Anthropometrics I Rad Zdero, Ph.D. University of Guelph.
-
Upload
stella-grant -
Category
Documents
-
view
236 -
download
5
Transcript of Anthropometrics I Rad Zdero, Ph.D. University of Guelph.
Outline
• Anatomical Frames of Reference• What is “Anthropometrics”?• Static Dimensions• Dynamic (Functional) Dimensions• Measurement of Dimensions
A
B
C
A
BC Point A is Proximal to point B
Point B is Proximal to point CPoint A is Proximal to point C
Point C is Distal to point BPoint B is Distal to point APoint C is Distal to point A
Relative Position
What is “Anthropometrics”?
• The application of scientific physical measurement techniques on human subjects in order to design standards, specifications, or procedures.
• “Anthropos” (greek) = person, human being• “Metron” (greek) = measure, limit, extent• “Anthropometrics” = measurement of people
Static Dimensions• Definition: “Measurements taken when the
human body is in a fixed position, which typically involves standing or sitting”.
• Types• Size: length, height, width, thickness
• Distance between body segment joints
• Weight, Volume, Density = mass/volume
• Circumference
• Contour: radius of curvature
• Centre of gravity
• Clothed vs. unclothed dimensions
• Standing vs. seated dimensions
Static Dimensions
• Static Dimensions are related to and vary with other factors, such as …
• Age• Gender• Ethnicity• Occupation• Percentile within Specific Population Group• Historical Period (diet and living conditions)
Static Dimensions
OCCUPATION
e.g. Truck drivers are taller & heavier than general population
e.g. Underground coal miners have larger circumferences (torso, arms, legs)
Reasons• Employer imposed height and weight restrictions• Employee self-selection for practical reasons• Amount and type of physical activity involved
Static DimensionsPERCENTILE within Specific Population Group
Normal or GaussianData Distribution
No. ofSubjects
5th percentile = 5 % of subjectshave “dimension”below this value
50 %95 %
Dimension(e.g. height,weight, etc.)
Static DimensionsHISTORICAL PERIOD(Europe, US, Canada, Australia)
Decade1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990
Increasein
AverageAdultHeight(inches)
4 inch increase in 8 decades
Dynamic (Functional) Dimensions• Definition: “Measurements taken when the human body is
engaged in some physical activity”.• Types: Static Dimensions (adjusted for movement),
Rotational Inertia, Radius of Gyration• Principle 1 - Estimating
• Conversion of Static Measures for Dynamic Situations• e.g. dynamic height = 97% of static height• e.g. dynamic arm reach = 120% of static arm length
• Principle 2 - Integrating• The entire body operates together to determine the
value of a measurement parameter• e.g. Arm Reach = arm length + shoulder movement
+ partial trunk rotation and + some back bending + hand movement
• Segments are modeled as rigid mechanical links of known physical shape, size, and weight.
• Joints are modeled as single-pivot hinges.• Standard points of reference on human body are
defined in the scientific literature and are not arbitrarily used in ergonomics
• Less than 5% error by this approximation
Segment Lengths: Link/Hinge Model
L
Joint or Hinge
Segment
Segment Density
where
D = density [g/cm3 or kg/cm3]
M = mass [g or kg]
V = volume [cm3 or m3]
W = weight [N or pounds]
g = gravitational acceleration = 9.8 m/s2
D = M / V = (W/g) / V
Segment Density
Double-tanksystem for measuringdisplaced volumeof human bodysegments on livingor cadaver subjects.Using standardizeddensity tables, the mass can then be calculated usingD = M / V.
[source: Miller & Nelson, 1976]
• Important to know the location of the effective center of gravity (or mass) of segments
• Gravity actually pulls on every particle of mass, therefore giving each part weight
• For the body, each segment is treated as the smallest division of the body
• Can obtain C-of-G for individual segments or group of segments
• C-of-G usually slightly closer to the “thicker” end of the segment
Segment Center-of-Gravity
[Kreighbaum & Barthels, 1996]
Segment
C-of-G
9 6 3 963distance
Force 3020
10
3020
10
[adapted from Kreighbaum & Barthels, 1996]
C-of-G Line30
2010
3020
10
9 6 3 963
Force
distance
Different weightor mass distributionscan have the sameC-of-G
Balance Method• Weight (force of gravity) & vertical reaction force
at the fulcrum (axis) must lie in the same plane.
[Kreighbaum & Barthels, 1996]
Segment Center-of-Gravity
C-of-G line
C-of-G line
C-of-G line
Reaction Board Method 1 – Individual Segments
Segment Center-of-Gravity
[LeVeau, 1977]
Sum all moments around pivot point ‘O’ for both cases:-WX – SL – W2L2 = 0-WX’ – S’L – W2L2 = 0 Subtract equations and rearrange to obtain the exact location (X) of C-of-G for the shank/foot system:
X = {L(S - S’)/W + X’}
O
O
W2
W2
L2
L2
Reaction Board Method 2 – Group of Segments
[Hay and Reid, 1988]
Segment Center-of-Gravity
Weigh Scales
Support Point
C-of-G
Suspension Method• Determine pivot
point which balances the object in 2D plane
• Use frozen human cadaver segments
[Hay & Reid, 1988]
Segment Center-of-Gravity
Multi-Segment Method• Imagine a body composed of three segments, each with the
C-of-G and mass as indicated• sum of Moments of each segment mass about the origin =
Moment of the total body mass about the origin• mathematically: MO = MA + MB + MC = MA+B+C
O 4 6 82
30 N 10 N 5 N
A B C
distance
Segment Center-of-Gravity
Multi-Segment Method Example – Leg at 90 deg
A leg of is fixed at 90 degrees. The table gives CGs and weights (as % of total body weight W) of segments 1, 2, and 3. Determine coordinates (xCG, yCG) of Centre of Gravity of leg system.
Step 1 - sum of moments of each segment about origin ‘O’ as in Figure 5.39.
MO=xCG{W1+W2+W3}=x1W1+x2W2+ x3W3
xCG = {x1W1 +x2W2 + x3W3}/(W1+W2+W3)
= {17.3(0.106W) + 42.5(0.046W) +
45(0.017W)}/(0.106W + 0.046W + 0.017W)
xCG = 26.9 cm[Oskaya & Nordin, 1991]
O
O
Step 2 - rotate leg to obtain the yCG and repeat the same procedure as Step 1.
MO = yCG{W1 + W2 + W3}
MO = y1W1 + y2W2 + y3W3
yCG = {y1W1 + y2W2 + y3W3}
/(W1 + W2 + W3)
= {51.3(0.106W) + 32.8(0.046W) +
3.3(0.017W)}/(0.106W + 0.046W +
0.017W)
yCG = 41.4 cm
O
C-of-G
Segment Rotational Inertia
Rotational Inertia, I (Mass Moment of Inertia)• real bodies are not point masses; rather the mass is
distributed about an axis or reference point
• resistance to angular motion and acceleration
• depends on mass of body & how far mass is distributed from the axis of rotation
• specific to a given axis
2 ii rmI
Rotational Inertia, I
I = rotational inertiam = massr = distance to axis or point of interest
[Miller & Nelson, 1976]
Rotational inertia can becalculated around anyaxis of interest. Distancefrom axis (r2) has moreeffect than mass (m)
• Radius (k) at which a point mass (m) can be located to have the same rotational inertia (I) as the body (m) of interest
• measures the “average” spread of mass about an axis of rotation; k = “average r”
• not same as C-of-G• k is always a little larger than
the radius of rotation (which is the distance from C-of-G to reference axis)
Radius of Gyration, K
k = I/m
[Hall, 1999]
Measuring Rotational Inertia, I
Pendulum Method• use frozen cadaver segments• frictionless, free swing, pivot system• measure rotational resistance to swing
I = WL / 2f2
I = rotational inertia (kg.m2)W = segment weight (N)L = distance from C-of-G to pivot axis (m)f = swing frequency (cycles/s)
pivot
C-of-G
fL
[see Lephart, 1984]
Measuring Rotational Inertia, I
Oscillating Beam Method• use live subjects• forced oscillation system• measure resistance to forced rotation
I = R/(2f)2 = Rp2/2
I = rotational inertia (kg.m2)R = spring constant (N.m/rad)p = period (sec)f = freq. of oscillation (cycles/sec)
[Peyton, 1986]
Sources Used• Chaffin et al., Occupational Biomechanics, 1999.• Dempster, Space Requirements of the Seated Operator, 1955.• Hay and Reid, 1988.• Kroemer, “Engineering Anthropometry”, Ergonomics, 32(7):767-
784, 1989• Lephart, “Measuring the Inertial Properties of Cadaver Segments”,
J.Biomechanics, 17(7):537-543, 1984.• LeVeau, Biomechanics of Human Motion, 1977.• Peyton, “Determination of the Moment of Inertia of Limb Segments
by a Simple Method”, J.Biomechanics, 19(5):405-410, 1986.
• Sanders and McCormick, Human Factors in Engineering and Design, 1993.
• Moore and Andrews, Ergonomics for Mechanical Design, MECH 495 Course Notes, Queens Univ., Kingston, Canada, 1997.
• Hall, Basic Biomechanics, 1999.
• Miller and Nelson, Biomechanics of Sport, 1976.
• Kreighbaum & Barthels, Biomechanics: A Qualitative Approach for Studying Human Movement, 1996.
• North, “Ergonomics Methodology”, Ergonomics, 23(8):781-795, 1980.
• Oskaya & Nordin, Fundamentals of Biomechanics, 1991.
• Webb Associates, Anthropometric Source Book, 1978.