This is amazing. I built one to help my nephew walk, and now selling commercially ( http://trexorobotics.com )
I am fed-up at the lack of options available to individuals. People thought that everyone will get an exoskeleton and be able to walk with it everywhere. But the industry ran into many challenges.
A big one that many dont understand is getting insurance coverage. The way the US healthcare system is designed, it will only cover restoration of mobility, not a restoration of function. So, from their perspective, a wheelchair and some pain meds can do the job easily.
I believe that they key is to start with children, this is where you have families desperate for a solution, higher costs due to them growing and spending their entire life in a wheelchair, and the option to truly have a life changing impact.
But things are changing, people are starting to notice the work that we are doing. We need a lot more people building exoskeletons and similar powered orthotics!!
> So, from their perspective, a wheelchair and some pain meds can do the job easily.
And not even a good wheelchair. For my wife recently diagnosed with MS, they would only approve of a basic, featureless, uncomfortable one after I would pay the $3000 deductible plus 20% coinsurance. Instead, I got a light-weight folding electric wheelchair with nearly full-day worth of battery (15 miles), with a spare battery, adjustable headrest for $1300 off Amazon. Add an octopus-tripod fan with 10hr battery, golf-cart umbrella, bendable cane holder, bottle holder, and an A/C fan jacket for a total of $200 and now she is able to spend a few hours out with our kids at museums, aquariums, and zoos.
It was literally cheaper for me to buy all of this cash than try to spend 40+ hours getting insurance approval.
I absolutely love how practical and solid your product is. I cannot comment on the pricing because I have no idea what your costs/market is but if my kid needed $999/mo to walk, I would do literally anything to be able to afford it. Hopefully the costs keep coming down for those with a smaller budget. Good luck!
Great thing it works this way for mechanical tech.
For chemicals, that is, medicines, paying out of pocket is not impossible, but much harder. The $1500 you invested will likely last a number of years. Or it might be a month worth of prescription drugs; cheap generics do not exist for everything (and may sometimes be inferior).
I don't know a good way out of it. The U.S. medical insurance system sucks, but my friends from Germany and Netherlands report that theirs is even worse at providing any remotely advanced treatment.
> Germany and Netherlands report that theirs is even worse at providing any remotely advanced treatment.
It kind of depends on what you'd consider advanced treatment. I know a few people with chronic illnesses that are dependent on getting their (expensive) medications and they never had a problem with that. Besides the prescription fee of 5€ (not 100% sure on that one) they pay nothing out of their pocket.
But I've heard from people that that they often have problems for example with getting approval for new wheelchairs, accessibility adjustments for their cars, etc.
In general it is true that only necessities are covered by public health insurance. This makes sense in most cases for obvious reasons, but in some cases the limits seem totally arbitrary and are not beneficial to the consumer nor the insurer. Luckily I am young and healthy so my confrontations with our healthcare are limited to my bi-yearly dentist appointments, but I can absolutely imagine how there are gigantic bureaucratic hurdles when needing something remotely special.
Generally, getting a wheelchair or similar is a bit of a paper war with the insurance. Once you have it though, the barrier is lower to get a replacement or upgrades.
I’ve only managed to get more advanced treatment in the UK (still nothing ground breaking) by having private medical cover in addition to the national health care. Thankfully as the national health service covers all the basic care it’s possible to get private cover for around £40 per month.
That sounds _really_ good, and kind of blows a big hole in a lot of arguments against universal health care. I pay more than that monthly for relatively basic medication and that's _with_ pretty good employer-funded insurance
It gets better/worse. NHS provides universal cover for a lower per capita cost than Medicare/Medicaid covers the portion of the US population it covers.
Isn’t that a bit unfair of a comparison, since Medicare disproportionately covers the elderly who have higher medical costs, while the NHS serves the whole population?
The cost of Medicare + Medicaid divided by the number of people in the US - not the number of people covered by those services, has tended to be higher than the cost of the NHS divided by the number of people in the UK.
EDIT:
According to CMS[1], Medicare cost $799bn in 2019, and Medicaid cost $613bn in 2019. The Census bureau gave 328 million people in 2019 [3], or ~$4300 per person for Medicare and Medicaid whether or not they are covered.
According to Kings[2], the NHS cost 150bn pounds in 2019, or ~$208bn (I've not taking into account exchange rate changes). ONS gives mid-year estimate of 66.8m for the UK in 2019 [4].
Which gives $3113 for NHS per person, all of whom are covered.
The point is that if Medicare and Medicaid were allowed to work in the same kind of regulatory environment as the NHS (e.g. Medicare is legally prevented from negotiating best prices for some categories of cover), and was equally efficient, then you ought to be able to take the same budget and extend Medicare cover to every citizen of the US without paying more.
In fact, you'd have 33% more per resident to cover e.g. salary gaps without touching the Medicare/Medicaid budgets.
Americans are effectively paying twice, as money paid in private insurance is at least the same amount over again. It's bizarre to me there are no riots in the streets over this - current US healthcare regulation is corporate welfare to insurers and healthcare providers at the cost of regular people.
I called up the seller to buy more spare batteries and they said the 2 batteries the chair comes with, are under warranty for 1 year. And they should last another 2-3 years easily even with heavy use. So there's no point in buying spares now since the spares will lose the ability to charge over the same time.
We have been out for 2-3 hours per trip many times this year and not once has even one battery run out.
Talk about impactful work. I wonder how many lives you've changed.
Well done. This is something close to miracle tech, at least for the people wearing it.
I can't help but feel curious whether they're a viable alternative to wheelchairs, or if it's a temporary feeling (kind of like riding on a rollercoaster, in that you go and do it for the experience and then return to your normal life). But that's just my ignorance talking.
Also, fuck the US insurance system. You won't find many topics that make me talk that way, but as I get older it feels something closer to pure evil. I've met so many people who have been screwed over by that system (and personally experienced my share of it).
There's a woman I've been texting with who I met at a gas station. She was clearly in distress, so my wife and I offered her a ride home. To cut a long story short, she spent her fourth of july miserable, and when I raised the idea of getting prozac or some sort of antidepressant (my own "miracle tech"), she said "Oh, I used to be on that. I can't afford it because no insurance" and I practically flipped my phone onto the concrete. She could be living a normal and happy life.
I can't imagine how much worse it is for parents who otherwise need to spend $thousands for alternative solutions like this. If you can make it in any way affordable, it'll change countless lives, I'm certain.
I used to be on that. I can't afford it because no insurance
If/when anyone runs into this regarding medications, be aware that even without insurance many pharmacies (at least in chains) have significant lists of medications available at very little or no charge. Companies like GoodRX can also lead to much lower prices, particularly on generics.
Meijer has free antibiotics and prenatal vitamins.
Walmart has a variety of medications for many conditions at $4 for 30 days and $10 for 90, as well as inexpensive insulin options (discussed here on HN within the last month or two - maybe not preferred fastest-acting options, but certainly better than 'rationing hoping I don't die')
Walgreens has a prescription savings club for $20-35/year that has 30-90 day supplies of generics at various price points between $5-15 for 30-day supplies and 10-30 for 90 day supplies
CVS has some kind of system that I didn't create an account to look at but is likely similar.
Costco has a Member Prescription Program and has all their medication prices available on the site, and the pharmacy can be used for prescriptions even without a membership.
Kroger has a prescription savings club linked to GoodRX that has prescriptions at $0/3/6/9, with a membership of $36/72 year individual/family.
None of these plans are going to cover the medications being advertised on TV, but they're going to provide coverage for a lot of long-term proven generics that treat conditions that have been around as long as humans have. They may not be AS effective (or perhaps they just lack marketing budgets), but if they weren't at least SOMEWHAT effective they wouldn't still be around as generics.
And if you've read this far and are interested in other information on keeping medical care less expensive, I highly recommend looking up the Arm and a Leg Show podcast for a lot of useful information.
Some of the newer antidepressant manufacturers offer income-based coupons that cover the costs of the medications, as well.
Although Prozac has been generic forever, and depending where you live, you might be able to get a 30 day supply for a few bucks. Walmart has it for $4.
The expensive part is regularly seeing a doctor for prescription refills. Depending on the state and her income, she might be eligible for expanded Medicaid, though.
Expensive, but many families spend more on physio and other professionals (150$-300$ per hour). When we are talking about children's health and future, parents will raid their pensions accounts, grandparent's etc...
Hopefully once they get more popular, the government will pay for it to setup in Rehabilitation centers. From what I saw right now it's mostly private centers that are buying it (US/Canada).
New tech is always expensive at first. Selling something for $1k/month is better than not selling it at all. If these things were easy to make cheaply someone would be doing it.
It doesn't always need to be expensive, but it also isn't always inexpensive upfront. And the comment you reply to makes a plea about the price.
Price doesn't mean you haven't changed a lot of lives either: In addition, a lot of folks that can't walk are covered by some sort of government-provided insurance. Unfortunately, it doesn't really help all that much because insurance limitations don't always cover everything or cover enough.
I'll also say that it is a lot for a single person/family: It isn't nearly as much at a daycare, school, physical therapy and other such things. I'd not be surprised if such places weren't their most common home.
$1k a month seems downright cheap compared to many medical treatments.
Hospital visits in the US average $11.7k for a full stay[1]. Antiviral treatments for Hepatitis C like Harvoni and Sovaldi cost $16k-90k for 12 weeks, though you can go with a generic version for $5k-10k a month.
I was looking at the videos, and realized that maybe we don't need small exo-bones (societal expectations and normalcy aside), maybe it's easier to go the other way and make exo-robots, since they'd be bigger with more room for batteries, could balance on their own and a human could be sitting/standing inside, driving the legs with some input method - either with legs, or hand gestures.
I'm picturing the robot in Avatar [1], but with an open top and much less threatening and not weaponized [2], like big robotic pants. If I were to quit my job, it would be to make human robot minotaurs a reality, but then again, what do I know about robots?
I had thought when the Segway came out that a wheelchair version would follow shortly afterward where a person without functional legs could get on a saddle and move around quickly and at a typical human height so things on shelves aren't such a problem.
Segway hit the market 20 years ago and it still has not happened. I get that there are a number of complications (getting on and off is a challenge), but it seems like it should be solvable. The technology has only improved over the years, especially the batteries. This should be doable.
From my own (admittedly limited) experience with riding a Segway and my own (day to day) experience with a child that can't sit, stand or walk, I would guess that it is a) difficult to get in and out and b) difficult to balance and steer.
Extra mechanical stabilizers are in the way when you finally are on/in and without the Segway was really stubborn and threw me and others off in the beginning. A person without proper sense and ability to balance, will have big problems getting onto it and off again with just the gyros running. Also balancing is a really difficult thing to do if you have the problems that forced you in a wheelchair in the first place.
For people who are ok with the upper part of the body, and can lift themselves onto the machine, you might be right though. Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be a "used Segway" market that is cheap enough to attract hackers trying out new things with them.
Not long ago I saw a guy in a Segway-like wheel chair. It looked just like a regular wheelchair, with two wheels on each side. I spoke the owner and he loved it.
Here is a Segway converted to a wheelchair here in New Zealand:
A big issue for industry is medical certification too. Have you done yours? An exoskeleton like yours falls under Class II medical device and would require, at the minimum, a 510(k) notification to be filed.
That's too much getting in my face without giving me a chance to browse.
If I'm visiting the website, I'm probably going to be able to answer some of those questions without having these distracting offers thrown into my face immediately.
There are plenty of exoskeletons trainers for adults, Trexo novelty (well there is another device company in Sweden - Made For Movement ) is that they are targeting kids.
>The way the US healthcare system is designed, it will only cover restoration of mobility, not a restoration of function.
You'll find that countries with socialized medicine won't cover more than that either. It's too expensive, regardless of whether your covered privately or publicly. Socialized medicine is typically much harsher on keeping costs down as well.
I've always wondered about these devices. How do they work? Like they detect muscle contraction and amplify the motion? Or is it a purely mechanical device?
It looks expensive, and each machine is custom fitted to the users legs and also grows with the user. The market for it is really small to instantly lower the price.
I've been making my own, purely as a pipe-dream to have some hope of walking again, it's not easy but I'm hoping it'll be a better fit than consumer ones, and probably cheaper.
I feel like we've made leaps and bounds in prosthetics this past decade but orthotics and exoskeletons haven't been following the trend for some reason. As an engineer I imagine there are some significant design constraints that make it hard but seeing what we're capable of doing in any other industry I can't help but feel the problem has to be something other than purely technical limitations.
The price is also a big issue, 10k for the cheapest exoskeletons, 150k for the one in this article.
My understanding is its the same thing limiting everything else. Power. Batteries more specifically. We just don't have a way to power anything for very long that doesn't have a cable attached to a wall attached to a power station. Honestly the ability for humans (and other living creatures) to just DO SO MUCH on just a little bio mass each day is astounding.
Don't forget patents. You yourself can create whatever you want, but the second you want to sell it you have to have a patent law firm scour over everything, pay dozens of companies, get rejected by others, and end up having to entirely redesign your product in an inefficient manner because some dipstick owns a patent they just sit on.
If we abolish patents innovation will finally be possible.
3D printers are a good example that I recently came across.
There is a patent for a 3D printer enclosed in a box. A number of plastics print much better when in an enclosure with no drafts and more easily controllable temperatures.
But instead, 3D printers must be sold and function on their own without a box, to avoid the patent. Enclosures are then sold separately and you end up with a 3D printer in an enclosure anyway, but that doesn’t infringe on the patent… so it’s allowed.
> 1. A three-dimensional modeling apparatus comprising a heated build chamber in which three-dimensional objects are built, a base located in the build chamber, a dispensing head for dispensing modeling material onto the base, the dispensing head having a modeling material dispensing outlet inside of the build chamber, and an x-y-z gantry coupled to the dispensing head and to the base for generating relative movement in three-dimensions between the dispensing head and the base, characterized in that: the x-y-z gantry is located external to the build chamber and is separated from the chamber by a deformable thermal insulator. [...]
Why abolish patents rather than just fix their implementation? Patents are very important. Without them, incentive to bring things to market falls as all your hard work of designing and creating something can just immediately be taken and reused by others. This encourages everyone to sit around and wait for others to make something first, and then punishes the one who does. Why not instead rework patents so that they have to be used continuously to be upheld or increase the stringency of that aspect of them?
Is there any evidence that this argument is true? It sort of ignores the fact that people do invent, and frequently, almost as a byproduct of being alive. Plus the constant litigation around patents seems to add more friction to the process, preventing people who would materially contribute to the common good by tinkering and inventing.
>> Power. Batteries more specifically. We just don't have a way to power anything
There is progress. Japan has been developing assistance exoskeletons as an answer to elder care problems: power assist devices to allow not-strong people to lift/carry elderly people. Interestingly, much development has gone into pneumatic devices as they are inherently more waterproof than electric.
"In Japan, the commercialization of exoskeletons is already underway. Innophys, a startup founded in 2013 at the Tokyo University of Science, has already dispatched about 1,000 units across the country, in particular to Asahi-Sun, an elderly care supplier. Lighter than ActiveLink's AWN-03, Innophys' Exo-Muscle is a little less quick but offers more flexibility for a similar lifting capacity of 22 to 30 kilos (48 to 66 pounds). But Exo-Muscle uses an entirely different technology: compressed air, which is injected into rubber valves that inflate and contract."
That's less about progress, and more about finding applications where it's not a limitation.
Innophys suit has a compressed-air tank with limited endurance, built to be periodically refilled from a stationary compressed-air system on job sites (since those are common in many industrial settings). Notably, their ad copy says: "Simply fill it with air using the supplied pump and it is ready for use. Therefore it can be used anytime, anywhere, for an unlimited amount of time, easily. When the assistive power weakens, just add more air." i.e. you're expected to be able to pump the thing (they include a hand pump as a last resort!) at any time.
The AWN-03, for its part has one set of high-power motors for when it's connected to AC power and a lower-power motor for battery operation; that Panasonic division, in the 5 years since that story was written, discontinued that product and defined down the problem to less power-hungry assist modes, namely short assistance during particularly strenuous motions.
>...Power. Batteries more specifically. We just don't have a way to power anything for very long that doesn't have a cable attached to a wall attached to a power station...
To be clear (not to be snide, just to improve clarity), increased power density is the ability to discharge energy in larger amounts in shorter time periods (think heavy lift olympians). Energy density is the ability to store large amounts of energy for longer periods of time (think long distance runner). Some applications, like cell phones are quite happy with high energy density, but relatively low power density. Others, like an battery-electric drill, need more power density but can offset the low energy density by swapping out batteries and having a rotable pull.
Great idealic batteries for this application would have both large energy and power desnity. I say this because people often overlook "batteries" that people don't refer to ass batteries because they generally don't come in a self-contained cell (they have subsystems that don't benefit much from cellular architectures). Case in point are Hydrogen fuel cells. I'm not saying their better than Li-ion, but they are for certain applications. Often H2 fuel cells are paired with Li-ion batteries or supper capacitors to provide improved power when transient energy bursts are needed. H2 fuel is stored in some tank - perhaps a pressure tank, perhaps in the form of Aluminum and water reaction, or for this application it may likely be some metal hydride that stores H2 'benignly'. However, to your point, even these metal hydrides have a lot of room and potential for improving energy density.
My only point here is that, cureently, the best answer may not be a single cellular battery, but some hybriid of energy storage technologies.
I imagine it's part of it, but even when you look at unpowered devices there seems to have been shockingly little innovation when you compare what was available in the 1800s and today. It's still a few flatbars with leather/velcro fasteners, the main improvement has been with materials like carbon fiber to lower the weight but that's about it. There's some interesting patents like air cushions to improve fit and some weight redistribution mechanisms but nothing available for the consumer.
I'm sure this has already been thought of but is there much value in using capacitors to capture kinetic energy from the exoskeletons natural movement?
I worked in a logistics operation that explored exoskeleton options deeply in 2019. Options were shockingly limited and the best products were not powered in any way - essentially just frames to bolster your body mechanically. Compare to the massive, extremely precise, and power-efficient automated storage and retrieval systems and it just seemed like stone age tech. My takeaway was that powered exoskeleton tech must be vastly more difficult to implement than I'd expected. The financial incentives are there for warehouse and logistics applications, but the tech just isn't.
One issue is safety. A powered exoskeleton with any significant fraction of a human's full strength necessarily has the power to maim people including the operator. A robot can just be put in a cage where it can't hurt people, but an exoskeleton can't.
I haven't been in the industry for a little bit, so I'm sure the tech has evolved, but the versions we evaluated used battery hot-swapping to extend use time. I honestly don't recall how long a single battery ran for. We primarily evaluated them for use for loads that were too light or unwieldy to necessitate a vehicle but which were too heavy for a human worker to regularly lift without risk of injury (so the 75-200lb range)
So it needs power to move the weight of the human, plus 75-200lb? I’m wondering if an exoskeleton that’s only for moving a person about might have a lower power requirement or longer battery life?
The human bears their own weight, so they need to move the exoskeleton + load. These systems are more like braces you stand in with strong frames and motors to augment your natural lifting motions than "waldo"-style full exoskeletons. In that respect they differ from what would be needed to help a fully disabled person stand.
Might there be merit to a semi-tethered approach? Enough onboard batteries to last a minute or two when you walk to another room, where you promptly plug in again?
Semi-tethered approach would probably be good for being able to use around the house. And I think this would be consistent with other medical equipment. Some people who require oxygen often have a very large oxygen machine at home with a long cord so they can move around the house, but have to carry portable machines when they are not home.
The portable exoskeleton is a pretty big leap though. I think in order to have it be useful anywhere else but at home it would need to be significantly longer on the order of hours. I'm thinking time it takes from getting out of a car to go in to a shop and run an errand and come back (perhaps extra battery packs in the car or a place to recharge from the car)
Or for added convenience, what if you had something like a roomba that followed you around the house and plugged in to a socket in the room on one end and to the exoskeleton frame on the other end without any manual intervention on your part?
My grandpa, who died before I was born, was wheelchair-bound for the second half of his life, and I was told that he handled it well, but internally it took an incredible toll on his body. When he finally passed away, they found that his basement was littered with machinery, engines and pre-cut body panels. Apparently, in the last few years of his life he threw himself into the idea of building his own plane to restore his freedom on his own terms.
Bit of a sad story, but it never fails to motivate me past my usual, procrastinating self.
It's great that you're using him as a source of inspiration. The power of older role models today has unfortunately been overlooked, but I'm glad you've found it. Keep building.
I'm near ready to start a workshop, I think we ought to make these kind of things more prevalent, a lot of money is lost on ultra expensive medical devices with really low value (wheelchairs or similar)
giving someone an exoskeleton might be something much more joyful and inspiring than a wheelchair, it can revive your life
My wife is a wheelchair user and it makes me sad to hear that some think her chair has low value, when it's very valuable to us. She can chase after our 15 month toddler without ever getting tired, she can cruise at 6 mph with no problems, and she's quite happy with her life. An exoskeleton wouldn't let her do any of those things and would significantly reduce her quality of life.
"An exoskeleton wouldn't let her do any of those things and would significantly reduce her quality of life."
I do not want to talk down on the wheelchair, but what about an exoskeleton as simply another way to get around and do other things, you cannot do in a wheelchair, because not every way is level? That would probably be a further improvement, if the tech would be ready and affordable?
If I ever loose my ability to walk, I really hope walking "wheel"chairs or something like a exoskeleton will be avaiable.
A wheelchair can be much better than nothing and still be far inferior to a potential exoskeleton. I use a wheelchair whenever I leave the house, and I am not a fan. There are so many places I cannot go: anywhere that requires stairs, the beach and most other places that are unpaved, anywhere without curb cuts, any foreign country that doesn’t have accessibility laws, anywhere with a hill that’s even a little bit steep. I would happily pay $100k for a really great exoskeleton (if what’s in my imagination could be made real, anyway).
you didn't say anything wrong, it is a throw away account making claims about how a technology that doesn't exist would definitely decrease quality of life.. I wouldn't put too much stock in what they say.
I'm just relaying my wife's opinion. She's kinda tired of people presuming that her life isn't great because she's in a wheelchair and that everything would be better if she could walk.
UC San Francisco used to run disability inspiration porn ads showing a plodding exoskeleton that would go about maybe 1 mi/day? My wife would joke that in the time it would take the exoskeleton to get her to the front door, she could used her power chair to walk to Starbucks, order breakfast, and bring it home. Has society put limits on what she can do in her chair due to crappy architecture, yes. Would a practical exoskeleton fix that, we doubt it.
What about an exoskeleton with retractable wheels, that had motion powered or rollerblade style? I remember seeing a video of a robot that switched from quadruped/hexapod walking motion to sway like a rollerblade / skater.
Have you looked at the robots out of boston dynamics? They look more mobile than a lot of non-handicapped people. Maybe another avenue is smart physical assistants instead of just exoskeletons, "i, Robot (2004)" style.
I think both exoskeletons and prosthetics suffer from similar issues. To reach affordability, you need unit volume. To get unit volume, you need an initial user segment capable of paying what such a device currently costs. In computing, for example, there's always someone willing to pay for bleeding edge, which then paves the way to price reduction. With these, there just isn't much daylight between prices where basically no one can afford it, and prices where everyone who needs one can.
People like you are the best hope. Independent inventors aren't bound by manufacturing economics.
Side question: how much power does it take to run existing, mobility oriented exoskeletons?
I imagine new medical tech is usually covered by insurance, which makes it possible for people to afford it initially (and even later, when the device is more at scale), but I expect it's really hard to get insurance companies (in the US at least) to consider covering new things, especially when there is a cheaper alternative.
I imagine an insurance company is heartless enough to believe that a much cheaper wheelchair is "good enough" and there's "no reason" to pay the hefty costs for an experimental exoskeleton.
I live in the EU, and I surprised to discover that insurance companies themselves are interested in funding those exos themselves.
The total medical bill of a paraplegic person a or the course of its whole life can get very high. Recent clinical studies appear to show that time spent standing could really improve the health, to a point that "investing" into an exo for their patients could become worth it.
Some of the unpowered exoskeletons are pretty impressive, and all things considered, $10-20k isn't that crazy a price. After all, they are not really being mass produced, and are pretty complex mechanical systems. I'd love to see a big company like Caterpillar get on board and start pumping them out for construction purposes.
The powered ones are still too expensive for anything but the most niche applications sadly.
Size variation, maybe? If you're building an industrial robot you control the size precisely, but if you've got to make everything variable - and not just variable, but to be as comfortable as clothes - I can see that throwing a hell of a lot of complexity into the mix.
I mean in theory the motors and controllers are identical across all builds, but since the length of the rotating pieces is variable, the angles of rotation might remain the same but the leverage and hence the torque vary by quite a bit. Bigger people have longer limbs, and bigger people also weigh more.
If you don't already you should document your project on Youtube.
It's a super cool project and I'm sure you can even get lots of Patreon sponsors that way and even commercial ones probably.
Just for the love of ideating: if ones arms were working, it seems like there may be some way of essentially diverting arm strength between movement, and handling.
Kind of like picking up one leg at a time with your arm, while the other stays locked through some ratchet system.
It's just a hazy idea, but it could definitely help with the power issue. It's pretty much the same principle as a wheel chair in that regard.
Oh that's interesting, I use a spandex-like component inside the frame but only to hold electromyography (EMG) electrodes against the leg.
I reckon you'd still need a support structure to hold the 50-100kg of weight of the user though.
That, or leverage the existing bone. It may even be possible to leverage counter force of the opposing "muscle groups" of nitinol wire using some sort of artificial joint designed to take advantage of it.
In order to mimic muscle wouldn't you need the wires physically attached to your body somehow? Getting leverage with a spandex like material doesn't sound possible.
Yes, the nitinol is not the only component. You would need things to mimic other pieces of the system, like tendons and a way to anchor them to false structures or utilize existing bone.
I mentioned fitting similar to spandex because all these other suits are bulky. Sure, this system would still have bulk, but it should be more conforming than mechanical legs that sit several inches outside of the person's natural legs. Good luck fitting on public transportation, airplanes, or even walking through a 32" door if you were a bigger person to start with.
We live in a world where prices are usually set by the constraints of mass production. We have trouble accepting the cost of custom-made things. Hearing aids can be ridiculously expensive. Custom keyboards at least are not quite so ridiculous.
Now that some of the earbud manufacturers are dabbling in processing of environmental sound, some people may be able to use consumer grade equipment, particularly younger Boomers and older Gen-Xers, due more to stigma than anything else.
Unfortunately that probably reduces volume of product for everyone else, keeping the mean price roughly the same but jacking up the high end.
I think that maybe highlights another difficulty here: there isn't really a one-size-fits-all solution. Some people will need full support, and others will need more of an assist. Not sure both of those things can (or should) be served by the same device. But as soon as you have to build different things for different cases, that drives the cost up, both in R&D and in manufacturing (it's cheaper to build 1000 of one thing than 500 each of two things).
This is really cool! See to me this is what hacker news should be all about. A group of people facing some problem and hacking something together that works really well.
The research and engineering of new mobility aids is fine, but the inventor/CEO's quote, "Ten years from now, there will be no, or far fewer, wheelchairs" belies an attitude strongly criticized by many in the disability community. And in the video footage he says, "wheelchairs are an anomaly, men and women, human beings are meant to be upright". Imagine saying "Bicycles an anomaly—humans are meant to be upright, not in some aero-dynamic tucked position."
Deriding one form mobility tech (an asset to more than 10,000,000 people) to promote another potential one is disappointing.
The Exoskeleton's Hidden Burden [0] is a good article that includes the history of exoskeleton development (goes back to 19th c. Russia):
He’s not deriding wheelchair tech. He’s saying wheelchair tech is not good enough, disabled people deserve better, and he’s doing something about it. I’m not convinced wheelchair users would be better off if he embraced the wheelchair-positive attitude that you are arguing for.
I have a 3.5 year-old and just had twins. A story like this makes me feel very warm inside. Being a relatively new father, I'm beginning to understand the unconditional love and sacrifice that grows when you have kids. I commend this father for doing this. He is a modern day hero.
I am not a robotics expert, and I've always wanted to ask one...
Why do these designs always have the actuators mounted directly at the joints?
Why not have some high modulus yarn transfer the joint loads (ala a bike brake cable, say with high modulus aramid?)? One could keep the actuators near the center of mass (or a trolley that follows it around), and keep the suit fairly minimal.
Curious, could one apply fancy control theory and modern computing at the problem and fix most of the accuracy and flex problem? Position feedback with integrated sensors can be very compact and highly accurate, and human muscle seem to also use feedback control for holding position..
Rather than control theory you can use geometry to reduce the problems with cable driven robots. There are more but I like the Ambidex: https://youtu.be/aLaqMreVj9o
The human system doesn't use single-muscle feedback for holding position though; it requires flexing both the push and pull muscles and coordinating the strength between them; positional information is relayed not just from the muscles, but the surrounding skin as well.
The constant muscle tone is largely to help bones stay in ball-and-socket joints. Presumably, such tone wouldn't be necessary with other kinds of joints.
Hey ! I am not a robotics expert, but I work at this company (Wandercraft) as software dev, so I know some of the reasons :)
First of all I'd say that's because it simpler: we have so much to do that simplicity is a strong decision factor. That way you also reduce the number of moving parts, so maintenance is easier.
On the software side you also get the marginal benefit that you keep a 1:1 mapping between joints and actuator (an example with coupled actuators: Cassie, from the Oregon State University). That way you can have different control strategies for the different joints.
What I don't understand is why this is not more common. I plan to build one for when my parents are unable to walk around independently.
Who wants to call a nurse everytime they need to go to the bathroom? An exoskeleton gives you some autonomy and dignity. The fact it is so uncommon despite a growing aging population with stash of money is a mystery to me
This is inspiring. The cost can be brought down through use of soft and/or lightweight materials. For example, the use of textile based actuators. Good examples in link below:
You know what I am wondering, the accelerometers in phones are super small, cheap and there are some sensor systems that incorporate a ton of other sensors (whatever happened to Google's smart jacket they were making with Levis)
Anyway, it would be very interesting to have a textile with a fabric of accelerometers woven into the fabric... Solar panels on the thighs and what not to power the sensors... with a compression-heel in a shoe / boot to ad more power with every step.
Anyone know how much power an accelerometer takes and if you can wire a matrix of them together to a set of controllers that all they do is capture the telemetry from the sensors?
Check out this video on the making of accelerometers
Boston Dynamics should be making one of these. It fits really well with their expertise and is much better for them to be making these rather than robots that get sent to wars.
I'd love to see that! I tend to think that some of their technical choices on Atlas would have to revised, though.
Having hydraulic actuators (very good power/weight ratio) makes the robot quite noisy, which is fine for a robot, but less cool if there is someone stuck inside it a whole day
Just want to flag that, in addition to all this fun and exciting new tech for disabilities, we really do just need better basics.
As the partner of a wheelchair user, these exoskeletons are a great toy to have on the horizon – but the promise of this has been around for a long time, and while the hope of a better future is exciting, we need change on a much quicker time scale than this. (Not saying people shouldn't be working on this – it's rad that they are).
On a day-to-day level, my partner would much more benefit from:
- A better wheelchair (this will mean something different for every body – for them, someone who uses a wheelchair for chronic pain, an exoskeleton wouldn't even help – much more useful would be a wheelchair where every bump of pavement doesn't rattle your whole body).
- More accessible shops and public spaces. We don't really get to go out much – most often blockades include cracked sidewalks, friend's houses that require a step (or stairs), and inaccessible shops.
- Better safety nets for those with disabilities (it's VERY expensive to be disabled in America – consider how much more these exoskeletons will cost than already expensive wheelchairs).
tl;dr These technologies are exciting and deserve attention and energy – just keep in mind that the notion that these emerging technologies will someday wipe out all of wheelchair users' problems in one fell swoop is both false and does nothing for the many millions prevented from participating in society right now. We need better access today.
I agree. I think the problem is that most people don't see (why would they?) the problem areas.
Wheelchairs! What a pain. Try find one that answers a different need? It's impossible or super expensive. I have been pushing and pulling family members for years, across gravel, snow, rocks, stairs. Idea! Mountain bike.
I wanted to find one with mountain bike tires. Seems easy. Not at all. I finally bought a cheapo fat bike mountain bike, removed the wheels with the axles, and mounted them to a normal wheelchair. It's amazing. We go off road. Across rocks and gravel. Into creeks.
But you can't buy one.
Just by the way, the EduExo folks have a kickstarter that closes in 25 hours and is $1000 short of their funding goal:
"EduExo Pro: A Robotic Exoskeleton Kit for STEM Education
The EduExo Pro is an Arduino-powered educational robotics kit that enables you to build your own wearable robotic exoskeleton."
They actually did, as part of DARPA's Warrior Web program [1]. They ultimately spun off the program to Ekso Bionics as a consequence of the Google acquisition back in 2014 [2].
Tried that game out, but found it to be realllllllllly tedious. eg initial missions took walking, while carrying some person's body over the shoulder, for "miles". Urk.
This is cool, but it's better to just build with accessibility-first thinking. We'll all be disabled some day. Better to self-advocate now rather than when we need it. How many buildings could you make wheelchair accessible for the cost of one robot suit?
I share your skepticism but I wouldn't question the conviction of a guy who built a company and worked on this project for 10 years to help his son walk again.
Me neither, but that's only true for the richest part of the world, while a majority of the population will still have to deal with wheelchairs (and in many places I imagine self-built ones).
Not being snarky, I appreciate a lot what he's doing, and I hope he will succeed in his quest.
There's just a glimpse of sadness when I realize that solving the problem in the first world doesn't mean it will be solved for good (same with vaccines, we hope/expect to have solved the COVID problem soon, but it won't actually be the case for a majority of the world population).
Ten years seems fast, but I foresee a revolution in local micro manufacture that is a mashup of 3d printing as we know it and local assembly of off the shelf parts.
This will lead to a revolution of generic complex product availability that ignores patents and trademarks.
An exoskeleton may not be the first type of product to be ordered and assembled from a few blocks away. The amount of QA for safety would need to be high.
However, if the price of such things is 1/10 or even 1/20th that of the branded, official version people will continue to turn to hyperlocal, small-run manufacture for even the most safety-critical products.
What a commendable act made by the father. He didn't settle in making his son sit on a wheelchair throughout his own life. Instead, he built an exoskeleton to let his son experience how to walk.
All I can see is another dark pattern in GDPR avoidance (note, doesn't help a bit, this is still illegal since it is opt out instead of opt in and doubly so since it is next to impossible to opt out).
In today's culture wouldn't this be considered "ableist"? Aren't we internalizing the idea of being "disabled" to this kid and thus dehumanizing him by building a machine that "corrects" his inability to walk?
I've seen similar arguments from the deaf community about hearing restoration as "correcting" something when nothing is "wrong".
Are you genuinely curious or do you have an axe to grind? Have you seen anyone accuse such an invention as ableist? This is exactly what new technology is supposed to do: make things possible that were previously difficult or impossible. I don't see how any of the culture wars in vogue have anything to do with it.
1) Anyone can take a controversial position. But I'd want to read something more than a rather minimal Psychology Today article to conclude that this is indicative of "today's culture" and not just an opinion of a fringe minority.
2) In any event the deaf community is rather unique compared with other disabled groups in general. A substantial number of deaf/hearing impaired people are born that way and grow up in a community with its own language and culture, a community that would be for better or worse disrupted by a "cure." Other disabled groups tend not to have a separate strong cultural identity as such. It is true that there are instances of individual blind people who were "cured" of blindness and found the experience so disorienting that they fell into a deep depression [0], but as far as I know, they didn't advocate for an end to blindness research.
I think these kinds of questions are very personal. I had a close family member who couldn't walk. She didn't make her inability to walk a part of her identity, it was just something annoying she had to put up with. I doubt she would have been upset about gaining the ability to walk.
The only time I've heard these types of questions are around people who are deaf. I suspect that the issue is a complex one of language and community. My understanding is that (some?) deaf people consider sign language their primary language, not the native tongue of their country.
It's too bad that the hn downvoters are hitting your post so hard, this could be a useful, informative discussion. It's hard to talk about this kind of thing without crossing political correctness boundaries though.
> It's too bad that the hn downvoters are hitting your post so hard,
It's OK, I don't mind - plenty of karma.
I agree it's worth discussing because it's a bigger topic than a lot of people might realize. There's a lot of these types of ideas making a lot of progress in the university right now and they don't intend on being confined to them as theoretical. And in some cases they may have good points and in others maybe not.
I don't think so, and I think that's sort of a different thing.
I believe the original ideas around this go back to when a child is born with ambiguous sex organs. Parents and doctors would then choose to "correct" the issue to ensure the baby is either a boy or a girl, when in actuality it may have chromosome's that are not XX or XY. So then this (which is actually a really interesting debate) has cascaded into the greater world of disabilities. So there are currently critical theorists in the universities "theorizing" that looking at disabilities as something that needs to be corrected and not something that is normal puts people with them on the margins of society.
So there is well regarded (by some) literature that fixing deafness is wrong and that society shouldn't see it as a disability - that society should adapt to be seamlessly inclusive for deaf people. And this goes on and on.
In essence, science is racist and it has been white men who have classified what is normal and what is not and who is to say that everyone is normal and "correcting" these things is actually, well, "ableist".
It can get pretty crazy (whoops, that's a naughty word) out there.
If by adapting (for example) blind people into society they mean writing in braille everywhere and so on, then it's the same as if correcting their disability. An exo-exo-skeleton, extended to the whole society.
This is kind of dangerous. Something like this that is not tested can pretty much kill you if it fails in anyway. You’ll just fall to the ground from about 5 ft, which is often enough to do something bad to your skull.
Then don't do it. Everyone has their own level of comfort. It is disappointing to be criticized for awesome innovation by armchair advisors. Innovation and progress is necessary for humanity to continue. Fear, solves nothing.
Super impressed by this dad!
The discipline of engineering is littered with catastrophes throughout history - everything from bridge collapses to cars loosing braking power like in the old Buicks from the 50s. Yet we still keep innovating because we know that despite the risks involved the reward could be immeasurable.
Besides, this dad doing it for his son is probably taking more care and precaution than some nameless/faceless engineer.
You're not wrong, but if you had some of the tech from the Boston Dynamics robots, you could imagine something smart enough to either retain balance in the first place, or take a forward/backward roll to prevent a more serious injury.
The Father here has done a fantastic job, I'm sure his son is thrilled to be able to take some steps -- also the low-tech tether from above solves the falling problem for the moment which presumably lets him get on with solving other issues.
The medical device industry in France is heavily regulated and products are audited before they reach the market so you can be sure it's a risk that's been identified and remediated.
Yeah, I think the OP was really talking about this individual case.
Eg, this guy put his kid in a device that could kill him (maybe).
Looking back at the videos from Boston Dynamics, a ton of effort is put in to the failure mode testing. I highly doubt 1) this is dynamic, 2) failure modes were considered much.
This individual case is a medical device company in France, not some garage hacker as the title might imply. No human (except the engineers on the down-low) will have stepped foot inside the device before a very late stage in the design, possibly requiring approval for human trials, at which point all those risks will have been assessed.
I am fed-up at the lack of options available to individuals. People thought that everyone will get an exoskeleton and be able to walk with it everywhere. But the industry ran into many challenges.
A big one that many dont understand is getting insurance coverage. The way the US healthcare system is designed, it will only cover restoration of mobility, not a restoration of function. So, from their perspective, a wheelchair and some pain meds can do the job easily.
I believe that they key is to start with children, this is where you have families desperate for a solution, higher costs due to them growing and spending their entire life in a wheelchair, and the option to truly have a life changing impact.
But things are changing, people are starting to notice the work that we are doing. We need a lot more people building exoskeletons and similar powered orthotics!!