Mechanism and Machine Theory 105 (2016) 3143

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Mechanism and Machine Theory

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/mechmt

Evolutionary synthesis of mechanisms applied to the design of

an exoskeleton for nger rehabilitation
A. Bataller, J.A. Cabrera , M. Clavijo, J.J. Castillo
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Mlaga, C/ Doctor Ortiz Ramos s/n, Ampliacin Campus Teatinos, 29071 Mlaga, Spain

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received 30 January 2016
Received in revised form 22 June 2016
Accepted 23 June 2016
Available online 30 June 2016
Keywords:
Finger exoskeleton
Synthesis of mechanisms
Finger rehabilitation

a b s t r a c t
To rehabilitate certain nger injuries, passive movement has proved to be positive. To help in this
process, a physiotherapist's aid is necessary. In the last years, a series of exoskeletons have been
presented that can move the nger in a controlled way, which can substitute the physiotherapist.
However, these devices are not popular, mainly because of their high complexity and price. This
work presents a simple, low-priced and easy-to-manufacture nger exoskeleton. These features
make it possible to manufacture a customized device, so that it imitates each patient's natural nger
movement accurately. In this paper, the whole process is explained, starting with the synthesis of
the mechanism adapted to the patient's nger characteristics and nishing with the manufacturing
of the exoskeleton with a 3D printer.
2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
In recent years, the use of mechanical systems for medical applications has increased notably. In the case of exoskeletons,
mechanisms with links which move with a controlled relative movement between them are often used. Mechanism synthesis
can be used to achieve the desired movement with the minimum number of degrees of freedom (dof). The reduction in the number of dof simplies the control of the system and its complexity.
There is a variety of nger exoskeletons designed to help to rehabilitate when there are limitations in active nger movement [13].
Different studies have demonstrated the benets of using these devices, by means of either active [4] or passive movement [5]. The main
differences among them are related to their degrees of freedom, the number and type of sensors and the control used. There are exoskeletons that help to rehabilitate the nger in different cases, such as the recuperation of nger movement after a stroke [68], improvement in hand movement when the patient is affected by spine damage [9] and hand rehabilitation after an accident or exor tendon
surgery [2,1012], among others.
Most exoskeletons in the market are designed to recuperate hand movement after a stroke or spine damage. Usually, they have ve
ngers and include sensors to act according to the force carried out by the patient. Some of these devices use a virtual environment to
create a great variety of motivating therapeutic exercises. These exoskeletons can be used for rehabilitation after an injury transmitting
passive force. However, these devices are heavy and complex as they need one motor per dof. To avoid the weight of the motors on the
hand, most of them transmit movement through cables that act over the hand.
There are a few exoskeletons specically designed to rehabilitate hand movement after an accident or exor surgery. These
devices are focused on continuous passive movement (CPM) [5]. This therapy avoids arthrobrosis on joints following trauma
or surgery by repetitive passive slow motion. It starts with a short range of motion in the rst sessions a few hours after surgery
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: jcabrera@uma.es (J.A. Cabrera).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2016.06.022
0094-114X/ 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

32

A. Bataller et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 105 (2016) 3143

and increases it during the following days up to full range. As most injuries affect only one nger, many of these devices are developed to move just one nger. Some of them can be adapted to different hand sizes but none of them are custom manufactured
adapted to each patient's phalanx lengths. Another limitation of the available devices is that they cannot be used as a splint to
immobilize the nger, which would allow applying motion immediately after surgery.
In general, complex models of 24 dof are used to reproduce real movement of all ve ngers. Depending on the variety and
accuracy of the desired movements, devices with fewer dof can be used. This allows manufacturing less expensive and easier-tocontrol devices. Some authors propose the development of devices with 20 dof, which slightly simplies the model but does not
solve the complexity problem totally [13].
Some researchers have computed the error when using simpler models. Cobos et al. [14] evaluated the circular and prismatic
grasping error for a simplied hand model with 9 dof. Results show error indexes close to 5.9% and 7.7% respectively when comparing it with a 24 dof model. The same evaluation for a hand with 6 dof shows errors close to 9.2% and 13.1% respectively.
After studying ve subjects grasping 57 different objects and monitoring 15 joint angles of their ngers, Santello et al. [15]
came to the conclusion that the angles between their phalanges were not completely independent from each other, suggesting
that a hand has between 5 and 6 effective degrees of freedom.
In the case of a single nger, a 4-dof kinematic model is used to reproduce realistic nger movement; 3 degrees of freedom are
used for each phalanx turn allowing exion/extension and the fourth dof is used for adduction/abduction. However, when grabbing objects of different sizes, we tend to move the nger along different portions of a specic trajectory instead of following different trajectories [16].
This suggests that a nger exoskeleton with 1 dof could work properly for certain rehabilitation applications. The fact that there is
only 1 dof affects the variety of movements but it does not affect movement accuracy. One point on a nger with 1 dof follows one
predened trajectory. However, if it had more degrees of freedom, it could follow different trajectories. Hence, in the rst case the
point follows a path while in the second case it can move in an area which is limited by a shape that denes the limits of nger movement. Nevertheless, this is not a handicap in an exoskeleton for rehabilitation with CPM as it is enough for the device to transmit exion/
extension motion to the nger, moving it along different portions of a specic path up to full range motion.
To ensure that a 1-dof exoskeleton follows patients' natural nger movement accurately, a mechanism synthesis process can
be used. Not only does the synthesis of the mechanism have to take into account a desired path, but the phalanx angles during
movement as well.
During the last 40 years a great effort has been carried out in computational synthesis of mechanisms. The great increase in
computer power has allowed applying these methods to the minimization of goal functions. One of the rst authors who studied
these methods was Han [17], whose work was later improved by Kramer and Sandor [18] and Sohoni and Haug [19].
Recently, an increasing number of works have used evolutionary strategies to solve mechanism synthesis problems [2024].
The main advantages of these methods are their simplicity in implementing algorithms and their low computational cost in
some cases. One of the greatest challenges when these kinds of algorithms are used for synthesis of mechanisms is to nd a
good representation of the mechanisms. The rst works using a genetic algorithm were carried out by Fang [20] and Ronston
and Sturges [21]. Their algorithms used a binary representation of the mechanisms, whose processing procedures were time consuming and computationally expensive. Kunjur and Krishnamurty [22] used a real number representation of the mechanisms and
incorporated a guided genetic operator reducing computing time and obtaining more accurate results. Cabrera et al. [23,24] used a
new evolutionary technique called Differential Evolution to solve a four-bar path mechanism synthesis obtaining very accurate
results.
In the path generation synthesis, the coupler point traces a trajectory which is compared with the target trajectory. Then, an
objective function is used to obtain the error between the desired and generated path. This function is generally formulated as the
sum of squares of the differences between both trajectories [17,18,2224].
In this work, a new 1 dof nger exoskeleton to enable rehabilitation after an injury or exor tendon surgery is presented. The
main advantages of the new design are:
Customizable according to the shape of patients' ngers. The exoskeleton is adapted to each patient's nger movement by
means of an evolutionary technique for synthesis of mechanisms.
Simple to control and easy to manufacture.
Economic.
Can be used as a splint to immobilize the nger.
This paper is structured as follows: Section 2 explains the way to obtain the target path and the goal function. Section 3 is
dedicated to dening the steps to be followed in order to obtain the results by means of an evolutionary algorithm. Section 4 explains the denition of the synthesis problem. Section 5 presents the results, which are used to create a 3D virtual model in a
CAD-CAE parametric software application. This model allows simulating the movement of the exoskeleton, validating the design
and manufacturing the device with a 3D printer. Section 6 shows the device and its control. Finally, discussion and conclusions are
drawn in Sections 7 and 8 respectively.
2. Goal function
In this work, the mechanism shown in Fig. 1 is used to dene the goal function. The nger is represented by bars L1, L2 and L3
and its end point follows the trajectory displayed in Fig. 1.

A. Bataller et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 105 (2016) 3143

33

Fig. 1. Proposed mechanism with the design variables.

The mechanism has been designed looking for certain characteristics. The mechanisms of the exoskeletons mentioned above
act on top of the nger while in our case the goal is to nd a mechanism that wraps the phalanges. This allows using the exoskeleton as a splint to immobilize the nger after surgery applying passive movement within the rst days. Moreover, the proposed mechanism only has six links while the mentioned devices have eight or more links, including the exoskeletons with
only 1 dof [11].
The input data and design variables for the synthesis process are shown in Table 1. It is interesting to point out that input position 2 is a design variable and its value is the one which makes point F of the mechanism occupy each one of the points obtained after path discretization (see Fig. 1). On the other hand, angle values BAC and ECF are affected by the condition
imposed on sides BC and CF so that they are parallel to the middle and distal phalanges. This condition is formulated as part
of the objective function.
As seen in Table 1, the length of each of the patient's three phalanges is needed as input data. These values can be measured
accurately from joint to joint by means of an X-ray of the injured nger (see Fig. 2).

Table 1
Input data and design variables for the synthesis process.
Input data

Design variables

L1: Proximal phalanx length

L2: Middle phalanx length
L3: Distal phalanx length

2: input link angular position

x0, y0: coordinates of point O2
0: xed link angular position
r1: xed link length
r2: O2A (link 2) length
r3: AB (link 3) length
r4: O4B (link 4) length
rAC: AC length
AC: BAC angle
r5: DE (link 5) length
r6: CE (link 6) length
rD: O2D length
D: AO2 D angle
CF: ECF angle

34

A. Bataller et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 105 (2016) 3143

Fig. 2. a) Proximal phalanx length measured on an X-ray of the index nger, b) middle phalanx length, c) distal phalanx length.

We can also measure some other parameters that are needed for the design of the exoskeleton such as phalanx widths (see
Fig. 3a). Two more values that are used as restrictions in the synthesis process are the length from the ngertip to the skin between the injured nger and the next one and from there to the center of the proximal phalanx joint (see Fig. 3b).
Once obtained the input data, it is necessary to dene the desired trajectory of the ngertip and the phalanx angles when
moving the injured nger. To obtain this information, the exo-extension movement of the same nger of the healthy hand is
video-recorded. Then, the movement is studied by means of a video edition freeware software application (Kinovea). This software is used for biomechanical studies and allows measuring the position of different points, lengths and angles among other geometric values.
The desired trajectory of point F in the mechanism (see generated path in Fig. 1) can be dened by means of the measured
positions of the end point of the ngertip during the recorded movement (see Fig. 4). The angles of each phalanx can also be
measured with respect to a horizontal axis in different positions (see Fig. 4). All these values are shown in Table 2.
Once the desired trajectory and the angles of each phalanx are known, the objective function proposed in this work can be
dened. This function has two different parts. The rst one computes the error in distance between the points of the desired trajectory (see Table 2) and the positions of point F in the mechanism during movement (see Fig. 1). The second part determines the
quadratic error between the measured angles for the three phalanges in the healthy nger and the equivalent angles in the mechanism. It also considers the error between the measured angle for the middle phalanx and side BC angle.
In order to measure the position error of point F, we dene:
i
i
{Fdi} = {FXd
, FYd
}: Set of points measured during the movement of the nger
i
i
{Fgi} = {FXg
, FYg
}: Set of points of the generated path in the synthetized mechanism

Fig. 3. a) Phalanx widths measured on an X-ray of the nger. b) Other lengths used as restrictions in the synthesis process.

A. Bataller et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 105 (2016) 3143

35

Fig. 4. Coordinates of the endpoint of the ngertip and the angles of the phalanges measured in two different frames of the video: a) extended nger b) exed
nger.

So, the rst part of the objective function can be written as:

f 1 i1



F Xd F Xg

2

2 
i
i
F Yd F Yg

Where N is the number of points to be synthetized and = [x0, y0,0, r1, r2, r3, r4, rAC, AC, r5, r6, rD, D, CF, 12,., N
2 ] are the
design variables.
In order to obtain {Fgi}, we use a vector loop equation for the four-bar linkage {r1, r2, r3, r4} to calculate the positions of points C
and D with respect to the absolute coordinate system, OXY (see Fig. 1). Then, by analyzing added dyad RR{r5,r6}, we obtain the
position of point F with respect to the same coordinate system.
The vector loop equation for the four-bar linkage with respect to coordinate system O2X0Y0 is:
r 2 sin02 r 3 sin 03 r 4 sin 04
r 2 cos02 r 3 cos03 r 1 r 4 cos04

Where all the known values are dened in Fig. 1. The unknowns are angles 3 and 4.

Table 2
Measured values representing the desired coordinates of point F and the desired angle of each phalanx in the synthetized mechanism.
Position

FX [mm]

FY [mm]

PH1 [deg]

PH2 [deg]

PH3 [deg]

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

90.03
82.33
77.75
70.57
65
52.54
43.63
31.39
18.39
13.01
7.34
4.17
1.67
0.54
3.49
5.45

7.9
31.78
39.24
47.6
52.6
57.98
61.51
60.9
55.29
52.54
47.06
43.02
40.11
36.46
32.71
29.57

2.2
9.7
12.9
17.3
20
22.4
26.1
29.6
31.8
34.5
36.4
38.4
40.4
42.6
46.9
50.7

9.6
30.2
37.5
46.1
51.8
65.5
73.7
87.4
103.3
111.6
121.5
128.5
136
141.6
151.6
159.9

6.9
39.7
48.8
62.2
70.4
90.6
103.2
122
148.4
160.4
175.5
186.2
194.2
202.7
213.5
221.5

36

A. Bataller et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 105 (2016) 3143

Once Eq. (2) has been solved, the position of points B, C and D can be obtained with respect to coordinate system
O2X0Y0:
BX 0
BY 0
C X0
CY0
DX 0
DY 0

r 1 r 4 cos04
r 4 sin04
r 2 cos02 r AC cos03 AC
r 2 sin02 rAC sin03 AC
r D cos02 D
r D sin02 D

Then, we write these positions with respect to absolute coordinate system OXY:




BX
BY
CX
CY
DX
DY

cos0
sin0

sin0
cos0

cos0
sin0

sin0
cos0

cos0
sin0

sin0
cos0





BX 0
BY 0
CX0
CY0
DX 0
DY 0

x0
y0
x0
y0
x0
y0



4


Once the position of points C and D is known, we add dyad RR{r5,r6} dened by:
q
C X DX 2 C Y DY 2


C DY
CD atan Y
C X DX
!
2
CD r 25 r 26
acos
2CDr 5
CD

We use the values obtained from Eq. (5) to calculate the position of point E with respect to absolute coordinate system OXY
and the angle of link 6:
EX DX r 5 cosCD
EY DY r 5 sinCD


E C Y
6 atan Y
EX C X

Finally, the position of point F with respect to absolute coordinate system OXY is obtained as:


F Xg
F Yg

CX
CY

L3 cos6 CF
L3 sin6 CF


7

The second part of the objective function measures the quadratic error between the desired and generated angles for the
three phalanges. The error between the second phalange angle and the angle of side BC is also taken into account in the following
equation:
N

f 2 i1



PH1d PH1g

2

2

2

2 
i
i
i
i
i
i
PH2d PH2g PH3d PH3g PH2d BC

In order to calculate the angles of each phalanx during movement, we need to know the position of point G in dyad RR{L1, L2}
formed by the proximal and middle phalanges:
2

acos

OC L21 L22

2OCL1
 
CY
C atan
CX

 

GX
L cosC
1
L1 sinC
GY

A. Bataller et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 105 (2016) 3143

37

Using Eqs. (4), (7) and (9), we obtain the following expressions for the angle of each phalanx and the side BC angle:
 
G
PH1g atan Y
GX


C GY
PHg atan Y
C X GX
PH3g atan
BC

F Yg C Y

10

F Xg C X


C BY
atan Y
C X BX

Therefore, the optimization problem is dened as:

minf f 1 M1 f 2 M 2 h g
subject to :
xi
lii xi lsi

11

Where h() evaluates the sequence condition for the crank angle. If the sequence condition for crank angle 2 is true,
h() = 0. If the sequence condition is false, the crank angles are not in ascending or descending order and h() = 1 [23].
M1 and M2 are the penalty factors for functions f2() and h(). Factor M1 is used to balance the relative inuence of functions f1() and f2() and M2 is a constant of a very high value that penalizes the goal function when the associated constraint fails.
3. The MUMSA algorithm
Once the optimization problem has been explained in the previous section, an algorithm to solve the optimization problem is
required. In this work an evolutionary algorithm is used [24]. The proposed algorithm, which is dened as Malaga University
Mechanism Synthesis Algorithm (MUMSA), has the following three steps:
1. The algorithm starts with the random generation of a starting population with NP individuals. For mechanism synthesis, the
starting population is dened by sets of design variables whose values are randomly generated within the searching space.
Each individual (chromosome) of the population is a possible solution to the problem and it is formed by parameters
(genes) that are the design variables of the problem. In this paper, all genes are expressed as real values and grouped in a vector that represents a chromosome:
x1 ; xn  x R

12

2. To create a new population, we select a couple of individuals and apply reproduction and mutation operators according to the
following denitions:
In the selection process, the best individual and two individuals randomly selected with uniform distribution create a
disturbing vector V. The scheme known as Differential Evolution [25], yields:
i : i 1; NP 
V best F r1 r2

13

Where best is the best individual of a population of NP individuals, r1 and r2 are two individuals randomly selected
in the population and F is a real value that controls the disturbance of the best individual.
The next procedure of the algorithm is reproduction, where V is crossed over with individual i of the current population (i) to
generate individual i of the next population (inew). If new descendant inew is better than its antecedent, i, it will replace it. Otherwise, i remains and inew is rejected. Therefore, the population neither increases nor decreases. Crossover is carried out with a
probability dened as CP [0, 1].
The last procedure is mutation. Depending on the mutation probability, genes of each parent can be chosen to mutate. For example, if gene xi,n mutates, the operator randomly chooses a value within the interval of real values [xi,n range, xi,n + range], which is
added or subtracted from xi,n, depending on the direction of the mutation. Mutation is carried out with a probability dened as
MP [0, 1], which is lower than CP. When a mutated gene leaves the allowed interval, the optimization algorithm itself rejects it because it does not fulll the restrictions.
3. If the algorithm reaches the maximum number of iterations or the error is less than an acceptable value, it nishes. Otherwise,
it returns to step 2.

38

A. Bataller et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 105 (2016) 3143

In natural reproduction, parents' genes are interchanged to form the genes of their descendant or descendants. For example, if
CP=0.5, the new descendant will have 50% of its genes from parent 1 and 50% from parent 2. Fig. 5 shows how the reproduction
and mutation operators work.
4. Denition of the problem
As described in Section 2, a set of target positions for the endpoint of the ngertip and phalanx angles have to be set to dene
the problem (see Table 2). The case discussed here is a path and motion generation synthesis problem without prescribed timing.
The optimization problem is dened as follows:
Input parameters:

L1 52:7 mm; L2 28:6 mm; L3 18:44 mm

Design variables:
h
i
1
N
x0 ; y0 ; 0 ; r 1 ; r 2 ; r 3 ; r 4 ; r AC ; AC ; r 5 ; r 6 ; r D ; D ; CF ; 2 ; ; 2

Target points:

Fd

8
>
>
<

90:03; 7:9
65; 52:6

18:39; 55:29
>
>
:
1:67; 40:11

70:57; 47:6
31:39; 60:9
4:17; 43:02
5:45; 29:71

77:75; 39:24
43:63; 61:51
7:34; 47:06
3:49; 32:71

82:33; 31:78
52:54; 57:98
13:01; 52:54
0:54; 36:46

9
>
>
=
>
>
;

Target phalanx angles:

PH1

2:2

31:8

9:7

34:5

12:9

36:4

17:3

38:4

20

40:4

22:4

42:6

26:1

46:9

Fig. 5. Reproduction followed by mutation.

29:6

50:7

A. Bataller et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 105 (2016) 3143

39

Table 3
Results of the synthesis problem resolution. At the bottom, the error calculated with Eqs. (1) and (8) is shown.
Proposed mechanism
r1 [mm]
r2 [mm]
r3 [mm]
r4 [mm]
rAC [mm]
AC [rad]
r5 [mm]
r6 [mm]
rD [mm]
D [rad]
CF [rad]
x0 [mm]
y0 [mm]
0 [rad]

Proposed mechanism
12 [rad]
22 [rad]
32 [rad]
42 [rad]
52 [rad]
62 [rad]
72 [rad]
82 [rad]
92 [rad]
10
2 [rad]
11
2 [rad]
12
2 [rad]
13
2 [rad]
14
2 [rad]
15
2 [rad]
16
2 [rad]

19.097291
32.495716
28.069289
28.564681
19.077990
3.051444
13.953434
12.513065
34.309532
0.0034449
1.5206839
29.000000
0.0367892
4.7123889

Error [mm2 + rad2]

PH2

PH3

6.438887
6.080352
5.953821
5.806142
5.708697
5.529763
5.392375
5.277358
5.098184
5.045747
4.960712
4.908279
4.866048
4.823393
4.768722
4.714827

44.17

30:2

111:6

39:7

160:4

9:6

103:3

6:9

148:4

37:5

121:5

46:1

128:5

48:8

175:5

51:8

136

62:2

186:2

70:4

194:2

65:5

141:6


90:6

202:7

73:7

151:6

87:4

159:9


103:2

213:5

122

221:5

Variable limits:
i

r 1 ; r 2 ; r 3 ; r4 ; r 5 ; r 6 ; r AC ; r D ; y0 0; 40 AC ; D ; CF ; 2 0; 2
Restrictions:
In order to avoid collision between the mechanism and the hand at the base of the injured nger, the X coordinate of point O2,
x0, has to have a value of N28.8 mm (see Fig. 3b). Besides, angle 0 has to be in the fourth quadrant. These restrictions can be
written as:
x0 29; 40; 0 3=2; 2

Fig. 6. a) Path followed by the endpoint of the ngertip (desired path) versus path followed by point F of the mechanism (obtained path). b) Finger phalanx angles
(measured angles) versus mechanism phalanx angles (obtained angles) and obtained angle BC.

40

A. Bataller et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 105 (2016) 3143

Fig. 7. Evolution of position, angle and total error.

Parameters of the algorithm:

NP = 100,CP= 0.4,MP= 0.2 , range=0.5 , F =0.6 , itermax= 20.000.
To simplify the development of the algorithm in this work, the parameters mentioned above have been dened based on experience. However, a self-adapting technique could be used to solve the problem without needing to dene values CP, MP, range
and F previously [26].

5. Results
This section analyzes the results of the solution to our problem when applying the algorithm and the goal function developed
previously. The entire algorithm proposed, including the genetic operators, has been run sequentially following the steps indicated
in Section 3. Once the problem has been solved, we obtain the results shown in Table 3.
Fig. 6a shows that point F of the mechanism synthesized by means of the MUMSA algorithm follows the desired path (trajectory of the endpoint of the ngertip) with little error. In Fig. 6b we can see that the difference between the angles of each phalanx
of the nger during movement and the equivalent angles in the mechanism is also small.
Fig. 7 shows that the position error and the angle error uctuate along the evolution of the population. However, the objective
function, the sum of the position error and the phalanx angle errors, diminishes progressively during the optimization process.
To check the efciency of the optimization algorithm, we have run it 100 times with the conditions dened in Section 4. Fig. 8
shows the evolution of the population which obtained the best nal solution to the objective function. The superior line of the box
is the upper quartile error value. The inferior line of the box is the lower quartile error value. The line inside the box is the median
error and the rest of the data are represented outside these boxes. We can observe how the median of the error data decreases,
obtaining the best result in the last iteration.

Fig. 8. Statistical parameters during iterations when the MUMSA algorithm is run 100 times.

A. Bataller et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 105 (2016) 3143

41

Fig. 9. a) Path followed by the endpoint of the ngertip with points O2 and O4 of the mechanism in three different positions. b) Finger phalanx angles in the same
three previously described cases.

Finally, a comparison between the ngertip trajectories and the phalanx angles, when the relative position of the exoskeleton
with respect to the nger is not the expected one, has been carried out.
Fig. 9 shows the trajectory followed by point F of the mechanism and the phalanx angles when centers O2 and O4 are not in
the expected position. It can be seen that displacements of 1 mm and 2 mm forward change mechanism behavior slightly. Error
functions f1() and f2() for point positions and phalanx angles are shown in Table 4.
6. The device
Once the solution to the synthesis problem has been obtained, we can create a virtual model of the exoskeleton. To do so, we
have previously built a parametric model in CAD-CAM software with adjustable geometry depending on the values obtained for
the mechanism design variables and the measurements of the patient's phalanges (Fig. 10a).
In Fig. 10b we can see the device manufactured with a 3D printer. The frame of the mechanism is located in the palm. The
motor is xed to the hand using a velcro strap that surrounds the metacarpal bones.
The exoskeleton can be used as a splint to immobilize the nger allowing only passive movement.
Motion is generated with a servo motor that is controlled by means of an Arduino ONE board. The system can work manually or automatically with preset ranges of motion (see Fig. 11). Normally, rehabilitation will require motion with shorter trajectories in the rst stage of treatment and longer ones at the end. The motion range and velocity can easily be set up and stored in
the device by the physiotherapist so that the only options for the patient to control the exoskeleton at home are to switch it on or
off.
7. Discussion
The customized exoskeleton presented in this paper is a new approach to the design of devices for nger rehabilitation after
accidents or tendon surgery based on CPM. Current devices such as [2,10,12] have up to 4 dof and use force sensors. This makes
them very exible and functional for a variety of exercises but at the same time they are voluminous, heavy, complex and expensive. The use of mechanism synthesis with evolutionary algorithms gives way to the design of optimized exoskeletons with just 1
dof. This enables patients to do a specic rehabilitation exercise that can be adjusted in a range of motion. Due to its simplicity,
the device uses an inexpensive and easy-to-program control and can be custom-made, which ensures a perfect t to the patient's
nger. It can be manufactured with a 3D printer and its lightness allows it to be used as a splint.
One of the key factors when using evolutionary techniques for synthesis of mechanisms is how to dene the error. In this
work, millimeters have been used to measure distance errors and radians to measure angle errors. The weight of these two errors
is balanced along the optimization process by means of factor M1 (Eq. (11)). This error is used internally to compare different
Table 4
Error functions when the position of points O2 and O4 move forward 1 and 2 mm.

f1() [mm2]
f2() [rad2]

Expected position

+1 mm error position

+2 mm error position

41.1525
3.0258

66.4573
2.8875

123.7621
3.1106

42

A. Bataller et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 105 (2016) 3143

Fig. 10. a) Parametric model developed using CAD-CAE software. b) Device manufactured with a 3D printer with an overlapped kinematic scheme of the
mechanism.

mechanisms obtained along the synthesis process and to select the best mechanism. Therefore, the error units used are not relevant as long as the same units have been used to calculate the error for all mechanisms.
In Section 5, the optimization algorithm has been run 100 times to check its efciency. It can be seen that the solutions are
highly dispersed at the beginning. However, after only a few iterations, the error value becomes satisfactory.
To ensure the correct position of the exoskeleton with respect to the nger, the velcro strap that xes the motor to the hand
will be fastened when the ngertip touches the extreme of the device. As the device is customized for the patient, it will t accurately. However, a comparison between ngertip trajectories and phalanx angles, when the position of the exoskeleton is not
the expected one, has been carried out in Section 5. The results show that positioning errors of 1 mm and 2 mm have little impact
on the expected device operation. In the rst case, the function error gives an average error of 0.1 mm for the position of the ngertip and 0.04 for the angle of the phalanges while the average errors are 0.3 mm and 0.08 in the second case.

8. Conclusions
A customizable, low-priced exoskeleton for certain types of rehabilitation has been presented. The device can reproduce a
patient's nger movement accurately thanks to the synthesis process followed to generate the exoskeleton mechanism. The
input data and restrictions for the synthesis approach can easily be obtained by means of an X-ray of the injured nger and a
video of the same nger of the healthy hand. The use of the MUMSA algorithm provides good results in little time with low computational effort. A parametric 3D model dened in CAD-CAE software allows simulating device behavior and generating the les
needed to manufacture the device with a 3D printer. A servo motor and an Arduino control board complete the simple, inexpensive and easy-to-manufacture nger exoskeleton.
The device can be developed to move any of the ngers except the thumb. This implies the resolution to the synthesis problem
for the middle, ring or little nger following the process that has been explained for the index nger in this paper.
Future research will be focused on moving several ngers of the same hand. The d could still have 1 dof as the ngers could be
moved together, each one following its own natural trajectory. In this case, the exoskeleton should be adapted to avoid lateral
collisions between adjacent ngers.

Fig. 11. Open-loop control.

A. Bataller et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 105 (2016) 3143

43

References
[1] A. Battezzato, Towards an underactuated finger exoskeleton: an optimization process of a two-phalange device based on kinetostatic analysis, Mech. Mach. Theory 78 (2014) 116130.
[2] F. Zhang, L. Hua, H. Chen, S. Wang, Design and development of a hand exoskeleton for rehabilitation of hand injuries, Mech. Mach. Theory 73 (2014) 103116.
[3] J. Iqbal, H. Khan, N.G. Tsagarakis, D.G. Caldwell, A novel exoskeleton robotic system for hand rehabilitation conceptualization to prototyping, Biocybern. and
Biomed. Eng. 34 (2014) 7989.
[4] H.C. Fischer, K. Stubblefield, T. Kline, X. Luo, R.V. Kenyon, D.G. Kamper, Hand rehabilitation following stroke: a pilot study of assisted finger extension training in a
virtual environment, Top. Stroke Rehabil. 14 (2007) 112, http://dx.doi.org/10.1310/tsr1401-1.
[5] S.W. O'Driscoll, N.J. Giori, Continuous passive motion (CPM): theory and principles of clinical application, J. Rehabil. Res. Dev. 37 (2) (2000) 179188.
[6] T.T. Worsnopp, M.A. Peshkin, J.E. Colgate, D.G. Kamper, An Actuated Finger Exoskeleton for Hand Rehabilitation Following Stroke, Proceedings of the 2007 IEEE
10th International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics, June 1215, Noordwijk, The Netherlands, 2007.
[7] C.D. Takahashi, L. Der-Yeghiaian, V.H. Le, S.C. Cramer, A Robotic Device for Hand Motor Therapy After Stroke, Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE 9th International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics June 28July 1, Chicago, IL, USA, 2005.
[8] T. Kline, B.S.D. Kamper, B. Schmit, Control System for Pneumatically Controlled Glove to Assist in Grasp Activities, Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE. 9th International
Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics. June 28July 1, Chicago, IL, USA, 2005.
[9] M. DiCicco, L. Lucas, Y. Matsuoka, Comparison of control strategies for an EMG controlled orthotic exoskeleton for the hand, Proceedings of the 2004 IEEE International Conference on Robotics & Automation. April 2004, New Orleans, LA, USA, April 2004.
[10] A. Wege, G. Hommel, Development and Control of a Hand Exoskeleton for Rehabilitation of Hand Injuries, International Conference on Intelligent Robots and
Systems, 26 August, Edmonton, Canada, 2005.
[11] E.T. Wolbrecht, D.J. Reinkensmeyer, A. Perez-Gracia, Single degree-of-freedom exoskeleton mechanism design for finger rehabilitation, IEEE 12th International
Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics. 29 Jun01 Jul 2011. Zurich, Switzerland, 2011.
[12] Y. Fu, P. Wang, S. Wang, H. Liu, F. Zhang, Design and Development of a Portable Exoskeleton Based CPM Machine for Rehabilitation of Hand Injuries, Proceedings
of the 2007 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics. 1518 December, Sanya, China, 2007.
[13] M.J. Lelieveld, T. Maeno, Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. May 2006. Orlando, Florida, USA, 2006.
[14] S. Cobos, M. Ferre, M.A. Sanchez-Uran, J. Ortego, C. Pea, Efficient human hand kinematics for manipulation tasks, IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent
Robots and Systems Acropolis Convention Center. Nice, France, Sept, 2226, 2008, 2008.
[15] M. Santello, M. Flanders, J.F. Soechting, Postural hand synergies for tool use, J. Neurosci. 18 (1998) 1010510115.
[16] D.G. Kamper, E.G. Cruz, M.P. Siegel, Stereotypical fingertip trajectories during grasp, J. Neurophysiol. 90 (2003) 37023710.
[17] C. Han, A general method for the optimum design of mechanisms, J. Mech. (1966) 301313.
[18] S.N. Kramer, G.N. Sandor, Selective precision synthesis. A general method of optimization for planar mechanisms, J. Eng. Ind. 2 (1975) 678701.
[19] V.N. Sohoni, E.J. Haug, A state space technique for optimal design of mechanisms, ASME J. Mech. Des. 104 (1982) 792798.
[20] W.E. Fang, Simultaneous Type and Dimensional Synthesis of Mechanisms by Genetic Algorithms, Mechanism Synthesis Analysis, vol. 701994.
[21] G.D. Roston, R.H. Sturges, Genetic algorithm synthesis of four-bar mechanisms, Artif. Intell. Eng. Des. Anal. and Manuf. 10 (1996) 371390.
[22] A. Kunjur, S. Krishnamurty, Genetic algorithms in mechanical synthesis, J. Appl. Mech. Robot. 4 (2) (1997) 1824.
[23] J.A. Cabrera, A. Simon, M. Prado, Optimal synthesis of mechanisms with genetic algorithms, Mech. Mach. Theory 37 (2002) 11651175.
[24] J.A. Cabrera, A. Ortiz, F. Nadal, J.J. Castillo, An evolutionary algorithm for path synthesis of mechanisms, Mech. Mach. Theory 46 (2011) 127141.
[25] R. Storn, K. Price, Differential evolution. A simple and efficient heuristic scheme for global optimization over continuous spaces, J. Glob. Optim. 11 (1997)
341359.
[26] A. Ortiz, J.A. Cabrera, A. Guerra, A. Simon, The IMMa optimization algorithm without control input parameters, Veh. Syst. Dyn. 47 (2009) 243264.