Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T12:42:13.337Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Manipulability analysis of human thumb, index and middle fingers in cooperative 3D rotational movements of a small object

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 February 2013

M. Felix Orlando ,
Ashish Dutta ,
Anupam Saxena ,
Laxmidhar Behera ,
Tomoya Tamei  and
Tomohiro Shibata
M. Felix Orlando
Affiliation:
Department of Electrical Engineering, IIT Kanpur, Kanpur 208016, India
Ashish Dutta*
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, IIT Kanpur, Kanpur 208016, India
Anupam Saxena
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, IIT Kanpur, Kanpur 208016, India
Laxmidhar Behera
Affiliation:
Department of Electrical Engineering, IIT Kanpur, Kanpur 208016, India
Tomoya Tamei
Affiliation:
Graduate School of Information Science, Nara Institute of Science and Technology, Nara 630-0192, Japan
Tomohiro Shibata
Affiliation:
Graduate School of Information Science, Nara Institute of Science and Technology, Nara 630-0192, Japan
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: adutta@iitk.ac.in
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The combined motion of the human thumb, index and middle fingers while rotating a small object across the extended, intermediate and flexed planes with respect to the fingers was analyzed. Auto reflective markers were attached on the fingers to track their motion across three postures and planes via a 3D motion capture system. Central, right and left rotation postures were considered in each plane for investigation and the rotation experiments were performed with 30 healthy subjects. The obtained data were used to compute the finger joint angles. Based on the three criteria of (i) manipulability measure, (ii) major axis direction angle of the manipulability ellipsoid and (iii) ratio of the minor over major axis lengths, the collective behavior of the fingers was studied. It has been found after analysis that the thumb and middle finger were active, while the index finger operated passively when manipulating small objects in cooperative rotational motion across the three planes. Activeness refers to the independence of a digit in controlling the motion of an object whereas passiveness denotes its dependence on other digits. An active finger governs the motion of an object whereas a passive finger simply supports it. The results of this investigation are of great importance in planning treatment for rehabilitation and for designing controllers for robotic therapists, finger exoskeletons and prostheses.

Keywords

Cooperative rotation motionManipulabilityFinger motion analysis
Type
Articles
Information
Robotica , Volume 31 , Issue 5 , August 2013 , pp. 797 - 809
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Valero-Cuevas, F. J., “A mathematical approach to the mechanical capabilities of limbs and fingers,” Adv. Exp. Med. Biol., 629, 619–633 (2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Valero-Cuevas, F. J., “An integrative approach to the biomechanical function and neuromuscular control of the fingers,” J. Biomech. 38 (4), 673–684 (2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Valero-Cuevas, F. J., Hoffmann, H., Kurse, H. M. U., Kutch, J. J. and Theodorou, E. A., “Computational models for neuromuscular function,” IEEE Rev. Biomed. Eng. 2, 110–135 (2009).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Valero-Cuevas, F. J., Johanson, M. E. and Towles, J. D., “Towards a realistic biomechanical model of the thumb: The choice of kinematic description may be more critical than the solution method or the variability/uncertainty of musculoskeletal parameters,” J. Biomech. 36, 1019–1030 (2003).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Yokogawa, R. and Hara, K., “Manipulabilities of the index finger and thumb in three tip-pinch postures,” J. Biomech. Eng. 126 (2), 212–219 (2004).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Yokogawa, R. and Hara, K., “Measurement of distribution of maximum index-fingertip force in all directions at fingertip in flexion/extension plane,” J. Biomech. Eng. 124, 302–307 (2002).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Yoshikawa, T., Foundations of Robotics: Analysis and Control (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1990) Chap. 4.Google Scholar
8.Cobos, S., Ferre, M., Sanchez Uran, M. A., Ortego, J. and Pena, C., “Efficient Human Hand Kinematics for Manipulation Tasks,” In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Nice, France (2008) pp. 2246–2251.Google Scholar
9.Ingram, J. N., Kording, K. P., Howard, I. S. and Wolpert, D. M., “The statistics of natural hand movements,” Exp. Brain. Res. 188, 223–236 (2008).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Tung, W. L., Kuo, L. C., Lai, K. Y., Jou, I. M., Sun, Y. N. and Su, F. C., “Quantitative evidence of kinematics and functional differences in different graded trigger fingers,” Clin. Biomec. 25 (6), 535–540 (2010).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11.Metcalf, C. D. and Notley, S. V., “Modified kinematics technique for measuring pathological hyperextension and hypermobility of the interphalangeal joints,” IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 58 (5), 1224–1231 (2011).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Leijnse, J. N., Quesada, P. M. and Spoor, C. W., “Kinematics evaluation of the finger's interphalangeal joints coupling mechanism – variability, flexion – extension differences, triggers, locking swan neck deformities, anthropometric correlations,” J. Biomech. 43 (12), 2381–2393 (2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Kuo, L. C., Ciu, H. Y., Chang, C. W., Hsu, H. Y. and Sun, Y. N., “Functional workspace for precision manipulation between thumb and fingers in normal hands,” J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol. 19 (5), 829–839 (2009).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14.Friedman, J. and Flash, T., “Trajectory of the index finger during grasping,” Exp. Brian. Res. 196 (4), 497–509 (2009).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15.Kapur, S., Friedman, J., Zatsiorsky, V. M. and Latash, M. L., “Finger interaction in a three-dimensional pressing task,” Exp. Brain Res. 203, 101–118 (2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Martin, J. R., Zatsiorsky, V. M. and Latash, M. L., “Multi-finger interaction during involuntary and voluntary single finger force changes,” Exp. Brain. Res. 208 (3), 423–435 (2011).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17.Sun, Y., Zatsiorsky, V. M. and Latash, M. L., “Prehension of half-full and half-empty glasses: Time and history effects on multi-digit coordination,” Exp. Brain Res. 209 (4), 571–585 (2011).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18.Park, J., Zatsiorsky, V. M. and Latash, M. L., “Optimality vs. variability: An example of multi-finger redundant tasks,” Exp. Brain Res. 207, 119–132 (2010).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19.Hara, K., Yokogawa, R. and Yokogawa, A., “A Graphical Method for Evaluating Static Characteristics of the Human Finger by Force Manipulability,” In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Leuven, Belgium (1998) pp. 1623–1628.Google Scholar
20.Kim, B. H., “A joint motion planning based on a bio-mimetic approach for human-like finger motion,” Int. J. Control. Autom. Syst. 4 (2), 217–226 (2006).Google Scholar
21.Liu, J. and Zhang, Y., “Mapping human hand motion to dexterous robotics hand,” In: IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics (ROBIO) Sanya, China (2008) pp. 829–833.Google Scholar
22.Prattichizzo, D., Malvezzi, M., Gabiccini, M. and Bicchi, A., “On the manipulability ellipsoids of underactuated robotic hands with compliance,” Robot. Auton. Syst. 60 (3), 337–346 (2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23.Liu, H., “Exploring human hand capabilities into embedded multifingered object manipulation,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 7 (3), 389–398 (2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24.Lambercy, O., Dovat, L., Gassert, R., Burdet, E., Teo, C. L. and Milner, T., “A haptic knob for rehabilitation of hand functions,” IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng. 15 (3), 356–366 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25.Hollister, A., Buford, W. L., Myers, L. M., Giurintano, D. J. and Novick, A., “The axes of rotation of the thumb carpometacarpal joint,” J. Orthop. Res. 10 (3), 454–460 (1992).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
26.Leijnse, J. N. and Kalker, J. J., “A two-dimensional kinematic model of the lumbrical in the human finger,” J. Biomech. 28 (3), 237–249 (1995).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
27.Norkin, C. C. and Levangie, P. K., Joint Structure and Function: A Comprehensive Analysis, 2nd ed. (F. A. Davis, Philadelphia, PA, 1992).Google Scholar
28.Santello, M. and Soechting, J. F., “Force synergies in multi-fingered grasping,” Exp. Brain Res. 133, 457–467 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
29.Maitland, M. E. and Epstein, M. B., “Analysis of finger position during two- and three- fingered grasp: Possible implications for terminal device design,” J. Prosthet. Orthot. 21 (2), 102–105 (2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30.Grinyangin, I. V., Biryukova, E. V. and Maier, M. A., “Kinematic and dynamic synergies of human precision-grip movements,” J. Neurophysiol. 94 (4), 2284–2294 (2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31.Lin, H. T., Kuo, L. C., Liu, H. Y., Wu, W. L. and Su, F. S., “The three-dimensional analysis of three thumb joints co-ordination in activities of daily living,” Clin. Biomec. 26 (4), 371–376 (2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
32.Orlando, M. F., Akolkar, H., Dutta, A., Saxena, A. and Behera, L., “Optimal design and control of a thumb exoskeleton,” In: Proceedings of the IEEE TENCON, Fukuoka, Japan (2010) pp. 1492–1497.Google Scholar
33.Orlando, M. F., Akolkar, H., Dutta, A., Saxena, A. and Behera, L., “Optimal design and control of a hand exoskeleton for rehabilitation of stroke patients,” In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics, Automation and Mechatronics, Singapore (2010) pp. 72–77.Google Scholar
34.Goehler, C. M. and Murray, W. M., “The sensitivity of endpoint forces produced by the extrinsic muscles of the thumb to posture,” J. Biomech. 43 (8), 1553–1559 (2010).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
35.Santos, V. J. and Valero-Cuevas, F. J., “Reported anatomical variability naturally leads to multimodal distributions of Denavit-Hartenberg parameters for the human thumb,” IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 53 (2), 155–163 (2006).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed