Professional Documents
Culture Documents
To cite this article: Michael Greig & Richard Wells (2004) Measurement of prehensile grasp
capabilities by a force and moment wrench: Methodological development and assessment of
manual workers, Ergonomics, 47:1, 41-58, DOI: 10.1080/00140130310001611107
Download by: [Punjab Engineering College] Date: 19 December 2015, At: 03:58
ERGONOMICS, 15 JANUARY, 2004, VOL. 47, NO. 1, 41 58
Prehensile grasp capability is typically quantied 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 modied pinch/grip
dynamometer axed 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 exed to 908 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
exor 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.
1. Introduction
Characterization of an individuals prehensile capacities has predominantly
examined single axis, or uni-component, exertions such as grip force or pinch force.
These values are often used as a normalization method to classify relative task
demands (e.g., dividing grip force requirement by maximal grip force attainable or
population average). This methodology is applicable for some task demand
predictions but not for the majority of tasks since they are multi-axial (Wells and
Greig 2001). Developing methods to characterize the force and moment magnitudes
Ergonomics ISSN 0014-0139 print/ISSN 1366-5847 online # 2004 Taylor & Francis Ltd
http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
DOI: 10.1080/00140130310001611107
42 M. Greig and R. Wells
(Mathiowetz et al. 1985, Martin vigrometers (Desrosier et al. 1995), and strain gauge
dynamometers (An et al. 1986) to the more complex transducer based arrangements
that can measure the contributions of individual digits to the total grip force (Chao
et al. 1989, Li 2002). Similarly, the measurements of force or moment creation
magnitudes have utilized unidirectional instrumentation, multi-axis transducers to
measure exertions in more than one motion (Buchanan et al. 1993) and specially
created jigs (An et al. 1986, Deivanayagam and Sethi 1993, Snook et al. 1997). The
authors are not aware of work that has been done combining all of these apparatuses
to collect grip force, force and moment data simultaneously.
The majority of demand estimations (stress placed on the internal structures of
the forearm and hand) created by prehensile tasks are almost always determined
from the normalization to grip strength. Although this may be appropriate in
selected tasks, such as gripping an object, tasks with increasing complexity (for
example gripping and manipulating an object) are not well characterized (Wells
and Greig 2001). If gripping an object or squeezing a pair of pliers, grip force as a
percentage of the maximum force generation possible would estimate that demand
accurately but, in a task such as holding a hammer, operating a screwdriver, or
turning a key in a lock, the role of the grip has changed. The grip function then is
to eectively stabilize the object and provide a means for force and moment
transmission from proximal segments, with capacities depending on the grip
chosen. One approach to address this issue is by determining the functional
strength capabilities on a range of common objects (Peebles and Norris 2003). The
authors of the present study recently proposed that characterizing the external task
by a force and moment wrench, which also includes the internal grip force
generation, would better characterize strength during functional tasks (Wells and
Greig 2001). Wrench classication describes the forces and moments as a 6 6 1
vector applied at a point (gure 1). If this information were to be coupled with
muscle activation measurements of the forearm and hand, a more comprehensive
understanding of the demands placed on the individual in prehensile tasks would
be possible.
This paper reports on the development of instrumentation to measure the force
and moment wrench in three distinct grasps and, as a demonstration of its
applicability, also documents the strength capacities of manual workers. It will
therefore build on the information gathered by other researchers regarding
individual strength capacities, providing insight into the magnitudes of forces and
moments an individual can generate both singly and in combination. Correlating
these force and moment magnitudes to those measured on power and pinch grip
Measurement of prehensile grasp capabilities 43
Downloaded by [Punjab Engineering College] at 03:58 19 December 2015
Figure 1. Depiction of wrench classication at the grip centre (Wells and Greig 2001), where:
X (+) are palmar and dorsal forces, Y (+) are pull and push forces, Z (+) are radial and
ulnar forces, Mx (+) are radial and ulnar deviator moments, My (+) are pronator and
supinator moments, and Mz (+) are exor and extensor moments.
dynamometers will illustrate the applicability of using these grip strengths to predict
task demands for an individual.
A full characterization of the prehensile strength capacities of the working
population will enable increased comprehension of the acceptable ranges within
which individuals could perform manual work for both the design and evaluation of
work.
2. Methods
2.1. Force and moment collection methods
Grip forces were obtained from a strain gauge dynamometer and amplier (Model
ST-GRIP, Medical Research Ltd., Leeds, UK). For the power grasp, two half pieces
44 M. Greig and R. Wells
of plastic pipe were added to the forks of the grip dynamometer, making the
diameter (62 mm), similar to that found in many tools. For the power grasp, the long
axis of the dynamometer was aligned vertically (gures 2 and 3). For the lateral and
pulp pinch grips, metal tabs 20 6 50 mm were added to the end of the forks. The
dynamometer orientation for the lateral pinch (gripping with thumb opposed by side
of rst and second ngers) was horizontal. The setup for the pulp pinch (gripping
with thumb pad in opposition to pads of rst and second ngers) was chosen to
maintain the same wrist and forearm posture for all three grips. To accomplish this,
the long axis of the dynamometer was in the horizontal plane but aligned at a 458
angle (gures 2 and 3). Grip dimensions were 28 mm and 27 mm respectively for the
Downloaded by [Punjab Engineering College] at 03:58 19 December 2015
Figure 2. Schematic of cube and grip dynamometer arrangement and orientation for all
three grips.
Measurement of prehensile grasp capabilities 45
Downloaded by [Punjab Engineering College] at 03:58 19 December 2015
Figure 3. Three grips used in the current study: power, lateral pinch and pulp pinch.
46 M. Greig and R. Wells
lateral and pulp pinch. The contact surfaces of the dynamometers were covered by
new white athletic tape (Sportstape, Athletics Products Inc., Schomberg, ON,
Canada) for each participant to maintain surface consistency within and between
participants.
A 6 df multi-axis force and torque sensor (cube) (AMTI MC3A-6-250,
Watertown, MA, USA) with amplier (AMTI SCA-6-4, Watertown, MA,
USA) was used (gure 2). This allowed the measurement of three orthogonal
forces and moments. Calibration of the force and moment output was done using
a matrix provided by the manufacturer to minimize cross-talk. Verication of the
matrix occurred before the study commenced. Seven channels of information were
collected from the transducers at a sampling rate of 1024 Hz, A/D converted and
stored for further processing. A shunt calibration was used to convert the grip
Downloaded by [Punjab Engineering College] at 03:58 19 December 2015
force data into Newtons and was veried prior to study commencement. In each
of the grips, forces acting on the grip dynamometer created a moment about the
centre of the cube (gure 2). To measure moments about the grip centre, a
moment correction was required.
Since the grip dynamometer is rigidly mounted to the force cube and has
instrumentation on only one of its forks, a misrepresentation of the grip force could
be created. For example, in the power grasp setup, the instrumented fork would
register a force if a proximally directed or pulling force was created even when no
force was exerted across the two forks of the grip dynamometer. As a result the grip
force would be overestimated. This was corrected by taking the lesser of the two
values (registered force on the instrumented fork vs the calculated magnitude (from
the cube) on the non-instrumented fork) which was chosen to represent the internal
grip force since it was assumed that the larger value was augmented by an external
force application to the grip dynamometer.
To handle the collection and feedback of all data channels, an interactive software
program (LabVIEW 5.1, National Instruments Corporation, Austin, TX, USA) was
created. The program was driven by a le containing the randomized single and
multi-axial force exertions. Information regarding the upcoming task was displayed
to give a description to the participant. Force and moment data were collected,
zeroed, and calibrated in real-time as described and displayed as bar charts on the
computer monitor for participant feedback.
As this was a subset of a larger protocol, the following explanation focuses purely
on those trials that were included to examine maximal strength capacities. The grips
examined were the power grasp, lateral pinch and pulp pinch. The order of
measurement of the three grips was randomized within a subjects trials and
balanced between the male and female participants. Randomized within each grip
were 13 possible actions. These included force and moment exertions along and
about the three principal orthogonal axes in both the positive and negative directions
(see gure 1 for clarication of actions and their axes). Maximal grip or pinch force
exertions were exerted as well. Specically, the force actions examined were maximal
push and pull, palmar and dorsal and radial and ulnar directed forces, and pronator
and supinator, exor and extensor, and radial and ulnar deviator moments.
Following description of the task, the participant was instructed to gradually increase
their level of exertion up to their maximum and maintain a constant exertion for 3 s.
Visual feedback was given of all forces and moments produced. The participant was
instructed to minimize the non requested actions as much as possible. Throughout the
active portion of the collection, the individual was standing with their feet comfortably
spaced approximately shoulder width apart. Their orientation with respect to the cube
and dynamometer setup allowed the participant to have their arm adducted against their
side with elbow exed to a 908 degree angle and their wrist positioned midway between
pronation and supination with slight extension. During the inactive portion of the
protocol, the participant was allowed to move around or be seated if they desired.
Post collection, ve males and ve females were recruited as volunteers to examine
the frictional properties of the interacting surfaces. Three trials to determine the
coecient of friction were completed. In these trials the participant attempted to
maintain a 40 N pulp pinch grip while pulling horizontally in line with the long axis
of the grip dynamometer until their hand slipped free (a modication of the protocol
of Buchholz et al. 1988).
For the trials to determine the coecient of friction, the point of slipping was
determined from a manual inspection of the converted grip force and pull force data.
Coecient of friction was predicted using the equation
m L=2 F
where m = coecient of friction, L = pulling force (N), F = grip force (N) (Bucholz
et al. 1988).
Converting the data into spherical coordinates for the forces and moments
allowed the assessment of the isolation of the exertion. The ideal relationship was 1.0
meaning the exertion matched the requested force or moment action.
Downloaded by [Punjab Engineering College] at 03:58 19 December 2015
3. Results
The gain and amplication settings within the setup for this study allowed a
resolution of 1.2 N grip force, 0.2 N for horizontal forces (Fx and Fy), and 0.75 N
for vertical forces. Moment resolution was under 0.015 Nm for the x and y axes and
approximately 0.010 Nm for moments about the z-axis. Application of the white
athletic tape to the grip dynamometer surface created a surface coecient of friction
between the interacting surfaces averaging 0.72 (SD + 0.13).
Strength magnitudes were greatest in the power grasp for all actions in males and
for 12 of 13 actions for females (tables 2 and 3). With the exception of female lateral
pinch exertions (n = 9), all exertions had the potential of 10 male and female
participants. For dorsal and palmar force directions in lateral and pulp pinch and for
radial and ulnar force directions in lateral pinch, the maximal forces exceeded the
instrumentation range. As a result, these actions were capped at a magnitude to
prevent damage to the instrumentation. Therefore maximal force exertions in these
directions are not reported in this paper.
Table 2. Average maximal force generated in isolated force exertions and the female to male strength ratio for three dierent grip types in 10 males and
10 females.
Force (N + SD)
49
50 M. Greig and R. Wells
Table 3. Average maximal isolated moment exertions generated about the centre of the grip
and the female to male strength ratio for three dierent grip types in 10 males and 10 females.
Moment (Nm + SD)
Radial Ulnar
Pronator Supinator Deviator Deviator Extensor Flexor
Power grasp
Female 4.7 (1.7) 4.9 (1.6) 6.2 (2.7) 7.7 (1.9) 6.2 (1.8) 7.1 (2.3)
n 10 10 10 10 10 10
Male 8.1 (2.3) 8.0 (1.9) 10.3 (3.5) 13.0 (4.2) 8.2 (1.7) 9.3 (2.0)
n 10 10 9 9 8 8
Female/Male 0.58 0.61 0.59 0.57 0.68 0.69
Downloaded by [Punjab Engineering College] at 03:58 19 December 2015
Lateral pinch
Female 1.9 (0.6) 2.2 (1.0) 2.0 (0.6) 1.1 (0.2) 0.8 (0.3) 0.9 (0.4)
n 9 9 8 8 8 8
Male 3.8 (1.1) 3.5 (0.8) 3.0 (1.1) 1.7 (0.5) 0.9 (0.3) 1.3 (0.6)
n 10 10 9 9 9 9
Female/Male 0.49 0.62 0.70 0.55 0.78 0.69
Pulp pinch
Female 1.3 (0.4) 1.9 (0.7) 1.1 (0.6) 2.0 (0.9) 1.8 (0.7) 1.5 (0.5)
n 10 10 9 9 10 10
Male 2.2 (0.4) 2.4 (0.8) 1.7 (0.3) 2.6 (0.9) 2.6 (0.8) 2.1 (0.6)
n 9 10 9 8 10 10
Female/Male 0.59 0.77 0.64 0.75 0.69 0.64
whereas pronator moment (74%) and push force (72%) were lowest in the power
grasp.
power grip on the measurement device was 0.83 in the power grip. The relationship
between the grip force from the commercial hand grip dynamometer and maximal
lateral and pulp pinch was lower (0.59 and 0.73, respectively). The power grip had
higher correlations (table 5; seven of 12 actions 4 0.70) between the force or moment
exertions and the grip strength from the commercial dynamometer. Correlations
were inconsistent for a given action between the force measurement tools.
4. Discussion
The advantage of the equipment used within this study is that it simultaneously
collected all forces and moments exerted by the hand during a task. This
methodology has not been reported in the literature, nor has a complete data set
with these three grips and this number of actions for one person been published.
Downloaded by [Punjab Engineering College] at 03:58 19 December 2015
Table 5. Correlation between maximum force or moment exertion magnitudes, grip force or maximum exertion on a Jamar dynamometer for the power
grip (18 to 20 samples per cell).
Forces Moments
Forces
Push 1.00 0.81 0.79 0.77 0.88 0.84 0.83 0.86 0.77 0.85 0.69 0.81
Pull 1.00 0.86 0.94 0.61 0.67 0.55 0.60 0.59 0.65 0.46 0.75
Dorsal 1.00 0.87 0.66 0.64 0.62 0.60 0.78 0.75 0.52 0.70
Volar 1.00 0.44 0.52 0.45 0.45 0.56 0.53 0.42 0.66
Radial 1.00 0.86 0.91 0.89 0.81 0.90 0.73 0.73
Ulnar 1.00 0.78 0.78 0.76 0.86 0.67 0.75
Moments
Pronator 1.00 0.81 0.82 0.87 0.72 0.58
Supinator 1.00 0.78 0.90 0.70 0.65
Radial Deviator 1.00 0.89 0.65 0.66
Ulnar Deviator 1.00 0.63 0.78
Flexor 1.00 0.74
Extensor 1.00
Measurement of prehensile grasp capabilities 53
participants in this study created the force by pulling on the dynamometer. A slightly
dierent style of grip was also used. The higher coecient within this study could
also be due to slight bleeding of the tape adhesive through to the grip surface.
Nevertheless, within this study, the surface characteristics were consistent between
tasks and participants.
Female grip force magnitudes from the pretest collection were almost identical to
the age matched average found by Mathiowetz et al. (1985) for the power grip
(300.2 N vs 308.5 N). Conversely male values of this study were 87.4% of the
magnitude reported by Mathiowetz et al. (450.5 N vs 515.4 N). Participant body
positions were also dierent between the protocols. Those involved in the
Mathiowetz et al. study were seated, whereas those within this study were standing.
These posture dierences have been shown to cause strength dierences for a given
Downloaded by [Punjab Engineering College] at 03:58 19 December 2015
individual (Balogun et al. 1991) but unlike the relationship between the work of
Mathiowetz et al. (1985) and this study, grip strength values found by Balogun et al.
(1991) were 5.2% lower in the seated posture.
Power grip exertion magnitudes collected with the cylindrical dynamometer
surface were lower than hand grip dynamometer values seen elsewhere (Mathiowetz
et al. 1985, An et al. 1986, Peebles and Norris 2003). The grip dynamometer within
this study was modied to reect the shape and size found on power grasp tools, with
a grip diameter of 62 mm. Grip force has been demonstrated to have an optimum
diameter between 50 and 60 mm (Oh and Radwin 1993, Blackwell et al. 1999).
However, when examined for maximum total normal nger forces (Amis 1987) or
EMG and fatigue based optimal cylinder size (Ayoub and Lo Presti 1971), optimum
diameters are seen between 30 and 40 mm. Peebles and Norris (2003) used a grip
force measuring device similar to, but narrower than, the strain gauge dynamometer
used in the present study. At widths of 50 and 70 mm, their results from a similar age
range were much higher than the values from the hand grip dynamometer study, but
were quite similar to the values obtained by the Jamar dynamometer.
For the lateral pinch force, magnitudes were within the range of values seen by
other researchers. Swanson et al. (1987 as cited in Kamal et al. 1992) found values
that averaged 10 N lower for both males and females compared to values found
within this study. In contrast, the majority of authors found magnitudes greater than
100 N for males and approximately 75 N for females (Mathiowetz et al. 1985
(averaged for same age range), An et al. 1986, Imrhan and Alhaery 1994).
Mathiowetz et al. (1985) and Kamal et al. (1992) found female strength magnitudes
similar to the majority of authors, but their average results for six males was nearly
identical to the values in the present study.
Finding pinch force comparisons for the pulp pinch used within this study was
more dicult due to a lack of identical work and, at times, inconsistent terminology
in describing the specics of the grip tested. The pinch force magnitudes in this study
consistently exceed those of other researchers (An et al. 1986, Imrhan and Loo 1989)
but were within 7 N and 4 N for females and males, respectively, when compared to
the age matched population in the work of Mathiowetz et al. (1985). A pinch span of
27 mm was used within the present study compared to approximately 17 mm within
the study of Mathiowetz et al. (1985) or the span of under 16 mm of Imrhan and Loo
(1989). Pinch spans of 20 to 140 mm have been examined for the lateral pinch and
chuck pinch by Imrhan and Rahman (1995). The exertion magnitude ratio (chuck/
lateral) for the closest width tested (32 mm) was 1.2. In the present study, the ratio
for males was 1.2 and that for females 1.3.
54 M. Greig and R. Wells
Flexor and extensor moments about the wrist during a power grip are generally
higher in the literature (for example Vanswearingen (1983) and An et al. (1986)).
Flexor magnitudes within this study were 10 to 14 Nm lower for males and 3 to
6 Nm lower for females. Dierences in extensor magnitudes were less extreme. The
average magnitude found by An et al. (1986) was 1 Nm less (5.2 Nm versus 6.2 Nm).
Female values for pulp pinch (Snook et al. 1995, 1999) were substantially higher
(6.13 Nm and 3.92 Nm vs 1.5 Nm and 1.8 Nm, for exor and extensor, respectively)
and showed greater dierences between exor and extensor than those found with
this protocol. Again this is likely a by-product of dierent arrangements and axis
denitions. References were not found for the lateral pinch exor and extensor
moment magnitudes.
Pronator and supinator moments are well reported in the literature. Male
Downloaded by [Punjab Engineering College] at 03:58 19 December 2015
using a lateral pinch grip was similar to values within the present study (99.8 N vs
96.6 N). Using the grip they dened as chuck pinch, which appeared most similar to
the two nger pulp pinch in this study, gave values substantially lower (67 N vs
100 N). The pulp pinch values of this study were likely higher due to the oblique
angle of contact between the hand and grip dynamometer as opposed to the line of
force being in line with the long axis of the gauge. The actions used in the tests by
Imrhan and Sundararajan (1992) and Imrhan and Alhaery (1994) were also created
perpendicular to the line of action used here (i.e. pulling across the body versus fore
and aft). Chuck pinch pull strengths collected by Peebles and Norris (2003) were
nearly identical (76.8 N) for females in the 31 50 year age range at a width of
20 mm. Male values in this study were 8.3 N less in the same age range.
Downloaded by [Punjab Engineering College] at 03:58 19 December 2015
4.1. Correlations
Only moderate correlation magnitudes were found between an individuals
maximum force and moment generation and the grip force generated within the
grip on a grip force dynamometer. This gives little evidence for the existence of a
general hand strength construct. Therefore the grip force alone may not capture all
of the capabilities within the hand/forearm complex to generate forces and moments.
Frequently, the hand grip dynamometer has been used as a prediction of prehensile
strength, without consideration given to the directions of forces and moments
involved in the task. This would be an acceptable method if the strength capabilities
in the six axial forces and six axial moments of an individual correlated well with
their grip strength and, more specically, their strength measured via a grip
dynamometer (e.g., A Jamar Dynamometer). It is understandable that this
relationship is poorer between pinch strength and hand grip strength as the grip
used in a hand grip dynamometer is fundamentally dierent. However, relationships
within the power grip might be expected to be better.
Past literature examining the construct of whole body strength measures has
shown that correlations between strength measures are also moderate (Borchardt
1968, Baumgartner and Zuidema, 1972, Zuidema and Baumgartner 1974). These
studies have shown that a single strength measure is usually insucient to
characterize strength capacity in dierent types of exertion. The present study
supports the assertion that a grip strength measure only is insucient to characterize
strength of the forearm and hand.
4.2. Limitations
Although this study provided a comprehensive examination of the strength
capacities of experienced manual workers, limitations in the application and
interpretation of the results must be considered. A limitation was imposed by the
equipment for a small number of actions. Only participants who did not exceed this
level are reported in correlations and the maximum values are not compared to the
literature. Examination of the relative demand incurred on the hand as determined
through muscle activation and rating of perceived exertion for sub-maximal
exertions will be examined in a subsequent study.
Throughout the active portion of the protocol the individual was standing, with
their arm adducted against their side, elbow at 908 and feet comfortably spaced
apart. The strength values can then be considered reective of the potential
limitations in the proximal joint strength (e.g., shoulder) and balance aorded in this
posture.
56 M. Greig and R. Wells
To ensure that the participants isolated strength capability for a desired action
was obtained, visual feedback was given of all channels that were collected. Within
the data collection process repeat attempts were given if the isolation of the action
was poor. Should these actions be considered functionally similar to motions of the
low back, a perfectly isolated trial would not be possible, since o-axis exertions are
present and increase with fatigue (Parianpour et al. 1988).
5. Conclusion
The methodology employed within this study allows exertion magnitudes along and
about the axes of an orthogonal system at the grip centre to be collected
simultaneously. Values are consistent with ndings of previous researchers where
sucient similarity in protocol exists, but are specic to the setup with the grip
Downloaded by [Punjab Engineering College] at 03:58 19 December 2015
coupling and proximal joints limiting magnitude generation in some tasks. Further
application of the methodology will enable the determination of the response to the
generation of sub-maximal external wrench magnitudes typical of a variety of grasp
types and tasks. Simultaneous collection of muscle activation levels and participant
perception of eort will then allow a more complete understanding of the demand
required in manual tasks. The presentation of this demand analysis will occur in a
future paper.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge the support of the Ontario Workplace Safety
and Insurance Board, Grants #98 0008 and #01 041. However the views and opinions
expressed are those of the authors.
References
AMIS, A. A. 1987, Variations of nger forces in maximal isometric grasp tests on a range of
cylinder diameters, Journal of Biomedical Engineering, 9, 313 320.
AN, K. N., ASKEW, L. J. and CHAO, E. Y. 1986, Biomechanics and functional assessment of
upper extremities, in W. Karwowski (ed), Trends in Ergonomics/Human Factors III,
(Amsterdam: Elsevier), 573 580.
ARMSTRONG, T. J. 1982, Development of a biomechanical hand model for study of manual
activities, in R. Easterby, K.H.E. Kroemer and D.B. Chan (eds), Anthropometry and
Biomechanics: Theory and Application (New York: Plenum Publishing Corporation),
183 192.
AYOUB, M. M. and LO PRESTI, P. 1971, The determination of an optimum size cylindrical
handle by use of electromyography, Ergonomics, 14, 509 518.
BALOGUN, J. A., AKOMOLAFE, C. T. and AMUSA, L. O. 1991, Grip strength: eects of testing
posture and elbow position, Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 72, 280
283.
BAUMGARTNER, T. A. and ZUIDEMA, M. A. 1972, Factor analysis of physical tness tests, The
Research Quarterly, 43(4), 443 450.
BERNARD, B. 1997, A Critical Review of Epidemiological Evidence for Work-Related
Musculoskeletal Disorders of the Neck, Upper Extremity, and Low Back, US Department
of Health and Human Services, National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health,
Cincinnati.
BLACKWELL, J. R ., KOMATZ, K. W. and HEATH, E. M. 1999, Eect of grip span on maximal grip
force and fatigue of exor digitorum supercialis, Applied Ergonomics, 30, 401 405.
BORCHARDT, J. W. 1968, A cluster analysis of static strength tests. The Research Quarterly,
39(2), 258 264.
Measurement of prehensile grasp capabilities 57
BUCHANAN, T. S., MONIZ, M. J., DEWALD, J. P. and ZEV RYMER, W. 1993, Estimation of muscle
forces about the wrist joint during isometric tasks using an EMG coecient method,
Journal of Biomechanics, 26, 547 560.
BUCHOLZ, B., FREDERICK, L. J. and ARMSTRONG, T. J. 1988, An investigation of human palmar
skin friction and the eects of materials, pinch force and moisture, Ergonomics, 31,
317 325.
CHAO, E. Y., AN, K. N., COONEY, III W. P. and LINSCHEID, R. 1989, Hand functional strength
assessment and its clinical application, in Biomechanics of the Hand: A basic research
study (Singapore: World Scientic Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd), 97 129.
DEIVANAYAGAM, S. and SETHI, N. 1993, Eects of wrist deviation on hand torque strength and
the potential for CTS, in W. S. Marras., W. Karwowski, J. L. Smith and L. Pacholski
(eds), The Ergonomics of Manual Work (London: Taylor & Francis), 265 268.
DESROSIER, J., HEBERT, R., BRAVO, G. and DUTIL, E. 1995, Comparison of the Jamar
Dynamometer and the Martin Vigorimeter for grip strength measurements in a healthy
Downloaded by [Punjab Engineering College] at 03:58 19 December 2015
SNELL-MASSIE, S., BARBER, M., PAZDERKA, M., WILHELM, G. and HALLBECK, M. S. 1997,
Interaction of static pinch and forearm torque, in Proceedings of the Human Factors and
Ergonomics Society 41st Annual Meeting, (Santa Monica: The Human Factors and
Ergonomics Society), 688 691.
SNOOK, S. H., CIRIELLO, V. M. and WEBSTER, B. S. 1999, Maximum acceptable forces for
repetitive wrist extension with a pinch grip, International Journal of Industrial
Ergonomics, 24, 579 590.
SNOOK, S. H., VAILANCOURT, D. R. and CIRIELLO, V. M. 1995, Psychophysical studies of
repetitive wrist exion and extension, Ergonomics, 38(7), 1488 1507.
SNOOK, S. H., VAILANCOURT, D. R., CIRIELLO, V. M. and WEBSTER, B. S. 1997, Maximum
acceptable force for repetitive ulnar deviation of the wrist, American Industrial Hygiene
Association Journal, 58, 509 517.
SPEILHOLZ, P. S., SILVERSTEIN, B. S., MORGAN, M. CHECKOWAY, H. and KAUFMAN, J. 2001,
Comparison of self-report, video observation and direct measurement methods for
Downloaded by [Punjab Engineering College] at 03:58 19 December 2015
upper extremity musculoskeletal disorder physical risk factors, Ergonomics, 44(6), 588
613.
STOY, D. V. and ASPEN, J. 1999, Force and repetition measurement of ham boning:
Relationship to musculoskeletal symptoms, American Association of Occupational
Health Nurses, 47(6), 254 260.
SWANSON, A. B., GOSAN HAGERT, C. and SWANSON, G. 1987, Evaluation of impairment in the
upper extremity, Journal of Hand Surgery, 12A, 896 923.
VANSWEARINGEN, J. M. 1983, Measuring wrist muscle strength, The Journal of Orthopaedic and
Sports Physical Therapy, 4(4), 217 228.
WELLS, R. and GREIG, M. 2001, Characterising human hand prehensile capabilities by force
and moment wrench, Ergonomics, 44(15), 1392 1402.
ZUIDEMA, M. A. and BAUMGARTNER, T. A. 1974, Second factor analysis of physical tness tests,
The Research Quarterly, 45(3), 247 256.