11th IFAC

IFAC Symposium
Symposium on
on Robot
Robot Control
Control
11th
11th
IFAC
Symposium
on Robot
Control
August
26-28,
2015.
BA,
Brazil
11th IFAC
IFAC
Symposium
on Robot
Robot
Control
August
26-28,
2015. Salvador,
Salvador,
BA,
Brazil
11th
Symposium
on
Control
August 26-28, 2015. Salvador, BA,
Brazil
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
August
26-28,
2015.
Salvador,
BA,
August 26-28, 2015. Salvador, BA, Brazil
Brazil

ScienceDirect
IFAC-PapersOnLine 48-19 (2015) 148153

Robotics
as
a
Tool
for
Physiotherapy
Robotics
as
a
Tool
for
Physiotherapy
Robotics
as
a
Tool
for
Robotics Rehabilitation
as a Tool for Physiotherapy
Physiotherapy
Sessions
Rehabilitation
Sessions
Rehabilitation
Sessions
Rehabilitation
Sessions

and
and
and
and

Flavia Loterio Vivianne Cardoso

Carlos
T.
Valadao
Carlos
T.
Valadao
Cardoso
Flavia Loterio Vivianne

Carlos
T.
Valadao
Loterio
Cardoso
FlaviaFrizera-Neto
Vivianne

Anselmo
Ricardo
Teodiano
Bastos
Carelli

Carlos
T.
Valadao
Flavia
Loterio
Vivianne
Cardoso
Teodiano
Bastos
Frizera-Neto
Carelli
Anselmo
Ricardo
Carlos
T.
Valadao
Flavia
Loterio
Vivianne
Cardoso
Teodiano
Bastos
Anselmo Frizera-Neto Ricardo Carelli
Anselmo Frizera-Neto Ricardo Carelli
Teodiano
Bastos
Teodiano
Bastos Anselmo Frizera-Neto Ricardo Carelli

Federal University of Espirito Santo, Vitoria, Brazil

Federal
University of Espirito Santo, Vitoria, Brazil

Federal University of Espirito Santo, Vitoria, Brazil

National
University of
of Espirito
San Juan,
Juan,
San Vitoria,
Juan, Argentina
Argentina
Federal
University
Santo,
Brazil
University
of
San
San
Juan,
National
Federal
University
of
Espirito
Santo,
Vitoria,
Brazil
National University of San Juan, San Juan, Argentina
National University of San Juan, San Juan, Argentina
National University of San Juan, San Juan, Argentina

Abstract:
Abstract:
Abstract:
The
ability
of
walking
is
related
to
various
daily
tasks,
while
the
lack
of
mobility
can
decrease
Abstract:
The ability
ability of
of walking
walking is
is related
related to
to various
various daily
daily tasks,
tasks, while
while the
the lack
lack of
of mobility
mobility can
can decrease
decrease
Abstract:
The
significantly
the
quality
of
life
of
people
affected
by
diseases
related
to
locomotion.
The
etiology
The
ability
of
walking
is
related
to
various
daily
tasks,
while
the
lack
of
mobility
can
decrease
significantly
the
quality
of
life
of
people
affected
by
diseases
related
to
locomotion.
The
etiology
The
ability
of
walking
is
related
to
various
daily
tasks,
while
the
lack
of
mobility
can
decrease
significantly
the
quality
of
life
of
people
affected
by
diseases
related
to
locomotion.
The
etiology
of
those
diseases
can
be
from
distinct
origins,
such
as
neurological,
genetic,
cardiovascular,
among
significantly
the
quality
of
life
of
people
affected
by
diseases
related
to
locomotion.
The
etiology
of
those
diseases
can
be
from
distinct
origins,
such
as
neurological,
genetic,
cardiovascular,
among
significantly
the
quality
of
life
of
people
affected
by
diseases
related
to
locomotion.
The
etiology
of
those
diseases
can
be
from
distinct
origins,
such
neurological,
genetic,
cardiovascular,
among
others.
a
result
the
lack
of
mobility,
affected
may
have
difficulties
to
perform
basic
of
thoseAs
diseases
canof
be
from
distinct
origins,
such as
aspeople
neurological,
genetic,
cardiovascular,
among
others.
As
a
result
of
the
lack
of
mobility,
affected
people
may
have
difficulties
to
perform
basic
of
those
diseases
can
be
from
distinct
origins,
such
as
neurological,
genetic,
cardiovascular,
among
others.
As
a
result
of
the
lack
of
mobility,
affected
people
may
have
difficulties
to
perform
basic
tasks
and
this
can
bring
problems
in
several
stages
of
their
lives,
such
as
labor,
and
socialization
others.
As
a
result
of
the
lack
of
mobility,
affected
people
may
have
difficulties
to
perform
basic
tasks
and
this
can
bring
problems
in
several
stages
of
their
lives,
such
as
labor,
and
socialization
others.
As
a
result
of
the
lack
of
mobility,
affected
people
may
have
difficulties
to
perform
basic
tasks
and
this
can
bring
problems
in
several
stages
of
their
lives,
such
as
labor,
and
socialization
and
even
psychological
issues
may
appear.
In
order
to
try
to
help
those
people,
researchers
from
tasks
and
this
can
bring
problems
in
several
stages
of
their
lives,
such
as
labor,
and
socialization
and
even
psychological
issues
may
appear.
In
order
to
try
to
help
those
people,
researchers
from
tasks
and
this
can
bring
problems
in
several
stages
of
their
lives,
such
as
labor,
and
socialization
and
even
psychological
issues
may
appear.
In
order
to
try
to
help
those
people,
researchers
from
all
over
the
world
try
to
improve
or
create
treatments
and
devices
which
may
help
them.
Some
of
and
even
psychological
issues
may
appear.
In
order
to
try
to
help
those
people,
researchers
from
all
over
the
world
try
to
improve
or
create
treatments
and
devices
which
may
help
them.
Some
of
and
even
psychological
issues
may
appear.
In
order
to
try
to
help
those
people,
researchers
from
all
over
the
try
to
or
create
and
which
may
help
Some
of
those
researches
smart
walkers,
which
are
walkers
that
rely
on
electronics
and
control
all
over
the world
worldare
tryabout
to improve
improve
or
create treatments
treatments
and devices
devices
which
may
help them.
them.
Some
of
those
researches
are
about
smart
walkers,
which
are
walkers
that
rely
on
electronics
and
control
all
over
the
world
try
to
improve
or
create
treatments
and
devices
which
may
help
them.
Some
of
those
researches
are
about
smart
walkers,
which
are
walkers
that
rely
on
electronics
and
control
systems,
besides
the
mechanical
structure.
Since
those
devices
use
sensors
and
actuators,
they
those
researches
smart
walkers,
walkers
that
rely
on
and
systems,
besides are
the about
mechanical
structure.
Sinceare
those
devices
use
sensors
and actuators,
actuators,
they
those
researches
are
about
smart structure.
walkers, which
which
are
walkers
thatuse
rely
on electronics
electronics
and control
control
systems,
besides
the
mechanical
Since
those
devices
sensors
and
they
may
improve
the
gait
of
those
people
who
can
use
this
kind
of
device,
helping
them
in
their
systems,
besides
the
mechanical
structure.
Since
those
devices
use
sensors
and
actuators,
they
may
improve
the
gait
of
those
people
who
can
use
this
kind
of
device,
helping
them
in
their
systems,
besides
the
mechanical
structure.
Since
those
devices
use
sensors
and
actuators,
they
may
improve
the
gait of
those
people
who can
use
this
kind
device,
helping
in
their
physical
rehabilitation
process.
Furthermore,
smart
walkers
canof
help
people
who them
may not
not
have
may
improve
the
those
people
use
this
of
device,
helping
them
in
physical
rehabilitation
process.
Furthermore,
smart
walkers
can
help
people
who
may
have
may
improve
the gait
gait of
of
those Furthermore,
people who
who can
can
use walkers
this kind
kind
ofhelp
device,
helping
them
in their
their
physical
rehabilitation
process.
smart
can
people
who
may
not
have
enough
force
to
use
a
conventional
walker,
but
can
rely
on
a
smart
walker,
since
it
uses
engines
physical
rehabilitation
process. Furthermore,
Furthermore,
smart
walkers
can
help
peoplesince
whoitmay
may
not
have
enough
force
to
use
a
conventional
walker,
but
can
rely
on
a
smart
walker,
uses
engines
physical
rehabilitation
process.
smart
walkers
can
help
people
who
not
have
enough
force
to
use
a
conventional
walker,
but
can
rely
on
a
smart
walker,
since
it
uses
engines
to
help
the
orientation
and
propulsion.
This
kind
of
device
can,
therefore,
help
more
people
that
enough
force
to
use
a
conventional
walker,
but
can
rely
on
aa smart
walker,
since
it
uses
engines
to
help
the
orientation
and
propulsion.
This
kind
of
device
can,
therefore,
help
more
people
that
enough
force
to
use
a
conventional
walker,
but
can
rely
on
smart
walker,
since
it
uses
engines
to
help
the
orientation
and
propulsion.
This
kind
of
device
can,
therefore,
help
more
people
that
conventional
walkers
and
be
an
aid
for
physiotherapy
sessions.
This
work
shows
an
adaptation
to
help
the
orientation
and
propulsion.
This
kind
of
device
can,
therefore,
help
more
people
that
conventional
walkers
and
be
an
aid
for
physiotherapy
sessions.
This
work
shows
an
adaptation
to
help
the
orientation
and
propulsion.
This
kind
of
device
can,
therefore,
help
more
people
that
conventional
walkers
and
be
an
aid
for
physiotherapy
sessions.
This
work
shows
an adaptation
of
conventional
walker
into
an
robotic
smart
walker,
by
connecting
the
conventional
walker
to
conventional
walkers
and
be
for
sessions.
This
shows
of aa
a conventional
conventional
walker
into
an aid
robotic
smart walker,
walker, by
by
connecting
the conventional
conventional
walker to
to
conventional
walkers
andinto
be an
an
aid
for physiotherapy
physiotherapy
sessions.
This work
work
shows an
an adaptation
adaptation
of
walker
an
robotic
smart
connecting
the
walker
a
robot.
of
a
conventional
walker
into
an
robotic
smart
walker,
by
connecting
the
conventional
walker
to
a
robot.
of
a
conventional
walker
into
an
robotic
smart
walker,
by
connecting
the
conventional
walker
to
a
robot.
a
arobot.
robot.
2015, IFAC (International Federation of Automatic Control) Hosting by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords:
robotics,
walkers,
smart-walker,
mobility,
gait,
locomotion.
Keywords:
robotics, walkers,
walkers, smart-walker,
smart-walker, mobility,
mobility, gait,
gait, locomotion.
locomotion.
Keywords:
robotics,
Keywords:
robotics,
walkers,
smart-walker,
mobility,
gait,
locomotion.
Keywords: robotics, walkers, smart-walker, mobility, gait, locomotion.
1.
INTRODUCTION
using
augmentative
devices,
the
user
has
to
participate
in
1. INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION
using
augmentative
devices,
the
user
has
to
participate
in
1.
using
augmentative
devices,
the
user
has
to
participate
in
the
movement
with
his/her
residual
forces
(Bradley
and
1.
INTRODUCTION
using
augmentative
devices,
the
user
has
to
participate
in
the
movement
with
his/her
residual
forces
(Bradley
and
1. INTRODUCTION
using
augmentative
devices,
the
user
has
to
participate
in
the
movement
with
his/her
residual
forces
(Bradley
and
Hernandez,
2011).
the
movement
with
his/her
residual
forces
(Bradley
and
Robotics
applied
to
health
has
a
wide
use
throughout
the
Hernandez,
2011).
Robotics
applied
to
health
has
a
wide
use
throughout
the
the
movement
with
his/her
residual
forces
(Bradley
and
Hernandez, 2011).
Robotics
applied
to
has
wide
use
the
2011).
world.
Some
robots
can
help
in
several
distinct
health
Robotics
applied
to health
health
has a
wide
use throughout
throughout
the Hernandez,
world. Some
Some
robots
can help
help
inwide
several
distinct health
health
Hernandez,
2011). sessions,
For
physiotherapy
walkers
can
be
used
as
a
tool
Robotics
applied
to
health
has
aain
use
throughout
the
For
physiotherapy
sessions,
walkers
can
be
used
as
a
tool
world.
robots
can
several
distinct
areas.
In
mobility
related
issues,
people
may
use
walkers
world.
Some
robots
can
help
in
several
distinct
health
For
physiotherapy
sessions,
walkers
can
be
used
as
a
tool
areas.
In
mobility
related
issues,
people
may
use
walkers
for
recovering
muscle
strength
and
avoid
atrophy.
These
world.
Some
robots
can
help
in
several
distinct
health
For
physiotherapy
sessions,
walkers
can
be
used
as
a
tool
for
recovering
muscle
strength
and
avoid
atrophy.
These
areas.
In
mobility
related
issues,
people
may
use
walkers
For
physiotherapy
sessions,
walkers
can
be
used
as
a
tool
to
help
their
rehabilitation
and
daily
life
(van
Hook
et
al.,
areas.
In
mobility
related
issues,
people
may
use
walkers
for
recovering
muscle
strength
and
avoid
atrophy.
These
to
help
their
rehabilitation
and
daily
life
(van
Hook
et
al.,
walkers
can
provide
weight
support,
transferring
part
of
areas.
Intheir
mobility
related issues,
people
may Hook
use walkers
for
recovering
muscle
strength
and
avoid
atrophy.
These
walkers
can
provide
weight
support,
transferring
part
of
to
help
rehabilitation
and
daily
life
(van
et
al.,
for
recovering
muscle
strength
and
avoid
atrophy.
These
2003).
These
walkers
can
be
mechanical
walkers,
which
can
to
help
their
rehabilitation
and
daily
life
(van
Hook
et
al.,
walkers
can
provide
weight
support,
transferring
part
of
2003).
These
walkers
can
be
mechanical
walkers,
which
can
the
users
weight
to
the
walker,
but
they
still
require
to
help
their
rehabilitation
and
daily
life
(van
Hook
et
al.,
walkers
can
provide
weight
support,
transferring
part
of
the
users
weight
to
the
walker,
but
they
still
require
2003).
These
walkers
can
be
mechanical
walkers,
which
can
walkers
can
provide
weight
support,
transferring
part
of
have
different
ground
reaction,
such
as
four
legged
walkers,
2003).
These
walkers
can
be
mechanical
walkers,
which
can
the
users
weight
to
the
walker,
but
they
still
require
have
different
ground
reaction,
such
as
four
legged
walkers,
affected
limb
to
participate
in
the
movement,
which
2003).
These
walkers
can
be
mechanical
walkers,
which
can
the
users
weight
to
the
walker,
but
they
still
require
affected
limb
to
participate
in
the
movement,
which
have
different
ground
reaction,
such
as
four
legged
walkers,
the
users
weight
to
the
walker,
but
they
still
require
front-wheeled
walkersreaction,
and rollator
rollator
walkers
(Bradley
and the
have
different ground
ground
reaction,
such as
as
four legged
legged
walkers,
affected
to
participate
in
the
movement,
front-wheeled
walkers
and
walkers
(Bradley
and
helps
the user
userlimb
to keep
keep
his/her muscle
muscle
tone
(Martins which
et al.,
al.,
have
different
such
four
walkers,
the
affected
limb
to
in
movement,
which
the
to
his/her
tone
(Martins
et
front-wheeled
walkers
and
rollator
walkers
(Bradley
and
the
affected
limb
to participate
participate
in the
the
movement,
which
Hernandez,
2011).
Each
of
them
has
its
advantages
front-wheeled
walkers
andone
rollator
walkers
(Bradley
and helps
helps
the
user
to
keep
his/her
muscle
tone
(Martins
et
al.,
Hernandez,
2011).
Each
one
of
them
has
its
advantages
2012).
This
research
focus
on
adapting
a
conventional
front-wheeled
walkers
and
rollator
walkers
(Bradley
and
helps
the
user
to
keep
his/her
muscle
tone
(Martins
et
2012).
This
research
focus
on
adapting
a
conventional
Hernandez,
2011).
Each
one
of
them
has
its
advantages
helps the
userresearch
to keep his/her
muscle
tone (Martins
et al.,
al.,
and
disadvantages,
and
a
physician
the
Hernandez,
2011). Each
Each
one
of them
them should
has its
its choose
advantages
2012).
This
focus
on
adapting
aa conventional
and
disadvantages,
and
a
physician
should
choose
the
front-wheeled
walker
into
a
robot,
thus
building
a
smart
Hernandez,
2011).
one
of
has
advantages
2012).
This
research
focus
on
adapting
conventional
front-wheeled
walker
into
aa robot,
thus
building
a
smart
and
disadvantages,
and
aa not
physician
should
choose
the
2012).
This
research
focus
on
adapting
a
conventional
structure
carefully
in
order
to
hurt
the
user
during
and
disadvantages,
and
physician
should
choose
the
front-wheeled
walker
into
robot,
thus
building
a
smart
structure
carefully in
inand
ordera not
not
to hurt
hurt the
user
during
adapted
walker,
besides
the
weight
bearing,
and
disadvantages,
physician
should
choose
the
front-wheeled
walker
aa robot,
thus
building
a
walker. This
This
adapted
walker,
besides
the
weight
bearing,
structure
carefully
to
the
user
during
the walker.
front-wheeled
walker into
into
robot,
thus
building
a smart
smart
physiotherapy
sessions
and not
daily
use
(Lacey
andduring
Dawsonstructure
carefully
in order
order
not
touse
hurt(Lacey
the
the
This
adapted
walker,
besides
the
weight
bearing,
physiotherapy
sessions
and
daily
and
Dawsoncan
provide
other
kinds
of
support,
such
as
propulsion
and
structure
carefully
in
order
to
hurt
the user
user
during
the walker.
walker.
This
adapted
walker,
besides
the
weight
bearing,
can
provide
other
kinds
of
support,
such
as
propulsion
and
physiotherapy
sessions
and
daily
use
(Lacey
and
Dawsonwalker.
This
adapted
walker,
besides
the
weight
bearing,
Howe,
1997)
(Bradley
and
Hernandez,
2011).
In
addition
physiotherapy
sessions and
and Hernandez,
daily use
use (Lacey
(Lacey
and
Dawsonprovide
other
of
support,
such
Howe, 1997)
1997) (Bradley
(Bradley
2011).and
In Dawsonaddition can
aid
the
orientation
movement.
physiotherapy
sessions
and
daily
can in
provide
other kinds
kindsof
ofthe
support,
such as
as propulsion
propulsion and
and
aid
in
the
orientation
of
the
movement.
Howe,
and
Hernandez,
2011).
In
addition
can
provide
other
kinds
of
support,
such
as
propulsion
and
to
mechanical
walkers,
there
are
smart
walkers,
add
Howe,
1997) (Bradley
(Bradley
and
Hernandez,
2011). In
Inwhich
addition
in
the
orientation
of
the
movement.
to mechanical
mechanical
walkers, and
thereHernandez,
are smart
smart walkers,
walkers,
which
add aid
Howe,
1997)
2011).
addition
aid
in
the
orientation
of
the
movement.
to
walkers,
there
are
which
add
aid
in
the
orientation
of
the
movement.
Besides that,
that, the
the goal
goal of
of this
this work
work is
is also
also to
to show
show the
the
electronics
andwalkers,
controlthere
systems
to help
help
userswhich
to avoid
avoid
to
mechanical
walkers,
there
are smart
smart
walkers,
which
add Besides
electronics
and
control
systems
to
users
to
to
mechanical
are
walkers,
add
Besides
that,
the
goal
of
this
work
is
also
to
show
the
electronics
and
control
systems
to
help
users
to
avoid
possibility
of
using
aa cheap
adapted
walker
frame
for
collisions
and
provides
cognitive,
health
and
sensorial
Besides
that,
the
goal
of
this
work
is
also
to
show
the
electronics
and
control
systems
to
help
users
to
avoid
possibility
of
using
cheap
adapted
walker
frame
for
collisions
and
provides
cognitive,
health
and
sensorial
Besides
that,
the
goal
of
this
work
is
also
to
show
electronicsand
and provides
control systems
to health
help users
to
avoid possibility of using a cheap adapted walker frame the
for
collisions
cognitive,
and
sensorial
rehabilitation
simply
by
attaching
it
to
a
robot
that
is
supports
besides
physical
support
a
common
feature
to
possibility
of
using
a
cheap
adapted
walker
frame
for
collisions
and provides
provides
cognitive,
health
and feature
sensorial
rehabilitation
simply
by
attaching
it
to
a
robot
that
is
supports
besides
physical
support
a
common
to
possibility
of
using
a
cheap
adapted
walker
frame
for
collisions
and
cognitive,
health
and
sensorial
rehabilitation
simply
by
attaching
it
to
a
robot
that
is
supports
besides
physical
support
a
common
feature
to
widely
used
in
education
and
research
and
is
already
every
walker.
rehabilitation
simply
by
attaching
it
to
a
robot
that
is
supports
besides
physical
support
a
common
feature
to
widely
used
in
education
and
research
and
is
already
every
walker.
rehabilitation
simply
by
attaching
it
to
a
robot
that
is
supports
besides
physical
support
a
common
feature
to
widely
used
in
education
and
research
and
is
already
every
walker.
present
in
several
educational
institutes.
widely
used
in
education
and
research
and
is
already
every
walker.
present
in
several
educational
institutes.
widely
used
in
education
and
research
and
is
already
every
walker.
Walkers
are
classified
as
augmentative
devices,
which
present
in
several
educational
institutes.
Walkers are
are classified
classified as
as augmentative devices,
devices, which
which present in several educational institutes.
Walkers
present in several educational institutes.
means
they
the
residual
force
the
user
still
has.
It
Walkers
areamplify
classified
as augmentative
augmentative
devices,
which
means
they
amplify
the
residual
force
the
user
still
has.
It
Walkers
are
classified
as
augmentative
devices,
which
means
they
amplify
the
residual
force
the
user
still
has.
It
does not
not
change
the the
wayresidual
people moves,
moves,
likeuser
the still
wheelchair
means
they
amplify
the
residual
force the
the
has.
does
change
the
way
people
like
the
wheelchair
means
they
amplify
force
user
still
has. It
It
2. METHODOLOGY
METHODOLOGY
does
not
change
the
way
people
moves,
like
the
wheelchair
2.
(classified
as
an
alternative
device),
which
changes
the
way
does
not
change
the
way
people
moves,
like
the
wheelchair
(classified
as
an
alternative
device),
which
changes
the
way
2.
does not change
the way people
moves,
likechanges
the wheelchair
(classified
as
an
alternative
device),
which
the
way
2. METHODOLOGY
METHODOLOGY
the
locomotion
is
done
and
also
does
not
require
the
use
2.
METHODOLOGY
(classified
as
an
alternative
device),
which
changes
the
way
the locomotion
locomotion
is done
done and
anddevice),
also does
does
notchanges
require the
the way
use
(classified
as an alternative
which
the
is
also
not
require
the
use
A
system
composed
of
aa robot
laser
sensor,
and
aa controller
of
residual
forces,
thus
leading
to
a
possible
atrophy
of
the
the
locomotion
is
done
and
also
does
not
require
the
use
system
composed
of
laser
sensor,
and
of residual
residual
forces,
thus
leading
to does
possible
atrophythe
of use
the A
the
locomotion
is thus
doneleading
and also
not require
A
system
composed
of
aa robot
robot
laser
sensor,
and
aa controller
controller
of
forces,
to
aaa et
possible
atrophy
of
the
system
can
be
adjusted
to
be
used
as
a
platform
for
muscles
that
are
not
used
(Martins
al.,
2012).
Evidently,
A
system
composed
of
robot
laser
sensor,
and
of
residual
forces,
thus
leading
to
possible
atrophy
of
the
system
can
be
adjusted
to
be
used
as
a
platform
for
muscles
that
are
not
used
(Martins
et
al.,
2012).
Evidently,
A
system
composed
of
a
robot
laser
sensor,
and
a controller
controller
of
residual
forces,
thus
leading
to
a
possible
atrophy
of
the
system
can
be
adjusted
to
be
used
as
a
platform
for
muscles
that
are
not
used
(Martins
et
al.,
2012).
Evidently,
mobility
rehabilitation.
This
built
platform
is
actually
system
can
be
adjusted
to
be
used
as
a
platform
for
muscles
that
are
not
used
(Martins
et
al.,
2012).
Evidently,
mobility
rehabilitation.
This
built
platform
is
actually
system
can
be
adjusted
to
be
used
as
a
platform
for
muscles that are not used (Martins et al., 2012). Evidently, mobility rehabilitation. This built platform is actually
 Authors acknowledge the financial support from FAPES, CAPES
the
adapted
walker
attached
to
a
mobile
robot
and
the
mobility
rehabilitation.
This
built
platform
is
actually

the
adapted
walker
attached
to
a
mobile
robot
and
the
Authors
acknowledge
the
financial
support
from
FAPES,
CAPES
mobility
rehabilitation.
This
built
platform
is
actually
 Authors acknowledge the financial support from FAPES, CAPES
the
adapted
walker
attached
aa mobile
robot
and
the

adapted
frame
of the
the
walkerto
has
four free
free
wheels
to
and
CNPq.
the
adapted
walker
attached
to
robot
and
Authors
the financial support from FAPES, CAPES
adapted
frame
of
walker
four
to
and
CNPq.acknowledge

the
adapted
walker
attached
tohas
a mobile
mobile
robotwheels
and the
the
Authors
adapted
frame
of
the
walker
has
four
free
wheels
to
and
CNPq.acknowledge the financial support from FAPES, CAPES
adapted
frame
of
the
walker
has
four
free
wheels
and
CNPq.
adapted frame of the walker has four free wheels to
to
and CNPq.

Copyright
2015,
2015
150
Copyright
2015 IFAC
IFAC
150 Hosting by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
2405-8963
IFAC (International Federation of Automatic Control)
Copyright 2015 IFAC
150
Copyright

2015
IFAC
150
Peer
review
under
responsibility
of
International
Federation
of
Automatic
Copyright 2015 IFAC
150Control.
10.1016/j.ifacol.2015.12.025

IFAC SYROCO 2015

August 26-28, 2015. Salvador, BA, Brazil Carlos T. Valadao et al. / IFAC-PapersOnLine 48-19 (2015) 148153

149

avoid big modifications in the whole system dynamics and

kinematics.
Since the adapted walker is attached to the robot and has
only free wheels, the robot is the responsible to guide the
user. Figure 1 shows the adapted walker connected to the
robot, i.e, the whole system built in different views.

Fig. 2. Photo showing the adaptations of the walker.

Details are specified in the text.
(1) and (2), respectively the handlebar and foam, and
in higher details in Figure 3.
Fig. 1. Views of the adapted walker. (A) Perspective. (B)
Side. (C) Frontal. (D) Detail of forearm support.
2.1 Adaptation
In order to turn the conventional walker into an smart
walker, it was necessary to add to the conventional walker
a robot. However, this walker was a front-wheeled walker,
i.e, a walker that has two wheels in the front part and
two legs in the rear part. This walker does not requires
lifting up the device completely to move, only the rear part
(Lacey and Dawson-Howe, 1997). It is indicated for people
who do not have enough force to use a standard reciprocal
frame walker, which requires lifting up the walker on each
step, and have a degree of control that is necessary to avoid
the walker rolling away (Martins et al., 2012).
Nevertheless, this type of walker cannot be adaptable
directly to the robot, since it has legs that would avoid
the robot movement carrying the walker frame. Also, the
walker was designed for people use them slightly bent and
not with erect posture and elbow at 90 degrees from the
ground. These adaptations and the attachment with the
robot are depicted in Figure 2.

Fig. 3. Handlebars and foam to provide more stability and

comfort to the user.
The walker frame legs were substituted by taller legs,
so people could walk with erect posture, with his/her
elbows at 90 from the ground. The arrow number (3)
in Figure 2 shows the taller legs. Figure 4 depicts the
legs with higher details. It is important to emphasize
that the taller legs also allow height adjustments, as
well as the previous ones, but with distinct heights
when compared to the first ones.

Therewith, some adaptations were necessary:

Two handlebars were added in order to allow the user
to grab in the walker safely. Regarding the comfort, a
polyurethane foam cover to the surface that supports
the forearm was added, which makes the surface
softer. These items are depicted in Figure 2, arrows
151

Fig. 4. Taller legs were used in the adapted walker.

There were added four free wheels to the walker
frame. This changing was important, due to the

IFAC SYROCO 2015

150
August 26-28, 2015. Salvador, BA, Brazil Carlos T. Valadao et al. / IFAC-PapersOnLine 48-19 (2015) 148153

kinematics of the robot, which would suffer little

influence if there were free wheels instead of the
previous conventional wheels. Therefore, the robot
would dictate the kinematics of the system, with
little influence from the adapted walker structure.
The wheels are showed in Figure 2, arrow (4) and
in more details in Figure 5

Fig. 5. Free wheels in the walker frame. The robot is

responsible to guide the whole structure.
It was needed to make an adaptation part that
connects the robot to the walker. This adjustment
in the system allows the robot to pull the walker,
guiding the user, providing physical support (bearing
part of the users weight) and helping with propulsion
and orientation.

Fig. 6. Photo showing the pieces that connects the robot

to the adapted walker frame.
Since the walker can be folded, stabilization bars were
used in order not to allow the system to vibrate
laterally during its use. These bars can be viewed in
arrows (6) and (7) in the Figure 2. In Figure 7 these
bars can be viewed in more details.

system. The bar that fits the walker into the robot allow
a minimum lateral movement of the frame, however this
movement is quite inexpressive and, in the tests, they were
not perceived.
2.2 Controller and interface
A controller for a smart walker can be adjustable and
can follow other equations such as PID equations. In the
experiments, tests were carried out using a PID controller.
The gains for the PID controller were 1.0 for proportional
term and 0.7 for derivative and integral terms. They were
determined empirically. The information given to the PID
controller is the current distance and angle errors, which
were calculated by comparing the desired distance and
angles and the measured ones. Mathematically the errors
are represented by equation 1.
= dd d(k)
d(k)

(k)
= d (k)

(1)
(2)

The controller equations are based on the classic PID

equations that are represented by equation 3. The k
index represent the discret time at the moment of the
calculation.

+ kd d(k)
+ ki
v = kp d(k)

k

dk
d(k)

(3)

+ kd (k)

= kp (k)
+ ki

k

dk
(k)

(4)

(5)
The aforementioned variables d and are calculated by
catching the laser information and postprocessing the
information looking for the closest point to the laser
sensor. Its range (both in distance and angle) were limited
from 75 to 105 , although the laser can read from 0 to
180 and a distance beyond 30 meters. Figure 8 shows the
safe zone, where the user can stay safely and support for
the arms while using the walker, and the laser range (for
angle and distance) that is within the safe zone.

Fig. 7. Bars to stabilize better the walker during the use.

The adapted walker structure (except the robot) shows
holonomic features, since it can move laterally. However,
once attached to the robot the non-holonomic features of
the robot overrides the holonomic features of the adapted
frame, since it blocks the lateral movement of the whole
152

Fig. 8. Diagram showing the laser range and the safe zone.
A graphical interface was developed, which helps the therapist controlling the walker, and allowing the specification

IFAC SYROCO 2015

August 26-28, 2015. Salvador, BA, Brazil Carlos T. Valadao et al. / IFAC-PapersOnLine 48-19 (2015) 148153

of gains and the time the robot will keep walking, which
is the duration of the test. To start the tests, a beep is
emitted from the external computer, indicating the robot
is going to start its movements. It helps the user not to
get confused when the robot will start to move. Similarly,
when the robot is about to stop (i.e, the time of the the
task is finishing) the computer emits another beep advising
the volunteer should stop walking.
The interface also keeps a record of the laser sensor
measurements and the speed of both user and walker. This
information may be useful for the physiotherapist analysis
after the experiments.
2.3 Safety Rules
Safety rules are a set of rules that are defined before
the test begins. After the controller output, there is an
algorithm that analyzes if the controller output is feasible
or not. If it is not safe or if there is any chance of harming
the volunteer, the safety rules must actuate in order to
avoid risky situations. Some of the rules are based on
the laser sensor reading, while others relies on the walker
speed.
Figure 9 shows the angle and distance range the laser
sensor captures to provide information to the robot. The
laser itself is able to reach over 30 meters and 180 of
angle range. However, only measurements that are inside
the safe zone of the walker are considered, which is from
75 up to 105 (considering the center angle equals 90 ),
and a maximum distance of 1.2 meters. This area is exactly
the area inside the walker, where the user can put his/her
arms safely in the upper support.

151

The walker has a speed limit for both linear and

angular speeds.
2.4 Experiments
The experiments using the adapted walker consisted of the
volunteers walking with and without the aid of the device.
The tests were performed as follows:
(1) In the first moment, the user walks with sEMG electrodes attached to his/her legs, positioned according to the Surface ElectroMyoGraphy for the NonInvasive Assessment of Muscles (SENIAM) protocol
(Stegeman and Hermens, 2007), in order to analyze
the gait of their affected leg by capturing the signals
from that limb (Loterio et al., 2007).
(2) The user rests for a while if he/she feels fatigue.
(3) The step (1) and (2) are repeated twice
(4) After that, the steps (1) and (2) are repeated three
times, but now using the robotic walker. The sEMG
signals are collected again to help healthcare professionals analyze the data from the leg movement.
Figure 10 illustrates the movement the user does with the
walker. The same path is used previously, but without the
aid of the walker.

Fig. 10. User path during the mobility aid system test.
2.5 Metrics
To test the robotic system in both modes, the SUS (System
Usability Scale) and the GAS (Goal Attainment Scale)
were used. These two metrics allow the conversion of
subjective information about quality and usability of the
robot into quantitative information (scores).

Fig. 9. Laser measurement range during the tests.

If the user goes out of this area, the system activates the
safety rules and automatically stops, due to the possibility of falls. Other safety rules may apply and can be
programmable. Some of the safety rules are:
If nobody is detected inside the safe zone and the
walker is on, the system shuts down the motors and
the walker stops.
If the legs are too far, the safety system decreases the
speed to allow the user to catch the walker.
On the other hand, if the legs are too close to the
walker, the system accelerates until the maximum
allowed speed, in order to avoid the user to shock
with the walker.
153

Goal Attainment Scale (GAS) This scale converts goals

achievements (using the system) into a score, according to
predefined goals that should be attained. The way these
goals are attained defines the score of the goal (Kiresuk
and Sherman, 1968). Also, it is possible to have more than
one goal to be attained and there is an overall score. In the
case of this research, the goals analyzed were the speed of
walking using the smart walker and the time of learning
how to use it.
GAS uses a score that ranges from +2, that means the goal
was achieved much better than expected, from -2, that
means the goal was achieved much worse than expected or
it was not achieved. The average value for the goal is 0,
which means the goal was achieved as expected (Kiresuk
and Sherman, 1968). Equation 6 calculates the overall
GAS score.

10 Xi
T = 50 +
,
(6)
n rn + rn2

IFAC SYROCO 2015

152
August 26-28, 2015. Salvador, BA, Brazil Carlos T. Valadao et al. / IFAC-PapersOnLine 48-19 (2015) 148153

where Xi is the score of the i-th goal (which varies from

-2 to +2). The estimated correlation between the tasks,
represented by r, has a value of 0.3. A score of 50 is the
expected, i.e., the average, which means the individual
goals has all reached the value zero.
System Usability Scale (SUS) This scale can measure
how useful and the how easy the system is to be used by
the user. It was developed in 1986 by John Brooke (Brooke,
2013) and consists of a questionnaire that contains ten
questions about the usability of the system.
The questions are (Brooke, 1996):
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)

I think that I would like to use this system frequently

I found the system unnecessarily complex
I thought the system was easy to use
I think that I would need the support of a technical
person to be able to use the system
I found the various functions in this system were well
integrated
I thought there was too much inconsistency in this
system
I would imagine that most people would learn to use
this system very quickly
I found the system very cumbersome to use
I felt very confident using the system
I needed to learn a lot of things before I could get
going with this system

To calculate the score, the user has to answer the questions that can receive values from 1 to 4. The value 1
means strongly disagree, in contrast with the value 4
which means strongly agree. To calculate the score, it
is necessary to use equation 7. The questions has equal
weights in the calculation, since weighting differently each
question does not add statistical advantages (Lewis and
Sauro, 2009).



T = 2.5
(odd 1) +
(5 even)
(7)

The results, although range from 0 to 100 points in the

scale, should not be interpreted directly as a percentile
rank. To make turn it into a percentile rank it is necessary
some calculation process. According to (Brooke, 2013),
following this calculation process it is possible to find
that 68 is an average for the SUS, meaning that this
value equals the 50% in the percentile rank. In Figure
11 (adapted from (Brooke, 2013)), it is possible to see
the curve that correlates the SUS score and the percentile
rank.
3. RESULTS
The results of the tests were satisfactory. There were two
groups, the first one of healthy people (control group) and
other with people who had suffered stroke and were in the
subacute (from 2 days up to six months) or chronic phase
(over six months). Figure 12 shows some pictures from the
tests.
The results for people in the control group were 68.55
for GAS and 96.25 for SUS. In contrast, for the poststroke group the results were 59.4 and 73.75, respectively.
Analyzing both results, it is possible to see that the
154

Fig. 11. Conversion from SUS to percentile rank.

Fig. 12. Photos from the mobility test using the walker.
adapted smart walker provided them more stability. The
GAS goals are shown in figure 13.

Fig. 13. GAS goals for the robot in the walker mode.
The maximum speed of the robot was set in 0.5 meters
per second to avoid possible accidents (although it can
be adjusted according to the user needs). However, some
people (including those affected by stroke) could walk
faster than the maximum speed of the walker. Because of
this safety measure taken to avoid accidents, some people
had their speed decreased when compared with free gait.
Nevertheless, in terms of stability they felt safer.
4. DISCUSSION
The smart walker presented good results, regarding the
stability and safety of people using the device. The comfort
was also an important feature of the system reported
by the volunteers. All the tests were made in a straight
line, 10 meters long. The maximum speed of the walker
was of 0.5 meter per second and some people, even some
affected by the stroke could walk faster than the walker.
Even with reduced speed, the users reported they felt

IFAC SYROCO 2015

August 26-28, 2015. Salvador, BA, Brazil Carlos T. Valadao et al. / IFAC-PapersOnLine 48-19 (2015) 148153

comfortable with the walker, as the SUS scores showed.

Complementary, the results of GAS and SUS showed good
results for both groups (control and volunteers), which
indicates the smart walker worked as a tool for enhancing
the gait and turn it more comfortable and stable.
As future works, we will evaluate the possibility of greater
speeds for the robot, i.e., it will be able to move at a
speed over 0.5 meters per second. However, this speed
must not exceed 1.0 meter per second, due to the safety
conditions. The possibility of making curve paths will
also be added, giving the physiotherapists more options
of rehabilitation exercises. In addition, ultrasound sensors
located in the front area of the robot will be used as
obstacle detectors, which will allow the implementation
of an obstacle avoidance controller. This will turn the
whole system safer for the user, even inside a controlled
environment.
5. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Authors acknowledge the financial support from FAPES,
CAPES and CNPq and technical support from Federal
University of Espirito Santo and National University of
San Juan.
REFERENCES
Bradley, S.M. and Hernandez, C.R. (2011). Geriatric
assistive devices. American family physician, 84(4), 405
11.
Brooke (1996). Brooke, J.: SUS: A quick and dirty usability scale. In: Jordan, P.W., Thomas, B., Weerdmeester,
B.A., McClelland, I.L, dustrypp, 189194.
Brooke, J. (2013). SUS : A Retrospective. Journal of
Usability Studies, 8(2), 2940.
Kiresuk, T.J. and Sherman, R.E. (1968). Goal attainment
scaling: A general method for evaluating comprehensive
community mental health programs. Community mental
health journal, 4(6), 44353. doi:10.1007/BF01530764.
Lacey, G. and Dawson-Howe, K. (1997). Evaluation of
Robot Mobility Aid for the Elderly Blind. In Proceedings
of the Fifth International Symposium on Intelligent
Robotic Systems.
Lewis, J.R. and Sauro, J. (2009). The factor structure of
the system usability scale. Lecture Notes in Computer
Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial
Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 5619
LNCS, 94103. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-02806-9 12.
Loterio, F.A., Jairo, J., and Mayor, V. (2007). Assessment
of Applicability of Robotic Walker for Post-Stroke Hemiparetic Individuals through Muscle Pattern Analysis.
(Figure 3).
Martins, M.M., Santos, C.P., Frizera-Neto, A., and
Ceres, R. (2012).
Assistive mobility devices focusing on Smart Walkers: Classification and review.
Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 60(4), 548562. doi:
10.1016/j.robot.2011.11.015.
Stegeman, D. and Hermens, H. (2007). Standards for surface electromyography: The European project Surface
EMG for non-invasive assessment of muscles (SENIAM).
Online. Avaiable at: http://www.med.uni-jena.de/, 108
112.
155

153

van Hook, F.W., Demonbreun, D., and Weiss, B.D. (2003).

Ambulatory Devices for Chronic Gait Disorders in the
Elderly. American Family Physician, 67(8), 17171724.