CONFIDENTIAL. Limited circulation. For review only.
An Adaptive, Lightweight, Body-Powered System for Prosthetic Hands
Equipped with a Selectively Lockable Differential Mechanism
Bryan Busby, Geng Gao, and Minas Liarokapis
Abstract— The need for more practical, robust, and af-
fordable prosthetic hands for amputees has led to significant
advancements in their functionality. However, the challenge
of designing prostheses that balance dexterity, functionality,
and affordability still persists. The lack of prosthetic designs
that can efficiently address the needs of amputees for both
heavy manual labor and social interactions, while also being
lightweight and dexterous, is still evident. This paper presents
a design for an anthropomorphic, adaptive, lightweight, body-
powered prosthetic hand built for performing Activities of Daily
Living using a selectively lockable differential mechanism. The
proposed differential mechanism allows the users to flex and
lock the prosthesis’ fingers in a wide range of poses and
grasps. The performance of the body-powered prosthesis is
experimentally validated with three different types of exper- Fig. 1: The proposed anthropomorphic prosthetic hand
iments: i) object grasping, ii) total grasping strength, and iii) utilises both underactuation and a body-powered system to
individual finger force exertion. The resultant prosthetic hand is achieve a lightweight structure with adaptive grasping and
lightweight and comfortable to wear and is adequately capable
ease of use. Its design employs a unique, nested pulley dif-
of grasping a wide range of objects, including items commonly
used in cleaning and cooking applications where waterproofness ferential mechanism, an intuitive finger locking mechanism,
is essential. and is constructed using waterproof materials.
I. INTRODUCTION
Despite the advances of medical technology, limb loss
Underactuation - where a system operates with fewer
and emergency amputations continue to lead to severe loss
actuators than degrees of freedom - is integrated in most
of dexterity. Studies have found that approximately 185,000
prosthetic designs and is particularly useful at minimizing the
amputations are performed per year in the United States of
cost. However, its usage is generally limited to reducing the
America alone [1], with the total national amputee population
actuation complexity of individual fingers. In truth, the con-
reportedly reaching as high as 2 million people [2]. In New
cept of underactuation can be exploited further through the
Zealand, in [3] it is mentioned that almost 4,400 people live
introduction of clever differential mechanisms for simultane-
with some form of amputation, corresponding to one in every
ous finger actuations. This type of underactuation allows a
1,000 people. Prosthetic solutions for transradial amputees
prosthesis to perform adaptive grasps while being lightweight
- that is, patients who have undergone amputations below
and requiring simple control. Body-powered prostheses are
the elbow - have evolved dramatically, but an urgent and
one of the two common types of active prosthetic devices,
unsatisfied need for more versatile prosthetic hands remains.
the other being myoelectric. Body-powered prostheses derive
In [4], the authors discuss that there is a significant demand
power from the compensatory motions of the human body
for prostheses that can be comfortably used for Activities of
that transfer forces from the user’s torso or shoulder to the
Daily Living (ADL’s) such as cooking, cleaning, and even
end-effector through appropriate artificial tendons. Myoelec-
simple tasks such as opening doors. In addition, commer-
tric prostheses collect myoelectric information to control
cially available prosthetic hands are expensive, difficult to
an electronically-driven end effector that is typically more
use, and often weigh more than a typical adult human hand,
expensive and heavy. While myoelectric prostheses tend to
causing discomfort for amputees who bear the weight of the
be suited for light work and social interactions [6], [7], body-
prosthesis on their skin rather than their skeletal structure
powered prostheses are generally cheaper and more durable
[5]. The design choices that can be employed to optimise the
in heavy work and rough environments [8].
weight and functionality of a prosthetic hand are: i) use of
This paper presents the design of an anthropomorphic,
underactuation, ii) use of lockable differential mechanisms,
adaptive, body-powered prosthetic hand meant to fulfil the
and iii) harnessing the efficiency of body powered systems.
need for prosthesis usability in heavy work and water-
Bryan Busby, Geng Gao, and Minas Liarokapis are with the saturated applications. The proposed design features a unique
New Dexterity research group, Department of Mechanical and Mecha- selectively lockable differential mechanism to allow the
tronics Engineering, at the University of Auckland, New Zealand.
[Link]: bbus864@[Link], ggao102@[Link], mi- user to execute a wide range of grasps and gestures while
[Link]@[Link] minimising weight and associated complexity.
Manuscript 1265 submitted to 45th Annual International Conference of the IEEE
Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Received February 7, 2023.
CONFIDENTIAL. Limited circulation. For review only.
The remainder of the paper is organised as follows: exertion when displacement remains unchanged. This is
Section II analyses the related work, Section III presents the particularly useful in robotics and bionics, where actuated
design of the differential mechanism and locking system of limbs and effectors often need to exert great amounts of
the prosthetic hand, Section IV discusses the experimental force even when said limbs are not moving. SEA’s are
validation and results of the prosthesis, and finally, Section comprised of elastic components in series with an actuator.
V concludes the paper. In [18], the authors provide an example of a SEA utilising
compression springs, whereas in [19] and [20] use compliant
II. RELATED WORK rotary patterns cut from spring steel and polyurethane rubber,
Body-powered full-hand prostheses generally come in the respectively. In [21], the authors take this concept further by
form of shoulder- or elbow-powered devices with mechanical using polyurethane rubber components to produce a differ-
hooks or claws as end-effectors. These devices are robust in ential mechanism exploiting the characteristics of SEA’s.
day-to-day and heavy work applications, but lack dexterity In combination with differential mechanisms, locking
and grasping precision [9], [10] and can be uncomfort- mechanisms can be devised to fix the fingers in certain
able - sometimes even painful - to wear [11]. The use configurations. These are crucial for performing gestures and
of non-anthropomorphic hooks and claws pose difficulties maintaining firm grasps on particular objects. One type of
to social reintegration, yet there is little academic pursuit locking mechanism in contemporary literature is the single-
of anthropomorphic body-powered prostheses, likely due position locking system, which locks selected fingers in
to high rejection rates resulting from the increased force a set position, as shown in the prostheses of [13] and
requirements of such designs [9], [12]. [14]. However, such mechanisms can only hold individual
An anthropomorphic body-powered prosthesis can be fingers in full extension. In contrast, users of body-powered
made possible through underactuated designs equipped with prostheses typically want to be able to hold a given grasp or
differential mechanisms. Such force transmission systems gesture without having to constantly exert force with their
allow for the execution of adaptive grasps, distributing the actuating limb. Ratchet mechanisms such as that devised by
actuation force equally among the fingers of the prosthetic [15] free the user’s actuating arm once the desired pose or
hand. Three methods of actuation are explored here: i) grasp is achieved.
whiffletree-based (or lever-based) mechanisms, ii) pulley-
based mechanisms, and iii) series elastic systems. III. DESIGNS
Whiffletree-based systems employ the use of rigid links Two new mechanisms were developed for the proposed
that behave like levers to achieve differential action. The adaptive, body-powered prosthesis: i) a Nested Pulley Dif-
input actuation force is exerted through the center point of a ferential mechanism and ii) a Selective Finger Locking
link and is distributed equally between the two output loads mechanism. These mechanisms were manufactured almost
connected at the ends of the link. Imbalances in each load entirely using 3D printing (fused deposition modelling)
cause the link to rotate as well as translate, yielding different technology, with the only exceptions being the steel shafts,
load displacements while maintaining equal force distribu- bearings, compression springs, and nuts and bolts. Almost
tion. Due to its simplicity and robustness, the whiffletree has all 3D printed parts were manufactured from polylactic acid
seen use in the designs of several underactuated prostheses, (PLA) plastic with no support material and no bed adhesion,
such as those produced by [13], [14] and [15]. One issue with resulting in a design that is not only lightweight but also
whiffletree mechanisms, however, is their reduced efficiency simple and affordable to manufacture and maintain.
at large displacements: as the links of a whiffletree rotate,
they produce more undesirable displacement and force ex- A. Nested Pulley Differential Mechanism
ertion in the transverse direction rather than in the desired A unique differential mechanism was devised to achieve
longitudinal direction. the aim of converting a single input actuation force into four
Pulley-based mechanisms, as the name suggests, utilise output finger forces: the Nested Pulley Differential (NPD)
pulleys to achieve differential behaviour. An input force is mechanism.
applied perpendicular to the rotational axis of a pulley body, The NPD emulates a two-stage pulley differential, drawing
pulling on the output loads and rotating the pulley. Unlike inspiration from the whiffletree-and-pulley differential of
the whiffletree, the pulley produces minimal transverse dis- [17], the SEA developed by [18], and the planetary gear
placement as it travels, converting the input displacement and mechanisms used in automotive transmission systems. It
force into mostly longitudinal outputs. The prostheses devel- consists of a cage pulley sub-assembly that slides and rotates
oped by [16] and [17] integrate such pulley systems. The within the confines of a mechanism’s casing. The cage pulley
design of [17] combines pulleys with a whiffletree system sub-assembly is made up of two rigidly connected halves; the
to combat the drawbacks of both mechanisms. Traditionally, right half connected to the index and middle fingers and the
wider pulleys are needed to achieve greater displacements, left half connected to the ring and little fingers. Each half
however [17] instead achieves this by attaching pulleys on of the cage pulley contains two nested half-pulleys - one for
the ends of whiffletree links. each finger - surrounded by rings of six rollers. Recessed
Series elastic actuators (SEA’s) are a unique and rela- in between each pair of nested half-pulleys are two com-
tively new actuation method that allows for increasing force pression springs in series, producing series elastic behaviour.
Manuscript 1265 submitted to 45th Annual International Conference of the IEEE
Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Received February 7, 2023.
CONFIDENTIAL. Limited circulation. For review only.
(a) Left side view (b) Back view (c) Right side view
Fig. 2: Final prototype of the body-powered prosthesis as worn during experimental validation. The prosthetic hand is actuated
by the displacement of the tendon that is terminated at the user’s opposing arm. The differential mechanism is housed in
the compartment mounted behind the shoulder of the user’s wielding arm. The finger-locking mechanism is attached to the
base of the prosthetic hand.
(a) View of differential mechanism assembly inside
casing (b) Close up of differential mechanism from above
Fig. 3: The Nested Pulley Differential (NPD) mechanism combines the function of a two-stage pulley differential and a series
elastic mechanism. Each finger is connected via tendon routing to a half-pulley nestled inside the cage pulley sub-assembly,
which translates back and forth between the ends of the mechanism casing.
The cage pulley sub-assembly rotates on a transverse shaft behaviour when actuated, utilising the line where the cables
flanked by two sliders, which themselves are mounted on terminate the cage pulley as a point of leverage (similar to a
two shafts mounted longitudinally in the mechanism casing. whiffletree), while also having the ability to slide along the
Stiff compression springs separate the sliders from the output surface rollers of the cage pulley when one finger tendon
terminal of the casing, maintaining sufficient tension in the experiences greater resistance than its corresponding tendon
output cables of the pulley mechanism. pair (similar to a pulley).
In contrast to traditional pulley systems, each finger tendon
is actuated and terminated by a single half-pulley in the cage B. Selective Finger Locking Mechanism
pulley sub-assembly. For each pair of nested half-pulleys, the An intuitive, Selective Finger Locking (SFL) mechanism
tendon cables are routed in opposite directions; that is, one was devised to enable users to not only select which fingers
cable is wound clockwise about one half-pulley, while the to actuate but also maintain the grasp of an object while
other cable is wound counterclockwise about its companion freeing the opposing arm for other actions. The SFL mech-
half-pulley. The outputs of each tendon pair are then led out anism consists of four main components: the plungers, the
of the core of the cage pulley, and the tendon pairs of the upper clamps, and the compartment top and base plates. The
right side are then wrapped clockwise along the rollers of plungers and upper clamps are bolted to together, while the
the cage pulley while those of the left side are respectively lower clamps corresponding to each upper clamp are built
wrapped counterclockwise along their corresponding sets of into the compartment bottom plate. The compartment bottom
rollers. The tendon cables are then finally routed through the plate is attached to the base of the prosthetic gripper, and the
output terminals of the differential mechanism casing. This compartment top plate is attached to the input and output
mechanism allows four finger tendons to exhibit differential tubing used to shield the tendon cables.
Manuscript 1265 submitted to 45th Annual International Conference of the IEEE
Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Received February 7, 2023.
CONFIDENTIAL. Limited circulation. For review only.
Fig. 6: The Selective Finger Locking (SFL) mechanism
operates similar to a click pen: a plunger is pressed down
to engage its clamps and lock the selected tendon, and can
then be squeezed to disengage and release the tendon.
Fig. 4: The cage pulley sub-assembly has tendons for each
finger, which are attached through a hole in its corresponding
half-pulley (blue), then wound around the half-pulley before input cables. These thinner tendon cables are punctuated
being wound around the outer ring of rollers (green). by evenly spaced stopper knots. When a plunger is pushed
down, the upper clamp attached to it presses down on the
knotted tendon cable below it, compressing it against its
corresponding lower clamp. The teeth of the clamp faces
oppose the motion of the tendon cable’s stopper knots,
ceasing actuation of the corresponding finger. The tightness
of the clamps on the cables can be adjusted by turning the
bolts joining the compartment top plate and bottom plate
together.
C. Anthropomorphic Gripper
The gripper used for the development of the body-powered
(a) Disengaged (clamp raised) (b) Engaged (clamp lowered) prosthesis is the one developed and presented in our previous
work in [13]. The original prosthesis was emptied of all
Fig. 5: Section view of one locking mechanism sub-unit.
electronics and mechanical components to maximise the
The plunger and upper clamp (green) are pushed down
available space and minimise the weight of the prosthesis.
towards the lower clamp (blue) to restrict a tendon positioned
between the two clamp faces. The ratchet teeth on the side IV. EXPERIMENTS AND RESULTS
of the plunger fix the upper clamp in either the engaged or The efficiency of the proposed body-powered prosthesis
disengaged configuration. was evaluated with three different experiments: i) object
grasping, ii) grasping strength, and iii) individual finger
strength.
The locking system draws inspiration from the clicker
of a Parker JotterTM pen and operates similar to a set of A. Object Grasping Capability
four squeeze-release click pens. Four hexagonal plungers - The aim of the object grasping experiments was to de-
each consisting of a rigid body and a flexible side with two termine the range of objects, geometries, and grasp types
ratchet teeth - are positioned inside four hexagonal holes. that the prosthesis could achieve, as well as the stability of
Pressing down on a plunger causes its flexible toothed side to grasps. Several objects ranging from food items to kitchen
bend inwards, allowing the plunger to slide downwards and and cleaning utensils were grasped in a fashion similar to
audibly click into its lowered position. Compression springs how humans grasp such objects. The objects and grasp types
placed between the bottom of the plunger and the compart- chosen reflect the water-saturated or water-exposed applica-
ment bottom plate keep the plunger’s ratchet teeth pushed tions that the body-powered prosthesis could be enduring.
flush against the compartment top plate. Upon squeezing the Figure 7 illustrates the selected objects and the quality of
flexible toothed face and rigid body of the plunger together, their grasps when locked in position.
the ratchet teeth are freed, and the compression springs force All grasps were performed to a satisfactory level. Power
the plunger upwards to reach the compartment top plate. grasps were executed well, conforming to the geometry of
The tendon cables that run through the locking mechanism the Pringles can, drill, and sanitary wipes, and maintaining
and to the fingers are thinner than those connected to the robustness upon locking of the fingers. Precision grasps that
differential mechanism, and are tied securely to the thicker were performed with unnecessary fingers locked in extension
Manuscript 1265 submitted to 45th Annual International Conference of the IEEE
Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Received February 7, 2023.
CONFIDENTIAL. Limited circulation. For review only.
(a) Cylindrical grasp (b) Precision grasp (c) Holding power tool (d) Carrying cleaning wipes
(e) Lifting dinner plate (f) Holding drinking mug (g) Using kitchen utensil (h) Holding cleaning sponge
Fig. 7: Assessment of grasping capabilities on different object geometries. The objects selected are commonly found in
water-saturated or rough applications, such as common food items (a) and (b), tools and cleaning instruments (c), (d), and
(h), and kitchen utensils and cutlery (e), (f), and (g).
experienced some slippage of the locked digits but generally
retained robust form when all digits were locked in their
final grasping pose. Precision grasps executed with all fingers
were similarly achieved and were maintained to a satisfactory
level before and after locking of the fingers.
B. Grasp Strength Assessment
The grasp strength experiments were conducted with the
goal of determining the maximum grasping force that the
body-powered prosthesis can achieve. The load cell apparatus
used in these experiments is comprised of two semi-cylinders
housing two strain gauges and was devised by [22] for the
purpose of assessing robot gripper grasping strength. The
load cell detects the force applied normal to the two semi-
cylinders and generates a reading of the measured force.
As per the methodology set out by [22], this experiment
was conducted with the load cell positioned in two orien- Fig. 8: Line graph showing grasp force exerted by the
tations: i) transversely, such that the load cell measures the prosthesis when actuated by a Dynamixel motor. The force
force applied by the fingers perpendicular to the palm, and measurements perpendicular and parallel to the palm are
ii) longitudinally, so that the force exerted by the fingers shown as solid blue and green lines, respectively, and the
parallel to the palm is measured. The hand of the prosthesis overall grasp strength was calculated to be 27.1N.
was closed and opened fully, with full flexion maintained
for 10 seconds to measure the force generated in each load
cell orientation. The phalanges of the fingers apply force in to determine the overall grasp strength of the prosthesis.
multiple directions, so the measurement of force output in Using body-powered actuation, the mean load achieved in the
these two orientations is necessary for determining the grasp transverse orientation was found to be approximately 16.2 N,
strength of the prosthesis. With the results derived from these while the longitudinal orientation yielded a mean of 14.6 N.
experiments, the mean force in each orientation is calculated, With these values, the overall grasp strength of the prosthesis
and the L2 norm of these two means can be calculated was found to be 21.8 N.
Manuscript 1265 submitted to 45th Annual International Conference of the IEEE
Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Received February 7, 2023.
CONFIDENTIAL. Limited circulation. For review only.
(a) Index finger (b) Middle finger
Fig. 9: Line graph showing pinch force exerted by the (c) Ring finger (d) Little finger
prosthesis when actuated by a Dynamixel MX-64AR motor.
Fig. 10: Line graphs showing pinch forces exerted by each
The pinch force exerted by all four fingers (maximum 44.2
individual finger of the prosthesis. The ring finger (subfigure
N) is shown by a solid blue line.
(c)) exerted the highest pinch force, 9.18 N, while the index
finger (subfigure (a)) had the lowest pinch force, 7.59 N.
The experiment was further conducted with an actuator,
employing a high torque Dynamixel MX-64AR motor to
measure the force exertion of the prosthesis under controlled reached. A BIOPAC® Systems Inc. hand dynamometer was
conditions. Using the motor, the fingers were gradually flexed used to measure the pinch force exerted by the fingers in
until the motor reached its maximum stall torque, the grasp five different configurations, the first with all four fingers
was maintained for approximately 10 seconds, and then the being actuated, and the other four configurations utilising
fingers were gradually released back to full extension. As the locking mechanism to actuate each finger individually.
with the body-powered tests, the overall grasp strength was The maximum pinch force exerted by all four fingers of
calculated as the L2 norm of the mean forces measured in the prosthesis was 44.2 N, as shown in Figure 9. This was
the transverse and longitudinal load cell orientations. more than 60% greater than the prosthesis’ maximum grasp
The results of the Dynamixel-driven experiments demon- strength of 27.1 N, reflecting the previous observation that
strated similar force exertion as in the body-powered trials, the DIP and PIP joints had a higher tendency to flex than the
and the overall grasp strength was calculated to be 27.1 MCP joints - the fingers exerted force on the dynamometer
N. However force exertion patterns were inconsistent be- through their DP’s alone, rather than through all three of
tween each orientation of the load cell. While the results their phalanges. This, however, was still well below the input
of the transverse load cell orientation yielded the predicted force from the motor, corresponding with a 7.37% efficiency
behaviour, it was observed that the distal and proximal inter- in power transmission. Of course, this percentage can be
phalangeal (DIP and PIP, respectively) joints of the fingers further improved through minimization of the friction in
had a higher tendency to flex than the metacarpophalangeal the differential mechanism, the locking mechanism, and the
(MCP) joints. As a result, when the maximum input force tendon routing.
was maintained in the longitudinal orientation, the fingers V. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
reconfigured such that the proximal phalanges (PP) of the
fingers lost contact with the load cell, while the distal We presented a fully mechanical, anthropomorphic, adap-
phalanges (DP) curled towards the palm. This resulted in tive, body-powered prosthesis that is intended for both light
a significant drop in the measured force exerted towards the and heavy work in a range of environments, as well as for
thumb, as the proximal phalanges were no longer exerting social interactions. The prosthesis design utilises an novel
force on the load cell. selectively lockable differential mechanism that facilitates
grasping of objects of various geometries, allowing also the
C. Finger Strength Analysis user to maintain specific grasps by locking the fingers in
The final finger strength analysis was conducted with various configurations, while using their other arm to perform
the purpose of determining the mechanical effectiveness of other tasks. The prosthesis also provides the user with the
the prosthesis’ differential mechanism. As with the grasp ability to adjust the cable tension and locking tightness of the
strength assessment, the prosthesis prototype was actuated device, so the user can adjust the settings of the prosthesis
by a Dynamixel MX-64AR motor, flexing the desired fingers as they see fit. While further improvements can be made to
until the maximum stall torque of the motor, 6.0 Nm was the durability and performance of the design, it has proven
Manuscript 1265 submitted to 45th Annual International Conference of the IEEE
Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Received February 7, 2023.
CONFIDENTIAL. Limited circulation. For review only.
successful in achieving its intended purpose: enabling an [18] L. T. Martins, R. de Mendonça Pretto, R. Gerndt, and
amputee to use a prosthesis in any environment without R. da Silva Guerra, “Design of a Modular Series Elastic Upgrade
to a Robotics Actuator,” in RoboCup 2014: Robot World Cup XVIII
fear of losing its core functionality upon exposure to the (R. A. C. Bianchi, H. L. Akin, S. Ramamoorthy, and K. Sugiura,
elements. eds.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, (Cham), pp. 701–708,
Springer International Publishing, 2015.
[19] D. Ruiken, J. P. Cummings, U. R. Savaria, F. C. Sup, and R. A. Grupen,
“uBot-7: A dynamically balancing mobile manipulator with series
R EFERENCES elastic actuators,” in 2017 IEEE-RAS 17th International Conference
on Humanoid Robotics (Humanoids), pp. 676–682, Nov. 2017. ISSN:
[1] M. F. Owings and L. J. Kozak, “Ambulatory and inpatient procedures 2164-0580.
in the United States, 1996,” no. 139, pp. 1–119. [20] L. T. Martins, C. A. Arend Tatsch, E. H. Maciel, R. Gerndt, and
[2] K. Ziegler-Graham, E. J. MacKenzie, P. L. Ephraim, T. G. Travison, R. da Silva Guerra, “A Polyurethane-based Compliant Element for
and R. Brookmeyer, “Estimating the Prevalence of Limb Loss in the Upgrading Conventional Servos into Series Elastic Actuators**This
United States: 2005 to 2050,” Archives of Physical Medicine and work was partially funded by Univ. Federal de Santa Maria, by Ostfalia
Rehabilitation, vol. 89, pp. 422–429, Mar. 2008. Univ. of Applied Sciences and by the RoboCup Federation.,” IFAC-
[3] Peke Waihanga, “Artificial limb service statistics 2013-2014.” PapersOnLine, vol. 48, pp. 112–117, Jan. 2015.
[21] M. Shahmohammadi and M. Liarokapis, “A Series Elastic, Com-
[4] C. Pylatiuk, S. Schulz, and L. Döderlein, “Results of an Internet
pact Differential Mechanism: On the Development of Adaptive,
survey of myoelectric prosthetic hand users,” Prosthetics and Orthotics
Lightweight Robotic Grippers and Hands,” in 2021 IEEE/RSJ Interna-
International, vol. 31, pp. 362–370, Dec. 2007.
tional Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), pp. 6110–
[5] J. T. Belter and A. M. Dollar, “Performance characteristics of anthro-
6116, Sept. 2021. ISSN: 2153-0866.
pomorphic prosthetic hands,” in 2011 IEEE International Conference
[22] NIST, “Grasping Performance Metrics and Test Methods,” National
on Rehabilitation Robotics, pp. 1–7, June 2011. ISSN: 1945-7901.
Institute of Standards and Technology, May 2018.
[6] m. Hafshejani, M. Javanshir, M. Kamali, M. Ghasemi, M. Emami,
S. Esmaeeli, A. Langari, and M. Sattari Naeini, “The comparison
of psychological and social adaptation below elbow amputation men
using a mechanical and myoelectric prosthesis by using of TAPES
questionnaire,” Life Science Journal, vol. 9, pp. 5583–87, Dec. 2012.
[7] J. M. Meredith, “Comparison of three myoelectrically controlled
prehensors and the voluntary-opening split hook,” The American
Journal of Occupational Therapy: Official Publication of the American
Occupational Therapy Association, vol. 48, pp. 932–937, Oct. 1994.
[8] G. H. Kejlaa, “Consumer concerns and the functional value of prosthe-
ses to upper limb amputees,” Prosthetics and Orthotics International,
vol. 17, pp. 157–163, Dec. 1993.
[9] S. Carey, D. Lura, and M. Highsmith, “Differences in myoelectric and
body-powered upper-limb prostheses: Systematic literature review,”
Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, vol. 52, pp. 247–
262, Aug. 2015.
[10] M. Hichert, D. A. Abbink, P. J. Kyberd, and D. H. Plettenburg, “High
Cable Forces Deteriorate Pinch Force Control in Voluntary-Closing
Body-Powered Prostheses,” PLOS ONE, vol. 12, p. e0169996, Jan.
2017.
[11] M. E. Huang, C. E. Levy, and J. B. Webster, “Acquired limb de-
ficiencies. 3. Prosthetic components, prescriptions, and indications,”
Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, vol. 82, pp. S17–
24, Mar. 2001.
[12] M. Hichert, A. N. Vardy, and D. Plettenburg, “Fatigue-free operation
of most body-powered prostheses not feasible for majority of users
with trans-radial deficiency,” Prosthetics and Orthotics International,
vol. 42, pp. 84–92, Feb. 2018.
[13] G. Gao, A. Dwivedi, and M. Liarokapis, “An Anthropomorphic Pros-
thetic Hand with an Active, Selectively Lockable Differential Mecha-
nism: Towards Affordable Dexterity,” in 2021 IEEE/RSJ International
Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), pp. 6147–6152,
Sept. 2021. ISSN: 2153-0866.
[14] G. P. Kontoudis, M. V. Liarokapis, A. G. Zisimatos, C. I. Mavro-
giannis, and K. J. Kyriakopoulos, “Open-source, anthropomorphic,
underactuated robot hands with a selectively lockable differential
mechanism: Towards affordable prostheses,” in 2015 IEEE/RSJ In-
ternational Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS),
pp. 5857–5862, Sept. 2015.
[15] L. Gerez, J. Chen, and M. Liarokapis, “On the Development of
Adaptive, Tendon-Driven, Wearable Exo-Gloves for Grasping Capa-
bilities Enhancement,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 4,
pp. 422–429, Apr. 2019.
[16] E. Anderson, J. Moloughney, K. Ozerinsky, and R. Saleh, “Body
powered anthropomorphic prosthetic hand with force feedback and
auto-rotation regimes,” in 2012 38th Annual Northeast Bioengineering
Conference (NEBEC), pp. 33–34, Mar. 2012. ISSN: 2160-7028.
[17] J. T. Belter and A. M. Dollar, “Novel differential mechanism enabling
two DOF from a single actuator: Application to a prosthetic hand,” in
2013 IEEE 13th International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics
(ICORR), pp. 1–6, June 2013. ISSN: 1945-7901.
Manuscript 1265 submitted to 45th Annual International Conference of the IEEE
Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Received February 7, 2023.
