The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Transmission of vibration through gloves: effects of material thickness
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Ergonomics, December 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1080/00140139.2015.1102334 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Khairil Anas Md Rezali, Michael J. Griffin |
| Abstract |
It might be assumed that increasing the thickness of a glove would reduce the vibration transmitted to the hand. Three material samples from an anti-vibration glove were stacked to produce three thicknesses: 6.4, 12.8 and 19.2 mm. The dynamic stiffnesses of all three thicknesses, the apparent mass at the palm and the finger and the transmission of vibration to the palm and finger were measured. At frequencies from 20 to 350 Hz, the material reduced vibration at the palm but increased vibration at the finger. Increased thickness reduced vibration at the palm but increased vibration at the finger. The measured transmissibilities could be predicted from the material dynamic stiffness and the apparent mass of the palm and finger. Reducing the dynamic stiffness of glove material may increase or decrease the transmission of vibration, depending on the material, the frequency of vibration and the location of measurement (palm or finger). |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 20 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 30% |
| Professor | 3 | 15% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 2 | 10% |
| Researcher | 2 | 10% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 4 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 11 | 55% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 10% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 5% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 5 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 December 2015.
All research outputs
#12,646,707
of 22,835,198 outputs
Outputs from Ergonomics
#1,347
of 2,258 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#171,870
of 389,038 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ergonomics
#13
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,835,198 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,258 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 389,038 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.