Analysis of Bowden Cable Transmission Performance

for Orthosis Applications

A. Goiriena, I. Retolaza, A. Cenitagoya, F. Martinez, S. Riaño, and J. Landaluze

Mechanical Design Department
IKERLAN Technological Research Centre
Arrasate/Mondragon, The Basque Country (Spain)
AGoiriena@ikerlan.es

Abstract— A Bowden cable performance analysis, based on a
Design of Experiments (DoE) is presented for orthosis
applications. The need for analysing these cables is based on the
construction of IKO (IKerlan`s Orthosis) with five actuated
degrees of freedom (DoF) to help the human arm. The aim is for
an individual to be capable of lifting weight without any great
effort using this exoskeleton, which should be portable and
readily dressed (and, therefore, lightweight). In order to transmit
the power from the actuators to the joints, Bowden cables are
used due to their flexibility and light weight. Transmission
performance has been analysed in terms of load loss and cable
deformation in order to estimate actuator requirements and
positioning accuracy. A test bench has been built to measure the
cable deformation and load loss occurring between the two ends
of the cable in different situations. This has been applied to
cables with two different diameters and at different loads. The
variables for which the effect has been analysed are weight, the
angle formed by the cable at the point where it leaves the sheath,
the cable flexion angle, cable length, cable flexion curvature
radius and cable type.
Furthermore, the orthosis must be wearable and portable,
which means that it must be lightweight. Accordingly, the
transmission system must be as light as possible. It must also
be flexible so that it can be adapted to the different arm
positions and it must be capable of transmitting sufficient
force.
In order to transmit the power from the actuators to the
joints Bowden cables are used. This transmission system has
already been analysed in other projects, such as [3] and [4]. In
principle, the Bowden cables are a good solution since they
have the desired specifications: they are lightweight, flexible
and capable of transmitting great force. They are also
economical and do not complicate the design of the
exoskeleton to any great extent. Nevertheless, Bowden cable
efficiency must be known, for a correct cable and actuator’s
size selection. A DoE test has been used to analyse Bowden
cable performance.

Keywords-Bowden cable; exoskeleton; orthosis; design of

experiments

I. INTRODUCTION

A. The arm orthosis, IKO (IKerlan’s Orthosis)

Ikerlan-IK4 has developed a prototype of an active orthosis
with five DoF for the arm [1][2]. As it can be seen in Fig. 1 this
prototype comprises an exoskeleton that is placed on the arm
and can be used by the individual wearing it to lift a weight or
perform tasks that require considerable arm strength without
any great effort. It could also be useful for an individual with a
mobility problem in one of his arms wanting to do
rehabilitation or carry out the tasks which would be impossible
without external help.
IKO has five actuated DoF (three in the shoulder, one in the
elbow and another in the forearm). Four of these DoF are
actuated by DC motors and the other by a pair of pneumatic
muscles. For the weight of the exoskeleton to be as low as
possible to reduce the required power on the actuators and the
inertia of the arm, the actuators are placed in a backpack
carried on the individual's back. Therefore, a system is
necessary to transmit the power from the backpack to the joints
that are to be moved.
Figure 1. Exoskeleton IKO (IKerlan’s Orthosis)

The material used in this paper was partly supported by the Spanish
Ministry of Education and Science and European FEDER Fund (research
project DPI2006-14928-C02-01).

Figure 2. Cable types. From right to left: 1x7, 1x19, 7x7, 7x19
B. Bowden cables
The Bowden cable is a type of flexible cable used to
transmit power via the linear movement of a cable in a sheath,
also flexible. The cable is normally made of steel and the
sheath usually consists of a steel wire rolled helicoidally and
covered with plastic. The cable can work under compression if
it is short and the loads are small, but for greater lengths and
loads, it is only possible to work under traction, as used in
IKO’s design. When choosing cables, there are many options.
This is an explanation of some of the factors that are to be
considered:
• Cable type (Fig. 2): 1x7, 1x19, 7x7, 7x19… For the
same diameter, the cables with more wires are more
flexible and more resistant to fatigue. However, the
cables with fewer wires are capable of withstanding
greater loads and are more resistant to crush and
abrasion.
• Cable material: there are several materials but the most
common are galvanised and stainless steel (with
greater resistance to corrosion).
• Diameter: a thicker cable is capable of withstanding a
greater load, but it is less flexible.
C. Tests
It is necessary to know the factors that affect the load loss
and the deformation of the cable in order to optimise the design
of the orthosis to minimise these two factors.
To perform the tests, four different cables and one single
sheath were selected. Table I shows the specifications of the
cables that have been used.
The cable thickness has been selected in accordance with
the breaking load in search of values of interest for use in the
IKO. The cable types have been selected in search of a
midpoint between resistance and flexibility, since they are both
necessary for the exoskeleton.
II. DESIGN OF EXPERIMENTS (DOE)
A. Objective and selected variables
The objective of these tests is to analyse which factors
affect the deformation and load loss, and to what extent. This
information is important for optimising the design of the
exoskeleton and for pointing out the limitations of the
transmission using Bowden cables.
Total load transmitted by the cable, load to lift the external
charge plus load loss at the Bowden cable, should be known in
order to estimate cable and actuator size.
TABLE I. SPECIFICATIONS OF THE CABLES SELECTED FOR TESTS
Cable type Diameter Breaking load (provided by the
manufacturer)
1x19 1.2 mm 170 kg
1x19 1.6 mm 227 kg
7x7 1.2 mm 122 kg
7x7 1.6 mm 218 kg
Also, cable deformation should be known in order to
estimate the elastic delay introduced between the two ends of
the Bowden cable transmission. Excessive deformation could
make difficult the control of the orthosis. To know the position
of the DoF actuated by an electrical motor, it is sufficient to
read the pulsations of an encoder fitted on the turn axis and
apply the corresponding mechanical transformation ratios.
When the power is transmitted to the joints using Bowden
cables, a hard non-linearity is introduced into the control. This
is a dead zone, caused by the stretching of the cable when a
load is fitted on the end of the arm. When the load is removed,
the cable recuperates its nominal length, causing an unwanted
movement of the arm. This produces a loss of precision not
detected by the encoder. If the non-linearity introduced by the
Bowden cables is to be compensated, a sensor must be fitted on
the joint so that the exact position of the arm is known and the
control can take into account the deformation occurring to the
cable, or this deformation law can be implemented in the
control strategy.
The variables that have been analysed are as follows:
• Weight: the load applied to the cable has been selected
in accordance with the maximum forces the cables
have been calculated to withstand in the IKO.
• Angle formed by the cable when it leaves the sheath: in
the DoF actuated by electrical motors, the cable is
rolled up in the drum of the motor helicoidally, which
sometimes means that the cable leaves the sheath at a
certain angle.
• Cable flexion angle: to ensure that the cable stretches
from the actuator to the joint that is to be moved, it
must bend. Furthermore, the position of the joint may
change.
• Cable flexion curvature radius: the same comment as
in the previous variable also applies here.
• Cable length: depending on the distance between the
actuator and the joint and on the deviation required of
the cable, its length should be different.
• Cable type: to analyse the most interesting for use with
the exoskeleton.
It must be remembered that these variables have been
applied to cables with different diameters.
B. Two-level factorial design
In order to analyse the effect of these variables, a two-level
factorial design has been used [5]. The values that have been
given to the variables have been decided by taking into account
the specifications of the orthosis.
 TABLE II. BLOCK 1
Weight 600 N 1200 N
Cable-sheath angle 0º 12º
Cable flexion angle 90º 180º
Cable length 350 mm 700 mm
Curvature radius 60 mm
Cable type 1x19 7x7 Figure 4. Loads on both ends of the cable during a cycle

TABLE III. BLOCK 2

Weight 600 N 1200 N
Cable-sheath angle 0º 12º
Cable flexion angle 90º 180º
Cable length 700 mm
Curvature radius 60 mm 180 mm
Cable type 1x19 7x7
Figure 5. Deformation of the cable during a cycle
Tests have been performed on cables with diameters of 1.2
mm and 1.6 mm, but as the results obtained are very similar, point where the cable leaves the sheath. The following explains
this paper gives only the results corresponding to the 1.6 mm its operation using the letters in the figure.
diameter.
• A: changing this disc modifies the curvature radius.
In order to analyse the results, the tests have been separated
into two blocks because some combinations of length and • B: the function of this unit is to pull on the cable.
radius are not compatible. This does not allow analysing the Changing its position can modify the cable flexion
interaction between cable length and curvature radius, but its angle.
influence is expected to be negligible.
• C: this subunit (in the B unit) can be moved to modify
Tables II and III show the variables that have been analysed the angle of the cable at the point where it leaves the
in each block with the corresponding values used. sheath.
• D: these weights are used to define the cable load.
III. TEST BENCH DESIGN
To perform the tests, a test bench has been designed and • E: there is a load cell on each end of the cable to
constructed. When designing the test bench, consideration has measure the load loss.
been given to the values to be given to the variables and, • F: there is an LVDT on each end to measure the
therefore, the bench may adopt different configurations. deformation.
For example, Fig. 3 shows a specific configuration: long
cable, high curvature radius, 90° flexion and angle of 0° at the IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A. Introduction
Each test has consisted of raising and lowering a weight
three times in a 45 mm travel. The unit deformation and load
loss factor (LLF) have been measured on each of the three
times, taking the value of each for been considered as a
replicate measure. Analysing the measures it can be conclude
that replicate measures have a very low dispersion, allowing
considering the mean value for DoE response. These values
have been calculated for raising and lowering the weight. This
information provides four responses, two for LLF and two for
unit deformation, which are the responses that have been
analysed.
Fig. 4 and Fig. 5 show a load and deformation
measurement cycle. The load graph shows a constant load,
which is given by the load cell on the weight side. The other
load changes depending on whether the weight is raised or
lowered. When the weight is raised, the load is greater than the
weight and, when it is lowered, it is less than the weight, due to
friction load between the cable and the sheath. In the
deformation graph, the first steep gradient corresponds to the
moment when the weight begins to be raised (stretching of the
Figure 3. Test bench
 TABLE IV. RESPONSES ANALYSED
LLF_raising (F_raise-F_weight)/F_weight
LLF_lowering (F_weight-F_lower)/F_weight
Unit_Deformation_raising D_raise/L
Unit_Deformation_lowering D_lower/L
F: force measured by the load cells
D: deformation, difference between the measurements of the two LVDTs
L: length of cable that suffers the load changes when weight is raised or lowered

cable) and the next steep gradient is when it starts to be

lowered (shortening of the cable).
As the response value depend on the parameter level, and in
order to simplify parameter influence, these have been
normalised to a design parameter as can be seen in Table IV.
With the results obtained from the tests, the effects are Figure 8. Block 2. Effects for the LLF when the weight is raised
calculated and represented on a normal probability paper. This
shows which effects are significant and makes it possible to
draw conclusions.

B. Results
Here the graphs that corresponding to the unit deformation
and load loss factor (LLF) when the weight is raised for blocks
1 and 2 are shown. The variables with significant effects are
the same variables as when the weight is lowered. Therefore,
results obtained when the weight is lowered are not given here.

Figure 9. Block 2. CD interaction for the LLF when the weight is raised

All the graphs shown here have been created using Minitab.
This program calculates the effects of the variables and the
interactions and draws the graphs using these values.
For the block 1, Fig. 6 and Fig. 7 show the representation of
the effects for the LLF and for the unit deformation when the
weight is raised, as shown on normal probability papers. A line
is drawn matching the least effects to help to identify the
variables with significant effect. It can be seen that these
variables are weight, cable flexion angle and cable type for
LLF and unit deformation; and cable-sheath angle for LLF.
Figure 6. Block 1. Effects for the LLF when the weight is raised
For the block 2, Fig. 8 shows the representation of the
effects for the LLF when the weight is raised, as shown on
normal probability papers, and Fig. 9 shows the CD (cable
flexion angle/curvature radius) interaction for that case; Fig. 10
and 11 show the effects for the unit deformation when the
weight is raised, as well as the CD (cable flexion
angle/curvature radius) interaction. In the Fig. 8 and the Fig. 10
a line is drawn matching the least effects to help to identify the
variables with significant effect. It can be seen that these
variables are weight, cable flexion angle, curvature radius,
cable type and cable flexion angle/curvature radius interaction
for LLF and unit deformation; and cable-sheath angle for LLF.
In the Fig. 9 and the Fig. 11 a line is drawn connecting the two
points of each cable flexion angle value to make easier seeing
the interaction effect.

Figure 7. Block 1. Effects for the unit deformation when the weight is raised
 TABLE V. LLF AND UNIT DEFORMATION IN SOME OF THE TESTS
Cable Flexion Curvature LLF Unit
type angle radius deformation
1x19 90º 60 mm 0.245 [-] 0.00327 [-]
1x19 90º 180 mm 0.176 [-] 0.00305 [-]
1x19 180º 60 mm 0.555 [-] 0.00700 [-]
1x19 180º 180 mm 0.456 [-] 0.00523 [-]
7x7 90º 60 mm 0.273 [-] 0.00438 [-]
7x7 90º 180 mm 0.210 [-] 0.00356 [-]
7x7 180º 60 mm 0.603 [-] 0.00908 [-]
7x7 180º 180 mm 0.492 [-] 0.00651 [-]
Load: 1200N
Cable length: 700 mm
Diameter: 1.6 mm
Cable angle at the point where it leaves the sheath: 0º

of the cable because the friction it causes is concentrated in a

Figure 10. Block 2. Effects for the unit deformation when the weight is raised
very small area (greater abrasion).
c) Cable flexion angle
At 180°, the LLF is greater than at 90°. Furthermore, this is
by far the variable with the greatest effect. LLF at 180º is about
2.15 times the value obtained for LLF at 90º. According to [6],
in sheave applications with sliding behaviour, forces at both
extremities can be calculated as (Fig. 12):

F2 = F1 ⋅ exp ( µθ ) (1)

Being µ the coulomb friction coefficient and θ the sheave

contact angle in radians. LLF factor can so be expressed as:

LLF = exp ( µθ ) − 1 (2)

Figure 11. Block 2. CD interaction for the unit deformation when the weight
is raised
For values of µ between 0.1 and 0.15, estimated ratio
To obtain an idea of the LLFs and unit deformations between LLF at 180º and LLF at 90º varies from 2.17 to 2.27,
generated when the weight is raised, Table V shows some of so very close to the results obtained in these experiments.
the most representative results for block 2.
This formula can be used for estimating cable flexion angle,
C. Discussion for preliminary analysis purposes.
In the representation of the effects on the normal d) Curvature radius
probability paper, the variables with significant effects are When the curvature radius is increased, the LLF is
those that are distant from the line that is drawn. They are decreased. Although the effect is not as great as that of the
analysed individually below. cable flexion angle, it is quite significant. In addition, a smaller
As can be seen, the cable length has no significant effect on curvature radius would enable fatigue failure and increase
the unit deformation or the LLF. However, it should be abrasion.
remembered that what is being analysed is the unit deformation
and, consequently, the longest cable does indeed suffer greater e) Cable type
deformation. The 7x7 cable has greater LLF than the 1x19 cable,
although there is not much difference. The image of the section
1) Load loss factor (LLF)
a) Weight
The greater the weight, the greater the LLF.
b) Angle formed by the cable when it leaves the sheath
At 12°, the LLF is greater than at 0°. This was predictable
since, at 0° there is no friction when the cable leaves the sheath
and, at 12°, there is friction. Although the effect on the LLF is
not too great, this angle would probably reduce the service life
Figure 12. Forces on both ends of the cable
in Fig. 2 shows that the 7x7 cable has a rougher surface.
Furthermore, this rough surface can be noticed by running your
fingers along the cable.
f) Curvature radius-flexion angle interaction
When the curvature radius is 60 mm, changing the cable
flexion angle has a greater effect than when the radius is 180
mm. From another point of view, when the flexion angle is
180°, the curvature radius has a greater effect than when the
angle is 90°. In any case, these differences are not very great.
2) Unit Deformation
The first observation is that all the variables with significant
effects coincide except for one: the angle formed by the cable
when it leaves the sheath. The reason for this relation between
the two responses is that when the load loss is increased, the
stress on one part of the cable increases and, therefore, so does
the deformation. With the angle of the cable at the point where
it leaves the sheath, this does not occur because the part of the
cable at which the stress increases is very short and its
contribution to the total deformation is negligible.
a) Weight
This is the variable with the greatest effect. However, it is
not very interesting, since it is evident that the unit deformation
increases when the load increases.
b) Cable flexion angle
This variable has quite a large effect. When the angle is
large, the unit deformation is greater.
c) Curvature radius
At 180 mm, the unit deformation is less than at 60 mm.
d) Cable type
The 7x7 cable is deformed more than the others. This
variable has a more significant effect on the unit deformation
than on the LLF. This is due to the fact that the increase in
stress on one part of the cable is not the only reason for this
effect: the 7x7 cable is also more flexible and, therefore,
deforms more.
e) Curvature radius-flexion angle interaction
What has been said for the LLF is also applicable here.
By comparing the results for the unit deformation and LLF,
it can be seen that when the LLF increases, the unit
deformation also increases. The value of this deformation is
different depending on the part of the cable at which the load
loss occurs. If it occurs near the end of the cable at the actuator,
the cable length that is overloaded is shorter and, therefore, the
deformation is small. However, if the load loss occurs at a
distance from the said end, the deformation is greater. Of
course, all these statements are valid only in the case of cables
with the same diameter. A thicker cable may be subject to less
deformation even when the load loss is greater.
V. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK
A DoE has been carried out to find out more about the
performance of Bowden cables. These cables have been used
as an element of power transmission in IKO (IKerlan`s
Orthosis).
The first conclusion drawn is that it is more interesting for
the arm orthosis to use the 1x19 cable since the load loss factor
(LLF) and unit deformation are lower. In addition, it can
withstand greater loads.
Another conclusion is that cable flexion angle is the most
influencing factor from the point of view of LLF and a very
significant from the point of view of unit deformation response.
Curvature radius is also an influencing factor, although not as
much as flexion angle.
For orthosis applications these parameters change as the
system moves, but a maximum of 60% LLF can be obtained
for severe conditions (60 mm radius and 180º bend). This load
increasing at the actuator size may be taken into account when
defining the size of the cables and the actuator itself.
Cable length is a parameter to be taken into account to
predict elastic delay between actuator position and cable’s end
position. Although it can be assimilated as a linear spring.
Even if the angle of the cable at the point where it leaves
the sheath has been not pointed as a very influencing
parameter, it must be minimised in order to reduce premature
fatigue in cables.
As future work, it would be interesting to perform tests to
analyse if there are non-linear effects of the flexion angle and
the cable flexion curvature radius within a greater range and
taking more levels of analysis for the DoE. This could give rise
to the creation of a model for predicting cable behaviour.
REFERENCES
[1] F. Martinez, I. Retolaza, E. Lecue, J. Basurko, and J. Landaluze,
“Preliminary design of an upper limb IAD (Intelligent Assist Device)”,
9th European Conference for the Advancement of Assistive Technology,
AAATE 2007, October 3rd-5th, Donostia (Spain).
[2] F. Martinez, I. Retolaza, A. Pujana-Arrese, A. Cenitagoya, J. Basurko,
and J. Landaluze, “Design of a Five Actuated DoF Upper Limb
Exoskeleton Oriented to Workplace Help”, IEEE International
Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics, IEEE
BioRob 2008, 19-22 October 2008, Scottsdale, Arizona, U.S.A
[3] J.F. Veneman, R. Ekkelenkamp, R. Kruidhof, F.C.T. van der Helm and
H. van der Kooij, “A series elastic- and Bowden-cable-based actuation
system for use as torque actuator in exoskeleton- type robots”, The
International Journal of Robotics Research, 2006.
[4] A. Schiele and F. van der Helm, “The ergonomic EXARM exoskeleton
–Influence of ergonomic design on task performance and user comfort”,
IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, ICRA
2007, Roma, Italy.
[5] A. Prat Bartés, X. Tort-Martorell Llabrés, P. Grima Cintas, L.Pozueta
Fernández, and I. Solé Vida, Métodos estadísticos – control y mejora de
la calidad. Edicions UPC. Barcelona, 1997, pp. 127–164.
[6] H. Usabiaga, M. Ezkurra, M.A. Madoz, and J.M. Pagalday,
“Experimental test for measuring the normal and tangential line contact
pressure between wire rope and sheaves. Experimental techniques.”,
Society for Experimental Mechanics, 32(5), pp. 34-43. Published
Online: 12 Dec 2007.