96
1, FEBRUARY 2013
Design and Characterization of a Small-Scale
Magnetorheological Damper for Tremor Suppression
David Case, Behzad Taheri, and Edmond Richer
Abstract—This paper explores the design methodology and ef-
fectiveness of small-scale magnetorheological dampers (MRDs) in
applications that require variable damping. Previously, applica-
tions of MRD have been chiefly limited to vehicle shock absorbers
and seismic vibration attenuators. There has been recent biomedi-
cal interest in active-damping technology, however, particularly in
the field of rehabilitation robotics. The topic at hand is the feasi-
bility of developing MRDs that would be functionally and cosmet-
ically adequate for actuation of an upper limb tremor suppression
orthosis. A Bingham plastic model is used to determine MRD’s
functional characteristics, and experimental data are presented to
validate the mathematical model. The feasibility of applying the
developed small-scale MRDs to attenuation of tremorous motion is
explored.
Index Terms—Magnetic liquids, medical robotics, orthotics.
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Tremor and Current Clinical Treatment
REMOR is clinically described as a rhythmical, involun-
T tary oscillatory movement of a body part produced by
reciprocally innervated antagonist muscles and can be divided
into two primary categories of movement disorders: resting and
action tremor [1]. Resting tremor, most commonly associated
with Parkinson’s disease, arises after a brief period of nonuse
of the target muscle or muscle group. While not particularly
debilitating in and of itself, resting tremor can be the cause of
social embarrassment. Action tremor, in contrast, becomes ap-
parent during muscle use. The tremor typically manifests at a
frequency in the range of 3–12 Hz and can be particularly debil-
itating to fine motor skills, such as is needed in writing, shav-
ing, eating, or playing an instrument. Many patients complain
of social embarrassment, and some have been driven to career
changes. Current treatments for various action tremors include
a collection of prescription drugs and, in especially debilitating
or nonresponsive cases, neurosurgery [2].
The medications typically prescribed for essential tremor
may cause the patient to experience excessive drowsiness, nau-
sea, ataxia, confusion, blurred vision, fatigue, and even muscle
paralysis and hallucinations. Deep brain stimulation and stereo-
tactic thalamotomy are mostly empirical surgical options that
Manuscript received October 28, 2010; revised February 8, 2011; accepted
April 2, 2011. Date of publication August 30, 2011; date of current version
September 12, 2012. Recommended by Technical Editor W. J. Zhang.
The authors are with the Biomedical Instrumentation and Robotics
Laboratory, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX 75205 USA (e-mail:
dcase@lyle.smu.edu; btaheri@smu.edu; richer@lyle.smu.edu).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TMECH.2011.2151204
1083-4435/$26.00 © 2011 IEEE
IEEE/ASME TRANSACTIONS ON MECHATRONICS, VOL. 18, NO.
have been linked with permanent complications, paresthesia,
dysarthria, speech impediment, and even stroke and hemipare-
sis [3], [4]. Essential tremor and Parkinson’s disease are de-
generative conditions. Thus, while the administration of drugs,
stereotactic thalamotomy, or thalamic deep brain stimulation is
often initially effective in controlling tremor motion, none of
these treatments guarantees a permanent solution [1], [2].
B. Tremor Orthoses
Given the side effects and possible complications of current
treatments for action and resting tremor, many researchers rec-
ognized the necessity of a less invasive alternative, the attenua-
tion of tremor at the musculoskeletal level.
In 1988, Sanes, LeWitt, and Mauritz reported on the use of a
brushless dc motor to study the effects of adding viscous damp-
ing and inertia loads across the wrists of five patients experienc-
ing various types of action tremors. Although the initial inten-
tion of the project was to shed light on the driving mechanisms
of tremorous motion, the investigators reported that the appli-
cation of viscous loads “suppressed the (local) tremor nearly
linearly [5].”
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology developed two or-
thoses for the purpose of evaluating and testing the effects of
adding viscous and inertia loads more generally to the upper
limbs of patients suffering from action tremor. The “controlled
energy dissipation orthosis” (CEDO) was a wheelchair-mounted
device, which functioned by applying resistive loads via mag-
netic particle brakes to a cuff attached to the patient’s wrist. The
mechanism allowed the cuff 3 DOF in a horizontal plane. The
“modulated energy dissipation manipulator” (MEDM) was the
second generation of this device and less restrictive to general
motion. The MEDM allowed the wrist cuff 6 DOF in 3-D space;
however, it was also larger than the CEDO and nonportable.
During evaluation of both devices, “the application of viscous
damping loads was demonstrated to reduce tremor severity [6].”
While no single set of damping parameters was observed to be
most effective in attenuating tremor for all of the patients tested,
the investigators concluded that “an individualized optimal level
may exist which can maximize function [6].”
The “viscous beam” orthosis, from the University of Califor-
nia Davis, was designed to attenuate tremor via viscous damp-
ing along a single degree of freedom in the forearm, specifically,
flexion and extension of the wrist. The device proved success-
ful in principle, although experimental values differed greatly
from the calculated damping rates. The damping rate was not
variable, and thus, the device’s degree of functional success was
inconsistent between patients [7].
CASE et al.: DESIGN AND CHARACTERIZATION OF A SMALL-SCALE MAGNETORHEOLOGICAL DAMPER FOR TREMOR SUPPRESSION
An orthosis acting on the same general principle was created
in the course of the European “dynamically responsive interven-
tion for tremor suppression” (DRIFTS) project, with the noted
difference of employing a magnetorheological fluid (MRF) to
alter the damping ratio between patients and potentially in real
time. The design allowed tuning of the damping properties to op-
timize performance and was less restrictive to general motion.
It allowed adduction/abduction and pronation/supination and
added viscous damping to flexion/extension of the wrist [8], [9].
The “wearable orthosis for tremor assessment and suppres-
sion” (WOTAS) was the final product of the DRIFTS project.
This device was designed to be minimally restrictive to natural
movement and capable of monitoring and suppressing tremor,
employing both active and passive strategies [10], [11]. The
passive strategy employing a constant damping rate proved less
effective than the active one. However, the investigators noted
that “customization of viscosity or inertia added to the upper
limb according to the biomechanical characteristics of each
user should improve the efficiency of passive tremor suppres-
sion strategy [12].” The orthosis proved functionally successful
in reducing the amplitude of the patients’ tremor by as much as
90%, though there were some complaints on the aesthetic draw-
backs of the device, and the investigators stressed the necessity
of further reducing its size and weight [13], [14].
The main challenge for the design and construction of an
effective, least intrusive, portable tremor cancelling orthosis is
the availability of compact, powerful, light, direct drive actu-
ators and dampers. Thus, it is necessary to develop novel ac-
tuators/dampers that satisfy the power/force requirements for
tremor cancellation, and have a sufficiently small profile and
weight to be either hidden or easily ignored. In addition, to min-
imize interference with voluntary motion and avoid discomfort,
they should exhibit the least amount of resistance force when
back driven. None of the existing actuators combine all the
desired characteristics. While electrical motors are easily pow-
ered by batteries and can be effectively controlled using rela-
tively simple algorithms they cannot provide high-force, low-
mechanical impedance actuation. Magnetorheological dampers
(MRDs) excel at creating energy efficient variable damping
forces but have relatively high mechanical impedance due to
high viscosity of the fluid.
In this paper, an MRD was designed using two mathematical
models. The first one uses a planar approximation of the inter-
nal geometry and leads to a linear set of equations. The second
model considers the real annular geometry of the damper re-
sulting in a nonlinear model that is potentially more accurate.
Two sets of experiments were conducted in order to validate the
mathematical models and the applicability of MRDs for tremor
suppression.
II. MRFS
An MRF consists of a suspension of microscopic magnetiz-
able particles in a nonmagnetic carrier medium, usually water
or some type of synthetic oil. In the absence of a magnetic
field, the fluid behaves in a roughly Newtonian manner. When
a magnetic field is present in the same space, the microscopic
97
Fig. 1. Particle arrangement in the (a) absence and (b) presence of magnetic
flux across the elements.
particles suspended in the fluid become oriented and form chains
along the magnetic flux lines, changing the fluid’s rheology (see
Fig. 1). Under these conditions, the properties of the fluid be-
come nonisotropic. The presence of the particle chains causes
the fluid to exhibit a yield stress if flow occurs perpendicular to
the magnetic flux lines. Thus, when a magnetic field is applied,
the MRFs behave similarly to a Bingham plastic.
Since the observed yield stress is directly related to the inten-
sity of the magnetic field, MRFs seem ideally suited for use in
a low-power tunable damper.
Variable resistance through the use of MRFs is a strat-
egy currently being used commercially in vehicle shock ab-
sorbers and seismic vibration dampers for civic structures.
In the field of human–machine interaction, particularly that
of wearable robotics, high strength-to-weight ratio actuators
are required to maximize assistive and rehabilitative poten-
tial [15]. Magnetorheological-based actuators can potentially
achieve these high ratios and have the additional advantages of
rapid response time and high fidelity control [16], [17]. These
characteristics allow MRF dampers to be customized to the in-
dividual needs of a patient, as well as change the damping factor
if the severity of the condition changes.
III. GENERAL DAMPER DESIGN
With the intent of minimizing the profile of a tremor-
suppression orthosis, the proposed design incorporates a series
of linear dampers/actuators acting roughly in parallel (in ten-
sion and compression) to the muscles of the forearm. A damper
of the general design proposed here would be secured above
the dorsal and radial surfaces of the forearm. The shafts would
be connected to the hand by articulated linkages, thus, forming
a direct-drive mechanism for applying torque at the transverse
and dorsopalmar axes of the wrist. The palmar and ulnar sur-
faces would be unobstructed, allowing proximal movement and
functionality at a desk.
In an attempt to balance efficiency with ease of manufactur-
ing, a piston/cylinder design was adopted for the dampers. A
copper coil is wound about the piston head to create a magnetic
field within the annular gap between the piston and interior
cylinder surface (see Fig. 2). Both the cylinder wall and the pis-
ton head are machined from magnetically permeable material
to close the magnetic circuit and direct the magnetic flux lines
normal to the piston/cylinder gap.
DRIFTS project investigators measured the biomechanical
characteristics of tremorous movement at each joint in the arms
of 33 patients, providing the necessary torque characteristics
98 IEEE/ASME TRANSACTIONS ON MECHATRONICS, VOL. 18, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 2013

Fig. 2. Cross-sectional diagram of a piston/cylinder MRD design.

Fig. 3. Unit diagram for Bingham plastic flow between fixed parallel plates.
TABLE I
TORQUE MEASUREMENTS AT THE WRIST

The constructed damper weighs approximately 204 g. When

run continuously with the maximum allowable current applied
to its coil, the damper requires a 1.9 W power supply.

for the actuators of a tremor-suppression orthosis [18]. The IV. MATHEMATICAL MODEL
mean values of torque measured in the wrist are summarized in A. Linear Model
Table I.
With a projected moment arm of 3 cm about the patient’s wrist For steady flow between parallel elements (i.e., the piston
joint, the required damper would need to be able to produce a head and interior cylinder wall), Phillips provides a thorough
resistance force of approximately 37 N. Given that the frequency description of ideal Bingham plastic behavior [19]. The deriva-
of tremorous movement in the arm typically ranges between 3 tion is illustrated with the help of Fig. 3, with the x-axis corre-
and 12 Hz, the undamped velocity at the damper connection is sponding to the direction of flow and the z-axis normal to both
projected at approximately 0.5–2.0 m/s. surfaces.
The primary variables that affect the resistance force in this Summing forces on the unit
piston/cylinder design are the shaft diameter Ds , piston diameter    
∂τ ∂P
Dp , cylinder inside diameter Dc , active length L, and the fluid’s P δz + τ + δz δx − P + δx δz − τ δx = 0 (1)
∂z ∂x
viscosity and yield strength (the latter being dependent upon the
generated magnetic field and, thus, upon the dimensions of the and can be reduced to
coil and the applied current). dP dτ
The design required a hollow shaft to accommodate the coil = . (2)
dx dz
leads that is both nonmagnetic and structurally rigid. Thus, the
shaft diameter (4.76 mm) was based upon material availability. For simplicity, the pressure gradient, −dP /dx, is denoted by
The cylinder inside the diameter was restricted early on in the P . Thus,
design process to a maximum of 12.7 mm to keep the device’s dτ = −P  dz (3)
profile reasonably small. In order to minimize resistance of the
damper in passive mode, a low-viscosity MRF was selected for τ = C1 − P  z. (4)
the project (LORD MRF-122EG, μ = 0.042 ± 0.020 Pa·s). The
By symmetry of the flow and shear profile, we have τ = 0 at
0.635-mm piston/cylinder gap was selected in order to reduce
z = (h/2). Therefore,
the damping rate in passive mode, thus defining the piston diam-
eter at 11.43 mm. The coil was restricted to the outer diameter P h
C1 = . (5)
of the piston. It was estimated that the coil could generate a 2
magnetic flux density of 1.7 T at its core when the maximum Let z = h1 at τ = τy , so that
admissible current of 0.54 A is applied. According to the man-
ufacturer’s specifications, the required MRF yield strength of P h
τy = C1 − P  h1 = − P  h1 (6)
15 kPa can be produced using a relatively small fraction of the 2
maximum field intensity. Thus, the remaining design parameter h τy
(the active length of the piston) was determined through use of h1 = − . (7)
2 P
the mathematical model, requiring that the damper be able to
produce at minimum a resistance force of 37 N at an operating Using hc to describe the “core flow” region that is farther than
velocity of 0.5 m/s, when maximum current is applied to the h1 from either of the parallel plates where τ < τy
coil. By regulating the current, then, the resistance force of the def 2τy
damper can be varied in real time to suit the patient’s needs. hc = h − 2h1 = . (8)
P
CASE et al.: DESIGN AND CHARACTERIZATION OF A SMALL-SCALE MAGNETORHEOLOGICAL DAMPER FOR TREMOR SUPPRESSION 99

Applying Bingham’s equations to the remaining “transient”

region
du
τ = τy + η for τ > τy (9)
dz
τ = C1 − P  z = (τy + P  h1 ) − P  z
du
= τy + P  (h1 − z) = τy + η for 0 ≤ z ≤ h1
dz
(10)

P (h1 − z) du
= for 0 ≤ z ≤ h1 (11)
η dz
Fig. 4. Approximate velocity profile for a Bingham plastic in annular flow.
P  (2h1 z − z 2 )
u = C2 + for 0 ≤ z ≤ h1 . (12)
2η
This minimum value determines which of the three solutions to
A no-slip condition at the surface (u = 0 at z = 0) leads to Cz
the governing equation is relevant to the model. Thus, a readily
= 0, and
solvable linear system is obtained to assist in the design of an
P  (2h1 z − z 2 ) MRD with specific desired characteristics.
u= for 0 ≤ z ≤ h1 . (13)
2η It should be noted that there are several assumptions employed
in using this system to model the proposed piston-cylinder con-
The core velocity evaluated at z = h1 = (h/2) − (τy /P  ) is
figuration. First, the formulae given here are for Bingham plastic
given by
flow between fixed elements, whereas, in a piston-cylinder de-
P  h21 (P  h − 2τy ) vice, flow occurs between the interior surface of the cylinder and
uc = = . (14)
2η 8P  η the piston plunger, which moves relative to that surface. Second,
Using b to indicate the width of the elements, the core flow these equations assume the plates to be flat and parallel, whereas
rate is signified by the piston/cylinder device has a radial symmetry along its long
axis. Finally, these calculations serve only to estimate the damp-
Qc = bhc uc = b(h − 2h1 )uc . (15) ing rate of the device; additional resistance forces (i.e., friction
in the seals) are not accounted for but are ideally minimal.
Integrating the velocity profile in the transient region, we can
determine the flow rate there as
 h1  h1  B. Nonlinear Model
P (2h1 z − z 2 )
Qb = 2b u dz = 2b dz Kamath, Hurt, and Wereley describe a model of Bingham
0 0 2η
  plastic flow that accounts for both the moving elements and the
bP  h31 2bP  h31 4 axial symmetry of a piston/cylinder device [20]. The Navier–
= h1 −
3
= = buc h1 . (16)
η 3 3η 3 Stokes equation, in cylindrical coordinates is used to model the
The total flow rate between the elements Q is the summation force equilibrium
of Qc and Qb ∂u ∂τ τ ∂p
ρ + + = . (21)
Q Qb + Qc 4 ∂t ∂r r ∂z
= = uc h1 + (h − 2h1 )uc . (17)
b b 3 Neglecting inertia and assuming a constant pressure gradient
Substitution of the previously calculated values for uc and over the characteristic length L
h1 leads to the following cubic equation, which governs the
dτ τ ΔP
pressure gradient: + = . (22)
   τ 3 dr r L
3 12 Q η τy 2 y
P − + 3 P + 4 = 0. (18) Just as before, the flow is divided into two “post-yield” or
b h3 h h
transient regions and one “core flow” region, producing a veloc-
Recalling the description of the core flow region, one recog- ity profile in the gap as shown in Fig. 4. Applying Bingham’s
nizes that for any flow to occur, hc must be strictly less than h. description in the post-yield region adjacent to the piston, where
When the terms are equated shear stress exceeds the yield stress of the fluid
2τy du
h= . (19) τ = τy + η (23)
P dr
Rearranging this equation yields the following minimum
pressure gradient, below which there can be no flow:
dτ d2 u
2τy =η 2. (24)
Pm in = . (20) dr dr
h
100 IEEE/ASME TRANSACTIONS ON MECHATRONICS, VOL. 18, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 2013

The force balance becomes

d2 u (τy + η(du/dr)) ΔP
η + = . (25)
dr2 r L
Integration leads to the velocity profile in region 1
ΔP 2 τy
u1 (r) = r − r + C1 ln(r) + C2 . (26)
4ηL η
In the parallel-plate model there was symmetry across the core
flow region, and it was safe to assume that the two post-yield
regions were identical. This assumption cannot be made in the
radial model, and the post-yield region adjacent to the cylinder,
region 3, requires a slightly different description
du Fig. 5. Experimental setup for damper characterization.
τ = −τy + η (27)
dr
dτ d2 u The shear stress is known at the limits of the core flow region,
=η 2 (28) leading to the boundary conditions
dr dr
d2 u (−τy + η(du/dr) ΔP τ (Rpi ) = τy τ (Rpo ) = −τy .
η + = (29)
dr2 r L Substitution leads to the fourth necessary equation
ΔP 2 τy
u3 (r) = r + r + C3 ln(r) + C4 . (30) ΔP 2
4ηL η Rpi τy = R + C5 (36)
2L pi
The constants C1 , C2 , C3 , and C4 can be determined by applying ΔP 2
the following boundary conditions, assuming no-slip conditions −Rpo τy = R + C5 (37)
2L po
at the cylinder wall and the piston head (the velocity of which
ΔP
is −v0 ): (Rpi + Rpo )τy = 2 − R2 ) (38)
 2L(Rpi po
du1 
u1 (R1 ) = −v0 =0 ΔP
dr r →R p i τy = . (39)
 2L(Rpi − Rpo )
du3  One may note that the governing system of equations in this case
u1 (R2 ) = 0 = 0.
dr r →R p o is nonlinear, and, thus, more time consuming to solve. Once a
set of acceptable dimensions was found with the parallel-plate
In region 2, velocity is uniform and defined by
model, it was evaluated with this nonlinear model as well. The
u2 = u1 (Rpi ) = u3 (Rpo ). (31) calculated resistance force was found to differ by less than 0.8%.
Thus, the linear model is considered sufficiently accurate for
A volume balance can thus be established, equating flow design purposes.
through the annular gap with fluid displacement due to the mo-
tion of the piston profile V. EXPERIMENTS
 Rp i
A. Model Validation
− v0 π(R1 − Rs ) =
2 2
u1 2πr dr
R1 The experimental setup built to evaluate the properties of the
 R2 small-scale MRD includes a disk with inertial loads actuated
2
+ u2 π(Rpo − Rpi
2
)+ u3 2πr dr. (32) by a brushless dc electrical motor and corresponding ampli-
Rp o
fier (EDC, Cambridge, MA). An optical encoder (ACCU-Coder
The system has effectively three equations with four un- 260 N-T-02-S-1000, Encoder Products Co., Sandpoint, ID) mea-
knowns, ΔP, Rpi , Rpo , and u2 . To get the final equation nec- sures the angular position of the disk. The MRD is mounted in
essary for a solution, the simplified Navier–Stokes equation is a rotating support and connected to the disk through a force
integrated transducer (MLP-50, Transducer Techniques, Temecula, CA).
A multifunction RIONIPCI-7833R field-programmable gate ar-
dτ τ ΔP ray (FPGA) card allows real-time data acquisition from the
+ = (33)
dr r L encoder and force sensor and control of the motor. In order to
ΔP C5 mitigate the discrete nature of the optical encoder readout, the
τ (r) = r+ (34)
2L r angular velocity and acceleration are estimated in real time us-
ΔP 2 ing a custom-developed algorithm implemented in the internal
r τ (r) = r + C5 . (35) memory of the FPGA card (see Fig. 5).
2L
CASE et al.: DESIGN AND CHARACTERIZATION OF A SMALL-SCALE MAGNETORHEOLOGICAL DAMPER FOR TREMOR SUPPRESSION
Fig. 6. Experimental values for the static resistance force of the damper at
various applied currents.
Fig. 7. Yield force versus applied current.
Static properties of the damper were measured by applying
a slowly increasing linear force with various currents applied
to the coil and measuring the position change to determine the
point of yield as shown in Fig. 6.
The linear mathematical model was used to determine the
theoretical yield force under the experimental conditions. These
theoretical values were given a bias of 3 N to account for friction
in the seals and a gain of 0.10 to account for losses in the
magnetic field. Good agreement is observed between measured
and theoretical values for several applied currents as shown in
Fig. 7.
In order to partially characterize the dynamic properties of the
damper, excitation frequencies of 3 and 6 Hz were imposed with
a peak velocity of ∼0.2 m/s. Figs. 8 and 9 show the resistance
force of the damper measured with the following configurations:
no fluid in the chamber, MRF in the chamber (no current through
the coil), and MRF in the chamber (20% max current through
the coil).
101
Fig. 8. Experimental data for the resistance force of the damper at 3 Hz sinu-
soidal excitation.
Fig. 9. Experimental data for the resistance force of the damper at 6 Hz sinu-
soidal excitation.
Note that the same peak velocity and applied current produces
approximately the same resistance forces at both frequencies,
as expected.
B. Tremor Reduction Application
In order to estimate the functional potential of the small-
scale MRD in the construction of a tremor reduction orthosis,
an additional set of experiments was performed. The voltage
applied to the electric motor consisted of the superposition of
two sinusoidal waves of two different frequencies, the lower
frequency wave representing voluntary motion, and the higher
frequency wave representing the involuntary tremor. Several
cycles of motion were examined with an incremental increase
of current through the coil. The experimental results and a fast
Fourier transform of each dataset are shown in Fig. 10 in order
to quantify the signal spectral composition. With no current
applied to the MRD, the damping force is strictly a result of
friction in the seals, the inherent viscosity of the fluid, and the
damper’s inertial properties. With the application of current to
the coil, one can note an immediate decrease in the amplitude of
motion for both sinusoids and an increase of resistive force. As
current is increased, these effects become more pronounced. At
200 mA, both voluntary and involuntary motion has been almost
completely eliminated. At this point, there is effectively no fluid
flow in the annular gap of the damper.
102
Fig. 10. Response of the damper to the dual frequency excitation with an applied current of (a) 0, (c) 100, and (e) 200 mA and spectral composition of the
response with an applied current of (b) 0, (d) 100, and (f) 200 mA.
VI. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
A small-scale MRD was designed and constructed based on
a linear mathematical model of MRF flow under magnetic field.
The design parameters obtained using the linear model were
verified using a potentially more accurate nonlinear model that
considers radial symmetry and relative motion of the internal
surfaces of the damper. No significant differences where noted
in the estimated resistance force using the two models. Exper-
imental validation of the models was conducted. As expected,
the modification of the magnetic field produced by the coil is
shown to significantly alter the resistance force of the damper.
Good agreement was observed between the values predicted by
IEEE/ASME TRANSACTIONS ON MECHATRONICS, VOL. 18, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 2013
the theory and the measured force when the friction and losses
in the coil’s magnetic field were considered. Nevertheless, the
relatively high losses in the magnetic field at the piston/cylinder
gap shown experimentally emphasize the need to optimize the
coil geometry.
In addition, experiments designed to evaluate the MRD’s per-
formance in a tremor reduction orthosis were performed. The
damper attenuated both the voluntary and involuntary motions
to a similar degree. In order to restore the voluntary motion,
the amplitude of the low frequency signal applied to the elec-
trical motor had to be doubled. This resulted in a voluntary
motion with no significant tremorous disturbance. In orthotic
CASE et al.: DESIGN AND CHARACTERIZATION OF A SMALL-SCALE MAGNETORHEOLOGICAL DAMPER FOR TREMOR SUPPRESSION
applications, this effect would translate into a significant resis-
tance force felt by the wearer, but it would potentially improve
the ability to perform fine motor skill tasks.
The mathematical models presented in this paper assumed
fully developed flow within the damper, and fluid inertia was
not taken into account. These models are, therefore, suitable
to predict the operational range of the damper, but they are
inadequate to accurately predict behavior in oscillatory flow,
which would be seen in application to tremor reduction. In
order to develop an effective control strategy for the attenuation
of tremor with MRDs, further modeling (e.g., taking fluid inertia
and response time into account) is necessary.
REFERENCES
[1] G. Deuschl, P. Bain, and M. Brin, “Consensus statement of the movement
disorder society on tremor,” Movement Disorders, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 2–23,
1998.
[2] D. Sirisena and D. R. Williams, “My hands shake: Classification and
treatment of tremor,” Austral. Fam. Phys., vol. 38, no. 9, pp. 678–683,
Sep. 2009.
[3] Y. Katayama, T. Kano, K. Kobayashi, H. Oshima, C. Fukaya, and T.
Yamamoto, “Difference in surgical strategies between thalamotomy and
thalamic deep brain stimulation for tremor control,” J. Neurol., vol. 252,
no. 4, pp. 17–22, 2005.
[4] E. D. Flora, C. L. Perera, A. L. Cameron, and G. J. Maddern, “Deep
brain stimulation for essential tremor: A systematic review,” Movement
Disorders, vol. 25, no. 11, pp. 1550–1559, 2010.
[5] J. N. Sanes, P. A. LeWitt, and K.-H. Mauritz, “Visual and mechanical
control of postural and kinetic tremor in cerebellar system disorders,” J.
Neurol., Neurosurg., Psychiatry, vol. 51, pp. 934–943, 1988.
[6] M. L. Aisen, A. Arnold, I. Baiges, S. Maxwell, and M. Rosen, “The effect
of mechanical damping loads on disabling action tremor,” Neurology,
vol. 43, pp. 1346–1350, Jul. 1993.
[7] J. Kotovsky and M. J. Rosen, “A wearable tremor-suppression orthosis,”
J. Rehabil. Res. Develop., vol. 35, pp. 373–387, Oct. 1998.
[8] R. C. V. Loureiro, J. M. Belda-Lois, E. R. Lima, J. L. Pons, J. J. Sanchez-
Lacuesta, and W. S. Harwin, “Upper limb tremor suppression in ADL via
an orthosis incoporating a controllable double viscous beam actuator,” in
Proc. IEEE 9th Int. Conf. Rehabil. Robot., Chicago, IL, Jun./Jul. 2005,
pp. 119–122.
[9] J.-M. Belda-Lois, A. Page, J.-M. Baydal-Bertomeu Rakel Poveda, and
R. Barbera, Rehabilitation Robotics: Biomechanical Constraints in the
Design of Robotic Systems for Tremor Suppression. Vienna, Austria:
I-Tech, 2007.
[10] M. Manto, M. Topping, M. Soede, J. Sanchez-Lacuesta, W. Harwin,
J. Pons, J. Williams, S. Skaarup, and L. Normie, “Dynamically responsive
intervention for tremor suppression,” Rehabil. Robot., vol. 22, pp. 120–
132, May/Jun. 2003.
[11] E. Rocon, M. Manto, J. Pons, S. Camut, and J. M. Belda, “Mechanical
suppression of essential tremor,” Cerebellum, vol. 6, pp. 73–78, 2007.
[12] E. Rocon, J. M. Belda Louis, A. F. Ruiz, M. Manto, J. C. Moreno, and
J. L. Pons, “Design and validation of a rehabilitation robotic exoskele-
ton for tremor assessment and suppression,” IEEE Trans. Neural Syst.
Rehabil. Eng., vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 367–378, Sep. 2007.
[13] E. Rocon, A. F. Ruiz, and J. L. Pons, “Rehabilitation robotics: A wearable
exo-skeleton for tremor assessment and suppression,” in Proc. 2005 IEEE
Int. Conf. Robot. Autom., Barcelona, Spain, Apr. 2005, pp. 2271–2276.
[14] E. Rocon, M. Manto, J. Pons, J. M. Belda, and S. Camut, “Evaluation of
a wearable orthosis and an associaed algorithm for tremor suppression,”
Physiol. Meas., vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 415–425, Apr. 2007.
[15] J. Rosen, S. Burns, and J. C. Perry, “Upper-limb powered exoskeleton
design,” IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 408–417,
Aug. 2007.
[16] H. B. Gurocak and J. Blake, “Haptic glove with MR brakes for virtual
reality,” IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics, vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 606–615,
Oct. 2009.
[17] A. S. Shafer and M. R. Kermani, “On the feasibility and suitability
of MR fluid clutches in human-friendly manipulators,” IEEE/ASME
Trans. Mechatronics, [Online]. Available: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org, DOI:
10.1109/TMECH.2010.2074210.
103
[18] J. M. Belda-Lois, E. Rocon, J. J. Sanchez-Lacuesta, A. F. Ruiz, and
J. L. Pons, “Estimation of the biomechanical characteristics of tremorous
movements based on gyroscopes,” in Assistive Technol.: From Virtual-
ity Reality, vol. 16, A. Pruski and H. Knops, Eds. Amsterdam, The
Netherlands: IOS Press, 2005, pp. 138–142.
[19] R. W. Phillips, “Engineering applications of fluids with a variable yield
stress,” Ph.D. dissertation, Dept. Mech. Eng., Univ. California, Berkeley,
1969..
[20] G. M. Kamath, M. K. Hurt, and N. M. Wereley, “Analysis and testin of
bingham plastic behavior in semi-active electrorheological fluid dampers,”
Smart Mater. Struct., vol. 5, pp. 576–590, 1996.
David Case received the B.S. degree in mathematics
from the University of Dallas, Irving, TX, in 2007.
He is currently working toward the M.S. degree in
the Biomedical Instrumentation and Robotics Labo-
ratory, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX.
He is currently a Research Assistant in the
Biomedical Instrumentation and Robotics Labora-
tory, Southern Methodist University. In 2008–2009,
he assisted studies in multiple robot interaction at
the Automation and Robotics Research Institute, The
University of Texas at Arlington. His current research
interests include rehabilitation robotics and novel actuator design with smart
materials.
Behzad Taheri received the B.S. degree from Bu Ali
Sina University, Hamedan, Iran, and the M.S. degree
from Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran,
both in mechanical engineering. He is currently work-
ing toward the Ph.D. degree in mechanical engineer-
ing in the Biomedical Instrumentation and Robotics
Laboratory, Southern Methodist University, Dallas,
TX.
He is currently a Research Assistant in the
Biomedical Instrumentation and Robotics Labora-
tory, Southern Methodist University. His current re-
search interests include dynamics of human gait, human arm tremor control,
rehabilitation, nonlinear control, and robust control.
Edmond Richer received the M.S. degree in me-
chanical engineering from the University of Craiova,
Craiova, Romania, in 1988 and the Ph.D. degree in
dynamic systems and control from the Lyle School of
Engineering, Southern Methodist University, Dallas,
TX, in 1998.
He currently directs the Biomedical Instrumen-
tation and Robotics Laboratory, Southern Methodist
University, where he is an Associate Professor in the
Bobby B. Lyle School of Engineering. His current re-
search interests include advanced dynamics and con-
trol, image-guided and haptic-assisted robotic systems, and ultrasound applica-
tions in bone quality assessment and supra resolution imaging.
Dr. Richer is currently a member of the American Society of Mechanical
Engineers.