Leap motion sensors and the exoskeleton frame 1

FINAL REPORT;Research Method for Engineeers.

LEAP MOTION SENSORS AND THE EXOSKELETON

FRAME.

Name

Institution

Professor

Course

Date
 Leap motion sensors and the exoskeleton
frame 2

Abstract

The main aim of the research reported here is to analyze the working of a Leap motion sensor

controlled exoskeleton. This research explores various ways of designing the advanced devices in

such a way that it serves to help gait posture and gesture designed to fit elderly people. Power and

computer hardware and software are incorporated in order to ensure that the device is developed

in a proper way. Recent studies predict that by 2060, developer companies dealing with leap

motion controllers that offer complex technological solutions and sustain the society. For several

years the leap motion has been operating smoothly on bringing hand gestures to virtual reality. It

is therefore important when an individual use hand to move digital objects from one position to

the other in a more natural way than using a certain controller.

The methodology of the work

The following were addressed to describe the project;

1.Description of leap motion sensor from scholarly resources

2.Research on working of the leap motion controllers.

3.Research on the description of the exoskeleton frame.

4.How leap motion sensors are used to control the exoskeleton frames

(a)Features used to operate exoskeleton frames.

(b)The general setting of the leap motion control panel.

(c) Checking on the allow background apps in the leap motion sensor
 Leap motion sensors and the exoskeleton
frame 3

(d) Tracking settings used in leap motion sensors in controlling the exoskeleton frames.

5.How exoskeleton frames are used to control the leap motion sensors.

(a)Use of algorithm in frames to control the sensors

(b)Graphical representation of the steps used to control the sensors

Introduction.

The project describes the working of the leap motion sensors, working of the exoskeleton frame.

the use of leap motion sensors to control the exoskeleton frame and the working of the exoskeleton

frame to control the leap motion sensors. Different information from different sources have

facilitated the research work.

Literature review

This research aims to discuss in detail the leap motion sensor, its working ability and also on how

it can be designed to fit an exoskeleton mechanical frame. The project discusses on the various

methods used to obtain information required for the project. Data used to describe the leap motion

sensors, the working of the leap motion controller and the working of the exoskeleton frame. It

also includes the information about the use of the leap motion sensors and the exoskeleton frame

and the vice versa.

Methods

It describes the report by giving out related information about the study of the work. Description

on the instruments used to illustrate the framework of the report. How information is managed,
 Leap motion sensors and the exoskeleton
frame 4

process of collecting the data from various concepts, illustrations of the figures and diagrams

describing the statistical data about the project.

Discussion

1. Leap motion sensor

This is a computerized hardware device that is specifically designed to maintain motions as

input and analogs to a computer peripherals and mouse. It a software that is designed for hand

tracking in various virtual reality dimension.

This sensor is a controller USB peripheral system that is built and put on a physical computer in a

position that ensures it is facing upwards. Also, the controller can be inserted on to a virtual

handset.

By utilizing monochromatic IR cameras plus 3 infrared Light-emitting diodes which are a two –

lead semiconductor light source that has junction diodes that produce light when activated in a

particular system (Potter et al 2013). In this case, the system represents a hemispherical total area

to a perimeter of about 1oo centimeters. The Light-emitting diodes often produce a lower quantity

of IR light rays and the two cameras installed in the system generate at least 2000 light frames per
 Leap motion sensors and the exoskeleton
frame 5

given time second of a reflected dataset. These rays are then passed in a crucial USB cable up to

the main desktop from where the device is evaluated by the leap motion software using a complex

algorithm in such a situation that cannot be disclosed by the developer company to the public. This

dimension usually incorporates 3D position dataset by putting a clear comparison with the 2D

frameworks that are provided by the cameras. In a certain research study, the average precision of

the controller was found to be 0.7 millimeters (Potter et al 2013).

The lesser observations area and increased device resolution distinguishes it from the Kinect

which involves motion sensors and other input devices that enables users to access, control and

relate with their host computer without necessarily using game controllers through a given natural

user interface by utilizing gestures and commands (Weichert et al 2013)The Kinect is more

convenient to use in the whole body tracking in an open area or free space, In a certain

demonstration the leap motion device indicated to perform operations like proper navigation of a

website using gestures on maps, high accuracy art drawing and manipulation of critical 3D visual

aspects. At first, the leap motion delivered thousands of units to sole developers who aimed to

create significant software for the running of the device.

 Leap motion sensors and the exoskeleton
frame 6

For several years the leap motion has been operating smoothly on bringing hand gestures to virtual

reality. It is important when a person use hands to move digital objects from one position to the

other in a more natural way than using a certain controller. However, in order to accomplish this

activity, the user requires strapping one of the developer’s motion sensor peripherals before an

existing VR headset which is a little bit solid or heavy (Potter et al 2013). Also, the sensor was

still working on the same software designed for desktop Personal Computers; which is a

continuation of the period when leap motions were originally focused on the said personal

computer system. Currently, the developer company has the ability to take the next leap to another

advanced level where it is dealing with Orion, a new hardware component, and software that is

specifically designed just for VR.

2.Working off a leap motion controller

From the earliest developed hardware prototypes to the current tracking software, the leap

motion controller software has advanced in a long way. Individuals have provided lots of questions

on how this technology operates identifying how raw sensor data is changed into a more useful

information that engineers and developers can use in their system applications.

Hardware

In this case, a leap motion sensor is usually very simple. The main frame of the device is

consequently made up of two cameras and 3 LEDs with a given wavelength total of 850

nanometers that locates the outside of the visible light spectrum (Weichert et al 2013). Due to the

wide angle lenses, lead motion device has a large interaction space of 8 cubic feet that replaces the

shape of a pyramid in an inverted position which is the core intersection area of the binoculars

cameras field of view. Over the years the device viewing range was limited to 60 cm that is
 Leap motion sensors and the exoskeleton
frame 7

equivalent to 2ft above the leap motion controller. With the introduction of Orion beta software.

The viewing range has tremendously increased to roughly 80 centimeters that is equivalent to 2.6

feet constituting the upper distance of that device. This given dimension is often deterred by Light

emitting diodes light ray’s propagation through an area because it becomes much difficult to

deduce the user's hand position in a 3D angle in front of a particular distance. The light emitting

diode has a limitation on the use of the maximum amount of current produced by the USB.

At this juncture, the USB reads the provided sensor information into its own main memory then

makes any significant resolution adjustments (Fontana et al 2009). This dataset is then

continuously taken through USB to the Leap motion tracking software. The input data takes the

form of a grayscale image of the infrared light spectrum that is distinct from the left and right side

cameras. Normally, the objects that individuals can view are those that are illuminated directly by

the Leap Motion Controller LEDs.

Software

In this case, after the image is streamed directly to the user's host computer, it calls for some solid

mathematics approaches. Despite various myths and misunderstanding. The Leap Motion

controller do not provide a depth map. However, it uses complex algorithms to the raw sensor

dataset. The Leap Motion software is the software present in a certain desktop PC that ensures

processing various images. After accounting for background objects for example heads, the images

are evaluated to rebuild a 3D dimension representation of what the device views (Fontana et al

2009). After this point, the tracking layer matches the data to produce missing information and

deduce the positions of obstructed objects. Filtering techniques are assessed to enable smooth

temporally consistency of the data provided. The device then feeds the entire outcome or results
 Leap motion sensors and the exoskeleton
frame 8

expressed in form of frame series and snapshots that are composed of all the tracking data into a

delivery protocol.

The Leap motion service exchanges message with the panel and other web users through a socket

interface connected on the computer, for example, web socket and TCP. The native clients direct

the data into simple API structures that direct mechanical frame and issues helper functions. Then,

the application logic is rounded up into the leap motion input ensuring free interaction with the

motion controller device.

3. Exoskeleton frame

An exoskeleton frame involves a complete wearable machine capable of moving and is

powered by a system of electric motors, hydraulic systems a pneumatics. It is also powered by a

combination of various advanced technologies that allow limb mobility with a high strength and

increased endurance level. Some were developed with gait approaches as helpers for the elderly’s

as a result of its unique features that were large and heavy in order to cover other available features

(Fontana et al 2009). Wearing a visible device cause unwarranted discomfort and awkwardness.

Due to this situation, developers have built an active exoskeleton frame that is aimed to help the

gait of old individuals. The system is composed of a low-profile design that ensures a less frame

which allows it to be worn on lose clothes thus enhancing it to be more comfortable to wear in a

certain social or public setting. Three-dimensional human models were put into solid works and

carried out specific element analysis and simulations in order to test the complex system with

varying weights (Bortoli et al 2015). The specifications for building the mechanical frame for the

exoskeleton is provided. It can adapt to various body shapes using different distances around
 Leap motion sensors and the exoskeleton
frame 9

components. It maintains 7 degrees of freedom for all and different limbs on the lower part of the

whole body.

The frame was built using solid works 2015 from Assault and the analysis module made for making

static relative loads. (Cao et al 2009).

Material

In order to design an exoskeleton frame, the material chosen was aluminum metal with a capability

of 275MPa. The metal alloys are quite simple in a computer numerical control enabling quick

prototyping when getting a less weight than metals such as iron. This particular allowed was taken

due to its relatively high yield strength as it also incurred lower costs (Bortoleet al 2015). It is

evident that that for the frame to be small enough, the material needs to be of higher yield strength.

Hosing the material to be used made the amount incurred and accessibility to be widely considered

to get prototype that is functioning properly. This required all components present to be

incorporated using computer numerical control. Even though the cost for CNC s relatively high,

the selected material has lower costs that can be machined gradually as compared to other metals.

The frame was specifically designed to follow the following objectives;

 Leap motion sensors and the exoskeleton
frame 10

• To have the ability to individually support itself

• Occupy low volume and density

• Prevent bone and muscle contacts

• Avoid tight protrusions and indentations in order to be designed and produced through

quick prototyping

• Modular approach consisting of various components that connect through several points

which ensures the exoskeleton frame is adaptable to changing body shapes.

The exoskeleton was designed through a continuous cyclical development cycle to reach

maximum form

A human 3-dimension body was produced through a make Human and incorporated into the

program as the other components were being assembled. With this technique, the components were

enabled to be fitted nearer to the model.

 Leap motion sensors and the exoskeleton
frame 11

For each joint, the exoskeleton was made to bearings available to ensure a long-term and efficient

operation. The hip and ankle joints use spherical bearings to ensure a large diversity of movements

for example hip inversion. This allows the user to perform a natural gait as the knee joints use

linear bearings.

4.How leap motion sensors are used to control the exoskeleton frames

Leap motion sensors can be handled in different ways within the exoskeleton frame (Liu

et al,2011). Leap motion control panel application; The leap motion control panel in most it has

the settings, visualizers, and the pause or the resume tracking device. In setting menu, it helps the

user to open the panel in the motion control which is within the exoskeleton frame. In visualizer

content, there is the launching of the consumer-oriented visualization application which controls

the various activities while in the resume tracking in most cases it helps to produce the tracking

data within the frame (Liu et al,2011).

There are leap motion sensors features which are used to control the exoskeleton frames such;

(a)Static gesture features. These are always constructed depending on the palm and also the figures

with their distances. The distances between the figures would determine their capability on how to

operate the exoskeleton frames.

(b)Hand circle features they show how palm is used in drawing a circle in controlling the

exoskeleton frames. The frames detect the hand and its responses accordingly. One should ensure

the hand is not rotating when circling within the exoskeleton frame.
 Leap motion sensors and the exoskeleton
frame 12

(c)Use of the index swipe and the index key tapping in controlling the exoskeleton frame. For the

two index to operate exoskeleton frame, clockwise and anticlockwise movements should be

ensured. This boost the control of the frames.

(d)Use of hand interaction. Use of hand to operate the frames is based on rigid body whereby the

first option operating the exoskeleton is to detect when the objects start to touch each other.

Different shapes such as the use of cubes are designed to indicate the relationship between the

objects.

(e)Use of the leap motion sensors setting also helps to control the exoskeleton frame. There are

various methods to tackle these settings within the framework. The following are various settings

in most of the leap motion sensors.

General setting. In the page of there are the following functions which occur to assist the leap

sensors. Helps to check the allow web box which in overall it opens the web socket server and thus

helping tracking data to apply for the new applications within the data (Cui & Sourin,2014).

Checking on the allow background apps so as to allow most of the various applications thus can

assist in tracking the overall data in most of the focused application within the panel. The sensors

to help to check the images thus helping to get the infrared cameras which pose images contained

in the leap motion hardware (Du et al,2016). When most of the applications are not checked, they

continue to receive most of the data but the cameras will not be able to get the images as it is

recorded in various frames within the exoskeleton.

 Leap motion sensors and the exoskeleton
frame 13

Checking on the send usage of data icon as it contains the statistics in the most of the leap motions.

Also, the general setting contains the check launch in most of the start-up application this helps to

launch the control panel application in the frames (Du & Zhang, 2015).

Tracking settings. It checks on the robust module thus helping to perform the most of the lighting

conditions within the leap motion (Du & Zhang, 2015). Also, there is need to check the auto –

orient tracking as it gives the axis which helps to detect most of the views arranged on the opposite

sides of the bars within the exoskeleton frames. The leap motion controller in most of the cases

falls on the lighting parts as it captures the structured images for at least half a minute.

4.1. How leap motion sensor can be interfaced with the exoskeleton frame

In each of the controller panel, there are frames which have snapshots. In most cases only

hands and also fingers which are detected by the leap motion senses in the frames (Burdea et al,

2013). Most of the frames have the Id values which in many cases they are skipped when in use.

In the computers, the leap motion senses tend to drop frames which are recorded in most of the

computer software. When this software's detect the robust mode in order to analyze the IR there

are two frames which are which are discussed that is the frame object and the most ID which

consecutively produced and it always increases by a factor of two (Burdea et al, 2013).

The leap motion sensors settings are used to control exoskeleton frames in the following ways;

Getting the data from the frames. Mostly the frame structures tend to describe the access to data

in various frames (Field et al, 2011). There are various codes which tend to illustrate the process

on how to have the vital objects which are recorded by the leap motion system within the sensors

(Petric et al,2013). Most of the objects within the frames are always reads the only type of the
 Leap motion sensors and the exoskeleton
frame 14

object. They are always stored for future use since they tend to be safe and most of them are

encoded using the programming techniques such as the C++ programming method (De et al,2014).

Getting the exoskeleton frame by the polling. Forms the simplest leap motion method within the

frames. So long as the sensors have the natural exoskeleton frame rates the process is easy and

first. In most cases, the controllers within the leap motion parts contain the functions which are

always ready at any time to process data input (Young & Ferris,2017). Also, it happens that when

the polling is used in the sensors, one gets the same frame and thus giving the motion which is

twice the standard one (Savatekar et al, 2016). When an object is moved on the screen with

adjustments to the hand movement it means that the move should be maintained smooth at the

same time the sensors will give the history and also the frames which serve as the functions within

the leap motion panel (Yang et al,2016).

Using the exoskeleton frame with the call-backs in the system. At most of the time, listeners are

used in the leap motion frames to give the controller rates (Shi et al,2014). The controller contains

a function which shows when a new frame is available within the panel. Use of the call-backs

tends to be difficult because they handle a lot of the task per unit time. Each call-backs contains

various threads and therefore being complex to design and different objects depending on the data

provided by each thread (Park et al, 2017). Most of the problems incurred include the use of the

thread and the whole process of updating some of the objects in the sensors. Therefore, to have

adequate results it means most of the update should be used to detect threads and too to detect the

useful thread within the panel (Dobbins et al,2012). Thus it shows that in getting most of the leap

motion sensors data is always the same as getting the polling controller.
 Leap motion sensors and the exoskeleton
frame 15

By following the object or the entities across the exoskeleton frames. If the system has the ID for

the frame, then it means there must be an object that stands for the frames. The appropriate function

will be detected. If it happens that the code cannot be detected there is the return of the special

object or key to the system within the exoskeleton frames (Parietti et al,2015).

5. How is the exoskeleton frame controlled using the leap motion sensors?

5.1. By use of the algorithm (Todd, 2013). The exoskeleton uses the input method which

comprises of the freehand that helps to move over most of the sensors. In the output method, there

is a control system that moves with the help of the raspberry pi 3 to the leap motion sensors codes

recorded within the objects. The process of using the algorithm follows the following mechanism

whereby there is; start, using the check sensors, detection of the leap motion sensors in the system

if the detection is based on the hand movement the robot moves on, there is mail appearing to the

system and the end step is to stop.

5.2. By use of the flowchart. The procedure from the top to the bottom.

Start

Checking the

sensors

Leap motion

sensors is detected

The robot/system

moves
 Leap motion sensors and the exoskeleton
frame 16

The email is sent

to the pc

Stop

Results and the recommendation

The current exoskeleton designed can be modified effectively to various body times and the

material between the hip joints and the feet ensures that it supports its own weight. For the leg, a

frame is composed of a total of 37 models and weighing 4.7 kilograms in total. In this case, the

frame total weight is 9.4 kilograms (Kong & Jeon 2006). The hip supports 3 degrees DOFs, 17

degrees’ abduction, and rotation because of the continuous spherical bearing. (Cao et al 2009).

The mechanical frame is ported to the Opens in order to make biomechanical kinematics with the

available models. This situation has been properly viewed in other research works concerning

active exoskeleton frameworks. However, there exist other specifications and modifications that

can be used effectively to enable effective advancements. The exoskeleton frame’s do not support

flexion. Since this is a natural movement made by gait posture, it needs to be replaced by the

exoskeleton (Kong & Jeon 2006). It would also be possible to bring about an increment of

complexity at that point as this movement is prevented by a large range of footwear for all people.

Although the frame was designed around distinct body types, it should be compared to a dataset

regarding leap motion. By adopting a proper controller software through initial microcontrollers

that obtain data and commands the Direct Current motors, it may acquire a user control with less
 Leap motion sensors and the exoskeleton
frame 17

training. After good determination of the actuator systems and control devices, a prototype will be

deduced to test the system and continue with trials.

Appendix A.

Reflection of the project.

Leap motion controller is always useful in all system. It helps one to control various devices

at any place (Griffiths, 2015). Most of the time the leap motion sensor is always compatible in

most the electronic devices such as the computers and the laptops. This indicates that the system

is always flexible and also it is accurate when using tithe use of leap motion sensors is always

accurate as compared with the use of exoskeleton frames. During the research drawbacks such as

insufficient of the research materials and also lack of adequate data were experienced.

Appendix B.

Academic Integrity Declarations.

Leap motion sensors use wireless devices when controlling most of the objects such as the

robots which assist users to handle task appropriately as compared to the other systems. It was

noted that most of the exoskeleton frame objects cannot work on their own without the use of the

leap motion sensors. The research indicated that not leap motion sensors are used with the frames.

Each frame has a specific leap motion sensor used.

 Leap motion sensors and the exoskeleton
frame 18

References

Potter, L. E., Araullo, J., & Carter, L. (2013, November). The leap motion controller: a view on

sign language. In Proceedings of the 25th Australian computer-human interaction conference:

augmentation, application, innovation, collaboration (pp. 175-178). ACM.

Weichert, F., Bachmann, D., Rudak, B., & Fisseler, D. (2013). Analysis of the accuracy and

robustness of the leap motion controller. Sensors, 13(5), 6380-6393.

Bassily, D., Georgoulas, C., Guettler, J., Linner, T., & Bock, T. (2014, June). Intuitive and

adaptive robotic arm manipulation using the leap motion controller. In ISR/robotik 2014; 41st

international symposium on robotics; proceedings of (pp. 1-7). VDE.

Bachmann, D., Weichert, F., & Rinkenauer, G. (2014). Evaluation of the leap motion controller as

a new contact-free pointing device. Sensors, 15(1), 214-233.

Guna, J., Jakus, G., Pogačnik, M., Tomažič, S., & Sodnik, J. (2014). An analysis of the precision

and reliability of the leap motion sensor and its suitability for static and dynamic

tracking. Sensors, 14(2), 3702-3720.

Lu, W., Tong, Z., & Chu, J. (2016). Dynamic hand gesture recognition with leap motion

controller. IEEE Signal Processing Letters, 23(9), 1188-1192.

Cao, H., Ling, Z., Zhu, J., Wang, Y., & Wang, W. (2009, December). Design frame of a leg

exoskeleton for load-carrying augmentation. In Robotics and Biomimetics (ROBIO), 2009 IEEE

International Conference on (pp. 426-431). IEEE.

 Leap motion sensors and the exoskeleton
frame 19

Bortole, M., Venkatakrishnan, A., Zhu, F., Moreno, J. C., Francisco, G. E., Pons, J. L., &

Contreras-Vidal, J. L. (2015). The H2 robotic exoskeleton for gait rehabilitation after stroke: early

findings from a clinical study. Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 12(1), 54.

Fontana, M., Dettori, A., Salsedo, F., & Bergamasco, M. (2009, May). Mechanical design of a

novel hand exoskeleton for accurate force displaying. In Robotics and Automation, 2009. ICRA'09.

IEEE International Conference on (pp. 1704-1709). IEEE.

Kong, K., & Jeon, D. (2006). Design and control of an exoskeleton for the elderly and

patients. IEEE/ASME Transactions on mechatronics, 11(4), 428-432.

Lagoda, C., Schouten, A. C., Stienen, A. H., Hekman, E. E., & van der Kooij, H. (2010,

September). Design of an electric series elastic actuated joint for robotic gait rehabilitation

training. In Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics (BioRob), 2010 3rd IEEE RAS and EMBS

International Conference on (pp. 21-26). IEEE.

Murray, S. A., Ha, K. H., Hartigan, C., & Goldfarb, M. (2015). An assistive control approach for

a lower-limb exoskeleton to facilitate recovery of walking following stroke. IEEE Transactions

on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering, 23(3), 441-449.

Coelho, J. C., & Verbeek, F. J. (2014). Pointing task evaluation of leap motion controller in 3D

virtual environment. Creating the Difference, 78, 78-85.

Tung, J. Y., Lulic, T., Gonzalez, D. A., Tran, J., Dickerson, C. R., & Roy, E. A. (2015). Evaluation

of a portable markerless finger position capture device: accuracy of the Leap Motion controller in

healthy adults. Physiological measurement, 36(5), 1025.

 Leap motion sensors and the exoskeleton
frame 20

Smeragliuolo, A. H., Hill, N. J., Disla, L., & Putrino, D. (2016). Validation of the Leap Motion

Controller using markered motion capture technology. Journal of biomechanics, 49(9), 1742-

1750.

Chuan, C. H., Regina, E., & Guardino, C. (2014, December). American sign language recognition

using leap motion sensor. In Machine Learning and Applications (ICMLA), 2014 13th

International Conference on (pp. 541-544). IEEE.

Marin, G., Dominio, F., & Zanuttigh, P. (2016). Hand gesture recognition with jointly calibrated

leap motion and depth sensor. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 75(22), 14991-15015.

Liu, H., Wei, X., Chai, J., Ha, I., & Rhee, T. (2011, February). Real-time human motion control

with a small number of inertial sensors. In Symposium on Interactive 3D Graphics and Games (pp.

133-140). ACM.

Cui, J., & Sourin, A. (2014, October). Feasibility study on freehand geometric modeling using leap

motion in VRML/X3D. In Cyberworlds (CW), 2014 International Conference on (pp. 389-392).

IEEE.

Du, G., Zhang, P., & Liu, X. (2016). Markerless Human–Manipulator Interface Using Leap

Motion With Interval Kalman Filter and Improved Particle Filter. IEEE Transactions on Industrial

Informatics, 12(2), 694-704.

Du, G., & Zhang, P. (2015). A markerless human-robot interface using particle filter and Kalman

filter for dual robots. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 62(4), 2257-2264.

Burdea, G. C., Cioi, D., Kale, A., Janes, W. E., Ross, S. A., & Engsberg, J. R. (2013). Robotics

and gaming to improve ankle strength, motor control, and function in children with cerebral
 Leap motion sensors and the exoskeleton
frame 21

palsy—a case study series. IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering,

21(2), 165-173.

Petrič, T., Gams, A., Debevec, T., Žlajpah, L., & Babič, J. (2013). Control approaches for robotic

knee exoskeleton and their effects on human motion. Advanced Robotics, 27(13), 993-1002.

Young, A. J., & Ferris, D. P. (2017). State of the art and future directions for lower limb robotic

exoskeletons. IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering, 25(2), 171-

182.

Field, M., Pan, Z., Stirling, D., & Naghdy, F. (2011). Human motion capture sensors and analysis

in robotics. Industrial Robot: An International Journal, 38(2), 163-171.

De Vito, L., Postolache, O., & Rapuano, S. (2014). Measurements and sensors for motion tracking

in motor rehabilitation. IEEE Instrumentation & Measurement Magazine, 17(3), 30-38.

Savatekar, M. R. D., & Dum, M. A. (2016). Design Of Control System For Articulated Robot

Using Leap Motion Sensor.

Yang, C., Chen, J., & Chen, F. (2016, September). Neural learning enhanced teleoperation control

of Baxter robot using IMU based motion capture. In Automation and Computing (ICAC), 2016

22nd International Conference on (pp. 389-394). IEEE.

Shi, G., Wang, Y., & Li, S. (2014). Human Motion Capture System and its Sensor Analysis.

Sensors & Transducers, 172(6), 206.

 Leap motion sensors and the exoskeleton
frame 22

Park, Y., Jo, I., Lee, J., & Bae, J. (2017, September). A wearable hand system for virtual reality.

In Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 2017 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on (pp. 1052-

1057). IEEE.

Dobbins, M. K., Rondot, P., Schwartz, K., Shone, E. D., Yokell, M. R., Abshire, K. J., ... & Lovell,

S. (2012). U.S. Patent No. 8,217,995. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

Parietti, F., Chan, K. C., Hunter, B., & Asada, H. H. (2015, May). Design and control of

supernumerary robotic limbs for balance augmentation. In Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2015

IEEE International Conference on (pp. 5010-5017). IEEE.

Todd, D. J. (2013). Walking machines: an introduction to legged robots. Springer Science &

Business Media.

Griffiths, T. (2015). Optical Stereoscopy Motion Capture System 2014. The UNSW Canberra at

ADFA Journal of Undergraduate Engineering Research, 7(2).