REVISTA INGENIO
Non-Powered Hand Tool: Size Selection from an Anthropometric Ergonomic
Point of View
Ricardo Arciniega Rocha | Óbuda University, Budapest, Hungría
Vanessa Cristina Erazo Chamorro | Óbuda University, Budapest, Hungría
Szabo Gyula | Óbuda University, Budapest, Hungría
https://doi.org/10.29166/ingenio.v5i2.4233 pISSN 2588-0829
2022 Universidad Central del Ecuador eISSN 2697-3243
CC BY-NC 4.0 —Licencia Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial 4.0 Internacional ng.revista.ingenio@uce.edu.ec
, (), -, . -
In order to improve production companies are laying out resources to minimize time and save the wor-
ker force in each workstation. It means the ergonomist specialist must choose the correct hand device
according to each worker. e goal of this research is to set forth an instructions set for tool hand tools
selection focused on anthropometrics of the workers in order to rise production using the adequate tool
for the task. During the study, the anthropometrical data is processed and evaluated to obtain the disper-
sion population for each nger length and identied the main body size parameters for design tools. As
a result, a methodical guide to help ergonomics team managers to make sure the correct and appropriate
tool size selection to reduce the possibility of future illness for workers and the tailored ergonomic design
of each workstation according to specic data for the worker.
Con el n de mejorar la producción, las empresas están disponiendo recursos para minimizar el tiempo
y ahorrar mano de obra en cada puesto de trabajo. Signica que el especialista en ergonomía debe elegir
el dispositivo de mano correcto de acuerdo con cada trabajador. El objetivo de esta investigación es
establecer un instructivo para la selección de herramientas manuales enfocado en la antropometría de
los trabajadores para elevar la producción utilizando la herramienta adecuada para la tarea. Durante el
estudio, los datos antropométricos se procesan y evalúan para obtener la población de dispersión para
cada longitud de dedo e identicar los principales parámetros de tamaño corporal para las herramientas
de diseño. Como resultado, se elaboró una guía metódica para ayudar a los jefes de equipo de ergonomía
a asegurarse de la selección correcta y adecuada del tamaño de la herramienta para reducir la posibilidad
de futuras enfermedades de los trabajadores y el diseño ergonómico personalizado de cada estación de
trabajo de acuerdo con los datos especícos del trabajador.
1. Introduction
e methods for tool selection means great concern for
the probability of workers’ future illness aer realizing
one task a lot of time due to the repetitively and the ne-
cessary force during the work. One of the biggest pro-
blems is market dependence, owing that the companies
who designed the hand tool tried to make the design for
all users but it can be a problem for specic users.
Nowadays, as the globe becomes more industrialized,
an increasing number of businesses are investing money
and resources to improve production time while keeping
human resources in mind. [1]–[3] e monitoring of the
number of musculoskeletal problems in developed coun-
tries focuses on the method of observation in organiza-
tions that utilize hand tools to complete the exact task in
each workstation [4], [5].
e variables to control are explained and exposed
in the industrial document statements and international
standards to reduce their eect on workers, as well as the
Received: 5/9/2022
Accepted: 10/11/2022
Industrial risk, tools selection, hand tools,
occupational safety, tool size.
Riesgos industriales, selección de he-
rramientas, herramientas manuales,
seguridad en el trabajo, tamaño de he-
rramienta.
Herramienta Manual sin Motor: Selección de Tamaño desde un Punto de Vista Ergonómico
Antropométrico
32
Non-Powered Hand Tool: Size Selection from an Anthropometric Ergonomic Point of View
method of data collection, [6] It’s also vital to note that
some key features can cause a biased in tool selection are
not mentioned in the papers.
e ergonomics managers in each factory recognize
extremity cumulative trauma disorders as key ergonomic
risk factors. In order to improve the current situation, a
guide for non-powered tool selection for specic work
types will be presented in order to improve production
time and prevent worker injuries and future health disor-
ders, this guide is focused on the anthropometrics of wor-
kers and the hand dimension analysis to ensure the way
for correct and tailored hand tool selection according to
the palm-size of the workers (see Figura 1).
Figura 1 shows the approach steps in the research,
starting with collecting the data and going through the
method denition and nishing with the anthropometric
evaluation. is research is structured as follows. Section
2 presents Related works. Section 3 Tool selection me-
thod. Section 4 illustrates the Results. Finally, Section 5
presents the Conclusions.
1.1.RELATEDWORKS
Commonly, industrial employees utilize hand tools
based on their readiness in the workstation; however, be-
fore beginning operations in the companies, ergonomics
specialists conduct research and pick the appropriate de-
vice size; three stages are used in tool selection: i) Known
the workplace, ii) anthropometric study, iii) tool selec-
tion for workers. Kai WayLi [12] presents «Ergonomic
design and evaluation of wire-tying hand tools» (2002),
Table 1.
2015, occupational injuries
Occupational injuries
Injury source Hand machines Hand devices
total 59,83 52,03
Incidence rate 54 47
Sick days 7 5
Source [11].
Figure 1.
Research process denition
e evolution of risk assessment tools in the industry are
going from paper-pencil worksheets to articial intelli-
gence to prevent and minimize the causes of worker ill-
ness. It is focused on the causes of various occupational
illness for specic body parts. As a result, businesses face
the challenge of constantly improving their management
systems [7]–[9].
e problems related to ergonomic for hand tools are
frequently dependent on wrist exion and extension, as
well as excessive muscle eort and a high number of ma-
nual movement repetitions [10]. According to the U.S.
Bureau of Labour Statistics, there were 100.000 injuries
related with hand tools or machines. Table 1. Shows the
data for labour injuries (see Table 1).
33
Arciniega R., et al.
this oers some ideas on how to build a wire-tying hand
tool that will reduce poor posture and physical eort.
e research showed that now the wire-tying plier de-
signs minimized labour and employees’ diculty in the
sense of physical eort and awkward postures.
Whit the given works, it is reasonable to conclude that
design optimization and proper tool selection are critical
aspects of the present industry trend. However, in most
situations, a decision is made without regard for the an-
thropometrics of workers or their comfort during repetiti-
ve job activities. In this regard, the majority of the studies
evaluated do not provide a mechanism for selecting tool
sizes. is is exactly why the recommended rigorous hand
tool selection is so important. As a result, the suggested
technique is critical in proving the benets of choosing
the proper tool selection.
2.Method
To determine the selection criteria, the Derived / Compi-
led Data collecting approach is utilized to analyze the re-
ceived information using the collected information. e
criteria for picking information are focused on gathering
the most important ergonomic properties of tools for use
in general device selection in the industry to avoid po-
tential future problems based on comments from world-
wide occupational health institutes.
Hand devices and other hand tools are always a possible
source of injury for employees during typical job tasks.
Workplace injuries can be caused by a variety of circum-
stances, and worker disease can be classied in a variety of
ways; Table 2. shown the many injury types (see Table 2).
2.1. WORK ACTIVITY
Starting the hand tool selection process, the rst activity is
to recognize the task, considering that tools are created for
a specic purpose and that non-correct use can produce
tool degradation and damage. As another consequence,
incorrect tool operation can generate diseases like pain or
injury, as illustrated in Figura 2 (see Figura 2).
e workspace for manoeuvring the hand tool is a
characteristic to decide the correct tool size, it gives the
body length of the specic tool for the task.
2.2. TOOL CHARACTERISTICS
e uncomfortable postures, in combination with the ha-
zardous contact stresses, generate a future injury cause. To
avoid this, hand tools must be appropriate for the hand,
taking into account the primary tool features stated in Ta-
ble 3 as well as the gadget assessment criteria (see Table 3).
As another important fact, the texture of the handle
tool part shall be considered for a good operation during
Table 2.
Injury and possible
Medical problems Source
Amputations, Cuts, abrasions and punctures Tools with cutting edges can easily cut body parts
Muscles stress and ligaments inamation Repetitive motion all day long, using the same tool
Vision accidents Flying parts can cause needless and permanent blindness
Fractures Direct hit with the tool
Source [16].
18001 standard gives regulations for health and
security, based in Occupational Health and Safety Mana-
gement Systems () [17]. To cut down on workpla-
ce injuries e European Union directive 89/391/ [18]
says the need to implement measures to improvements
in worker safety. Tool selection is done in several steps,
including a) knowing your job, b) observing work envi-
ronment, c) keeping good work posture, and d) selecting
the appropriate tool. Various processes are specied in
this context in order to create an appropriate tool selec-
tion, with a focus on the task, tool features, and Ergono-
mic Worker Positions.
During 2013 Harih and Dolšak presents a digital-ba-
sed hand tool model, constructed from a static digital hu-
man-hand model, assuring comfort [13]. en Sohrabi
(2015) introduces e eect of diameter on comfort and
force for non-powered hand tools use [14].
In 2015 is presented the use of the Ergonomics in Hand
Tool Design [15], by Aptel, Claudon and Marsot, to de-
monstrate the inuence of ergonomics on future illness
for workers. Finally, «Usability of machinery» is presen-
ted by Szabo (2017), [11] where Wrong operator beha-
viour is identied as a factor in work accidents.
34
Non-Powered Hand Tool: Size Selection from an Anthropometric Ergonomic Point of View
the activities in each workstation to ensure the correct
manipulation and xing of the tool. [20]–[22] e die-
rent textures and tool shapes are shown in Figura 3.
e texture improves the tool grip increasing the fric-
tion between the tool handle and workers hand, this cha-
racteristic shall be functional when the tool is static and
when the device is moving, in this sense a non-slip tool
handle makes secure the tool use.
2.3 ERGONOMIC WORKER POSITIONSWAY OF
HANDLING THE TOOL
In order to determine the correct tool for each works-
tation, identify the handle manner for these devices. In
this sense, the tool applications in connection with the
handle manner are analysed in relation to the anthropo-
metrics of the workers’ hands to establish the correct se-
lection for tool size [23], [24] (see Figura 4).
e tool handle manner used for small and big ham-
mers is the Power Grip subjection shown in Figura 4, to
realize this action the devices are subjected to the total
palm of the hand using all ngers to produce the neces-
sary force to hit the materials [25] (see Figura 5).
Single-Handle Tools shown in Figura 5 is the hand-
ling way of the tool used for Tube-like tools driven by
handle length and diameter. During this way of grip tool,
the devices are subjected to the total palm of the hand
and the forces are applied through ngers and the thumb
(see Figura 6).
e handling way of the tool used for control, pre-
cision and accuracy is Pinch Grip shown in Figura 6, to
carry out the work activity the devices are subjected be-
tween the thumb, index nger and middle nger to pro-
vide the necessary force for the task. Figura 7 shows the
«Contact Pressure tool grip», which to dierent from the
previous one is the use of the palm of the hand to provi-
de the force to keep the device against the part to be xed
(see Figura 7).
e handling way of the tool used pliers is shown in
Figura 8, Double-Handle Tools grip uses the thumb, index
Figure 2.
Research process denition
Figure 3.
Texture of the tool Handle
Figure 4.
Power grip
Figure 5.
Single handling tool
Table 3.
Tool Characteristics
Parameters Shape Physical dimension Material surface
Features Feasible shape Lightweight Friction for material in contact surface
Not cutting edge Correct tool dimension Homogeneous distribution force
Source [19].
35
Arciniega R., et al.
nger and middle nger to provide the necessary force for
the task [26] (see Figura 8).
Employees in the industrial sector represent the ma-
jority of each country’s economically active population,
and numerous studies have been done to collect anthro-
pometric data on them, as shown in table 4 (see Table 4).
3.Results and discussion
ree main hand measure sizes are important to enable
proper tool selection based on the style of handling: index
nger length, middle nger length, and maximum grip
diameter. Aer processing the worker’s hand anthropo-
metric data in Table 4 to make sure that the work popu-
lation can use hand tools, ergonomics managers should
select tools with part sizes that fall between the shaded
zone shown in distribution graphic to ensure that 90% of
population can used during the work (see Figura 9).
Index nger length in contact pressure subjection and
pinch grip subjection is the main measure, for these task
which are performed with this nger, such as the little
touch between the hand tool and the body. Anthropome-
tric data are provided in Figura 9.
Considering tool activities are performed using the
thumb, middle, and index ngers, as well as the tiny con-
tact between the gadget and the body, the maximum han-
dgrip diameter is the most relevant dimension for single
handle tools and power grip tools. ese anthropometric
data are provided in Figura 10 (see Figura 10). Finally,
with double-handed tools, the middle nger is the most
signicant size because tool activities are performed with
this nger, such as the little touch between the gadget and
the body, as shown in Figura 11 (see Figura 11).
Figure 6.
inch Grip handling tool
Figure 7.
Contact pressure handling tool
Table 4.
Hand anthropometry
n Range
15,9 20,5 18,20 3,2526
91193 4,60 0,01
palmlength 8,90 11,6 10,25 1,90918
8309 2,70 0,017
12901
thumb length 4,00 5,80 4,90
1,2727
92206
1,80
0,0256
9351
middle finger length 6,90 9,00 7,95
1,484
92424
2,10
0,022
02301
ring finger length 5,90 8,00 6,95
1,484
92424
2,10
0,0230
2217
little finger length 4,30 6,30 5,30
1,41
4213562
2,00
0,0222
3021
index finger length 6,00 7,90 6,95
1,3435
02884
1,90
0,0243
4123
maximum grip diameter 4,30 5,90 5,10
1,131
37085
1,60
0,0289
0521
Source [27].
36
Non-Powered Hand Tool: Size Selection from an Anthropometric Ergonomic Point of View
Another contribution of this study identied the com-
mon handling grips subjection for hand tools in concor-
dance with the literature presented by Debesh M. and
Suchismita Satapathy [29] in «Hand Tool Injuries of Agri-
cultural Farmers of South Odisha in India».
4.Conclusion
Index nger length in contact pressure subjection and
pinch grip subjection is the main measure, for tool ac-
tivities are performed using the thumb, middle, and in-
dex ngers, the handgrip diameter is the most relevant
dimension for single-handle tools and power grip tools,
with double-handed tools, the middle nger is the most
signicant size because tool activities are performed with
this nger. In concordance with some studies where the
method of tool selection is considered [15] taking into
account the demographic data of each region and coun-
try the selected instrument must be between 10.19 mi-
llimetres and a maximum dimension of 11.71 centime-
tres in order to achieve it for tasks associated to contact
pressure subjection. e specied instrument for pinch
grip subjection must have a dimension of 6.19 millime-
tres to a maximum of 7.71 centimetres, the specied tool
for activity requiring single-handle tools and power grip
applications should be between 4.46 millimetres and a
maximum size of 5.74 centimetres, and for activities in-
Figure 10.
Handgrip diameter
Figure 11.
Middle nger
Figure 8.
Double handle tool
Figure 9.
Index nger length
e international organizations for establishing the
standards suggest the dimensions for hand tools focused
only from a point of view of task characteristic [30], [31],
in this project as a result, is presented the necessary steps
for a correct tool selection, each stage has some steps for
tool evaluation before the nd the chosen one.
Increasing productivity and resource eciency are the
industry’s main goals in order to enhance protability.
e environmental supervisors will be selective in the
size of tools they use to guarantee that this goal protec-
ting the worker from disease met [24]. In order to mini-
mize the possible risk and be agree with previous studies
where the safety and healthy workplace is dened [28],
this study identied the main used parts during the acti-
vities where is needed hand tools.
37
Arciniega R., et al.
References
[1] M. Cardona and C. E. García Cena, «Biomechani-
cal analysis of the lower limb: a full-body musculos-
keletal model for muscle-driven simulation»,
Access, vol. 7, 2019, pp. 92709-92723, : 10.1109/AC-
CESS.2019.2927515.
[2] Z. Wang and C. Zhang, «ree-dimensional hand re-
construction by single-shot structured light line pat-
tern», Access, vol. 6, 2018, pp. 59881-59890, :
10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2875496.
[3] R. P. Arciniega-Rocha et al., «Gasket tester for low-pres-
sure pipelines: design and tests», nov. 2019, :
10.1109/ETCM48019.2019.9014904.
[4] G. Szabo, «Ergo capture: a motion capture based er-
gonomics risk assessment tool», Advances in physi-
cal ergonomics and human factors: Part - Google
Books, vol. 2, .o 2, 2018, pp. 313-321. Accessed: oct.
11, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://books.google.
hu/books?hl=en&lr=&id=9olYBAAAQBAJ&oi=-
fnd&pg=PA313&dq=info:U7F4Q-XlwmcJ:scholar.
google.com&ots=42cdmGH8Ee&sig=uP-mq3Eda8XxU-
9FIa2hry-dI81Y&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false.
[5] V. C. Erazo-Chamorro, R. P. Arciniega-Rocha, N. Rudolf,
B. Tibor, and S. Gyula, «Safety workplace: the preven-
tion of industrial security risk factors», Applied Scien-
ces, vol. 12, .o 21, oct. 2022, p. 10726. : 10.3390/
APP122110726.
[6] B. Darío et al., «Design of pin on disk tribometer un-
der international standards» Accessed: oct. 12, 2021.
[Online]. Available: https://repositorio.uisek.edu.ec/
bitstream/123456789/4180/1/Byron Dario Analuiza Hi-
dalgo.pdf.
[7] G. Szabó and E. Németh, «Development an oce ergo-
nomic risk checklist: composite oce ergonomic risk
assessment ( Oce)», in Advances in Intelligent Sys-
tems and Computing, vol. 819, aug. 2019, pp. 590-597,
: 10.1007/978-3-319-96089-0_64.
[8] K. Petrie et al., «A framework to create more mentally
healthy workplaces: a viewpoint», Australian and New
Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, vol. 52, .
o
1, jan. 2018,
pp. 15-23, : 10.1177/0004867417726174.
[9] H. Veisi, A. Choobineh, H. Ghaem, and Z. Shaee, «e
eect of hand tools’ handle shape on upper extremity
comfort and postural discomfort among hand-woven
shoemaking workers», International Journal of Indus-
trial Ergonomics, vol. 74, nov. 2019, p. 102833. :
10.1016/J.ERGON.2019.102833.
[10] R. Graveling, «Ergonomics and musculoskeletal
disorders (MSDs)» in e Workplace. 2018.
[11] G. Szabó, «Usability of machinery», in Advances in Inte-
lligent Systems and Computing, vol. 604, 2018, pp. 161-
168. : 10.1007/978-3-319-60525-8_17.
[12] K. W. Li, «Ergonomic design and evaluation of wi-
re-tying hand tools», International Journal of Industrial
Ergonomics, vol. 30, .
o
3, sep. 2002, pp. 149-161. :
10.1016/S0169-8141(02)00097-5.
[13] G. Harih and B. Dolšak, «Tool-handle design based on a
digital human hand model», International journal of in-
dustrial ergonomics, vol. 43, .o 4, pp. 288-295, Jul. 2013,
doi: 10.1016/J.ERGON.2013.05.002.
[14] M. S. Sohrabi, «e eect of non-powered hand tools’
diameter on comfort and maximum hand torque», Ira-
nian Journal of Ergonomics, vol. 3, .
o
2, 2015, pp. 68-
75. Accessed: oct. 18, 2021. [Online]. Available: http://
journal.iehfs.ir/article-1-177-en.html.
[15] M. Aptel, L. Claudon, and J. Marsot, «Integration of
ergonomics into hand tool design: principle and pre-
sentation of an example», International Journal of Oc-
cupational Safety and Ergonomics, vol. 8, .o 1, 2015, pp.
107-115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2002.1107
6518, : 10.1080/10803548.2002.11076518.
[16] R. P. Arciniega-Rocha and V. C. Erazo-Chamorro,
«Non-powered hand tool size selection method», in
Mérnöki Szimpózium a Bánkin Előadásai: Proceedings
of the Engineering Symposium at Bánki (ESB2021), 1st
ed., vol. 1, R. Horváth, Ed. Budapest: Óbudai Egyetem,
2022, pp. 37-43.
[17] C. Uhrenholdt Madsen, M. L. Kirkegaard, J. Dyreborg,
and P. Hasle, «Making occupational health and safety
management systems ‘work’: a realist review of the -
18001 standard», Safety Science, vol. 129, sep. 2020,
p. 104843, : 10.1016/J.SSCI.2020.104843
[18] «-Lex - L:1989:183:TOC - en - -Lex» Ocial
Journal of the European Communities, vol. 32, 2018. Ac
-
cessed: oct. 25, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://eur-lex.
europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:L:1989:183:-
TOC.
[19] (National Institute for Occupational Safety and
Health), «A guide to selecting non-powered hand tools»,
California Department of Industrial Relations and the
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.
() Publication, vol. 164, 2004, p. 2004, Ac-
cessed: oct. 25, 2021. [Online]. Available: http://www.
dir.ca.gov/dosh/puborder.asp.
[20] C. Y. Wang and D. C. Cai, «Hand tool handle size and
shape determination based on hand measurements
using a contour gauge», Human factors and ergonomics
in manufacturing & service industries, vol. 30, .
o
5, sep.
2020, pp. 349-364, : 10.1002/HFM.20846.
[21] B. Guo, L. Tian, and W. Fang, «Eects of operation type
and handle shape of the driver controllers of high-speed
train on the drivers’ comfort», International Journal of
Industrial Ergonomics, vol. 58, Mar. 2017, pp. 1-11. :
volving double hand tools, the recommended tool should
be lower than 7.11 centimetres in concordance with the
OSHA international standard that suggested the values
between these limits [32].
38
Non-Powered Hand Tool: Size Selection from an Anthropometric Ergonomic Point of View
10.1016/j.ergon.2017.01.003.
[22] V. C. Erazo-Chamorro, Máquina peladora rotadora de
maní tostado para la industria artesanal (Tesis de in-
geniería). Universidad Técnica del Norte, Ibarra, 2014.
http://repositorio.utn.edu.ec/handle/123456789/3755
(accessed Jan. 20, 2020).
[23] S. Verma, «Development and analysis on ergonomic de-
sign of hand tool», International Journal of Research and
Analytical Reviews, vol. 6, .
o
1, 2019, pp. 2348-2350. Ac-
cessed: may 30, 2022. [Online]. Available: http://ijrar.
com/.
[24] P. Rosero et al., «Human sit down position detection
using data classification and dimensionality reduc-
tion case based reasoning () for medical applica-
tions View project Optimización del Master Production
Schedule en entornos inciertos View project Human
Sit Down Position Detection Using Data Classication
and Dimensionality Reduction», 2017, : 10.25046/
aj020395.
[25] M. T. Haque and M. T. Haque, «Ergonomic design of
hammer handle to reduce musculoskeletal disorders of
carpenters Eciency and Productivity Improvement
View project Ergonomic design of hammer handle to re-
duce musculoskeletal disorders of carpenters», Interna
-
tional Journal of Research in Advanced Engineering and
Technology, pp. 78-83, 2018. : 10.22271/engineering.
[26] I. Halim, «e inuence of hand tool design on hand
grip strength: a review» | International Journal of Inte-
grated Engineering, vol. 11, .o 6, 2019, pp. 53-69. Acces-
sed: may 30, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://publisher.
uthm.edu.my/ojs/index.php/ijie/article/view/3802.
[27] S. Pheasant, «Anthropometric data – Limited use only»,
2005. http://limited-use-only.com/strategies/anthropo
-
metric-data/ (accessed: oct. 26, 2021).
[28] V. C. Erazo-Chamorro, R. P. Arciniega-Rocha, and G.
Szabo, «Healthy and safe workplace denition: a friendly
boundary for a complex issue», in Mérnöki Szimpózium
a Bánkin Előadásai: Proceedings of the Engineering Sym-
posium at Bánki (ESB2021), 2022, pp. 51–56, Accessed:
Jun. 21, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://bgk.uni-obu-
da.hu/esb/system/les/le_upload/esb2021.pdf.
[29] D. Mishra and S. Satapathy, «Hand tool injuries of agri-
cultural farmers of south odisha in India», Materials
Today: Proceedings, vol. 5, .o 9, Jan. 2018, pp. 17648-
17653, : 10.1016/J.MATPR.2018.06.084.
[30] « 691:2005(en), Assembly tools for screws and
nuts –Wrench and socket openings– Tolerances for
general use», https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:i-
so:691:ed-4:v1:en (accessed: Mar. 22, 2022).
[31] , Safety and health in the use of machinery, 2013, p.
154,
[32] C. C. for O. H. and S. , «Hand tool ergonomics -
Tool design: Answers», Canada, 2020. https://www.
ccohs.ca/oshanswers/ergonomics/handtools/tooldesign.
html (accessed Mar. 22, 2022).
