Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
With the thumb serving an important role in the function of the human hand, improving robotic prosthetic thumb functionality will have a direct impact on the prosthesis itself. So far, no significant work exists that examines the ranges of motion a prosthetic thumb should exhibit; many myoelectric prostheses arbitrarily select them. We question this design practice as we expect a significant functional volume reduction for performing certain activities vs. the maximum obtainable workspace. To this end, we compare and contrast four anatomically-accurate thumb models. We quantify their angular ranges of motion by generating point clouds of end-effector positions, and by computing their alpha-shape bounded volumes. Examining the function of the thumb for several grasps, we identify a 76% reduction of the required workspace volume vis-a-vis the maximum volume of a "'generic'" human thumb.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/EMBC.2013.6610212 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!