Skip to main content

Table 2 Conclusions and comparisons of the different PARRs (P: Pneumatic-driven; E: Electrically-driven)

From: State of the art in parallel ankle rehabilitation robot: a systematic review

Group/device Institution/nationality Actuator types DOFs ROM Exercise mode Control strategies Subject Study with patients
Girone et al.
Rutgers Ankle
Rutgers
University, USA
P 6 DO/PL:\(\pm 45^{\circ }\)
IN/EV:\(\pm 40^{\circ }\)
AD/AB:\(\pm 80^{\circ }\)
Passive;
Active
Position control
Force control
N = 4 [58] yes
Yoon et al.
Reconfigurable
parallel ankle
robot
Gwangju Institute
of Science and
Technology, Korea
P 4 DO/PL:\(\pm 50^{\circ }\)
IN/EV:\(\pm 55^{\circ }\)
Passive Position control - no
Dai et al.
\(3{\mathrm{- }}SPS/PS\)
mechanism
King’s College
London, UK
E 4 no
Liu et al.
\(3{\mathrm{- }}RSS/S\)
mechanism
Hebei University
of Technology,
China
E 3 DO/PL:
\({\mathrm{- }}{41.86^{\circ }} \sim {42.79^{\circ } }\);
IN/EV:
\({\mathrm{- }}{43.8^{\circ }} \sim {41.89^{\circ } }\);
AD/AB:
\({\mathrm{- }}{53.78^{\circ }} \sim {44.08^{\circ } }\);
Passive; assistant; resistive Position control
Force control
No
Saglia et al.
ARBOT
Istituto Italiano
di Technologia,
Italy
E 2 - Passive
Active
Active (Isometric Isotonic)
Position control
Assistive control
Admittance control
N = 1 [27];
N = 5 [60]
No
Malosio et al.
PKAnkle
Institute of Industrial
Technologies and
Automation, Italy
E 3 - Passive
Active
Position control
Admittance control
N = 3 [86] No
Ayas et al.
2-DOFs parallel
ankle robot
Karadeniz Technical
University, Turkey
E 2 - Passive
Active
Trajectory tracking
Adaptive admittance control
No
Hamid et al.
9-DOFs hybrid
PARR
University of
Birmingham, UK
E 9 DO/PL:
\({\mathrm{- }}{42.24^{\circ }} \sim {25.92^{\circ } }\);
IN/EV:
\({\mathrm{- }}{16.46^{\circ }} \sim {16.11^{\circ } }\);
AD/AB:
\({\mathrm{- }}{30.49^{\circ }} \sim {33.71^{\circ } }\);
Passive Position control No
Ai et al.
2-DOFs ankle
rehabilitation robot
Wuhan University
of Technology,
China
P 2 - Passive Adaptive backstepping sliding mode control N = 5 [52] No
Jamwal et al.
Reconfigurable
PARR
University of
Auckland, New
Zealand
P 3 DO/PL:\(\pm 46^{\circ }\)
IN/EV:\(\pm 26^{\circ }\)
AD/AB:\(\pm 52^{\circ }\)
Passive Trajectory tracking control N = 1 [49] No
Jamwal et al.
intrinsically
compliant ankle
rehabilitation robot
Nazarbayev
University,
Kazakhstan
P 3 Passive
Active
Position control
Impedance control
Adaptive impedance control
N = 10 [50];
N = 10 [68]
N = 3 [69]
Yes
Zhang et al.
CARR
University of
Auckland, New
Zealand
P 3 Varying
workspace
Passive
Active
Position control
Adaptive patient-cooperative control
Adaptive trajectory tracking
N = 1 [34]
N = 4 [47]
N = 4 [70]
N = 2 [71]
Yes
Tsoi et al.
Redundantly
actuated PARR
University of
Auckland, New
Zealand
E 3 DO/PL:
\({\mathrm{- }}{60^{\circ }} \sim {72^{\circ } }\);
IN/EV:\(\pm 73^{\circ }\);
AD/AB:\(> 80^{\circ }\);
Passive
Active
Joint force control
Impedance control
N = 1 [64] No
Wang et al.
\(3-\underline{R}US/\underline{R}RR\)
Beijing Jiaotong
University, China
E 3 DO/PL:
\({\mathrm{- }}{62^{\circ }} \sim {50^{\circ } }\);
IN/EV:\(\pm 37^{\circ }\);
AD/AB:\(\pm 92^{\circ }\);
Passive Position control - No
Cazalilla et al.
\(3{\mathrm{- }}\underline{P}RS\)
Universidad
Politécnica de
Valencia, Spain
E 3 DO/PL:\(\pm 50^{\circ }\);
IN/EV:\(\pm 50^{\circ }\);
Passive
Active (assistive; resistive)
Position control
Force control
No
Li et al.
2-UPS/RRR
PARR
Beijing University
of Technology,
China
E 3 DO/PL:
\({\mathrm{- }}{42.24^{\circ }} \sim {25.92^{\circ } }\);
IN/EV:
\({\mathrm{- }}{16.46^{\circ }} \sim {16.11^{\circ } }\);
AD/AB:
\({\mathrm{- }}{30.49^{\circ }} \sim {33.71^{\circ } }\);
Passive;
Active
Position control
Patient-passive compliance exercise
Isotonic exercise
Patient-active exercise
N = 5 [67] No