Grasping Contact Analysis of Viscoelastic Materials With Applications in Minimally Invasive Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a method to determine the contact force and pressure on the surface of viscoelastic objects grasped by an endoscopic grasper, used in Minimally Invasive Surgery (MIS). Normally, an endoscopic grasper is corrugated (teeth-like) in order to grasp slippery tissues. It is highly important to avoid damage to the tissues during grasping and manipulation in endoscopic surgery. Therefore, it is essential to determine the exact contact force on the surface of the tissue. To this end, initially a comprehensive closed form analysis of grasping contact force and pressure on elastic and particularly viscoelastic materials which have similar behavior as that of biological tissues is studied. The behavior of a rigid grasper with wedge-like teeth, when pressed into a delayed elasticity material is being examined. Initially, a single wedge penetrating into a solid is studied and then is extended to the grasper. The elastic wedge indentation is the basis of this study and the effects of time are included in the equations by considering the corresponding integral operator from viscoelastic stress-stain relations. Under the action of a constant normal load, the penetration of the indenter and the contact area will change. In this research, the variation of the contact area with time and the grasping contact force is studied. The results of this study which provides a closed form expression for grasping contact force and contact area are compared with those from elastic analysis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".