MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415213263 · doi:10.3390/electronics14204020

Twisting Soft Sleeve Actuator: Design and Experimental Evaluation

2025· article· en· W4415213263 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammed Abboodi, Marc Doumit

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSoft Robotics and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActuatorBellowsPneumatic actuatorModular designTorsion (gastropod)TorqueThermoplastic polyurethaneFabricationSoft roboticsWearable computer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Soft wearable actuators must align with anatomical joints, conform to limb geometry, and operate at low pneumatic pressures. Yet most twisting mechanisms rely on bulky attachment interfaces and relatively high actuation pressures, limiting practicality in assistive applications. This study introduces the first Twisting Soft Sleeve Actuator (TSSA), a self-contained, wearable actuator that produces controlled bidirectional torsion. The design integrates helically folded bellows with internal stabilization layers to suppress radial expansion and enhance torque transmission. The TSSA is fabricated from thermoplastic polyurethane using a Bowden-type fused filament fabrication (FFF) process optimized for airtightness and flexibility. Performance was characterized using a modular test platform that measured angular displacement and output force under positive pressure (up to 75 kPa) and vacuum (down to −85 kPa). A parametric study evaluated the effects of fold width, fold angle, wall thickness, and twist angle. Results demonstrate bidirectional, self-restoring torsion with clockwise rotation of approximately 30 degrees and a peak output force of about 40 N at 75 kPa, while reverse torsional motion occurred under vacuum actuation. The TSSA enables anatomically compatible, low-pressure torsion, supporting scalable, multi-degree-of-freedom sleeve systems for wearable robotics and rehabilitation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.723
Threshold uncertainty score0.293

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectronicsSame topicSoft Robotics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207