2009 IEEE/ASME International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics
Suntec Convention and Exhibition Center
Singapore, July 14-17, 2009
Human Upper limb and Arm Kinematics for Robot based
Rehabilitation
S.Parasuraman Member, IEEE, Kee Chew Yee and Arif Oyong
Abstract — This project is focusing on the development of
robot-assisted stroke rehabilitation system of human upper limb
and arm. Realizing the complexity of human upper limb, the
study is limited to human arm, consisting of 3 glenohumeral
joints (abduction-adduction, flexion-extension, and rotation) and
elbow joint (flexion-extension). Rehabilitation robot is used to
assist patient to move their hand to a desired position. A 7
degree of freedom (DoFs) kinematical model of human arm, and
an 11 DoFs human hand kinematical model are presented in this
paper. The model was defined based on the literature survey
and assumptions are made to reduce the complexity. Denavit-
Hartenberg method is used for the positional analysis to
determine the end position in 3D space while the Lagrange-
Euler method is used for the dynamic analysis. A PID computed
torque controller was designed by utilizing the equation of
motion. The purpose of the controller is to compensate the
dynamical imperfection and the presence of disturbance.
MATLAB and Simulink was used in developing the
mathematical model while Anybody Modeling System was used
for physical modeling and simulation.
Keywords—component, formatting, style, styling, insert (key
words)
I. INTRODUCTION
Biomechanics of the human combined biological
information with engineering mechanics while anthropometry
provides data on size of the human body and its segment [1].
Biomechanical analysis can be defined as the study on the
motion of living organism by applying mechanical theory.
This consists of computing definitive kinematical and
dynamical data by employing the anatomical data; also the
muscles are modeled as the actuators to control the motion of
the living object. The A biomechanical model is established
prior to the development of the mathematical model to
facilitate the analysis.
S.Parasuraman is with the Mechatronics, School of Engineering, Monash
University Sunway Campus, Bandar Sunway, 46150, Malaysia. Tel:
+60355146254. Email: s.parasuraman@eng.monash.edu.my
Kee Chew Yee is graduated from Mechatronics, School of Engineering,
Monash University Sunway Campus, Bandar Sunway, 46150, Malaysia. Tel:
+60355146254.
Arif Oyong is a post graduate student, School of Engineering, Monash
University Sunway Campus, Bandar Sunway, 46150, Malaysia. Tel:
+60355146254. Email: arifoyong@gmail.com
978-1-4244-2853-3/09/$25.00 ©2009 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: King Mongkuts Institute of Technology Thornburi. Downloaded on May 18,2010 at 08:43:16 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
In this paper, the biomechanical analysis performed
focuses on the human upper limb’s rehabilitation for stroke
patient. The main objective of carry out this analysis is to
assist the development of robot assisted hand stroke
rehabilitation system. However, designation and building the
rehabilitation device is not included in this project.
Recognizing that the human upper limb is also a
biomechanical system which has similar functions as the
industrial robotic manipulators, the robotics principles used in
analyzing and designing electromechanical manipulators can
be applied in this study to evaluate the upper limb motion [2].
The main objective of studying the upper limb motion and
modeling these motions mathematically is to assist the
development of robot assisted stroke rehabilitation device.
Stroke or cerebrovascular accident (CVA) is a serious
neurological disorder which is a major cause of long term
disability due to sudden interruption of blood supply to part
of the brain or bleeding into or around the brain. One of the
most common disabilities resulted from stroke is Hemiparesis
(One-sided paralysis), where the opposite side of the brain is
damaged by stroke and may affect the face, an arm, a leg, or
the entire side of the body [3]. In order to restore the function
of the affected part of the body, rehabilitation training
programs were designed to help stroke survivors relearn skills
that were lost. After the first acute phase of the rehabilitation
therapy, ongoing process to maintain and refine skills is
labour intensive, involving working with specialist for
months or years after stroke. Thus, much effort has been
made in developing robot assisted stroke rehabilitation device
in the past decade to improve post stroke rehabilitation [4].
Designing the rehabilitation device requires a
mathematical representation of arm motion. As the human
upper limb system is also a mechanical system, robotics
principles are often applied in developing the mathematical
model [5]. A definition of the arm and hand mechanism is
required prior to the development of the mathematical model.
Lenarčič and Stanišić [6] define the arm as a 4 segment’s
serial mechanism involving the shoulder girdle, the upper arm,
the forearm and the hand. Due to its high complexity and high
number degrees of freedom, the hand movement is studied
separately. The hand and the wrist are replaced with a rigid
segment with two degree of freedom at the wrist. Chan et al.
[7] proposed a model of 8 DoFs and three segments, namely
the upper arm, the forearm and the hand. Grams and Lenarčič
[8] suggest an arm model that consists of 4 segments with 10
DoFs, where the shoulder girdle and glenohumeral joint
845
 possess 3 DoFs each, whereas the elbow and the wrist has a
total of 4 DoFs.
The analysis of the hand focuses on the grasping motion.
Similar to development of the arm mathematical model, the
definition of the hand model is required before constructing
the mathematical model for the hand grasping motion. Vardy
[9] proposes a 26 DoFs hand mode, where each finger has 5
DoFs and the thumb has 6 DoFs. All fingers has the same
essential structures, 1 DoF at Carpometacarpal (CMC)
articulation, 2 DoFs corresponding to metacarpophalangeal
(MCP) joint, and 1 DoF each at the Distal Interphalangeal
(DIP) and Proximal (PIP) joint. The thumb has different
structure, 3 DoFs corresponding to CMC articulation, 2 DoFs
at the MCP articulation and 1 DoF at the Interphalangeal (IP)
joint. The global reference frame is placed on the wrist. The
end position of the fingertips is specified with respected to this
frame. The models suggested by Yasumuro, Albrecht, Haber
and Seidel [10, 11] are very similar to Vardy [9], but the CMC
articulation has different DoFs. Kim, Youm and Chung [12]
proposed a three fingers grasping Haptics manipulation. The
thumb model developed has only two variables to be
calibrated and successfully expresses opposition, which is a
unique thumb motion of human.
A 7 DoFs kinematical model of human arm, and an 11
DoFs human hand kinematical model are defined and the
positional analysis and dynamical analysis are carried out to
observe the arm’s behavior during the training. The PID
computed torque controller is the designed to compensate the
dynamical imperfection and the presence of disturbance. The
physical model was developed in the Anybody Modeling
System, which is a unique tool for modeling a
musculoskeletal system.
II. MODEL DEFINITION
The highly articulated human upper limb system can be
represented by kinematic chain that consists of links that
connected with different joint. Due to the high complexity
and high degrees of freedom, the model of the hand is
separated from the arm. The arm is modeled as a 7 DoFs
kinematical chain which consists of the shoulder girdle, the
upper arm, the forearm and the hand, whereas the hand is
modeled as three fingers system including the thumb, index
and middle fingers. Each finger is modeled as an independent
kinematical chain. The articulation between the sternum and
clavicle is set as the base of the model, and the wrist joint is
the end effectors. Assumptions were made to reduce the
complexity of the models. The motions that are not
significant in stroke rehabilitation were eliminated.
A. Arm Kinematic Model
The 7 DoF arm model defined in this project consists of 4
segments, which is the shoulder girdle, the upper arm and the
forearm and the hand. The upper limb is connected to the torso
by the sternoclavicular joint, where the clavicle is connected
846
Authorized licensed use limited to: King Mongkuts Institute of Technology Thornburi. Downloaded on May 18,2010 at 08:43:16 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
to the sternum. The global reference frame is located at the
sternum and the wrist position specified later in the report is
referred to this global reference frame. The innermost portion
of the shoulder complex is the shoulder girdle, which consists
of the clavicle and the scapula. The clavicle is connected to
the sternum at the sternoclavicular joint, and both clavicle and
scapula is connected together at the acromioclavicular joint.
As the innermost portion of the shoulder complex, the
shoulder girdle must have high load carrying capacity. At the
same time, the motion developed within the shoulder girdle is
comparatively small [13]. This motion is critical for people in
sports field and pregnant woman when delivering baby.
However, it is not essential for rehabilitation training due to its
small motion capabilities. Thus, the shoulder girdle is modeled
as a rigid link connected to the base frame.
The humerus at the upper arm is connected to the shoulder
girdle by the spherical glenohumeral joint. The glenohumeral
joint is a ball-and-socket joint which contributes a wide range
of motion that allowed the arm to be oriented in 3D space. The
glenohumeral joint is modeled as 3 revolute joints
concentrated in a spherical joint with the center of rotation
located at the center of humerus head [14]. This 3 DoFs
motions are shown in fig. 1Error! Reference source not
found. where rotation is replicated by GH1, adduction-
abduction replicated by GH2 and flexion-extension replicated
by GH3.
The forearm consists of 2 bones: ulna and the radius which
connected at both end by the proximal radioulnar joint and the
distal radioulnar joint. The ulna and radius is attached to the
upper arm by the humeroulnar joint and the humeroradial joint
which form the elbow joint. The humeroulnar articulation
allowed the ulna to rotate with respect to the humerus causes
the forearm flexion-extension replicated by EB1 while the
forearm pronation-supination (EB2) is due to the rotation of
the radius about the ulna longitudinal axis [14]. Fig. 1
illustrates the 2 DoFs motion at the elbow complex modeled
by 2 revolute joint rotating in different axes.
The hand is connected to the arm by the wrist articulation
which controls the hand orientation [13] and provides strength
for gripping. The wrist comprised of eight small bones called
carpus which allowed the hand adduction-abduction replicates
by WS1 and flexion-extension replicates by WS2. The
mechanical function of the wrist joint is represented by 2
revolute joint is depicted in fig. 1. The end effector of the arm
model is located at point P, which is the center of mass of the
palm.
B. Three Fingers Grasping Model
The three fingers hand grasping model is analyzed
separately from the arm kinematical model. In order to
maintain the connection between both models, the reference
frame for the wrist joint (WS2) shown in Fig. 1 is set as the
base frame for the hand model, where the positions of the
fingers and thumb are indicated with respect to this base
 frame. It is assumed that the 4 fingers: index, middle, ring and
pinky has the same mechanical function. Thus, the hand
model is simplify to 3 fingers, where finger I represent the
thumb, while finger II and III represent the index and ring.
Figure 1. Kinematic Model o f Human Arm
Fig. 2 shown the hand anatomy which consist of 27 bones,
8 of which is located at the wrist. The thumb consists of 3
bones: Metacarpal, proximal phalanx and distal phalanx, while
the fingers consist of 4 bones each, with an additional middle
phalanx in between proximal and distal phalanx. The
Metacarpal bones are connected to the wrist by the
Carpometacarpal (CMC) joints and the other ends of the
Metacarpal bones are connected to the proximal phalanx by
the Metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints. The Interphalangeal
(IP) joint connect both phalanges together at the thumb. The
Proximal and middle phalanges at the finger is connected by
the Proximal Interphalangeal (PIP) joints while the middle and
distal phalanges is connected by the Distal Interphalangeal
(DIP) joints.
The thumb is modeled as a 3 DoF linkage system with 1
DoF at each joints as shown in Fig. 2. Both finger I and finger
II has 2 DoF at the MCP joints and 1 DoF each at the PIP and
DIP joints. The CMC joints for finger I and finger II is
modeled as a static link since the motion provided by this joint
is comparatively small.
847
Authorized licensed use limited to: King Mongkuts Institute of Technology Thornburi. Downloaded on May 18,2010 at 08:43:16 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
C. Positional Analysis
It is recommended that the used of the robotic techniques
in rehabilitation program commences after the first acute
phase of the rehabilitation therapy is carried out by the
specialist [15]. The first stage of the robot-aided neuro-
rehabilitation program is to restore the arm movement. Only 1
DoFs of movement is allowed at one time to minimize any
risk of exacerbating joint or tendon pain. This basic training
aims to help the stroke survivor to move their arm repetitively
to the desired location. The Denavit-Hartenberg method is
used to determine the hand position base on the angle of each
joint.
The Denavit-Hartenberg method is used to solve this
forward kinematic problem. The DH notation used to
construct the mathematical models in this project is referred to
J. Craig. [16] and the equations and formulas taken from other
sources are modified to suit these notation.
Figure 2. Kinematic Model o f Human Hand
First of all, the arm kinematic model in Fig. 1 is assigned
with its corresponding link frames where the Zi axes is parallel
to the rotational axis of the joint and the Xi axes is
perpendicular to the plane containing Zi and Zi+1. The DH-
Parameter tabulated in Table I is then substituted into the 4 x 4
homogeneous transformation matrixes in (1). The end
effectors position and orientation expressed with respect to the
previous link can be transformed and expressed in the base
coordinate through sequential transformation as shown in (2).
(1)
 ET T T T T T T T (2)
(7)
TABLE I. DH PARAMETERS FOR HUMAN ARM

Joint i αi-1 ai-1 di Θi G(θ) G(= n x 1 gravity loading force vector which can
be written as
GH1 1 0 LSG 0 Θ1
(8)
GH2 2 90 0 0 Θ2

GH3 3 -90 0 0 Θ3

EB1 4 0 LUA 0 Θ4

EB2 5 -90 0 LFA Θ5

WS1 6 90 0 0 Θ6 E. Controller Design

WS2 7 -90 0 0
P E 0 LH 0 0
D. Dynamic Analysis
The Lagrangian dynamic formulation is employed in this
section to derive the dynamic equation of the arm. The
Lagrangian dynamic formulation is applied directly together
with the Denavit-Hartenberg link coordinate representation.
The algorithm is expressed by matrix operations which
facilitates both analysis and computer implementation [17].
Due to the assumptions made when deriving the dynamic
Θ7
equations and the presence of disturbances at the rehabilitation
training device, the output of the system is not ideal. A
feedback control system as shown in Fig. 3 is designed to
compensate these dynamic imperfection and the torque
disturbances [17]. The dynamic equation will calculate the
torques required for each joint to move the arm to the location
specified. These values are then converted into the signal
required to drive the actuator. The sensors instrumented on
each joint will measure the actual angular position and
velocity, and feedback into the control system.

The Lagrange’s equation of motion for a Deriving the equation of motion by applying the computed
conservative system is given by: control law yields the mathematical representation for the PID
computed torque controller in equation (9) and the block
diagram is shown in Fig. 4. The inner loop is the equation of
(3) motion in equation (5).

τi is the generalized force (torque) of ith joint and L is the

Lagrangian which represent the difference between kinetic (K)
and potential (U) energies of the system:
( , ) , ( ) (4)
The Lagrangian function is applied to the Lagrange-Euler
formulation yields the generalized torque τi applied to joint i
actuator to drive the ith link
The equation of motion can be simplified as

(5) Figure 3. Basic Controller Diagram for Rehabilitation Training Device

Where M(θ) = n x n inertia acceleration-related symmetric
matrix which can be written as

(9)

∑ (, )
V (θ , θ) = n x 1 nonlinear Coriolis and
centrifugal force vector whose elements are
(6)
The controller design is then implemented in MATLAB
Simulink. The equation of motion obtained from the dynamic
analysis was computed using the embedded M-file. Refer to
Fig. 4 for the block diagram developed using Simulink.

848

Authorized licensed use limited to: King Mongkuts Institute of Technology Thornburi. Downloaded on May 18,2010 at 08:43:16 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 40
35
30

Desired Angle
25
20

(deg)
15
10
5
0
0 2 4 6 8 10
Time
Figure 5. Shoulder Abduction Desired Position

Figure 4. PID Computed Torque Controller Block Diagram 16

14

Angular Velocity
12
III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 10

(deg/s)
8
6
The simulation was performed with abduction-adduction,
4
flexion-extension and pronation-supination movements
2
repeatedly and the output results such as position, velocity, 0
torque against the time domain is discussed. Similar -2 0 2 4 6 8 10
simulation is repeated for the elbow joint. The simulation Time
results for the abduction-adduction based on the desired Figure 6. Shoulder Abduction Angular Velocity
position (coordinates) X Y Z = -0.3 -0.1 -0.4 are compared
with the computed value (mathematically) based on the
equation (1). It can be found that the above desired position 30
25
could be achieved with the following angle configurations:
Angular Acceleration

20
Shoulder abduction (θ1) = 34.752°
(deg/s^2)

15
Shoulder flexion (θ 2) = 10.856°
10
Shoulder rotation (θ 3) = -10.000° 5
Elbow flexion (θ 4) = -38.550° 0
-5 0 2 4 6 8 10
The following graphs in Figures 5 -8 show the results for -10
Shoulder abduction (θ1). -15
Figure 5 shows the set point of the control system. By Time
using the interpolation function, the set point is increased
Figure 7. Shoulder Abduction Angular Acceleration
gradually from the initial position and it will reach the desired
angle given by the trajectory generation within 3 seconds. 9
Figure 6 shows the position of human shoulder abduction. As 8
we can see, from the time the set point reach 7
the desired position, the system took another 2 seconds to 6
reach its steady state. Therefore the system requires a total of
Torque (Nm)

5
7 seconds to bring the patient’s arm from initial position to 4
the desired position. For the purpose of stroke rehabilitation 3
training five seconds is acceptable. Moving the patient’s arm 2
too fast might cause discomfort or even injuries. However, 1
depending on the patient’s performance, we can always 0
manipulate the time response of the system by modifying the 0 2 4 Time 6 8 10
coefficient of interpolation. In the initial stage of the training
we can use longer time response, however, as the patient’s Figure 8. Shoulder Abduction Torque (with interpolation)
performance increase we can reduce the time response of the
system.

849

Authorized licensed use limited to: King Mongkuts Institute of Technology Thornburi. Downloaded on May 18,2010 at 08:43:16 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Figure 8 shows the output torque with the
interpolation function. With the interpolation function, the
system is able to increase the output torque gradually until it
reaches the steady state, which is also 8 Nm.
The calculated error is as follows:
-. Shoulder abduction :-0.786°
-. Shoulder flexion :-0.139°
-. Shoulder rotation : 0.251°
-. Elbow flexion :-0.997°
The main purpose of the system is to teach patient to move
their hand to gain back his/her control over the stroke-
affected hand. In this training, high precision is not of a great
concern; therefore calculated error of the system is still within
an acceptable range.
VI CONCLUSION
The main objective of the project is to create a system that
is able to train stroke-affected patient to use back his/her
affected arm. One of the main concerns in this project is to
take care the comfort of the patient while carrying out the
training procedure. Many research have been carried out in the
area robotics for the purpose of stroke rehabilitation.
However, most of the system available does not take care the
comfort of patient. In this project, a model of human arm and
rehabilitation robot has been developed in SimMechanics. A
positional feedback controller was implemented into the
system. Apart from that an interpolation function was
implemented to increase the set point gradually from initial
position to the desired position. The availability of this
interpolation function reduces the initial torque applied to the
human arm, thus reducing patient’s discomfort.
The overall performance of the system was analysed in
Simulink. Based on the results shown above, the controller
was able to satisfy the requirement for moving patient’s hand
to a desired position. At the same time the system also takes
care of patient’s comfort.
The results of the project serve as a stepping stone for
further research in this area. The availability of hand model
and robot model in SimMechanics will allow us to implement
different control and design parameters and analyse the effect
on the system’s performance.
REFERENCES
[1] K.H.E. Kroemer, "Anthropometry and biomechanics:
anthromechanics," in Biomechanics in Ergonomics, S. Kumar, Ed.
Boca Raton,Florida, USA: CRC Press, 2007, ch. 2, pp. 41-85.
[2] F. J. Valero-Cuevas, "Applying principles of robotics to understand the
biomechanics, neuromuscular control and clinical rehabilitation of
850
Authorized licensed use limited to: King Mongkuts Institute of Technology Thornburi. Downloaded on May 18,2010 at 08:43:16 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
human digits," in IEEE International Conference on Robotics &
Automation, San Francisco, CA, 2000, pp. 270-275.
[3] (2008, Oct.) National Institute of Neurological Disorders or Stroke.
[Online]. http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/stroke/stroke.htm
[4] J. Eriksson, M.J. Mataric & C.J. Winstein, "Hands-off Assistive
Robotics for Post-Stroke Arm Rehabilitation," in IEEE 9th
International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics, Chicago, IL,
USA, 2005, pp. 21-24.
[5] F. J. Valero-Cuevas, "Applying principles of robotics to understand the
biomechanics, neuromuscular control and clinical rehabilitation of
human digits," in IEEE International Conference on Robotics &
Automation, San Francisco, CA, 2000, pp. 270-275.
[6] J. Lenarcic & M. Stanisic, "A humanoid complex and the humeral
pointing kinematics," IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation,
vol. 19, pp. 499-506, Jun. 2003.
[7] M.F. Chan, D.R. Giddings, C.S. Chandler, C. Crags, R.D. Plant, M.C.
Day, "An Experimentally confirmed statistical model on arm
movement," Human Movement Science 22, vol. 22, pp. 631-648, 2004.
[8] A. Gams & J. Lenarcic, "Humanoid arm kinematic modeling and
trajectory generation," in First IEEE/RAS-EMBS International
Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics, PISA,Italy,
2006, pp. 301-305.
[9] A. Vardy. (1998, Dec.) Computer Science 6755. [Online].
http://www.scs.carleton.ca/~avardy/software/hand/hand_doc.pdf
[10] Y. Yasumuro, Q. Chen, K. Chihara, "3D modeling of human hand with
motion constraints," in International Conference of Recent Advances in
3-D Digital Imaging and Modeling, 1997, pp. 275-282.
[11] I. Albreacht, J. Haber & HP Seidel, "Construction and Animation of
Anatomical Based HUman Hand Models," in
Eurographcis/SIGGRAPH Symposium on Computer Animation, 2003,
pp. 98-109.
[12] K. Kim, Y. Youm & W.K. Chung, "Human Kinematic Factor for
Haptic Manipulation : The Wrist to Thumb," in 10th Symp. On Haptic
Interfaces For Virtual Envir. & Teleoperator Systs. (HAPTICS'02),
2002, pp. 121-126.
[13] J. Lenarcic & Nives Klopcar, "Positional kinematics of humanoid
arms," Robotica, vol. 24, pp. 105-112, 2006.
[14] R. Colombo, F. Pisano, S. Micera, A. Mazzone, C. Delconte, M.C.
Carrozza, P. Dario & G. Minuco, "Robotic Techniques for Upper Limb
Evaluation and Rehabilitation of Stroke Patients," IEEE Transactions
on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering, vol. 13, no. 3, pp.
311-324, Sep. 2005.
[15] J. J. Craig, Introduction to Robotics: Mechanics and Control, 3rd ed.
United states of America: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2005.
[16] K.S. Fu, R.C. Gonzalez & C.S.G. Lee, Robotics: Control, Sensing,
Visioin, and Intelligence. McGraw-Hill, 1987.
[17] H.E.J. Veeger, B. Yu, K.N. An and R.H. Rozendal, "Parameters for
Modeling the Upper Extremity," J. Biomechanics, vol. 30, no. 6, pp.
647-752, 1997.
[18] K. Abdel-Malek1, J.Z. Yang, Z. Mi, V.C. Patel, and K. Nebel,
"HUMAN UPPER BODY MOTION PREDICTION," in Conference
on Applied Simulation and Modeling (ASM), Rhodes Greece, 2004.
[19] AnyBody Technology A/S. (2007, Sep.) The AnyBody Modeling
SystemTutorials,Version3.0.0.[Online].http://www.anybodytech.com/fi
leadmin/AnyBody.3.x.x/doc/Tutorials.pdf
[20] AnyBody Technology. (2008, Apr.) Repository 7. [Online].
http://www.anybody.aau.dk/repository/Repository7.0/index.htm