Anthropometric modelling for the determination of 3-D maximum functional reach

Abstract

Maximum functional reach for 3-D industrial workspace was determined from selected structural body dimensions. Six structural body dimensions out of 19 measured in this study were found to be dominant and statistically related to the functional reach in the spectrum of the workspace. Next to arm length, the most dominant body dimension was popliteal height for the male and stature for the female. The other dominant body dimensions were: (a) slump eye height and thigh clearance for both sexes; (b) stature and forearm-hand length for the male; (c) shoulder height and slumped shoulder height for the female. Multiple regression models were built and validated using the dominant body dimensions as the independent variables for the determination of the functional maximum reach distances of each participant in the workspace. The probability of rejection for any of the models was 0.01. The standard error for all models varied from 22 to 59 mm. The comparison of the observed and estimated volume of the maximum (3-D) workspace revealed that for the male sample, the estimation error was within AE9.5% and the corresponding error for the female sample was AE10.5%. The estimation method developed in this study provides an alternative to more time-consuming and difficult methods to empirically determine the reach envelope of an operator.

Development and Application of Stereo Camera-Based Upper Extremity Workspace Evaluation in Patients with Neuromuscular Diseases

“…Much effort has been put into evaluation of workspace envelope based on individual’s anthropometric data and the underlying kinematics model of the upper extremity (e.g. [16] – [18] ). Such approach is being used for design and development of workstations and other manual equipment in healthy population.…”

Evaluation of upper extremity reachable workspace using Kinect camera

“…The reachable workspace is wellestablished in robotics to graphically represent the boundaries of the working volume of a robotic manipulator [11]. Other researchers have investigated the workspace envelope by analyzing kinematic models of the upper extremity with an individual's anthropometric data [13][14][15]. Other researchers have investigated the workspace envelope by analyzing kinematic models of the upper extremity with an individual's anthropometric data [13][14][15].…”

Volumetric differences in body shape among adults with differing body mass index values: An analysis using three‐dimensional body scans

“…Historically, shape changes have been quantified using traditional one-dimensional (1D) anthropometric measurements such as lengths, breadths, and girths. 1D measurements are used for body shape analysis for various applications including ergonomics (Park and Park, 2013), modeling and design (Behara and Das, 2011;Hawes et al, 1994), biological and evolutionary anthropology (Katzmarzyk and Leonard, 1998;Ruff, 2002), and for health assessments and determining the risk of disease (Brown et al, 2012;Fujimoto et al, 2007;Garlie et al, 2010;Schernhammer et al, 2007;Wells et al, 2010). Multidimensional measurements have largely been examined through simple 1D measures, for example, body volume being calculated using waist circumference and BMI (Heymsfield et al, 2008).…”