Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMin, Kathy S.
dc.contributor.authorKazerooni, H.
dc.contributor.authorTung, Wayne
dc.contributor.authorPillai, Minerva
dc.contributor.authorEngelhoven, Logan Van
dc.date.accessioned2026-08-23T07:59:18Z
dc.date.available2026-08-23T07:59:18Z
dc.date.copyright2026/04/01
dc.date.issued2026
dc.identifier.issn2689-6117
dc.identifier.otheraldsc-25-1052.pdf
dc.identifier.urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4315908
dc.description.abstractAbstract. This article investigates the internal spinal forces experienced by the human body when assisted by either a rigid-body exoskeleton or a soft exosuit, both delivering equivalent supportive extension torques. Despite equivalent torque outputs, our analysis reveals that the spinal forces experienced by the user differ significantly between the two systems. This finding challenges the validity of an existing experimental equation that assumes identical extension torques from different assistive devices result in the same likelihood of spinal fatigue. We demonstrate that this assumption does not hold universally. Spinal fatigue failure, or structural tissue-level fatigue of the lumbar motion segments, depends on the forces acting on the spine. Therefore, variations in internal loading conditions (e.g., spinal compression and shear forces) should yield differing levels of risk for spinal fatigue, contradicting the equation's prediction. Furthermore, the study highlights the complexity of extrapolating ergonomic and biomechanical assessments from unassisted individuals to individuals using exoskeletons. Overlooking the specific architecture and dynamic interaction between the device and the user can lead to misleading conclusions about its safety and effectiveness in occupational settings. Finally, this article emphasizes the need for device-specific assessment tools, given the wide variation in exoskeleton geometries and mechanical behavior.
dc.publisherThe American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
dc.titleAddressing Exoskeleton Architectural Diversity in Ergonomic and Biomechanical Studies
dc.typeJournal Paper
dc.journal.volume6
dc.journal.issue2
dc.journal.titleASME Letters in Dynamic Systems and Control
dc.identifier.doi10.1115/1.4070144
dc.journal.fristpage237
dc.journal.lastpage249
dc.page13
dc.treeASME Letters in Dynamic Systems and Control:;2026:;volume( 006 ):;issue:002
dc.contenttypeFulltext


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record