C. Pylatiuk, S. Schulz and G. Bretthauer, Design of
a modular arm robot system based on °exible °uidic drive elements, in Proc. IEEE 10th
Int. Conf. Rehabilitation Robotics (IEEE Press, Noordwijk, The Netherlands, 2007),
pp. 269–273.
69. H. Huang, L. Jiang, Y. Liu, L. Hou, H. Cai and H. Liu, The mechanical design and
experiments of HIT/DLR prosthetic hand, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Robotics and Bio-
mimetics (IEEE Press, Kunming, China, 2006), pp. 896–901.
70. S. A. Dalley, T. E. Wiste, T. J. Withrow and M. Goldfarb, Design of a multifunctional
anthropomorphic prosthetic hand with extrinsic actuation, IEEE/ASME Trans.
Mechatron. 14 (2009) 699–706.
71. J. Kuniholm, Open arms, IEEE Spectrum 46 (2009) 36–41.
72. R. Weir, S. Clark, M. Mitchell, G. Puchhammer, K. Kelley, M. Haslinger, N. Kumar, R.
Hofbauer, P. Kuschnigg, V. Cornelius, M. Eder and R. Grausenburger, New multifunc-
tional prosthetic arm and hand systems, in Proc. 29th Annual Int. Conf. IEEE
Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (IEEE Press, Lyon, France, 2007),
pp. 4359–4360.
73. M. Controzzi, C. Cipriani and M. C. Carrozza, Mechatronic design of a transradial cy-
bernetic hand, in Proc. IEEE/RSJ Int. Conf. Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS)
(IEEE Press, Nice, France, 2008), pp. 576–581.
74. M. Controzzi, C. Cipriani, B. Jehenne, M. Donati and M. C. Carrozza, Bio-inspired
mechanical design of a tendon-driven dexterous prosthetic hand, in Proc. Int. Conf. IEEE
Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (IEEE Press, Buenos Aires, Argentina,
2010), pp. 499–502.
75. C. Cipriani, M. Controzzi and M. C. Carrozza, Objectives, criteria and methods for the
design of the smarthand transradial prosthesis, Robotica 28 (2010) 919–927.
76. A. R. Hirakawa and A. Kawamura, Trajectory planning of redundant manipulators for
minimum energy consumption without matrix inversion, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf.
Robotics and Automation (ICRA) (IEEE Press, Albuquerque, NM, USA, 1997),
pp. 2415–2420.
77. C. M. Light and P. H. Chappell, Development of a lightweight and adaptable multiple-
axis hand prosthesis, Med. Eng. Phys. 22 (2000) 679–684.
78. B. Massa, S. Roccella, M. C. Carrozza and P. Dario, Design and development of an
underactuated prosthetic hand, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Robotics and Automation
(ICRA) (IEEE Press, Washington, DC, USA, 2002), pp. 3374–3379.
1450018-24
79. P. B. Schmidt, D. J. Newman and E. Hodgson, Modeling space suit mobility: Applica-
tions to design and operations, in Proc. Int. Conf. Environmental Systems (Orlando,
Florida, 2001).
80. K. S. Thomas and H. J. McMann, U. S. Spacesuits (Springer Praxis Books, New York,
NY, 2006).
81. NASA-STD-3000-Vol-3: Man-Systems Integration Standards (National Aeronautics and
Space Administration, 1994).
82. F. E. Mount, M. Whitmore and S. L. Stealey, Evaluation of Neutral Body Posture on
Shuttle Mission STS-57 (SPACEHAB-1) (National Aeronautics and Space Administra-
tion, Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center, Houston, Texas, 2003).
83. E. Mackin, J.-M. Thomine and R. Tubiana, Examination of the Hand and Wrist, 2nd edn.
(CRC Press, London, England, 1998).
84. M. Nordin and V. H. Frankel, Basic Biomechanics of the Musculoskeletal System, 3rd
edn. (Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore, MD, 2001).
85. A. R. Tilley and H. D. Associates, The Measure of Man and Woman: Human Factors in
Design (John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, 2001).
86. C. R. Harrison and K. M. Robinette, CAESAR: Summary Statistics for the Adult
Population (Ages 18–65) of the United States of America (Wright-Patterson AFB, OH,
USA, 2002).
87. T. M. Greiner, Hand Anthropometry of U.S. Army Personnel (U.S. Army Natick
Research, Development, and Engineering Center, Natick, MA, USA, 1991).
88. Y. Noh, M. Segawa, A. Shimomura, H. Ishii, J. Solis, A. Takanishi and K. Hatake,
Development of the airway management training system WKA-2 designed to reproduce
di®erent cases of di±cult airway, in Proc IEEE Int. Conf. Robotics and Automation
(ICRA) (IEEE Press, Kobe, Japan, 2009), pp. 3833–3838.
89. Astronaut Glove Challenge, n.d. Available at http://www.astronaut-glove.us/. [Accessed
on 8 September 2011].
90. T. Baumeister and E. A. Avallone, Marks' Standard Handbook for Mechanical Engineers,
11th edn. (McGraw-Hill Professional, New York, NY, 2007).
91. K. Manal, D. P. Roberts and T. S. Buchanan, Optimal pennation angle of the primary
ankle plantar and dorsi°exors: Variations with sex, contraction intensity, and limb, J.
Appl. Biomech. 22 (2006) 255–263.
Dustyn P. Roberts received her B.S. in Mechanical and Biomedical Engineering

from Carnegie Mellon University in 2003 and her M.S. in Biomechanics and Move-
ment Science from the University of Delaware in 2004. She is currently a Ph.D.
Candidate and NSF Graduate Research Fellow in the Department of Mechanical and
Aerospace Engineering at New York University. She is a member of ASME and a
senior member of IEEE.
Jack Poon received his B.S. in Mechanical Engineering from NYU-Poly in 2012,
and is currently a mechanical engineer at MakerBot Industries in Brooklyn, New
York.
Daniella Patrick is pursuing a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering and an M.S. in

Mathematics at New York University.
1450018-25
Joo H. Kim received his Ph.D. (2006) in Mechanical Engineering, and M.S. degrees
in Mathematics, Mechanical Engineering, and Biomedical Engineering, all from the
University of Iowa, and a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering from Korea University in
Seoul, South Korea. He is currently an Assistant Professor in the Department of
Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering at New York University. Kim is a member of
ASME and IEEE.
1450018-26

Roberts 2014

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Roberts 2014

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of Humanoid Robotics

Vol. 11, No. 2 (2014) 1450018 (26 pages)

Anthropometric Robotic Hand for Pressurized Glove

Dustyn P. Roberts, Jack Poon, Daniella Patrick and Joo H. Kim†

Received 30 May 2012

Keywords: Anthropometric; biomimetic design; neutral con¯guration; pressurized glove; robotic

feedback. Although Schmidt et al.79 demonstrated the use of an anthropomorphic

2. Performance Requirements and Design Constraints

3.1. Mechanical design

Transverse arch MCP joint

FRONT SIDE FRONT SIDE

end of the cable that actuated the ¯nger.

75° Transverse axis

Design, fabricate, and

Design, fabricate, and

Does L fall within 1 SD of no

Fig. 9. Pivoting cable attachment joints near base of robotic digits.

3.3. Sensing and instrumentation

Robo c Hand with Glove

7.4 V External Pressure

Fig. 11. Block diagram of experimental setup.

4. Mechanical Analysis and Data Processing

4.1. Mechanical model

motor lever arm d1

4.2. Data processing for torque calculation

4.3. Repeatability analysis

divided by the mean  as follows:

5.1. Required actuator torque results

Fourth Digit Torque (Nm)

Second Digit Torque (Nm)

Table 1. Repeatability of ¯nger torque measurements (Nm) from

Fifth digit Fourth digit Third digit Second digit

unique design and fabrication methods. An instrumentation and data processing

Press, Seoul, Korea, 2008), pp. 1156–1161.

Dustyn P. Roberts received her B.S. in Mechanical and Biomedical Engineering

Daniella Patrick is pursuing a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering and an M.S. in

You might also like

divided by the mean as follows: