Üst Ekstremite Robot Protezleri için Duyusal İkame Yöntemlerinin Değerlendirilmesi Amaçlı Bir Deney Düzeneği

Öz

Duyusal ikame, robotik protez kullanıcılarına yapay duyu geribildirimi sağlamak için kullanılan kolay, uygun maliyetli ve çoğunlukla tercih edilen bir yöntemdir. Böyle bir duyusal geribildirim, mesela yapay propriosepsiyon, titreşim gibi farklı bir duyusal kiple vücudun farklı yerlerinde sağlanmaktadır. Bu çalışmada, yapay propriyosepsiyon geribildiriminin koordineli manipülasyonlar üzerindeki katkısını belirlemek için kullanılabilecek yeni bir yöntem ve deney düzeneği önerilmektedir. Düzenek yeni bir haptik arayüz, bir girdi cihazı, bir kuvvet algılayıcısı ve bir sanal ortamdan oluşmaktadır. Geliştirilen haptik arayüzü, deneylerle teknik olarak değerlendirilmiştir. Ayrıca, deneklerin gerçek ve sanal yayları karşılaştırdığı bir psikofizik test de yapılmıştır. Sonuçlar, deney düzeneğinin amaçlanan yayları başarılı bir şekilde sunabildiğini göstermiştir. Önerilen deneysel yöntem, yayların bükülme prensibiyle çalışan Dirençlilik-Maharet testine dayanmaktadır. Bu kararsız görev büyük ölçüde kuvvet ve konum koordinasyonuna bağlı olduğu için, bu çalışmada önerilen sanal uygulama tabanlı deneysel metod, duyusal ikame yöntemlerini test etmek için yenilikçi bir ortam sağlamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Duyusal ikame,Kuvvet geribildirimi,Robotik protezler,Sanal ortam

An Experimental Setup to Evaluate Sensory Substitution Methods for Upper Limb Robotic Prostheses

Öz

Sensory substitution is an easy, cost effective and mostly-preferred method to provide artificial sensory feedback to users of robotic prostheses. This sensory feedback, such as artificial proprioception, is provided through different sensory modalities, such as vibration, at different locations on the body. In this study, we propose a new methodology and an experimental setup, which are to be used to determine contribution of artificial proprioception feedback on coordinated manipulations. The setup consists of a novel haptic interface, an input device, a force sensor, and a virtual environment. Experiments were performed to technically evaluate the developed haptic interface. To further validate the interface, we conducted a psychophysical test in which subjects compared real and virtual springs with different stiffness constants. Results showed that the setup was able to successfully render the intended springs. The experimental methodology is based on the Strength-Dexterity test, which works on the principle of buckling of compression springs. Since this unstable task highly depends on coordination of force and position, its virtual implementation provides a novel platform to test sensory substitution techniques.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Sensory substitution,Haptic feedback,Robotic prostheses,Virtual environment

Kaynakça

1. 1. Antfolk, C., D’Alonzo, M., Rosén, B., Lundborg, G., Sebelius, F., Cipriani, C., 2013. Sensory Feedback in Upper Limb Prosthetics. Expert Review of Medical Devices, 10(1), 45–54. doi:10.1586/erd.12.68
2. 2. D’Alonzo, M., Cipriani, C., 2012. Vibrotactile Sensory Substitution Elicits Feeling of Ownership of an Alien Hand. PloS one, 7(11), e50756. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0050756
3. 3. Dudkiewicz, I., Gabrielov, R., Seiv-Ner, I., Zelig, G., Heim, M., 2004. Evaluation of Prosthetic Usage in Upper Limb Amputees. Disability and Rehabilitation, 26(1), 60–63. doi:10.1080/09638280410001645094
4. 4. Østlie, K., Lesjø, I. M., Franklin, R. J., Garfelt, B., Skjeldal, O. H., Magnus, P., 2012. Prosthesis Rejection in Acquired Major Upperlimb Amputees: A Population-based Survey. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 7(4), 294–303. doi:10.3109/17483107.2011.635405
5. 5. Sainburg, R.L., Ghilardi, M.F., Poizner, H., Ghez, C., 1995. Control of Limb Dynamics in Normal Subjects and Patients Without Proprioception. Journal of neurophysiology, 73(2), 820–35.
6. 6. Witteveen, H.J.B., Droog, E.A., Rietman, J.S., Veltink, P.H., 2012. Vibro- and Electrotactile User Feedback on Hand Opening for Myoelectric Forearm Prostheses. IEEE Transactions on Bio-medical Engineering, 59(8), 2219–26. doi:10.1109/TBME.2012.2200678
7. 7. Mann, R., Reimers, S., 1970. Kinesthetic Sensing for the EMG Controlled “Boston Arm.” IEEE Transactions on Man Machine Systems,11(1), 110–115. doi:10.1109/TMMS.1970.299971
8. 8. Wheeler, J., Bark, K., Savall, J., Cutkosky, M., 2010. Investigation of Rotational Skin Stretch for Proprioceptive Feedback with Application to Myoelectric Systems. IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering, 18(1), 58–66. doi:10.1109/TNSRE.2009.2039602

9. 9. Nohama, P., Lopes, A.V., Cliquet Júnior, A., 1995. Electrotactile Stimulator for Artificial Proprioception. Artificial Organs, 19(3), 225–30.
10. 10. Arieta, A.H., Afthinos, M., Dermitzakis, K., 2011. Apparent Moving Sensation Recognition in Prosthetic Applications. Procedia Computer Science, 7, 133–135. doi:10.1016/j.procs.2011.09.037
11. 11. Pistohl, T., Joshi, D., Ganesh, G., Jackson, A., Nazarpour, K., 2015. Artificial Proprioceptive Feedback for Myoelectric Control. IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering. doi:10.1109/TNSRE.2014.2355856
12. 12. Patterson, P.E., Katz, J.A., 1992. Design and Evaluation of a Sensory Feedback System that Provides Grasping Pressure in a Myoelectric Hand. The Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, 29(1), 1. doi:10.1682/JRRD.1992.01.0001
13. 13. Blank, A., Okamura, A.M., Kuchenbecker, K. J., 2010. Identifying the Role of Proprioception in Upper-limb Prosthesis Control. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception,7(3),1–23. doi:10.1145/1773965.1773966
14. 14. Gurari, N., Kuchenbecker, K.J., Okamura, A. M., 2013. Perception of Springs with Visual and Proprioceptive Motion Cues: Implications for Prosthetics. IEEE Transactions on HumanMachine Systems, 43(1), 102–114. doi:10.1109/TSMCA.2012.2221038
15. 15. Stepp, C.E., Matsuoka, Y., 2012. Vibrotactile Sensory Substitution for Object Manipulation: Amplitude Versus Pulse Train Frequency Modulation. IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering, 20(1), 31–7. doi:10.1109/TNSRE.2011.2170856
16. 16. Chatterjee, A., Chaubey, P., Martin, J., Thakor, N., 2008. Testing a Prosthetic Haptic Feedback Simulator With an Interactive Force Matching Task. JPO Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics, 20(2), 27–34. doi:10.1097/01. JPO.0000311041.61628.be
17. 17. Brown, J.D., Shelley, M.K., Gardner, D., Gansallo, E.A., Gillespie, R.B., 2016. NonColocated Kinesthetic Display Limits Compliance Discrimination in the Absence of Terminal Force Cues. IEEE Transactions on Haptics, 9(3), 387-96. doi:10.1109/TOH.2016.2554120
18. 18. Chatterjee, A., Chaubey, P., Martin, J., Thakor, N.V., 2008. Quantifying Prosthesis Control Improvements using a Vibrotactile Representation of Grip Force. 2008 IEEE Region 5 Conference, 1–5. doi:10.1109/TPSD.2008.4562727
19. 19. Valero-Cuevas, F.J., 2005. An İntegrative Approach to the Biomechanical Function and Neuromuscular Control of the Fingers. Journal of Biomechanics, 38(4), 673–84. doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2004.04.006
20. 20. Valero-Cuevas, F.J., Smaby, N., Venkadesan, M., Peterson, M., Wright, T., 2003. The Strength-dexterity Test as a Measure of Dynamic Pinch Performance. Journal of Biomechanics, 36(2), 265–70.
21. 21. Venkadesan, M., Guckenheimer, J., ValeroCuevas, F.J., 2007. Manipulating the Edge of Instability. Journal of Biomechanics, 40(8), 1653–61. doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2007.01.022
22. 22. Gurari, N., Kuchenbecker, K.J., Okamura, A. M., 2009. Stiffness Discrimination with Visual and Proprioceptive Cues. In IEEE World Haptics Conference, 121–126. doi:10.1109/WHC.2009.4810845
23. 23. Cipriani, C., D’Alonzo, M., Carrozza, M.C., 2012. A Miniature Vibrotactile Sensory Substitution Device for Multifingered Hand Prosthetics. IEEE Transactions on Bio-medical Engineering, 59(2), 400–8. doi:10.1109/TBME.2011.2173342
24. 24. Samur, E., 2012. Performance Metrics for Haptic Interfaces. London: Springer London. doi:10.1007/978-1-4471-4225-6
25. 25. Wu, B., Klatzky, R.L., Hollis, R.L., 2011. Force, Torque, and Stiffness: Interactions in Perceptual Discrimination. IEEE Transactions on Haptics. doi:10.1109/TOH.2011.3