A low cost stair climbing wheelchair
Luis A.M. Riascos
Engineering Center (CECS), UFABC
Santo Andre, SP, Brazil
e-mail: luis.riascos@ufabc.edu.br
AbstractThere are around 68 millions of wheelchair users in
the world. And 49.2% must use steps to enter or exit their homes, in
the USA. But only a few successful stair climbing wheelchair
models or middle scale robots have been built. A low cos stair
climbing wheelchair is here proposed. The wheelchair is powered by
a system which enables it to have smooth motion on flat surfaces
and has the capability of climbing stairs and traversing obstacles by
local and dynamic conditions and not by an external command and
so, only two motors for locomotion are necessary. Experimental
tests show its functionality. The additional cost of a stair climbing
wheelchair as proposed here is 20% of a conventional wheelchair of
the economic class.
KeywordsAssistive technology, accessibility, mechanical
design.
I. INTRODUCTION
Around the world the amount of wheelchair users is
estimated in 68 millions (1%), [1].
Just over 2.62% of population in the USA uses assistive
devices to help them with mobility. This group comprises 1.7
million wheelchair or scooter riders (0.6% of population) and
6.1 million users of other mobility devices, such as canes,
crutches, and walkers. From the wheelchair users, 90% or 1.5
million persons use manual wheelchairs. 155,000 use
electrically powered wheelchairs, and 142,000 use scooters,
[2].
Other obstacle is the cost; while financing may have
become more available, it remains the case that about half of
people or their families pay for devices on their own. The
unmet needs for devices are substantial, with the primary
barrier being that people simply cannot afford to purchase
them.
A significant portion of mobility device users are
employing these aids for a relatively short period of time,
while recovering from surgery, injury, or disease. Thus,
performing permanent accessibility modifications in their
homes and jobs is not the first option.
For wheelchair users, it is necessary to overcome natural
and virtual obstacles such as stairs, which are the most known
obstacles to the motion. About half of users (49.2%) must use
steps to enter or exit their homes, in the USA, [2].
Many researches have been conducted toward the design of
stair climbing and obstacle traversing robots during the past
decade. However, a few successful robots, which can be
adapted as wheelchairs, have been built.
978-1-4673-7554-2/15/$31.00 2015 IEEE
Although they are defined as stair climbing robots, their
locomotion is not restricted to stairs, they also overcome
obstacles such as curbs, irregular sidewalks, etc.
They can be classified in 3 groups: tracked, wheeled, and
leg-robot.
An example of wheeled robot is the Personal Rover [3],
which moves the center of gravity for wheelie and climbing
one step.
An example of tracked robot is the Silver [4]. Tracked are
stable for stairs but waste too much energy on flat surfaces, the
energy consumed by a tracked robot is 20 times higher than a
wheeled robot on flat terrains, [5]. Therefore most tracked
wheelchairs have 2 locomotion systems, one for stairs (i.e.
tracked) and other for flat surfaces (i.e. wheels), which made
them complex and very expensive.
An example of leg robot is the RHex [6], a cockroach-
inspired locomotion form which have 6 curved legs making
possible the locomotion in a variety of terrains.
However some models such as the Personal Rovert and the
RHex are not suitable for wheelchair applications.
Other leg robots are the Asguard [7], in this case each
wheel corresponds to a five leg configuration, Fig. 1-a). And
the Looper [8], in which each wheel corresponds to a three leg
configuration, Fig. 1-b). Although leg-robots can climb stairs
and traverse obstacles, they do not have smooth motion on flat
surfaces.
There are some cases combining several locomotion
systems. An example of wheel and track in the same unit is the
VIPeR which applies the Galileo-wheel for transforming a
wheel into a track in few seconds, [9].
The MSRox [10] uses legs for climbing obstacles and
wheels for flat terrains. However, it needs different powered
motors for each locomotion system. In this case, a distance
sensor monitors the type of terrain for activating the respective
locomotion system.
a) b)
Fig. 1. a) Asguard robot, [7]. b) Loper robot, [8].
627
 The Epi.q-1.2 is a successful small scale robot, which
climbs stairs using four wheel-leg units but only two units have
traction, [11]. Other examples of hybrid leg-wheels robots are
the Spacecat [12], Whegs and Mini-Whegs [13-15].
Examples of commercial stair climbing wheelchairs are the
TopChair [16], the Observer [17], and the iBOT.
The TopChair is able to climb over obstacles and to go up
and down stairs. However, it has two locomotion systems
(tracked for stairs and wheels for flat terrains) which make it
too heavy (140 kg), demands a structural shift, and needs long
time for this transformation; in addition, its operation demands
skills for a good pre-position for the first step. Nevertheless,
one of the most restrictive factors is maybe the cost, around
13000.
The Observer is unable to climb steps higher than 14 cm
and is 197 kg weight. A standard stair is 17 cm high.
Kamen developed a wheelchair (iBOT 3000) that could
climb stairs by rotating part of the chassis and suspension
system [18]. However, it needs assistance by another person
for climbing stairs. And its cost was U$29000 in 2002. This
wheelchair is no longer sold by stability problems.
II. A LOW COST STAIR CLIMBING WHEELCHAIR (LCSCWC)
The LCSCWC here proposed has a hybrid mechanism
called Delta-Wheel which has both walking and rolling
capabilities employing only one motor.
The LCSCWC is based on four wheel-leg units, containing
three orbital wheels each, but only two units need traction.
Different kinds of motions can be obtained by only one
motor and a transmission system for each wheel-leg unit, the
wheelchair passively changes its functioning mode from
rolling on wheels to stepping on legs, without any command,
just by blocking the wheels with an obstacle.
The locomotion unit design is based on the idea that
different motions can be obtained using only one transmission
system, simply locking or unlocking some degrees of freedom
along the kinematic chain.
While the wheelchair moves on flat, uphill, downhill or
irregular surfaces, the delta-wheels can rotate freely around
their shaft; thus the robot adapts itself with respect to uneven
terrain making unnecessary a suspension system.
There are two options for propelling the orbital wheels,
gears or belts, in the literature in general planetary gears are
referenced as star wheels, and triangular units propelled by
belts are here defined as delta-wheels. Since we are focused on
a low cost solution, we adopt belts within delta-wheels,
because belts are cheaper than planetary gears and permits less
restrictive dimensional tolerance, which reduces manufacturing
costs.
A. Delta-wheel design
Defining the delta-wheel parameters depend on the size of
the obstacle, for ex. the high of the step. A standard stair
should be up to 17 cm high and at least 27 cm long.
However, it can be found stair with different high and size.
The limit to be climbed depends basically on the distance
among the orbital-wheel axes, from now defined as the Delta-
628
side. Apparently, the more the delta-side, the higher the step to
be climbed. However, a small orbital-wheel radius produces a
collision between the delta and the step edge.
The delta-wheel design should obey trigonometric
relationships considering the delta-side () and the orbital
wheel radius (r), for maintaining a free distance to the step
edge (E), as described in equation (1).
= (1)
Where: a is the step high, r is the orbital wheel radius, is the
delta-side in which the delta is an equilateral triangle, and OGr
is the external orbital gear radius.
This relationship was plotted in Fig. 2, both axes in mm.
Other parameter to be defined is the relationship between
the orbital wheel gear (OG) and the delta gear (DG), Fig. 3.
This reduction determines when the orbital wheels roll and
when the delta wheel rotates, depending on the obstacle size.
When an obstacle blocks the orbital wheels, then the motor
toque increases until the delta rotates. A satisfactory reduction
selection maintains the orbital wheel rolling when small
obstacles are overcome (for example, obstacles smaller than 4
cm high); and produces the delta rotation when big obstacles
are overcome (for example a stair or a curb), but also maintains
enough traction on the orbital wheels for climbing obstacles.
A reduction too big produces unnecessary delta rotation to
overcome tiny obstacles. And on the other hand a reduction too
small becomes difficult the delta rotation and produce slippage
of the orbital wheels when climbing obstacles.
Since the delta rotation implies a vertical variation of the
delta shaft, and therefore the chassis center of mass (and also
the passenger), the weight of the wheelchair and the passenger
should be considered when testing the obstacle transposition
by rolling the wheels or by rotating the delta.
Once defined the delta-side and the gear reduction, the
delta unit can be constructed.
40
35
30
Distance to step edge
25
20
15
10
5
0
200 205 210 215 220 225 230 235 240
Delta-side
Fig. 2. Relationship between free distance to step edge and delta-side.
 1

3
Fig. 4. Chassis and wheels

Fig. 3. Gear reduction and delta wheel parameters.

The chassis should provide physical support for all sub-

systems such as batteries, motors, delta units, and tilt sub-
system. But remember, this is also an indoor vehicle; therefore
its dimensions should be limited. The chassis was designed 6
applying CAD programs. 5
Fig. 4 shows the chassis containing the delta-wheels (1),
motors (2), batteries (3), and control board (4). Tests show that
only two motors are enough for climbing stairs.
During stair climbing operations is necessary to move
backward the seat center of mass in order to avoid wheelchair
turning over and to maintain a comfortable posture for the
passenger.
During climbing stairs, the wheelchair goes always up or
down stairs with the seat backrest oriented in the stair
direction, i.e. climbing in reverse motion.
A tilt system maintains the seat in a horizontal position
Fig. 5. Tilt system mechanical design
whatever the chassis inclination is. An IMU measure the seat
pitch angle; then a second control boar uses this information An illustrative video demonstrating the operation of the
for eliminating this inclination by triggering a motor (5) stair climbing wheelchair is available in:
coupled to a worm (6). The tilt system operation is completely https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xy4aBExz_l8
automatic and the passenger don not have to worry about it. A Fig. 8 illustrates the LCSCWC transposing a curb.
Kalman filter was implemented in the tilt control board for
smooth movements, [19, 20].
Fig. 5 illustrates the tilt system mechanical design. Notice B. Cost of a stair climbing wheelchair
that the tilt system is completely modular and if removed from For calculating the additional cost for constructing a stair
the chassis continues operational, as illustrated in Fig. 6. climbing wheelchair with delta wheels should be considered
The complete prototype is only 78 kg weight; this is almost that most part of the locomotion system of a conventional
half of other stair climbing wheelchair models. Fig. 7 wheelchair can be recycled including motors, batteries,
illustrates a stair climbing sequence of the prototype. Notice charger, electronic board, etc.
that the front wheels are powered delta wheels, and the rear The chassis have specific characteristic, but its cost is
wheels are free star wheels (i.e. they are not powered by similar to a conventional chassis. Therefore the additional
motors). costs are restricted to the tilt system and delta wheels. Our
Experimental tests show that powering the rear wheels does estimative shows that a stair climbing wheelchair with delta
not work when climbing in reverse motion, because in this wheels as proposed here will be only 20% more expensive than
configuration, those wheels do not have enough traction, and a conventional wheelchair of the economic class.
then, it produces slippage. Table 1 illustrates the costs of the additional components.

629
 Motor

IMU

PWM
a) b)

Control
board

Fig. 6. Tilt system.

TABLE I. COST OF THE ADDITIONAL COMPONENT.

Description amount price un. total c) d)

gears 14 4.30 60.20
20cm wheels 4* 10 40.00 Fig. 7. Stair climbing wheelchair with delta wheels.

PWM board 24 Vcc, 1 14 14.00

Tilt control board 1 23 23.00
free star wheel 2 24 48.00
gyroscopic sensor (IMU) 1 19 19.00
Construction of tilt components 1 40 40.00
Gear-motor 40W, 60 rpm 1 28 28.00
Other materials (screws, belts,
transistors, etc.) 20 20.00
Total $ 298.20
* A conventional wheelchair has already two wheels.

630

Fig. 8. Low cost stair climbing wheelchair transposing a curb.
III. CONCLUSIONS
A stair climbing wheelchair with delta wheels was
designed and constructed. For a low cost solution, belts were
chosen instead planetary gears. It was possible to validate its
design, dynamics, and functionality.
The design of the stair climbing wheelchair chassis
maintains similar dimensions of a conventional wheelchair,
making possible their use in indoor environments. Obviously,
the weight is higher than a conventional wheelchair because
the additional components such as tilt system, gears, delta
wheels, etc. However it is lighter than other stair climbing
wheelchair models.
Tests show that only two powered units are enough for
climbing stairs, but it should be the front wheels and climbing
in reverse motion. Then only two motors are necessary for
locomotion.
Belts were chosen instead planetary gears, because are
cheaper and demand less restrictive dimensional tolerances,
reducing manufacturing cost.
When compared to other stair climbing models (e.g. The
TopChair, [16]), the wheelchair proposed here is able to move
from flat terrain to stairs instantaneously and without
additional user commands for shifting the locomotion systems,
and vice-versa. It can climb standard steps (17cm high), in
631
contrast to the Observer, [17]. And dont need assistance by
another person for climbing stairs, in contrast to the iBOT,
[18].
The total costs of the additional components for climbing
stairs are around 20% of an economic conventional
wheelchair.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors thank FAPESP (grant nr. 2012/04915-0) and
CNPq (grant nr. 473491/2012-5) for financial support for the
present project.
REFERENCES
[1] Bender E., TED Talks - Demos human exoskeletons, Berkeley Bionics,
available at:
http://www.ted.com/talks/eythor_bender_demos_human_exoskeletons,
accessed: 09/2014.
[2] Kaye, H. S., Kang, T. LaPlante, M.P., Mobility Device Use in the
United States, U.S. Department of Education, 2000
[3] Falcone, E.; Gockley, R.; Porter , E.; Nourbakhsh, I. The Personal
Rover Project: The comprehensive design of a domestic personal robot.
Robotics and Autonomous Systems, Special Issue on Socially
Interactive Robots, v. 42, pp. 245258, 2003.
[4] Mihankhah, E.; Kalantari, A.; Aboosaeedan, E.; Taghirad , H.D.;
Moosavian, A. Autonomous Staircase Detection and Stair Climbing for
a Tracked Mobile Robot using Fuzzy Controller. Proceedings of the
2008 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics,
2009.
[5] Tao, W, Ou, Y. Feng, H., Research on dynamics and stability in the
stair-climbing of a tracked mobile robot. Int. Journal of Advanced
Robotic System, v.9 n. 146, 2012.
[6] Moore, E.Z.; Campbell, D.; Grimminger, F.; Buehler, M. Reliable Stair
Climbing in the Simple Hexapod RHex. Proceedings of the 2002 IEEE
International Conference on Robotics & Automation, 2002.
[7] Eich, M.; Grimminger , F.; Kirchner, F. A Versatile Stair-Climbing
Robot for Search and Rescue Application. Proceedings of the 2008
IEEE International Workshop on Safety, Security and Rescue Robotics,
2008.
[8] Herbert, S. D.; Drenner , A.; Papanikopoulos, N. Loper: A Quadruped-
Hybrid Stair Climbing Robot. 2008 IEEE International Conference on
Robotics and Automation, 2008.
[9] Galileo Mobility Instruments Ltd. Available at:
http://www.galileowheel.com/ accessed 09/2014.
[10] Moshsen, D.M., and Moghadam, M.M., Stair Climber Smart Mobile
Robot (MSRox), Autonomous Robots, v. 20, pp. 314, 2006.
[11] Quaglia, G., Maffiodo, D., Franco, W., Appendino, S., Oderio, R., The
Epi.1-1 hybrid mobile robot, The International Journal of Robotics
research, v.29, n.1, pp.81-91, January 2010.
[12] Siegwart, R. Lamon, P. Estier, T. Lauria, M. Piguet, R., Innovative
design for wheeled locomotion in rough terrain, Robotics and
Autonomous Systems v. 40 (2002), pp. 151162.
[13] Quinn, R., Nelson, G., Bachmann, R., Kingsley, D., Offi, J., Allen, T.
and Ritzmann, R. (2003). Parallel complementary strategies for
implementing biological principles into mobile robots. The International
Journal of Robotics Research, v. 22, n. 3, pp. 169186.
[14] Allen, T., Quinn, R., Bachmann, R. and Ritzman, R. (2003). Abstracted
biological principles applied with reduced actuation improve mobility of
legged vehicles. Proceedings of the 2003 IEEE/RSJ International
Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Las Vegas, NV.
[15] Morrey, J., Lambrecht, B., Horchler, A., Ritzmann, R. and Quinn, R.
(2003). Highly mobile and robust small quadruped robots. Proceedings
of the 2003 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots
and Systems (IROS 2003), Las Vegas, NV
[16] Top Chair, available at: <http://www.topchair.fr/en/distributor.php>
Accessed: 03/2012
 [17] Observer, available at: http://www.wheelchair88.com/product/pw-4x4q/
accessed: 12/2014.
[18] Segway, 2003, Segway Inc.'s Human Transporter (HT) models.
Available at: https://www.msu.edu/~luckie/segway/iBOT/iBOT.html
Accessed: 12/2014.
[19] Riascos, L., Pereira, D., Fault detection by variable behavior analysis,
Int. J. of Mechanical Eng. and Automation, v.1, n.3, p.182-192, 2014.
[20] Moraes, R.J.C., Design and control of a tilt system for wheelchairs, gr.
Thesis, UFABC, 2014.

632

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)