MESA Prosthetic Arm Challenge

Althea Spahn
Aengy Pedrazzini
Kayla Garcia
Yazmin Hernandez

Liberty High School

Hillsboro, OR

April 2016

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.

Table of Contents
Abstract1
Introduction..3
Discussion....5
Conclusion...9
Recommendations..10
Acknowledgements10
References..11
Appendix....12
Itemized Budget Sheet...15

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 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.

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 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 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.
The 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 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 1 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 2 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 3) 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 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 in more cost effective than the
previous one.

Dexterity (old arm):

trial

Seconds elapsed

120

120

116

117

120

(new arm):

120

116

117

115

112

Object relocation (old arm):

trial

# objects unremoved

(new arm):

Distance accuracy (old arm):

trial

Total points earned

60

75

95

100

100

(new arm):

85

90

115

90

120

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.
Acknowledgments
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 advisor Aimee for providing valuable
insight into our project and our futures.

References
(2013, August 12). Prosthetic Arm Challenge. MESA USA National Engineering Design
Competition. Print.
Clements, I. (n.d.). The History of Prosthetic Limbs. Retrieved April 19, 2016, from
http://science.howstuffworks.com/prosthetic-limb1.htm
Lee, T. (2014, April 4). Man Compares $50 3D Printed Hand To $42,000 Prosthetic
Limb.Ubergizmo. Retrieved April 22, 2014, from
http://www.ubergizmo.com/2014/04/man-compares-50-3d-printed-hand-to-42000prosthetic-limb/
MESA Day 2015. (n.d.). Retrieved April 12, 2016, from http://oregonmesa.org/activities/mesaday-2015/

Appendix
(Ill make all the graphs in Latex)