Bendable Medical Robot Actuator for Compact Manual Robotic Control

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current bendable medical instruments, especially robotized ones, require large and cumbersome stationary supports that occupy valuable space in operating rooms, necessitating a need for a more compact and lightweight solution that allows for both manual and robotic manipulation while maintaining control and precision during medical procedures.

Innovation Solution

A method and apparatus featuring a bendable medical device with a bendable body, control wires, and an actuator for manual or robotic manipulation, including a supporting insertion unit that can be miniaturized, allowing for flexible adaptation between manual and robotic control modes, and equipped with a controller for precise control of bending sections, along with a tool channel for accommodating medical tools like biopsy tools or cameras.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If robotized instruments with multiple conduits are used to enhance distal maneuverability, then control precision is improved, but device size and weight increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecontrol precisionVSAvoiddevice weight
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSWeight of stationary object

Solution Approach 1:

The robotic instrument is divided into modular components: a bendable body with multiple bendable sections, control wires for each section, and a compact actuator. This segmentation allows precise control of individual sections while keeping the overall device lightweight and manageable.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent transitions from traditional 2D bending control to 3D spatial manipulation by incorporating multiple bendable sections that can be controlled independently in different planes, enabling complex distal maneuvers with a compact proximal structure.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #17Another dimension (Dimensionality change)

2Stability of the object's composition

If large stationary support is used for robotic manipulation, then structural stability is improved, but operating room space consumption increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvestructural stabilityVSAvoidspace consumption
Core Design Contradiction:
Stability of the object's compositionVSArea of stationary object

Solution Approach 1:

The instrument incorporates a dynamic bendable body that can adapt its shape and stiffness on demand. The proximal end remains stable when needed for control, while distal sections can be dynamically bent and repositioned, eliminating the need for large stationary supports.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces traditional mechanical rigid supports with a flexible, actively controlled bendable body. Instead of relying on external rigid structures for stability, the system uses controlled stiffness and active positioning of the bendable sections to achieve structural stability in a compact form.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

3Adaptability or versatility

If multiple bendable sections are controlled independently, then maneuverability is improved, but control complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovemaneuverabilityVSAvoidcontrol complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The control system is designed with universal control mechanisms that can manage multiple bendable sections through a unified interface. The actuator and control wires are configured to provide multi-functional control, allowing a single control system to manipulate multiple sections independently while maintaining a relatively simple overall control architecture.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

4Volume of moving object

If the actuator is integrated with the bendable body, then device compactness is improved, but ease of manual manipulation decreases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedevice compactnessVSAvoidease of manual manipulation
Core Design Contradiction:
Volume of moving objectVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The actuator is segmented and integrated along the bendable body rather than being a single large external component. This distributed actuation system maintains compactness while leaving the proximal end accessible for manual manipulation when robotic control is not required.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Applied Scientific Principles

This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.

Function Achieved in This Case

Enables flexible and precise manipulation of medical devices within the body, reducing procedural time and minimizing patient discomfort, while allowing for a more compact and cost-effective setup by enabling both manual and robotic control with tactile feedback, thus enhancing safety and dexterity.

Implementation Method 1

an actuator (7) connected to the at least one control wire (4) and configured to actuate the control wire (4) to manipulate the at least one bendable section (12, 13, 14)

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectMechanical Force: Mechanical Force

Data Source

PatentUS20230137954A1Medical robot having multiple manipulation means and methods of use thereof
Publication Date: 2023.05.04 CANON USA INC
  • US20230137954A1 patent drawing
  • US20230137954A1 patent drawing
  • US20230137954A1 patent drawing

AI summary

An articulated medical device having a hollow core, capable of large degrees of maneuverability through small cavities to reach a target with minimal invasiveness, wherein the medical device is capable of manual and robotic manipulation.