Skip to main content

The screw

Initially all the parts were intended to be printed on desktop 3D printer. This is good approach taken from e-Nable organization – they print prosthetic hands for kids out of charge. Beside being easily available everywhere around the world (thanks for printing services like eg. 3D Hubs) and being relatively cheap desktop 3D printing has its weakness: limited quality. While in most usual cases it’s not the problem (believe me, for most applications desktop printer quality is just great), in arm exoskeletons is one of main factors responsible for locking and jerky movement. Iteration after iteration it was clearly visible that I wouldn’t design another clone of 3D printed WREX. And it wouldn’t have been even possible…
Always focused on users comfort and fun of wearing supportive exoskeleton I’ve been trying to keep it slick and friendly. That’s why I reduced number of components and screws to minimum. The less screws means other joining methods must be utilized and this is the reason of parts internal complexity (while still maintain external simplicity). Such complex parts couldn’t be 3D printed on desktop printer with required tolerances and surface quality. Keeping above in mind leaded me to the point where whole device was fastened with one metal screw which additionally acts as a tensioner.

At this point it was obvious I had to print them on professional SLS 3D printer. I contacted local manufacturer Sinterit and they agreed to print the parts on their model Lisa.

The quality was perfect. The parts fits incredibly well to each other, to previous resin parts, to bearings and to aluminum pipes. After combining them I saw the proof of concept. They moved freely and almost friction-less, exactly how they should.
  

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Rocky road to refinement

 Days passed… Stuck hard to my design guidelines I was still away from even a tiny sketch of the device. I was sure the direction but the horizon was covered by haze. I could recognize the overall shape but unable to see in details. And the devil is in the details. Working with form is like sculpting in clay; early stages of process give more freedom in reshaping but often it’s double-edge sword: you end up a day devastated by endless versions of nothing. And there’s no place for shortcuts. You can go on with refinement and detailing ONLY after previous stage is done. Every missed step will be only magnified by the next ones. I experimented a little with double bar design similar to Magic Arms, but being still unsatisfied I came up with the idea of hiding whole positioning “drive train”. This is what I like! The devices that are hard to figure out how they actually work! I did one more design choice: to achieve 180 degrees of motion. Its unnecessary in orthopedic a...
Post a Comment
Read more

Design choices

  Recently I had opportunity to talk with two SMA child families and discuss issues in existing exoskeleton solutions. Before that, they mentioned rubber bands of Angel Arms and Magic Arms are difficult to setup, and change its characteristics over time. I came out with a new idea and wanted to verify it with them.   I prepared some generic images of concepts and ask the parents to choose the most comfortable in their opinion. I tried not to bias their decisions, and restrict myself to raw description. A-B test used with parents   They agreed elimination of rubber bands and separation active and passive modules were good starting point.   I did several design choices to follow: the device should be fully mechanical the device should be counterweight driven the active (counterweight) module should be separated from passive (exoskeleton) module passive device (exoskeleton) could be mounted to corset forearm axi...
Post a Comment
Read more