Rehabilitation Centre for Children: Analysis and Redesign of Pediatric Mechanical Prosthetic Wrist Units
Bibliographic record
Abstract
At the request of the Rehabilitation Centre for Children, located in Winnipeg, MB, the design team was presented with a project to redesign a pediatric mechanical prosthetic wrist unit. Currently, prosthesis users are subjected to a limited range of wrist motion, as compared to an anatomical wrist. Children ages six to eight years old are forced to use bulky, heavy adult wrist units. In addition, the adjustment mechanisms are difficult to use and often require the assistance of a parent. In order to increase the children’s independence and capabilities, a ball and socket style wrist unit dubbed the “Lock Ball”, was developed. Main components of the design include a polyetheretherketone (PEEK) ball contained within an Aluminum 6061-T6 housing. A clamping collar, fashioned from PEEK with stainless steel locking hardware, applies a frictional force onto the ball to lock it in the desired position, which the user may adjust via a handle. Terminal device interfacing is provided via a quick release 316 Stainless Steel coupling; the male end affixed to the ball and the female end with a pull release attached to the terminal device. Finally, the wrist unit is screwed into the arm socket. The Lock Ball has a large range of motion and locking positions. Allowing 360° of pronation and supination and 45° of flexion, extension, radial deviation, and ulnar deviation, the Lock Ball increases the range of motion over current wrist units. The friction clamping collar used to secure the ball allows near infinite locking positions and can withstand an applied force of 1320 N without slip. The maximum stress found using finite element analysis was at the clamping edge of the collar, but remained well below the yield strength. Therefore this design is safe and is well suited for active children. Through material selection and finite element analysis optimization, the Lock Ball has an outer diameter of 46 mm and weighs 114 g without the quick release coupling and 245 g with, achieving a 6.5% decrease in size and up to 40% in weight savings over comparable wrist units available today. The Lock Ball costs $1038.22, which...
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".