Running head: AFFORDABLE PROSTHETICS

A Helping Hand: An Investigation of Affordable Prosthetics

Althea Spahn, Aengy Pedrazzini, Kayla Garcia, Yazmin Hernandez

Liberty High School, Hillsboro OR, 2016

AFFORDABLE PROSTHETICS

A Helping Hand: An Investigation of Affordable Prosthetics

Abstract
Imagine that you or a loved one has had to have a limb amputated. Life with an
amputation can be difficult and expensive. Many people, especially in impoverished
areas and third world nations, dont have the means to get reliable prosthetics. That is
why, for this challenge, our team was required to design and build a prosthetic arm that
is both functional and affordable. There was a lot of time spent conducting research
and investigating concepts and ideas. Through these investigations, it was found that
the design and movement of the fingers is one of the most important parts of any
prosthetic. In addition, it was discovered that comfort of design is just as vital as any
other aspect. A third finding is that inexpensive materials are, at times, more effective
than more costly ones. The team performed test challenges to analyze the overall
effectiveness of the final design. These tests were compared to previous models of
prosthetics and it was determined that the current arm was more effective. The tests
simulated real testing conditions so that they could be as accurate as possible. Though
the final product turned out very well, there can always be improvements. However, the
team is satisfied with the final product.

AFFORDABLE PROSTHETICS

Contents
Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Movement and Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Hardware and Software . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Arm Shaft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Cost Efficiency and Performance Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

AFFORDABLE PROSTHETICS

Introduction
The first record of functional prosthetics can be traced to Egyptian civilization,
where tombs have been unearthed to discover mummies with artificial toes. Fast
forward a few centuries Greeks, Romans, and even pirates have been known to use
them, both in films and in real life. However, a lack of medical expertise made survival
rates of amputations extremely low. Until the early 16th century, prosthetic limbs had
been very rudimentary, with simple designs using leather and wood parts. Later, French
military doctors began to work on amputation techniques and in the 1690s a Dutch
surgeon worked on ways to help the prosthetic stick to the body. In 1812 the
prosthetics developed a strap that went across the opposite shoulder and was controlled
by arm movement. Many of the methods discovered in these time periods are still used
in modern prosthetics.
Modern research has come a long way when it comes to the development of
prosthetic limbs. Due to medical advancements, doctors and surgeons have developed
more advanced mechanisms for easier use and higher functionality. As the research of
prosthetics advanced, technology such as joint modeling and suction-based attachment
methods also advanced. More recently, the functionality of prosthetics has been
improved through computer integration and design. Because of the application of 3D
printers, people all around the world have more access to artificial limbs that cost
effective and just as good as more expensive ones. Researchers have even developed a
way for amputees to use touch sensory through their prosthetics. Hopefully, with the
continuing research that is being done on prosthetics, people around the world will gain
even more access to them.
The purpose of this project was to design and build a prosthetic arm that could
benefit people who dont have access to advanced prosthetic technology, such as
amputees in third world countries and impoverished areas. To assess the prosthetics
versatility, the teams arm will be put to the test through various tasks that represent
real-world situations. It will have to prove its dexterity, ability to handle objects of
varying sizes, and its throwing capabilities. Through trials and tribulations, our team

AFFORDABLE PROSTHETICS

has found the four most important aspects to developing the right prosthetic for the job.
These aspects are the design of the fingers, how it is worn, the fingers operation, and
the price of putting it all together. The team approached this challenge in two ways.
Approach one was with everyday household items that were accessible and affordable.
The second approach was with an Arduino and 3D printing. The parts that couldnt be
made out of items that were found lying about had to be designed and printed.
The majority of our research and design was conducted at school, where there was
access to tools and materials. The team met in an engineering classroom once a week
for about nine weeks and twice a week for an additional eight weeks. As the team
progressed, they updated their engineering notebook and documented each concept and
change that was implemented. School, family, and sports commitments were just a few
of the factors that delayed the research and completion of the project. Because of this,
some aspects of the final project may have been rushed to completion. However, despite
these setbacks, the team completed their prosthetic to the best of their abilities.

AFFORDABLE PROSTHETICS

Discussion
Movement and Control
As the hand is the main function of an arm, prosthetic or otherwise, it is one of
the most crucial parts of this project. The efficiency of the hand comes from its ability
to grip objects without slipping or sticking, and the range of sizes that the hand can
grasp. On this model, the team has decided to make the hand as life-like as possible. It
consists of three fingers, two mobile and one stationary. The mobile fingers are
controlled by a DC motor whose direction is determined by the position of a linear
potentiometer. Each finger has three sections and they are moved by pulling on a
plastic strip located inside the fingers that is connected to the motor. Both the motor
and the potentiometer are controlled by an Arduino, the programming of which will be
discussed in a later section. The stationary finger acts as the thumb to balance the
other fingers as they grab objects.
Previous models of hands proved to be very proficient, but there are always
improvements to be made. For instance, with only one mobile finger and one stationary
finger, older models had difficulty with dexterity and picking up small objects. By
adding another finger and making them slimmer, the dexterity of the hand increases
and it is able to more easily grab and hold onto small objects. Rubber padding was
added to the end of the fingers to increase their gripping ability on all sorts of objects.
Previous models also included limited gripping material on the ends of the fingers,
which we believed was not sufficient for the tasks they had to perform. That is why, on
this model, rubber gripping material was adhered to the ends of the fingers.
Hardware and Software
The operation of the hand is another vital part of the project. According to the
guidelines, it cant be controlled from the opposite forearm, elbow, or either hand. This
limits the control options to both biceps and the head or neck. It also stands to reason
that the arm should be easy to maneuver and comfortable to use; it shouldnt be a
hassle to operate. So the team brainstormed ways to address these constraints. The

AFFORDABLE PROSTHETICS

first plan was to have a button located under the arm opposite the prosthetic that,
when pressed would open and close the hand. However, there were several issues with
that plan. For starters, the button was very small and took a lot of force to press.
Second, the programming proved to have too many complications for the team to
troubleshoot in the time given for this project. The circuit design for this plan can be
seen in Figure 1 in the appendix. All circuit designs were made in Fritzing, a circuit
modeling program. The plan the team went with was to use a linear potentiometer to
determine the direction of the motor. The programming required for this plan was
much simpler and it was overall more effective than the button.
Since the DC motor has to be able to turn both ways to open and close the hand,
we used an H-bridge motor driver in the circuit. The H-bridge provides the logic in
place of the Arduino so that the code is much simpler. All that needed to be
programmed were the values of the potentiometer that determined which way the motor
turned. The team still had to troubleshoot a few issues such as which potentiometer
values to have the motor stop moving. After multiple revisions, the final code was
uploaded to the Arduino so the team could perform tests on the prosthetic. See Figure
2 and 3 for the circuit design and schematic of this plan.

Arm Shaft
In the recipe for cooking up any prosthetic limb, a part to hold the amputated
limb is one of the most basic ingredients. As the base of our prosthetic, we created a
shaft of cardboard tubing to fit our operating hand in. To account for the varying sizes
in hands of our teammates, the tube was cut in half vertically and reassembled with
Velcro, to enable the user to adjust the width of the shaft as needed. The shaft is also
responsible for holding all of the hardware required to operate the prosthetic, such as
the Arduino, breadboard, batteries, and more. These parts are difficult to mount on a
curved surface, so specifically tailored platforms were 3D printed for each one to attach
them to the shaft. Because none of our teammates are amputees, the shaft includes a
cap at the end of the tube to prevent the operators hand from interfering with the

AFFORDABLE PROSTHETICS

systems on the outside.

In comparison to previous renditions of the shaft, the current one is much more
efficient. Older models proved to be more difficult for some of the team members to
wear than others. In this aspect, the new model accounts for varying sizes of arms of
amputees. The ability to adjust sizes also fixes the problem of getting the shaft to stay
on the users arm. The user no longer needs a strap around their shoulders to keep the
shaft in place, because the Velcro and padding do the job instead. Another issue that
previous models had was their comfort, or lack thereof. The users knuckles would be
red and irritated from being inside the shaft for long periods of time. That is why
padding was adhered to the inside of the shaft. The comfort issue also extends to the
amputees use of the prosthetic, because the prosthetic should feel like an extension of
the amputated limb.

Cost Efficiency and Performance Analysis

One of the goals of this project was to make the prosthetic affordable yet
functional. Last years prosthetic arm model reached a total of about $10. The
Sparkfun kit the team was provided with this year cost a total of $45, however, the
team did not use all of the parts in it. All inclusive, this project cost about $40, which
is quite an increase from $10. By comparing data from tests of this years and last
years prosthetics, we can analyze the effectiveness of each and weigh it against how
much they cost. The graphs of these data can be found in the appendix.
Figure 4 depicts the trials of the old and new arms in the dexterity challenge.
Each trial was scored based on how long it took for each nut to be screwed completely
onto each bolt. Figure 5 compares each arm in the object relocation challenge, which is
scored on how many objects were successfully carried into a waiting basket. The last
figure (Figure 6) compares the distances and accuracy of bean bags thrown by each arm.
This challenge was scored by giving points based on how far a bean bag was thrown,
with increasing points as the distance increased. It is obvious from the graphs that the
new arm overall performed better than the old, by a moderate amount. In fact, as can

AFFORDABLE PROSTHETICS

be seen in the graphs, the new arm did considerably well in all areas in comparison to
the old one. Some improvements were more significant than others, however. For
example, dexterity improved by an average difference of three seconds, whereas object
relocation only improved by an average difference of 0.2 objects. Distance accuracy had
the largest difference between the two arms with a 14 point improvement.
This overall improvement is probably due to the improved grip on the fingers.
another factor that could have affected the data was the improvement of the user in
each challenge as they continued to perform the trials. As the user got used to using a
prosthetic arm, their scores for each of the challenges might have improved, which could
have influenced the data. Although the new prosthetic model is more expensive, it
makes up for it in its performance and functionality. From this analysis, it can be said
that this model is more cost effective than the previous one.

AFFORDABLE PROSTHETICS

10

Conclusion

As a result of our investigation into affordable prosthetics, we found that the

design and control of the fingers, the base of the prosthetic, and its cost efficiency are
the most important parts to consider. The hand and fingers should be able to grip and
pick up a wide range of objects. The method of control should be easy to use and add to
the overall efficiency of the arm. When the user puts on the arm, it should be designed
so that they wouldnt want to take it off after a short while. The prosthetic should also
be relatively inexpensive for its functionality. These points are just some of the aspects
that make up a prosthetic arm, however they make the most impact on its results.
In a real-world application, prosthetic arms should meet the requirements of the
person in need. This challenge does an excellent job of helping students realize the
needs of those who are unfortunate enough to require a prosthetic. It also raises
awareness of the circumstances of third world and impoverished nations. Many lives
would be improved if more engineers were involved with humanitarian projects like
these. By introducing a younger generation of engineers and scientists to these issues,
they can add their own unique and exciting ideas to improve the world.

Recommendations

Overall, the team was very satisfied with the final product and we have high
hopes for it. However, there are always areas on which to improve. In particular, the
prosthetics ability to pick up larger objects could benefit from some extra attention
and study. Something that the team would like to experiment with in the future is
different types of sensors. Sensors would be more challenging and more interesting to
work with. The team would have benefited from a proper course on how to program
with the Arduino. For the most part, the team was on their own in finding resources to
learn from in that regard. Given more time and a larger variety of materials and
resources to work with, this project would have produced even better results.

AFFORDABLE PROSTHETICS

Acknowledgements
We would like to thank our MESA instructor Mrs. Reyes for aiding us in our
endeavours these past four years. We would also like to thank our adviser Aimee for
providing valuable insight into our project and our futures.

11

AFFORDABLE PROSTHETICS

12

References
Clements, I. n. (n.d.). The history of prosthetic limbs. How Stuff Works. Retrieved
from http://science.howstuffworks.com/prosthetic-limb1.htm
Lee, T. (2014, April). Man compares $50 3d printed hand to $42,000 prosthetic limb.
Ubergizmo. Retrieved from
http://www.ubergizmo.com/2014/04/man-compares-50-3d-printed-hand-to-42000prosthetic-limb/
Mesa day 2015. (2015). MESA USA National Engineering Design Competition.
Retrieved from http://oregonmesa.org/activities/mesa-day-2015/
Prosthetic arm challenge. (2013, August). MESA USA National Engineering Design
Competition.

AFFORDABLE PROSTHETICS

13

Appendix
Figure 1

Figure 2

AFFORDABLE PROSTHETICS

14

Figure 3

Figure 4
Dexterity Comparison

Points Earned

120
118
116
114
112

Old

New

110
1

Trial #

AFFORDABLE PROSTHETICS

15

Figure 5
Object Relocation Comparison
Old

Points Earned

New

0
1

Trial #
Figure 6
Distance Accuracy Comparison
Old

Points Earned

120

New

100
80
60
40
1

Trial #