A low-cost myoelectric robotic

hand prosthetic
Jesus Hernandez and Nicholas Luciano
Maggie Delano, Ph.D
May 10th, 2019

Abstract

Robotics is revolutionizing the effectiveness and capabilities of limb prostheses. They vary
widely in their level of sophistication, with the myoelectric kind at the highest level. These
prostheses use EMG signals to actuate fingers via servo motors. The high sophistication of these
prosthetics, however, comes with a high cost. The high cost can serve as an obstacle to receiving
proper care, which burdens families or individuals seeking to improve their lives with technology.
Here we show that is it possible to 3D print your own myoelectric hand prosthesis for a relatively
cheap price of about $140.15 that only requires 10.28 ± 0.2286 N of force to operate. With this
project, we have come one step closer to making robotic prostheses more financially accessible.
Table of Contents

Abstract 0

Introduction 2

Background 3
Electromyography 3

Methods 4
Anatomy & Hardware 4
The Code 6
Remodeling the Finger Joints 7
Testing 9

Results 10
Finger Forces 10
Project Cost 10

Discussion & Conclusion 11

Future Work 12

References 13

1
Introduction

Opposable thumbs evolved to what they are today about 5 million years ago [1]. We have

evolved so far that, to wiggle a finger, one simply has to think it, and it happens almost

instantaneously. Unfortunately, not everyone has this ability. There are currently about 2 million

people in the US right now that live with limb loss [2], and the rate of amputation is reported as 30

new amputations every second [3]. Disability, of course, is not inherently negative. The problem is

the fact that to this day, 68% of those with an upper limb amputation use a split hook prosthesis [4],

making it the most common kind of prosthetic, rather than a prosthetic that more closely resembles

the human hand. As a result, the things they can manipulate with a high degree of dexterity are

limited.

That is not to say that the prosthetics that are commercially available today aren’t more

capable than a hook. In fact, prosthetics and robotic hands have become exponentially more

complex than a simple hook. They went from being rigid or merely for aesthetic purposes to being

actuated using electromyography techniques, meaning that the prosthetic is actuated by electric

signals from muscle contraction [5]. Why, then, aren’t these more capable prosthetics widely seen?

It’s because these cutting edge prosthetics are much more expensive than a simple hook. For a

person with no health insurance, a purely aesthetic prosthetic typically costs somewhere between

$3000 and $5000, whereas a prosthetic that ends in a split hook typically costs about $10,000 [6][7].

For a more complex myoelectric prosthetic, the prices range from $20,000 to $60,000 depending on

the location of the amputation, with prosthetics starting closer to the shoulder being more expensive

[6][7].

2
 To better serve the disabled community, who are statistically more likely to have lower

incomes, this project aims to provide a more cost-efficient robotic hand prosthetic. The prosthetic

was 3D printed using open source CAD files from a popular 3D printing site, Thingiverse [8]. The

fingers were our design, but the palm and forearm are from the original design. We used these

designs in accordance with the Creative Commons - Attribution - Share - Alike license. It can be

printed at any library, community center, or local college equipped with 3D printers that are open to

the public. Through this project, we hope to make myoelectric robotic prosthetics financially more

accessible.

Background

Electromyography
Electromyography (EMG) uses sensors to detect electrical activity under the skin. More

specifically, the EMG electrodes sense electrical activity when a muscle contracts by placing

electrodes on neighboring skin. To understand what exactly the EMG circuit is sensing, it is

necessary to look at muscles on the cellular level. Muscle fibers are composed of muscle cells, each

of which has a semi-permeable membrane with a different number of equally and oppositely

charged ions on each side creating a resting potential. When a neuron sends a signal to the cell, the

membrane relaxes and ions flow freely across the membrane to equalize the charges creating what is

called an action potential. Almost immediately after charges have been neutralized, an ion pump

starts to pump out the ions to recreate the original charge distribution. If the number of ions that

entered the cell passes a threshold, the potential across the membrane changes from about -80mV to

+30mV. This begins at the muscle cell closest to the motor neuron and spreads the length of the

3
muscle fiber. The cascading sequence down the muscle fiber is what causes the contraction.This

change in potential is what and EMG sensor measures through the skin using electrodes.

The EMG is sensed via an instrumentation amplifier (as seen in Figure 1) using a bipolar

EMG configuration, which happens to be the most common configuration for EMG. The IA often

uses three op amps, and has high input impedance to prevent voltage attenuation of the signal.

amplifier
skin surface

motor neuron

nerve axo n
muscle fibres _r-- Reference

Figure 1 - Diagram showing EMG setup​ ​[9]

Methods

Anatomy & Hardware

The robotic hand was closely modeled after the human hand, including tendons and joints.

The fingers have flexor tendons to curl and extensor tendons to straighten them out [10]. The

fingers attach to the palm with a condyloid joint, which are similar to the well-known ball and socket
​
joints​ [11]. The major difference between the two is that the condyloid joint has only 2 degrees of

freedom (DOF). The two upper joints on fingers (or one in the case of the thumb) are hinge joints,
​
with 1 DOF​ [11]. See these joints illustrated below in Figure 2. In our design, the paracord was

4
analogous to the extensor tendon and the fishing wire to the flexor tendon. Similarly, the joints in

the robotic hand were a fusion of the condyloid joint and the hinge joint. For simplicity, this was the

only kind of joint used.

Hinge JIIOllt
L'jj,~
i:,ondylOld
'Jlll'lt
• SI• MC111;11;,11rpsl
J;fn~

Figure 2 - hinge joint, left, condyloid joint, right

The palm of the handwas fabricated from a strong carbon fiber and nylon fused material
​
called onyx​ [12]. This was chosen for the material’s overall strength, heat resistance, and

lightweightedness. The fingers are made out TPU for more flexibility and abrasion resistance. Each

finger is connected to the palm with paracord to allow for them to return to their extended position

after bending. Servo motors pull fishing wire threaded through each finger. The wire runs through

channels in the fingers and connect down towards the forearm. To be able to wind the wire, the

motor acts as a spool. When the motor turns forward, it winds the wire, increasing the tension. As a

result, the finger attached to this wire bends and curls towards the palm. The hand uses the paracord

also threaded into the fingers to curl the fingers back after the tension in the wires is released. Figure

3 depicts our fully assembled 3D printed prosthetic design.

5
 Figure 3 - Prosthetic Hand

The Code
We aimed to control the prosthetic in such a way that would allow for variable intensity in

the movement of the fingers. This was to ensure that the arm does not grip delicate objects too

forcefully but is still able to hold heavier objects with a strong grip. To do this we started by

mapping the muscle sensor readings directly to the pulse width ranges needed to fully rotate the

servo motors. Later, we developed an algorithm to more accurately reflect how the user’s muscle is

contracting. The first step in the algorithm is to append the latest sensor reading to an array of a

fixed size, or window. The mean of the sensor readings within the window are then compared to a

threshold. If the mean is higher than that threshold, the sensor value is mapped to a range of pulse

widths that corresponds to the servo angle, in addition to being mapped to a list of predetermined

rates that control the speed of the servo motors. Finally, the servos are commanded to turn to the

specified positions at the calculated rate. If the mean sensor value is below the threshold, the servos

remain still. See Figure 4 below for a flow chart of the algorithm.

6
 Figure 4 - algorithm flow chart

Remodeling the Finger Joints

We also redesigned the joints between each of the phalanges of the fingers. The original

open source design used a hinge joint, where the point of rotation was an entire edge of contact.

Each of the phalanges was trapezoidal (from a profile view) so that they folded compactly. See

Figure 5 below for SolidWorks renderings of the original design.

Figure 5 -​ original finger design; left is a ¾ view, right is a profile view

7
The goal was to improve this design by reducing the force required to curl the finger and making the

finger more humanlike. There were two main iterations before arriving at the final design: a ball and

socket joint finger and a cylindrical hinge joint finger. See Figure 6​ below for renderings.

Figure 6​ -​ ball and socket joint, left, cylindrical hinge joint, right

These designs failed for similar reasons. The ball and socket design had increasingly complex

geometry, and the paracord would not fit without the finger intersecting itself. As for the hinge joint,

the hope was that there would be ample room for the paracord, but unfortunately this was not the

case. In this design, the paracord actually pushed the joint forward when the finger curled,

effectively dislocating the joint.

8
 Figure 7 - final finger design

After many iterations, the final design, seen above in Figure 7, used a condyloid-hinge hybrid

joint. It was similar to the original design in that the paracord fit well and did not obstruct

movement, but the joints were smoother and more natural looking.

Testing
In order to test that our new finger design did indeed require less force to curl we conducted

a simple tension measuring experiment. We first calculated the spring constant of a small tension

spring by hanging several masses to the end of the it and measuring the spring’s displacement. Then,

using Hooke’s Law, we were able to determine the spring constant by averaging the mass and

displacement data from each trial. Using that same spring, fishing wire, measuring tape, and of

course, the finger in question, we anchored the finger and pulled on the spring until the finger was

fully curled, as seen in Figure 8. Now that the spring constant had been calculated, we could solve

for the force in the wire again by using Hooke’s Law. This procedure was repeated for multiple trials

for each finger design and averaged together to acquire our final values.

9
 Figure 8​ -​ setup to find curling force

Results

Finger Forces

Through testing, the force required to curl the finger was found to be 10.28 N with an

uncertainty of 0.2286 N. We arrived at this number using a spring constant of 21.3917 N/m with an

uncertainty of 0.4313 N/m​ ​and an average displacement of 0.4805 m with an uncertainty of ± 0.001.

Meanwhile, the original design of the finger required a force of 12.36 N with an uncertainty of

0.2706 N.

Project Cost
The retail price for commercial myoelectric prosthetics runs anywhere between $20,000 and

$60,000. Of course, a lot goes into that price tag in addition to the cost of materials, like payment for

10
labor, for a proper fitting of the prosthetic, R&D, testing, and of course, a cut of the profits for the

manufacturing company and the company who owns the rights to the prosthetic. In order to make a

fair comparison, a bill of materials is necessary. However, that information is not public and so we

can only ever make a qualitative comparison to the products on the market right now.

Below is an itemized list of all expected equipment costs.

Item Cost per unit ($) # units Total item cost ($)
Raspberry Pi 34.99 1 34.99

EMG sensor cables 4.95 1 4.95

EMG sensor pads 7.95 (for 10) 1 7.95

Servo motors 14.95 2 29.90

MCP3008 ADC 2.26 1 2.26

Fishing wire 2.99 1 2.99

Paracord 4.99 1 4.99

Onyx material 50.05 1 50.05

TPU material 2.07 1 2.07

Total 140.15

Discussion & Conclusion

All in all, we were successful in creating a functional, low cost myoelectric prosthesis. The

fingers were redesigned to be more efficient at curling, while at the same time looking more human

like. More specifically, the new design required approximately 2 N less than the original design to

fully curl while making the grip appear more natural and less rigid. The algorithm used to control the

11
movement of the prosthetic works well and is quite responsive to the muscle movement of the user

as seen in the demo video [13] . Of course, the total project cost of $140 does not account for the

3D printer used to fabricate the prosthetic, which can vary anywhere between $200 - $30,000 or

more. It is important to note that this is a prototype, which means that if this were to go into

production, some expenses could be spared. For instance, the microcontroller and muscle sensor

could be replaced with other cheaper devices. Also of note is that the TPU material used for the

fingers of the prosthetic has a lifespan of about 1 year at room temperature while most high end

myoelectric prosthetics last for about 5 years. In the end, it is our hope that this work helps make

quality prosthetics more financially accessible to people of low socioeconomic status.

Future Work

Future work should include adding more DOF to the system. Currently, the fingers only

have 1 DOF, but in actuality, the condyloid joint allows for 2 DOF: up and down, but also side to

side. The robot wrist currently does not move, but it could be improved by adding servos to more

closely resemble the 3 DOF of the human wrist. Along similar lines, more servos could be added to

allow individual control of fingers, as opposed to having four attached to the same servo.

Additionally, the current gripping force is, qualitatively speaking, rather weak, and so finding

methods to increase gripping strength would be beneficial for grasping heavy objects.

12
References

[1] Brunelli, Giovanni R. (1999). "Stability in the first carpometacarpal joint". In Brüser, Peter;

Gilbert, Alain (eds.). Finger bone and joint injuries. Taylor & Francis. ISBN

978-1-85317-690-6.

[2] “Limb Loss Statistics.” Amputee Coalition,

www.amputee-coalition.org/resources/limb-loss-statistics/​.

[3] “Amputee Statistics You Ought to Know.” Advanced Amputee Solutions LLC, 2012,

www.advancedamputees.com/amputee-statistics-you-ought-know​.

[4] Millstein, S. G., et al. “Prosthetic Use in Adult Upper Limb Amputees: a Comparison of the

Body Powered and Electrically Powered Prostheses.” O&P Virtual Library,

www.oandplibrary.org/poi/1986_01_027.asp​.

[5] Spector, Dina. “Artificial Limbs Have Gone Through An Amazing Evolution.” Business Insider,

Business Insider, 19 Aug. 2014.

[6] “How Much Does a Prosthetic Arm Cost?” CostHelper,

https://health.costhelper.com/prosthetic-arms.html​.

[7] Ochalla, Bryan. “Will My Health Insurance Pay for Prosthetics?” QuoteWizard, 27 Dec. 2018,

https://quotewizard.com/health-insurance/prosthetic-coverage​.

[8] Gross, Ryan. “Robotic Prosthetic Hand by Grossrc.” Thingiverse,

www.thingiverse.com/thing:1691704​.

[9] Jamal, Muhammad Zahak. “Signal Acquisition Using Surface EMG and Circuit Design

Considerations for Robotic Prosthesis.” IntechOpen, IntechOpen, 17 Oct. 2012.

13
[10] “Tendons.” Handcare.org > Anatomy > Tendons,

www.assh.org/handcare/Anatomy/Tendons​.

[11] “Types of Synovial Joints.” Lumen,

https://courses.lumenlearning.com/wm-biology2/chapter/types-of-synovial-joints/​.

[12] “Onyx Filament.” Markforged, ​https://markforged.com/materials/onyx/

[13] Hernandez, Jesus and Nicholas Luciano, directors. E90 Demo: Low Cost Myoelectric Robotic

Hand Prosthetic. YouTube, 9 May 2019, ​https://youtu.be/zkfM6_Ap3QE​.

[14] Balasubramanian, Ravi, and Yoky Matsuoka. “Biological Stiffness Control Strategies for the

Anatomically Correct Testbed (ACT) Hand.” 2008 IEEE International Conference on

Robotics and Automation, 2008, doi:10.1109/robot.2008.4543293.

[15] Jang, Chul Ho, et al. “A Survey on Activities of Daily Living and Occupations of Upper

Extremity Amputees.” Annals of Rehabilitation Medicine, vol. 35, no. 6, 2011, p. 907.,

doi:10.5535/arm.2011.35.6.907.

[16] Reaz, M. B. I., et al. “Techniques of EMG Signal Analysis: Detection, Processing, Classification

and Applications.” Biological Procedures Online, vol. 8, no. 1, 2006, pp. 11–35.,

doi:10.1251/bpo115.

[17] Sharington, Grace. “The True Cost of Prosthetic Limbs: What It Means For Families.” Jordan

Thomas Foundation, 11 Apr. 2017,

www.jordanthomasfoundation.org/true-cost-prosthetic-limbs/​.

14
[18] Xu, Zhe, et al. “A Low-Cost and Modular, 20-DOF Anthropomorphic Robotic Hand: Design,

Actuation and Modeling.” 2013 13th IEEE-RAS International Conference on Humanoid

Robots (Humanoids), 2013, doi:10.1109/humanoids.2013.7030001.

[19] Zahak, Muhammad. “Signal Acquisition Using Surface EMG and Circuit Design Considerations

for Robotic Prosthesis.” Computational Intelligence in Electromyography Analysis - A

Perspective on Current Applications and Future Challenges, 2012, doi:10.5772/52556.

[20] “The Cost of a New Limb Can Add up Over a Lifetime.” Hospital for Special Surgery, 25 Apr.

2013, ​www.hss.edu/newsroom_prosthetic-leg-cost-over-lifetime.asp​.

15