Measurement of prehensile grasp capabilities by a force and moment wrench: Methodological development and assessment of manual workers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prehensile grasp capability is typically quantified by pinch and grasp forces. This work was undertaken to develop a methodology to assess complex, multi-axis hand exertions through the measurement of forces and moments exerted by the hand along and about three orthogonal axes originating at the grip centre; termed an external wrench. Instrumentation consisting of a modified pinch/grip dynamometer affixed to a 6 df force cube was developed to simultaneously measure three forces, three moments and the pinch/grip force about the centre of the grip. Twenty right hand dominant manual workers (10 male and 10 female), free of hand or wrist disorders, completed a variety of maximal strength tasks. The randomized block design involved three separate grips--power grip, lateral pinch and pulp pinch. Randomized within each block were three non-concurrent repetitions of isolated maximal force and moment generations along and about the three principle orthogonal axes and a maximal grip force exertion. Trials were completed while standing, with the arm abducted and elbow flexed to 90 degrees with a wrist posture near neutral. Where comparable protocols existed in the literature, forces and moments exerted were found to be of similar magnitude to those reported previously. Female and male grip strengths on a Jamar dynamometer were 302.6 N and 450.5 N, respectively. Moment exertions in a power grip (female and male) were 4.7 Nm and 8.1 Nm for pronator, 4.9 Nm and 8.0 Nm for supinator, 6.2 Nm and 10.3 Nm for radial deviator, 7.7 Nm and 13.0 Nm for ulnar deviator, 6.2 Nm and 8.2 Nm for extensor, and 7.1 Nm and 9.3 Nm for flexor moments. Correlations with and between maximal force and moment exertions were only moderate. This paper describes instrumentation that allows comprehensive characterization of prehensile force and moment capability.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".