Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE
International Conference on Automation and Logistics
August 16-20 2010, Hong Kong and Macau
Robot Finger Design for Myoelectric Prosthetic Hand and
Recognition of Finger Motions via Surface EMG
Akitoshi Harada, Takashi Nakakuki and Mitsutaka Hikita
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Graduate School of Kogakuin University
Nishishinjuku, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, Japan
am09052@ns.kogakuin.ac.jp
Abstract - In this paper, robot hand design aiming at
application to a myoelectric prosthetic hand and recognition of
finger operation via surface EMG are discussed. The robot hand
with two fingers, thumb and index finger, was built to implement
fundamental motions required in daily life, such as grasping and
holding. The fingers are driven by the wire actuation system to
imitate the human's tendon mechanism. In order to control each
finger of the developed myoelectric prosthetic hand
independently, using the neural network, identifier which
classifies four finger operations, namely flexion and extension of
the thumb in metacarpophalangeal (MP) joint and flexion and
extension of the index finger in MP joint, was constructed. The
recognition of each finger operation was performed using the
four patterns of the neural network based identifiers in which the
recognition method of finger operations differs each other, and
the results were compared.
Index Terms - Neural network, EMG, Myoelectric prosthetic
hand, Gesture recognition
I. INTRODUCTION
Recently, myoelectric prosthetic arms/hands, in which an
operation is identified by the electromyogram (EMG) and the
artificial arm/hand is controlled based on the identification,
has been studied. The EMG has attracted an attention of
researchers as an interface signal of an electric actuated arm
for many years, and many of studies on the identification of
the EMG signal have been executed. Nowadays, it can be said
that the EMG is the most powerful source of control signal to
develop the myoelectric prosthetic arms/hands.
In early stage, the practical myoelectric prosthetic arms
such as "Boston Arm" by Massachusetts Institute of
Technology[1], "WIME Hand" by Waseda University[2], and
"Utah Artificial Arm" by Utah State University[3] were
developed. These arms are attached to an upper arm of the
person who lost his/her forearm. Then, extension and flexion
of the arm are performed based on the EMG signals measured
by electrodes attached to flexor and extensor of the upper arm
part.
From the 1970s to the 1980s, elementary pattern
recognition technique such as linear discriminant analysis, was
used for the identification of EMG signals[4],[5]. In the 1990s,
research on learning the nonlinear map between EMG pattern
and operation using a neural network has been performed[6],[7].
Kelly et al.[6] identified four kinds of operations of forearm by
combining Hopfield-type neural network and back
propagation neural network.
978-1-4244-8376-1/10/$26.00 ©2010 IEEE
Chiharu Ishii
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Hosei University
Kajino-cho, Koganei-shi, Tokyo, Japan
c-ishii@hosei.ac.jp
Amplitude and frequency are typical information
extracted from the EMG signal, which can be used for the
identification of operation. Ito at el.[8] presumed muscle
tension from the EMG signal, and tried to control the forearm
type myoelectric prosthetic arm driven by ultrasonic motor.
Farry et al.[9] has proposed a technique of teleoperating the
robot hand by identifying the frequency spectrum pattern of
the EMG signal.
On the other hand, as points for the improvement of the
myoelectric prosthetic arms/hands, enhancement of the
operativity, simplification of the structure, weight saving of
the artificial arms/hands, etc. are mentioned. At present, most
of the myoelectric prosthetic arms/hands are restricted to
realization of the specified operations such as palmar seizure,
flexion-extension of a wrist, and inward-outward rotation of a
wrist. Probably, a present cutting edge practical myoelectric
prosthetic hand is the "i-LIMB Hand" produced by Touch
Bionics Inc.[10]. However, the myoelectric prosthetic
arms/hands which imitate human's hand and in which various
operation is possible, have hardly spread to general public yet,
since they are expensive due to the requirement of
measurement of highly precise EMG signals and use of plural
number of actuators.
Therefore, to spread the myoelectric prosthetic hands to
the public, the purpose of this study is development of the
inexpensive myoelectric prosthetic hand which can realize
fundamental operation, such as holding and grasping, required
in daily life. In order to make it budget prices, an
underactuated robotic hand which realizes flexion and
extension of fingers by tendon mechanism, is introduced. In
addition, the "fit grasp mechanism" in which the fingers can fit
the shape of the object when the hand grasps the object, is
proposed. The "fit grasp mechanism" makes it possible for the
robotic hand to grasp a small object, a cylindrical object, a
distorted object, etc.. In this study, operation of three fingers
other than a thumb and an index finger is regarded as
equivalent to the operation of the index finger. Therefore,
robotic hand with thumb and index finger was designed and
built as a prototype.
As for the identification of operations, independent
operation of each finger by simple measurement and control
method is targeted. To the best of our knowledge, in the
previous studies, there is little research that tries to identify
operation of plural fingers and to actuate each finger
independently. In this study, using the neural network,
identifier which classifies four operations, namely flexion and
273
extension of the thumb in metacarpophalangeal (MP) joint and
flexion and extension of the index finger in MP joint, is
constructed. The identification of each operation of finger was
performed using the four patterns of the neural network based
identifiers in which identification method of operations of
fingers differs each other, and the results were compared.
II. ROBOT HAND
A. Specifications
An underactuated robot hand with two fingers, thumb and
index finger, shown in Fig.1 was designed and built. The
primary specifications of the robot hand are shown as follows. Fig. 1 Mechanism of the finger
1) Entire hand: 500mm total length, and 50mm thickness
2) Palm: 100mm length, 110mm width, and 20mm thickness
3) Finger: 100mm length, 15mm width, and 10mm thickness
4) Pinching force when MP joint is driven: 3N

Fig. 2 Arrangement of wires

In addition, as shown in Fig.3, the ring is attached to the
wire between DIP joint and PIP joint, and the interlocked
motion of DIP and PIP joints is attained by pulling the ring by
other wire due to the driving force of the actuator. This
mechanism allows to realize "fit grasp motion". We call this
mechanism "fit grasp mechanism." The details of the "fit grasp
motion" are illustrated in Fig.4.
Fig. 1 Appearance of robot hand
B. Mechanism of finger
As shown in Fig.2, as the human's frame structure, the
robot hand has the finger mechanism which consists of three
joints, namely distal interphalangeal (DIP: the first joint),
proximal interphalangeal (PIP: the second joint), and MP (the
third joint). The fingers are driven by the wire actuation
system to imitate the human's tendon mechanism. The finger
bends when each joint connected with the wire is pulled by the
wire due to the driving force of the actuator. The expansion of
the finger is performed due to the elastic force of the rubber
when loosening a tension of the wire. This makes it possible to
omit actuators used to extend the finger. The built robot hand
can realize fundamental operation, such as holding and
grasping, required in dairy life.
C. Fit grasp mechanism
In general, when human holds the object, the fingers Fig. 3 Bending motion by fit grasp mechanism
flexibly fit the shape of the object, and hold the object so that In the case where there is no object to hold, when the wire
the object may be wrapped in. We call this motion "fit grasp is pulled by the actuator, DIP and PIP joints bend at the almost
motion." As shown in Fig.3, the finger of the robot hand has same angle (Fig.4 upper). On the other hand, in the case where
two kinds of wires which perform interlocked motion in DIP there is object to hold, when the object contacts the finger,
and PIP joints and motion in MP joint respectively. Therefore, only one side of the wire is pulled since the wire between DIP
the interlocked bending in DIP and PIP joints and the bending joint and PIP joint can slide inside of the ring. As a result, DIP
in MP joint can be performed independently. joint can bend in accordance with the shape of the object
(Fig.4 lower). Thus, "fit grasp motion" is achieved. The "fit
grasp mechanism" makes it possible for the robotic hand to
grasp a small object, a cylindrical object, a distorted object,
etc..

274
 III. MEASUREMENT AND SIGNAL PROCESSING OF EMG Therefore, the amplitude value in 100Hz which is
considered as the influence of AC power source noise being
A. Measurement part of EMG
minimum is used for recognition of the finger motions.
In the built robot hand for myoelectric prosthetic hand, the
Three dimensional graph of the amplitude value data in
fingers which will be used for operation are thumb and index
100Hz when performing each motion in MP joint is shown in
finger. Eight motions of two fingers are considered, which are
Fig.7, in which each measurement position is taken as an axis
flexion and extension in MP joint, and flexion and extension
of coordinates. In addition, the distribution of Fig.7 was
in interlocked DIP and PIP joints, and inward rotation and
divided into the distribution along the thumb and the index
outward rotation are not taken into consideration. In addition,
finger respectively, which are shown in Fig.8 and Fig.9.
the thumb and the index finger are operated independently.
The measurement positions of EMG are shown in Fig.5. Those
are the following three positions, namely vicinity of a
musculus flexor carpi radialis / a musculus flexor digitorum
superficialis (ch1), vicinity of a musculus flexor digitorum
profundus (ch2) which are used when making the PIP joint of
each finger flexion, and vicinity of a musculus extensor
digitorum (ch3) which is used when making each finger
extension.

Fig. 7 Distribution of amplitude values in 100 Hz

Fig. 5 Measurement positions of EMG

B. Signal processing
One operation is performed in approximately 0.5 second,
and the EMG signal is measured by 1kHz of sampling
frequencies. Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) is performed to the
measured EMG signals, and spectral analysis is conducted.
The number of samples for FFT was set as 256. When
performing FFT, the humming window function was utilized
to the processing data.
However, the influence of the alternating current (AC)
power source, which is external noise, appears in the
amplitude value of the EMG by which FFT processing was
carried out. This AC power source noise appears in odd times
frequencies of the fundamental frequency. Since the area
where this experiment was conducted is East Japan, as shown
in Fig.6, the influence of the AC power source noise appears
in 50Hz and 150Hz. Fig. 8 Distribution of amplitude values in 100 Hz (thumb)

The amplitude values of flexion of the index finger are

distributed over the whole space. Hence, it is expected that it
is hard to distinguish the flexion of the index finger from
expansion of the index finger. However, in the case of the
thumb, the distribution seems distinguishable to flexion and
extension. Therefore, these data are used for the recognition of
the finger motions.

Fig. 6 FFT data of EMG signal

275

Fig. 9 Distribution of amplitude values in 100 Hz (index finger)
IV. RECOGNITION OF FINGER MOTIONS
A. Recognition by neural network
Recognition of finger motions is performed via surface
EMG signals using a neural network. In this study, we focus
on flexion and extension of thumb and index finger in MP
joint. Namely, flexion and extension in interlocked DIP and
PIP joints are not considered here. First of all, the neural
network which identifies four motions, flexion of the thumb in
MP joint, extension of the thumb in MP joint, flexion of the
index finger in MP joint and extension of the index finger in
MP joint, is constructed.
The input signals to the neural network are amplitude
values obtained through performing the signal processing
explained in Section III.B to the EMG signal measured by
each electrode at three measurement positions for each
motion. As the teacher signals, 0 for flexion of the thumb, 1
for extension of the thumb, 2 for flexion of the index finger
and 3 for extension of the index finger, are given. Hereafter,
this identification method, namely recognition of these four
finger motions by one neural network, is described as (x).
Learning of the feedforward neural network is performed
by error back propagation using these input signals and
teacher signals. As for the structure of the feedforward neural
network, the number of the input layer and of the output layer
is one, respectively, and the number of the hidden layer, each
consisting of three neurons, is two. 20 data for each finger
motion were used as input signals for learning of the neural
network. Assuming the shifting of the position of electrodes
when equipping with the myoelectric prosthetic hand, in order
to get flexibility for the learned neural network, these input
data include the data which were measured in different days
and by a little shifted positions.
The learning of the neural network was executed by the
error back propagation under the above conditions using
Neural Network Toolbox in MATLAB software. As a
condition for the learning, the end of the learning was set with
the repetition of 10000 times calculation.
276
After the learning of the neural network was over,
simulation was carried out using the 30 data for each finger
motion, which differs from the data used for the learning, and
its identification rate was examined. Then, if the integral value
which is rounded off to the first decimal places of the output
value from the neural network is equal to the integral value
given by the teacher signal, the recognition of finger motions
is judged as success. The results are shown in Table 1.
From Table 1, the successful identification rate was only
20.8% on average for use of the identification method (x).
TABLE 1 Simulation results of (x)
Motion Fl of Th Ex of Th Fl of If Ex of If Average
Identification
rate [%] 43.3 0 36.6 3.3 20.83
Fl: flexion, Ex: extension, Th: thumb, If: index finger
In order to investigate an effect of reduction of the
number of finger motions to identify, finger motions are
divided into of the thumb and of the index finger, and two
neural networks which identify flexion and extension for each
finger are constructed. This identification method, namely
recognition of two finger motions by one neural network, is
described as (y). The input signals to each neural network are
the same as the case of the identification method (x), and the
teacher signals were set as 0 for flexion and 1 for extension.
The structure of the neural network, the learning method and
the distinction of success or failure are also the same as the
case of the identification method (x). After the learning of the
neural network was over, simulation was carried out using the
30 data for each finger motion, which differs from the data
used for the learning, and its successful identification rate was
examined. The results are shown in Table 2.
TABLE 2 Simulation results of (y)
Motion Fl of Th Ex of Th Average
Identification rate
80 100 90
[%]
Motion Fl of If Ex of If Average
Identification rate
83.3 90 86.65
[%]
Fl: flexion, Ex: extension, Th: thumb, If: index finger
From Table 2, by reducing the number of finger motions
to which each neural network identifies, much higher
identification rate is obtained in the method (y) compared with
the method (x).
B. Improvement of recognition
From the simulation results of IV.A, improvement of the
identification rate is expected by improving the identification
method. Hence, as a remedy of the identification method, the
number of the choices of the identification for each neural
network is reduced. Then, identification is repeated by
connecting neural networks in series or in parallel. In each
neural network, identification is given as alternative, and the
integral values 0 and 1 are given as teacher signals. In this
study, the following three patterns shown in Fig.8 were the thumb. Again, if the output of N.N.-2 is 0, N.N.-3
considered. identifies whether input signal is extension of the index finger.
(a) is the identification method in which recognition of Finally, input signal which was not identified any of above
finger motions is finally achieved by distinguishing each one motion, is identified as flexion of the thumb. The simulation
motion by one neural network and repeating this. In (a), the was carried out using the 30 data for each finger motion,
finger motion is recognized by distinguishing in order with the which differs from the data used for the learning, and
high successful identification rate such as flexion of the index recognition of each finger motion was executed. Then, if the
finger, extension of the thumb, and extension of the index output of the neural network is larger than 0.5, it is regarded as
finger. This order was determined through the simulation 1, and if the output of the neural network is smaller than 0.5, it
results. In the case where it was not identified as either of is regarded as 0. The results are shown in Table 3.
these three motions, it is finally recognized as flexion of the
thumb. This identification method has the drawback that TABLE 3 Simulation results of (a)
incorrectly-identified motions are regarded as flexion of the Motion Fl of Th Ex of Th Fl of If Ex of If Average
thumb.
Identification
rate [%] 66.7 30 90 43.3 57.5
Fl: flexion, Ex: extension, Th: thumb, If: index finger

Table 3 shows that the identification rate was improved

compared with the identification method (x). However, since
most of the incorrectly-identified motions are identified as
flexion of the thumb, there is the necessity for an
improvement.
In (b), at first N.N.-1, which was trained to output 1 for
flexion of the thumb and the index finger and 0 for extension
of the thumb and the index finger, classifies the input signal
to flexion or extension. After that, N.N.-2 or N.N.-3
distinguishes the input signal whether it is motion of the
thumb or of the index finger. Thus, finally the input signal is
identified to one of the finger motions. Before performing
synthetic identification, in order to examine identification rate
of each neural network, the simulation when each neural
network is used independently was performed. In the
Fig. 10 Modified recognition methods simulation, the 30 data for each motion in four finger motions
(b) is the method which identifies the motion of the thumb were used in N.N.-1. The 30 data for each motion in flexion of
or of the index finger, after distinguishing flexion or the thumb and the index finger were used in N.N.-2, and the
extension. (c) is the method which identifies flexion or 30 data for each motion in extension of the thumb and the
extension after distinguishing motion of the thumb or of the index finger were used in N.N.-3. The results are shown in
index finger. In (b) and (c), firstly distinction of thumb/index Table 4.
finger or flexion/extension is performed. After this, From Table 4, the identification rate of 80% on average
identification from only two kinds of motions is performed was obtained at the first identification. In addition, the
aiming at improvement of the identification rate. However, the simulation which performs synthetic identification was carried
first distinction is important, and it is required that the out using the 30 data for each finger motion as well as (a), and
successful identification rate of the first distinction is high, the identification rate was examined. The results are shown in
since if the first distinction is incorrect, subsequent Table 5.
identification becomes meaningless. Table 5 shows that the identification rate was improved as
For each identification method, as same as Section IV.A, well as (a).
the learning of the neural network was executed by using the
error back propagation. Then, simulation of recognition of the TABLE 4 Independent simulation results of (b)
finger motions was carried out for each identification method, N.N.-1 Flexion Extension Average
and each identification rate was examined. Identification rate
83.3 76.7 80
C. Simulation results with improved identification method [%]
In (a), first of all, N.N.-1 identifies whether input signal of N.N.-2 Fl of Th Fl of If Average
finger motion is flexion of the index finger. N.N.-1 is trained Identification rate
93.3 86.7 90
to output 1 for flexion of the index finger and 0 for other [%]
finger motions by the learning. Therefore, N.N.-1 outputs 1 in N.N.-3 Ex of Th Ex of If Average
the case where the input signal was identified as flexion of the Identification rate
53.3 73.3 63.3
[%]
index finger. In the case where the output of N.N.-1 is 0, Fl: flexion, Ex: extension, Th: thumb, If: index finger
likewise N.N.-2 identifies whether input signal is extension of

277
 TABLE 5 Simulation results of (b) V. CONCLUSION
Motion Fl of Th Ex of Th Fl of If Ex of If Average In this paper, in order to control each finger of the
Identification developed myoelectric prosthetic hand independently, using
rate [%] 66.7 33.3 83.3 63.3 61.65 the neural network, recognition of four finger motions, namely
Fl: flexion, Ex: extension, Th: thumb, If: index finger flexion and extension of the thumb and the index finger in MP
joint, was performed. First, identification of these four finger
In (c), at first N.N.-1, which was trained to output 1 for motions by one neural network was executed. Then, the
motion of the thumb and 0 for motion of the index finger, identification rate of only 20.8% on average was obtained. In
classifies the input signal to motion of the thumb or motion of order to improve the identification rate, the choices of the
the index finger. After that, N.N.-2 or N.N.-3 distinguishes the finger motions which are identified by one neural network
input signal whether it is flexion or extension. Thus, finally were divided, and the method in which the partial
the input signal is identified to one of the finger motions. As identification is repeated was employed. Three types of the
well as in the case of (b), before performing synthetic improved identification methods were constructed, and the
identification, in order to examine identification rate of each simulation was carried out using each identification method.
neural network, the simulation when each neural network is The simulation result for each improved identification method
used independently was performed. The results are shown in showed successful identification rate of more than 57% on
Table 6. average.
We are now proceeding the control experiments for the
TABLE 6 Independent simulation results of (c)
built myoelectric prosthetic hand using the identification
N.N.-1 Thumb Index finger Average
method (b) which showed the highest successful identification
Identification rate rate. As a future work, recognition of 8 kinds of finger
80 55 67.5
[%]
motions including flexion and extension of the thumb and of
N.N.-2 Fl of Th Ex of Th Average
the index finger in interlocked DIP and PIP joints, is left.
Identification rate
80 100 90 Then, even if the number of finger motions which have to be
[%]
N.N.-3 Fl of If Ex of If Average identified increases, realization of the high identification rate
Identification rate is required.
83.3 90 86.65
[%]
Fl: flexion, Ex: extension, Th: thumb, If: index finger REFERENCES
[1] R. Mann, and D. Reimers, “Kinesthetic Sensing for the EMG Controlled
From Table 6, the identification rate of the first Boston Arm,” IEEE Transactions on Man-Machine Systems, pp. 110-115,
identification was only 67.5% on average. In addition, the March 1970.
[2] I. Kato, et al., “The Evaluation Method of Rehabilitation Devices-Field
simulation which performs synthetic identification was carried
Testing of Powered Forearm Prosthesis, WIME Hand-,” Proc. of 6th Int.
out using the 30 data for each finger motion, and the Symposium on External Control of Human Extermities, pp.141-184, 1978.
identification rate was examined. The results are shown in [3] S. Jacobsen, et al., “Development of Utah Artificial Arm,” IEEE
Table 7. Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, Vol.29, No.4, pp.249-269,
TABLE 7 Simulation results of (c) 1982.
[4] D. Graupe, J. Magnussen, and A. A. M. Beex, “A Microprocessor System
Motion Fl of Th Ex of Th Fl of If Ex of If Average for Multifunctional Control of Upper Limb Prostheses via Myoelectric
Signal Identification,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, Vol.23,
Identification
rate [%] 70 70 76.7 13.3 57.5 No.4, pp.538-544, 1978.
[5] S. Lee, and G. N. Saridis, “The control of a prosthetic arm by EMG
Fl: flexion, Ex: extension, Th: thumb, If: index finger pattern recognition,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, Vol.29,
No.4, pp.290-302, 1984.
From Table 7, the synthetic identification rate of 57.5% [6] M. F. Kelly, P. A. Parker, and R. N. Scott, “The Application of Neural
on average was obtained, which is almost same level as (a). Networks to Myoelectric Signal Analysis: A preliminary study,” IEEE
Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, Vol.37, No.3, pp.211-230,
From the above simulation results, it turned out that in all 1990.
(a), (b) and (c), the identification rate was improved compared [7] B. Hudgins, P. A. Parker, and R. N. Scott, “A new strategy for
with (x). As for (a), although incorrectly-identified motion multifunction myoelectric control,” IEEE Transactions on Biomedical
would be identified as flexion of the thumb, recognition of the Engineering, Vol.40, No.1, pp.82-94, 1993.
[8] K. Ito, T. Tsuji, A. Kato, and M. Ito, “An EMG Controlled Prosthetic
finger motions succeeded at the identification rate of 57.5% on Forearm in Three Degrees of Freedom Using Ultrasonic Motors,” Proc. of
average. As shown in (b) and (c), also in the case where the the Annual Conf. the IEEE Eng. In Medicine and Biology Society, Vol.14,
identification of each neural network was alternative and pp.1487-1488, 1992.
identification was performed by two steps, the identification [9] K. A. Farry, I. D. Walker, and R. G. Baraniuk, “Myoelectric
Teleoperation of a Complex Robotic Hand,” IEEE Transactions on
rate of more than 57% on average was obtained. On the other Robotics and Automation, Vol.12, No.5, pp.775-787, 1996.
hand, from the observation of N.N.-1 in (b), N.N.-2 in (c) and [10]http://www.touchbionics.com/
N.N.-3, it can be said that the difference between flexion and
extension is comparatively easy to identify.

278