Awkward working postures and precision performance as an example of the relationship between ergonomics and production quality
- Ngcamu, Nokubonga Slindele (Sma)
- Authors: Ngcamu, Nokubonga Slindele (Sma)
- Date: 2009
- Subjects: Human engineering , Posture , Posture disorders , Musculoskeletal system -- Diseases , Work -- Physiological aspects
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MSc
- Identifier: vital:5105 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1005183 , Human engineering , Posture , Posture disorders , Musculoskeletal system -- Diseases , Work -- Physiological aspects
- Description: Ergonomics aims to improve worker health and enhance productivity and quality. Knowledge and practical evidence of this relationship would be instrumental for optimising organisational performance particularly in industrially developing countries where the discipline is still in its developmental stages. Therefore this thesis set out to analyse the relationship between ergonomics deficiencies and performance. A survey was first conducted to establish the severity of quality problems in the South African manufacturing industry and to determine if these were related to Ergonomic deficiencies. The results indicated that quality problems continue to plague industry, a challenge associated with huge cost implications. Furthermore organisations were not cognisant of the fact that ergonomics deficiencies such as poor workstation design and awkward or constrained working postures are a major contributing factor to poor quality and performance decrements. This demonstrates that much is yet to be done in raising awareness about the benefits of ergonomics in South Africa and other industrially developing countries. However, for this to be effective, tangible evidence of these purported benefits is required. In lieu of this, a laboratory study was then conducted to establish the relationship between awkward working postures and the performance of precision tasks. Acknowledging that the task and the worker are interrelated elements, the impact of precision task demands on the postural strain experienced by the human was also investigated. A high and low precision task quantified positional precision while a force task (combination of pushing and pulling) was utilised to assess the ability to maintain a precise force over time. These three tasks were performed in eight different postures; namely seated, standing, stooping 300 and 600, working overhead, lying supine, and twisting to either side. A combination of the tasks and postures resulted in 24 experimental conditions that were tested on forty eight healthy male and female participants. The performance related dependent variables were movement time, deviation from the centre of the target, and the trend/slope followed by the force exerted. Muscle activity of eight arm, shoulder and back muscles, iii supplemented with heart rate and local ratings of perceived exertion, were utilised to quantify the impact of the tasks and the postures on the individual. The results revealed that awkward working postures do in fact influence performance outcomes. In this regard, awkward working postures (such as overhead work and lying supine and stooping) were evidenced to significantly affect movement time, deviations from the target and the ability to maintain a constant force over time. These variables have a direct relationship with organisational priorities such as productivity and quality. Furthermore, the results indicated that high precision demands augment postural strain elicited through high muscle activity responses and may have negative implications for the precipitation of musculoskeletal disorders. Essentially, the work done on this thesis reflected the complex nature of ergonomics by drawing on both macro and micro-ergonomics approaches. In so doing, challenges perceived to be relevant to industry as reported by organisations formed the foundation for further laboratory studies. Therefore, more collaborative research and knowledge transfer between industry and ergonomics researchers is a necessity particularly in industrially developing countries where ergonomics is still in its developmental stages.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2009
- Authors: Ngcamu, Nokubonga Slindele (Sma)
- Date: 2009
- Subjects: Human engineering , Posture , Posture disorders , Musculoskeletal system -- Diseases , Work -- Physiological aspects
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MSc
- Identifier: vital:5105 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1005183 , Human engineering , Posture , Posture disorders , Musculoskeletal system -- Diseases , Work -- Physiological aspects
- Description: Ergonomics aims to improve worker health and enhance productivity and quality. Knowledge and practical evidence of this relationship would be instrumental for optimising organisational performance particularly in industrially developing countries where the discipline is still in its developmental stages. Therefore this thesis set out to analyse the relationship between ergonomics deficiencies and performance. A survey was first conducted to establish the severity of quality problems in the South African manufacturing industry and to determine if these were related to Ergonomic deficiencies. The results indicated that quality problems continue to plague industry, a challenge associated with huge cost implications. Furthermore organisations were not cognisant of the fact that ergonomics deficiencies such as poor workstation design and awkward or constrained working postures are a major contributing factor to poor quality and performance decrements. This demonstrates that much is yet to be done in raising awareness about the benefits of ergonomics in South Africa and other industrially developing countries. However, for this to be effective, tangible evidence of these purported benefits is required. In lieu of this, a laboratory study was then conducted to establish the relationship between awkward working postures and the performance of precision tasks. Acknowledging that the task and the worker are interrelated elements, the impact of precision task demands on the postural strain experienced by the human was also investigated. A high and low precision task quantified positional precision while a force task (combination of pushing and pulling) was utilised to assess the ability to maintain a precise force over time. These three tasks were performed in eight different postures; namely seated, standing, stooping 300 and 600, working overhead, lying supine, and twisting to either side. A combination of the tasks and postures resulted in 24 experimental conditions that were tested on forty eight healthy male and female participants. The performance related dependent variables were movement time, deviation from the centre of the target, and the trend/slope followed by the force exerted. Muscle activity of eight arm, shoulder and back muscles, iii supplemented with heart rate and local ratings of perceived exertion, were utilised to quantify the impact of the tasks and the postures on the individual. The results revealed that awkward working postures do in fact influence performance outcomes. In this regard, awkward working postures (such as overhead work and lying supine and stooping) were evidenced to significantly affect movement time, deviations from the target and the ability to maintain a constant force over time. These variables have a direct relationship with organisational priorities such as productivity and quality. Furthermore, the results indicated that high precision demands augment postural strain elicited through high muscle activity responses and may have negative implications for the precipitation of musculoskeletal disorders. Essentially, the work done on this thesis reflected the complex nature of ergonomics by drawing on both macro and micro-ergonomics approaches. In so doing, challenges perceived to be relevant to industry as reported by organisations formed the foundation for further laboratory studies. Therefore, more collaborative research and knowledge transfer between industry and ergonomics researchers is a necessity particularly in industrially developing countries where ergonomics is still in its developmental stages.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2009
The effect of load and technique on biomechanical and perceptual responses during dynamic pushing and pulling
- Authors: Desai, Sheena Dhiksha
- Date: 2009
- Subjects: Work -- Physiological aspects , Biomechanics , Human engineering , Lifting and carrying
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MSc
- Identifier: vital:5109 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1005187 , Work -- Physiological aspects , Biomechanics , Human engineering , Lifting and carrying
- Description: Changes in the industrial job profile, from lifting and lowering to repetitive dynamic pushing and pulling have been facilitated through the use of manual vehicles, aimed at minimising the workload. Yet, the demands of pushing and pulling have not been well documented. Using measures of the horizontal component of the hand forces, spinal kinematics, muscle activity at various sites on the upper body and body discomfort ratings, this study aimed at quantifying the biomechanical and perceptual demands of various dynamic push/pull techniques. 36 healthy male participants performed two-handed forward pushing, two-handed backward pulling and one-handed forward pulling, employing an industrial pallet jack supporting two loads of 250kg or 500kg. While no single technique was definitively identified as preferable regarding hand forces, pushing at 500kg elicited higher initial and sustained forces (p<0.05) than one- and two-handed pulling respectively. Increments in load mass from 250kg to 500kg resulted in significant differences in the initial, sustained and ending forces. With regard to spinal kinematics in the sagittal plane, two-handed pulling elicited the highest trunk flexion, and may therefore expose individuals to prolonged forward bending. Generally this technique was found to evoke the highest sagittal responses. Spinal kinematic measures in the lateral and transverse planes suggested that one-handed pulling was accompanied by the highest measures, and hence the greatest risk of developing lower back disorders related to this plane. Although various combinations of muscles were active during each technique, one-handed pulling and pushing, most often induced the highest muscle activation levels and two-handed pulling, the lowest. While erector spinae evidenced no significant differences between techniques at each load or between loads for the same technique, activation levels were high under all conditions. Perceptual ratings of body discomfort revealed that not only is the upper body susceptible to injuries during pushing and pulling, but also that the lower extremities may have a considerable role to play in these tasks, with the calves being a particular area of concern. Findings concluded that symmetrical pushing and pulling tasks are preferable.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2009
- Authors: Desai, Sheena Dhiksha
- Date: 2009
- Subjects: Work -- Physiological aspects , Biomechanics , Human engineering , Lifting and carrying
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MSc
- Identifier: vital:5109 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1005187 , Work -- Physiological aspects , Biomechanics , Human engineering , Lifting and carrying
- Description: Changes in the industrial job profile, from lifting and lowering to repetitive dynamic pushing and pulling have been facilitated through the use of manual vehicles, aimed at minimising the workload. Yet, the demands of pushing and pulling have not been well documented. Using measures of the horizontal component of the hand forces, spinal kinematics, muscle activity at various sites on the upper body and body discomfort ratings, this study aimed at quantifying the biomechanical and perceptual demands of various dynamic push/pull techniques. 36 healthy male participants performed two-handed forward pushing, two-handed backward pulling and one-handed forward pulling, employing an industrial pallet jack supporting two loads of 250kg or 500kg. While no single technique was definitively identified as preferable regarding hand forces, pushing at 500kg elicited higher initial and sustained forces (p<0.05) than one- and two-handed pulling respectively. Increments in load mass from 250kg to 500kg resulted in significant differences in the initial, sustained and ending forces. With regard to spinal kinematics in the sagittal plane, two-handed pulling elicited the highest trunk flexion, and may therefore expose individuals to prolonged forward bending. Generally this technique was found to evoke the highest sagittal responses. Spinal kinematic measures in the lateral and transverse planes suggested that one-handed pulling was accompanied by the highest measures, and hence the greatest risk of developing lower back disorders related to this plane. Although various combinations of muscles were active during each technique, one-handed pulling and pushing, most often induced the highest muscle activation levels and two-handed pulling, the lowest. While erector spinae evidenced no significant differences between techniques at each load or between loads for the same technique, activation levels were high under all conditions. Perceptual ratings of body discomfort revealed that not only is the upper body susceptible to injuries during pushing and pulling, but also that the lower extremities may have a considerable role to play in these tasks, with the calves being a particular area of concern. Findings concluded that symmetrical pushing and pulling tasks are preferable.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2009
The effect of load and technique on biomechanical and psychophysical responses to level dynamic pushing and pulling
- Authors: Bennett, Anthea Iona
- Date: 2009
- Subjects: Work -- Physiological aspects , Human engineering -- Case studies , Lifting and carrying -- Case studies , Biomechanics -- Case studies , Musculoskeletal system -- Wounds and injuries
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MSc
- Identifier: vital:5110 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1005188 , Work -- Physiological aspects , Human engineering -- Case studies , Lifting and carrying -- Case studies , Biomechanics -- Case studies , Musculoskeletal system -- Wounds and injuries
- Description: Pushing and pulling research has yet to fully elucidate the demands placed on manual workers despite established epidemiological links to musculoskeletal disorders. The current study therefore aimed to quantify biomechanical and perceptual responses of male operators to dynamic pushing and pulling tasks. Three common push/pull techniques (pushing, one handed and two handed pulling) were performed at loads of 250kg and 500kg using an industrial pallet jack in a laboratory environment. Thirty six healthy male subjects (age: 21 ±2 years, stature: 1791 ±43 mm and body mass: 77 ±10 kg) were required to perform six loaded experimental and two unloaded control conditions. Hand force exertion, muscle activity and gait pattern responses were collected during 10m push/pull trials on a coefficient controlled walkway; body discomfort was assessed on completion of the condition. Horizontal hand force responses were significantly (p<0.05) affected by load, with a linear relationship existing between the two. This relationship is determined by specific environmental and trolley factors and is context specific, depending on factors such as trolley maintenance and type of flooring. Hand force exertion responses were tenuously affected by technique at higher loads in the initial and sustained phases, with pushing inducing the greatest hand forces. Comparison of the motion phases revealed significant differences between all three phases, with the initial phase evidencing the greatest hand forces. Muscle activity responses demonstrated that unloaded backward walking evoked significantly higher muscle activation than did unloaded forward walking whilst increased muscular activity during load movement compared to unloaded walking was observed. However increasing load from 250kg to 500kg did not significantly impact the majority of muscle activity responses. When considering technique effects on muscle activity, of the significant differences found, all indicated that pushing imposed the least demand on the musculoskeletal system. Gait pattern responses were not significantly affected by load/technique combinations and were similar to those elicited during normal, unloaded walking. Perceptually, increased load led to increased perception of discomfort while pushing resulted in the least discomfort at both loads. From these psychophysical responses, the calves, shoulders and biceps were identified as areas of potential musculoskeletal injury, particularly during one and two handed pulling. Pushing elicited the highest hand forces and the lowest muscle activity responses in the majority of the conditions whilst psychophysical responses identified this technique as most satisfactory. Current results advocate the use of pushing when moving a load using a wheeled device. Suitability of one and two handed pulling remains contradictory, however results suggest that one handed pulling be employed at lower loads and two handed pulling at higher loads.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2009
- Authors: Bennett, Anthea Iona
- Date: 2009
- Subjects: Work -- Physiological aspects , Human engineering -- Case studies , Lifting and carrying -- Case studies , Biomechanics -- Case studies , Musculoskeletal system -- Wounds and injuries
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MSc
- Identifier: vital:5110 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1005188 , Work -- Physiological aspects , Human engineering -- Case studies , Lifting and carrying -- Case studies , Biomechanics -- Case studies , Musculoskeletal system -- Wounds and injuries
- Description: Pushing and pulling research has yet to fully elucidate the demands placed on manual workers despite established epidemiological links to musculoskeletal disorders. The current study therefore aimed to quantify biomechanical and perceptual responses of male operators to dynamic pushing and pulling tasks. Three common push/pull techniques (pushing, one handed and two handed pulling) were performed at loads of 250kg and 500kg using an industrial pallet jack in a laboratory environment. Thirty six healthy male subjects (age: 21 ±2 years, stature: 1791 ±43 mm and body mass: 77 ±10 kg) were required to perform six loaded experimental and two unloaded control conditions. Hand force exertion, muscle activity and gait pattern responses were collected during 10m push/pull trials on a coefficient controlled walkway; body discomfort was assessed on completion of the condition. Horizontal hand force responses were significantly (p<0.05) affected by load, with a linear relationship existing between the two. This relationship is determined by specific environmental and trolley factors and is context specific, depending on factors such as trolley maintenance and type of flooring. Hand force exertion responses were tenuously affected by technique at higher loads in the initial and sustained phases, with pushing inducing the greatest hand forces. Comparison of the motion phases revealed significant differences between all three phases, with the initial phase evidencing the greatest hand forces. Muscle activity responses demonstrated that unloaded backward walking evoked significantly higher muscle activation than did unloaded forward walking whilst increased muscular activity during load movement compared to unloaded walking was observed. However increasing load from 250kg to 500kg did not significantly impact the majority of muscle activity responses. When considering technique effects on muscle activity, of the significant differences found, all indicated that pushing imposed the least demand on the musculoskeletal system. Gait pattern responses were not significantly affected by load/technique combinations and were similar to those elicited during normal, unloaded walking. Perceptually, increased load led to increased perception of discomfort while pushing resulted in the least discomfort at both loads. From these psychophysical responses, the calves, shoulders and biceps were identified as areas of potential musculoskeletal injury, particularly during one and two handed pulling. Pushing elicited the highest hand forces and the lowest muscle activity responses in the majority of the conditions whilst psychophysical responses identified this technique as most satisfactory. Current results advocate the use of pushing when moving a load using a wheeled device. Suitability of one and two handed pulling remains contradictory, however results suggest that one handed pulling be employed at lower loads and two handed pulling at higher loads.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2009
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »