Open Source EMG Device for Controlling a Robotic Hand

  • Mišel CevzarEmail author
  • Tadej Petrič
  • Jan Babič
Conference paper
Part of the Mechanisms and Machine Science book series (Mechan. Machine Science, volume 49)


Off-the-shelf electronic market is large, diverse and easily accessible by many. Credit card size computers (example: Raspberry Pi) or micro-controller boards (example: Arduino) can be used for learning how to code and how to control embedded systems. Nevertheless, there is a lack of off-the-shelf, open source devices that would enable us to learn about and make use of human signal processing. An example of such a device is an electromyograph (EMG). In this paper we investigated, if an EMG device could fulfill the aforementioned gap. EMG device we used for conducting our experiment was a five channel open source EMG Arduino shield. The performance of the device was evaluated on three healthy male subjects. They were instructed to perform basic finger movements which we classified and executed on the robotic hand. The EMG signal classification was performed using a Support Vector Machine (SVM) algorithm. In our experimental setup the average EMG signal classification accuracy was 78.29%. This we believe demonstrates there are EMG devices on the market today that provide access to cost effective prototyping and learning about EMG signals.


Open source Electromyograph (EMG) Education Support vector machine (SVM) Robotic hand 



MC would like to thank Irnas [9] for exposing him to the open source hardware community and Backyard Brains [3] for providing the equipment.


  1. 1.
  2. 2.
    Attys – The wearable data acquisition (DAQ) board – Measure data anywhere.
  3. 3.
    Backyard brains.
  4. 4.
    dLib C++ library.
  5. 5.
    Free Software Foundation.
  6. 6.
    Glia Free Medical hardware.
  7. 7.
  8. 8.
  9. 9.
  10. 10.
  11. 11.
  12. 12.
    Babič J, Mombaur K, Lefeber D, van Dieën J, Graimann B, Russold M, Šarabon N, Houdijk H (2016) SPEXOR: spinal exoskeletal robot for low back pain prevention and vocational reintegration. In: González-Vargas J, Ibáñez J, Contreras-Vidal J, van der Kooij H, Pons J (eds) Wearable robotics: challenges and trends, vol 16. Biosystems & biorobotics. Springer, Cham, pp 311–315. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-46532-6_51 Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Baden T, Chagas AM, Gage G, Marzullo T, Prieto-Godino LL, Euler T (2015) Open labware: 3-D printing your own lab equipment. PLoS Biol 13(3):1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Castellini C, Bongers RM, Nowak M, van der Sluis CK (2016) Upper-limb prosthetic myocontrol: two recommendations. Front Neurosci 9(9):496 Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gijsberts A, Bohra R, Sierra González D, Werner A, Nowak M, Caputo B, Roa MA, Castellini C (2014) Stable myoelectric control of a hand prosthesis using non-linear incremental learning. Front Neurorobot 8:1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hiraoka D, Ito SI, Ito M, Fukumi M (2016) Japanese Janken recognition by support vector machine based on electromyogram of wrist. In: 2016 8th international conference on knowledge and smart technology, KST 2016, pp 114–119Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jiang N, Vujaklija I, Rehbaum H, Graimann B, Farina D (2014) Is accurate mapping of EMG signals on kinematics needed for precise online myoelectric control? IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 22(3):549–558CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kavya S, Dhatri MP, Sushma R, Krupa BN, Muktanidhi SD, Kumar BG (2016)Controlling the hand and forearm movements of an orthotic arm using surface EMG signals. In: 12th IEEE international conference electronics, energy, environment, communication, computer, control: (E3-C3), INDICON 2015, pp 1–6Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lucas MF, Gaufriau A, Pascual S, Doncarli C, Farina D (2008) Multi-channel surface EMG classification using support vector machines and signal-based wavelet optimization. Biomed Sig Process Control 3(2):169–174 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Meselmani N, Khrayzat M, Chahine K, Ghantous M, Hajj-hassan M (2016)Pattern recognition of EMG signals: towards adaptive control of robotic arms (2016)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Moura KOA, Favieiro GW, Balbinot A (2016) Support vectors machine classification of surface electromyography for non-invasive naturally controlled hand prostheses. In: 2016 38th annual international conference of the ieee engineering in medicine and biology society (EMBC), pp. 788–791.
  22. 22.
    Palkowski A, Redlarski G (2016) Basic hand gestures classification based on surface. Electromyography 2016:1–9Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Paudel B, Shrestha BK, Banskota AK (2005) Two faces of major lower limb amputations. Kathmandu Univ Med J 3(11):212–216Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ziegler-Graham K, MacKenzie EJ, Ephraim PL, Travison TG, Brookmeyer R (2008) Estimating the prevalence of limb loss in the United States: 2005 to 2050. Archiv Phys Med Rehabil 89(3):422–429CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department for Automatiion, Biocybernetics and RoboticsJožef Stefan Institute (JSI)LjubljanaSlovenia

Personalised recommendations