Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-skzmx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-04T08:48:40.457Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Research on control method of upper limb exoskeleton based on mixed perception model

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

WenDong Wang*
Affiliation:
School of Mechanical Engineering, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi’an, China
JunBo Zhang
Affiliation:
School of Mechanical Engineering, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi’an, China
Dezhi Kong
Affiliation:
School of Mechanical Engineering, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi’an, China
Shibin Su
Affiliation:
Techinical Department, CSSC Guangzhou Huangpu Shipbuilding Company Limited, Guangzhou, China
XiaoQing Yuan
Affiliation:
School of Mechanical Engineering, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi’an, China
Chengzhi Zhao
Affiliation:
School of Mechanical Engineering, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi’an, China
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: wdwang@nwpu.edu.cn
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

As one of the research hotspots in the field of rehabilitation robotics, the upper limb exoskeleton robot has been widely used in the field of rehabilitation. However, the existing methods cannot comprehensively and accurately reflect the motion state of patients, which may lead to overtraining and secondary injury of patients in the process of rehabilitation training. In this paper, an upper limb exoskeleton control method based on mixed perception model of motion intention and intensity is proposed, which is based on the 6 degree-of-freedom upper limb rehabilitation exoskeleton in the laboratory. First, the kinematic information and heart rate information in the rehabilitation process of patients are collected, corresponding to patients’ motion intention and motion intensity, and fused to obtain the mixed perception vector. Second, the motion perception model based on long short-term memory neural network is established to realize the prediction of upper limb motion trajectory of patients and compared with back-propagation neural network to prove its effectiveness. Finally, the control system is built, and both offline and online test of the control method proposed are implemented. The experimental results show that the method can achieve comprehensive motion state perception of patients, realize real-time and accurate prediction trajectory according to human motion intention and intensity. The average prediction accuracy is 95.3%, and predicted joint angle error is less than 5 degrees. Therefore, the control method based on mixed perception model has good robustness and universality, which provides a new method for the active control of upper limb exoskeleton.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Figure 1. Schematic diagram of mixed vector construction.

Figure 1

Figure 2. Schematic diagram of model double period input.

Figure 2

Figure 3. The layout of sensors.

Figure 3

Figure 4. Angular velocity information collection.

Figure 4

Figure 5. Schematic diagram of LSTM cell.

Figure 5

Figure 6. Schematic diagram of multinetwork superposition model.

Figure 6

Table I. Parameter of LSTM neural network.

Figure 7

Figure 7. Schematic diagram of training motion.

Figure 8

Figure 8. Partial trajectory prediction comparison.

Figure 9

Figure 9. Partial trajectory prediction after filtering.

Figure 10

Figure 10. Elbow joint trajectory of volunteer A.

Figure 11

Figure 11. Elbow joint velocity of volunteer A.

Figure 12

Figure 12. (a) Heart rate information of volunteer A in the initial stage (b) Heart rate information of volunteer A in the latter stage.

Figure 13

Figure 13. Schematic diagram of exoskeleton control method based on mixed model of motion intention and motion intensity.

Figure 14

Table II. Experimental results of trajectory prediction.

Figure 15

Figure 14. Trajectory prediction experiment of volunteer B. (a) Unbound sandbag and (b) Bound two sandbags.

Figure 16

Figure 15. The comparison of the collection trajectory, predicted trajectory and real trajectory of volunteer B.