Liu, HY and Pearlman, J and Cooper, R and Hong, EK and Wang, H and Salatin, B and Cooper, RA
(2010)
Evaluation of aluminum ultralight rigid wheelchairs versus other ultralight wheelchairs using ANSI/RESNA standards.
Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, 47 (5).
441 - 456.
ISSN 0748-7711
![[img]](http://d-scholarship-dev.library.pitt.edu/style/images/fileicons/text_plain.png) |
Plain Text (licence)
Available under License : See the attached license file.
Download (1kB)
|
Abstract
Previous studies found that select titanium ultralight rigid wheelchairs (TURWs) had fewer equivalent cycles and less value than select aluminum ultralight folding wheelchairs (AUFWs). The causes of premature failure of TURWs were not clear because the TURWs had different frame material and design than the AUFWs. We tested 12 aluminum ultralight rigid wheelchairs (AURWs) with similar frame designs and dimensions as the TURWs using the American National Standards Institute/Rehabilitation Engineering and Assistive Technology Society of North America and International Organization for Standardization wheelchair standards and hypothesized that the AURWs would be more durable than the TURWs. Across wheelchair models, no significant differences were found in the test results between the AURWs and TURWs, except in their overall length. Tire pressure, tube-wall thickness, and tube manufacturing were proposed to be the factors affecting wheelchair durability through comparison of the failure modes, frames, and components. The frame material did not directly affect the performance of AURWs and TURWs, but proper wheelchair manufacture and design based on mechanical properties are important.
Share
| Citation/Export: |
|
| Social Networking: |
|
Details
Metrics
Monthly Views for the past 3 years
Plum Analytics
Altmetric.com
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |
![[feed]](/images/feed-icon-32x32.png){kind=icon}