Journal of the Ergonomics Society of Korea (대한인간공학회지)

Ergonomics Society of Korea (대한인간공학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison of Lifting and Lowering Activity based on Biomechanical, Physiological, Psychophysical Criteria

들기 작업과 내리기 작업의 생체역학적, 생리학적, 정신물리학적 기준치에 의한 비교

  • Kim, Hong-Ki (Department of Industrial Management Engineering, Kyonggi University)
  • 김홍기 (경기대학교 공과대학 산업경영공학과)
  • Received : 2009.11.25
  • Accepted : 2010.02.22
  • Published : 2010.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Activity of lifting has been a major issue in many research area related in manual materials handling tasks. However, the opposite activity of lifting, lowering, has received much less attention. It is known that 52% of all box-handling tasks were lowering in nature. The difference in stress between lifting and lowering activity is not well understood. A simple assumption that these two activities are very similar has been established and widely used. However, this simple assumption may be questionable. The objective of this study was to compare a lifting activity and a lowering activity based on the three different ergonomic approaches; (1) biomechanical, (2) physiological, (3) psychophysical approach. It was found that the stress of lowering activity was from 65% to 93%, from 87% to 97%, and from 87% to 96% according to the biomechanical, physiological, and psychophysical point of view, respectively. It is concluded from the result of this study that the stress of lowering activity is lower than that of the lifting activity. The maximum compressive force on the lumbro-sacral joint (L5/S1) was 158% and 108% respectively, for lifting and lowering activity of which the work load is the 58% of Action Limit. It is suggested that the NIOSH AL and RWL and biomechanical criteria should be reconsidered especially for the low frequency of lifting activities.

Keywords

References

  1. Asfour, S. S., Energy Cost Prediction Models for Manual Lifting and Lowering Tasks, Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas, USA., 1980.
  2. Bertec Force Plate 4060A, Bertec Corporation, 6171 Huntley Road, Suite 3, Columbus, Ohio, U.S.A.
  3. Ciriello, V. M. and Snook, S. H., A Study of Size, Distance, Height, and Frequency Effects on Manual Handling Tasks, Human Factors, 25(5), 473-483, 1983. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872088302500502
  4. Ciriello, V. M. and Snook, S. H., The Effects of Size, Distance, Height, and Frequency on Manual Handling Performance., Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Meeting, Human Factors Society, p. 318-322, 1978.
  5. Ciriello, V. M., Snook, S. H., Blick, A. C. and Wilkinson, P. L., The effects of task duration on psychophysically-determined maximum acceptable weights and forces, Ergonomics, 33(2), 187-200, 1990. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139008927109
  6. Davis, K. G., Marras, W. S. and Waters, T. R., Evaluation of spinal loading during lowering and lifting, Clinical Biomechanics, 13(3), 141-152, 1998. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0268-0033(97)00037-5
  7. De Looze, M. P., Toussaint, H. M., Van Dieen, J. H. and Kemper, H. C. G., Joint moments and muscle activity in the lower extremeties and lower back in lifting and lowering tasks, Journal of Biomechanics, 26(9), 1067-1076, 1993. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9290(05)80006-5
  8. Drury, C. G., Law, C. and Pawenski, C. S., A survey of industrial box handling, Human Factors, 24, 553-565, 1982. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872088202400505
  9. Fischer, B. O., Analysis of Spinal Stresses During Lifting, unpublished M.S. Thesis, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1967.
  10. Gagnon, D. and Gagnon, M., The influence of dynamic factors on triaxial net muscular moments at the L5/S1 joint during asymmetric lifting and lowering, Journal of Biomechanics, 25, 891-901, 1992. https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9290(92)90229-T
  11. Gagnon, M. and Smyth, G., Muscular mechanical energy expenditure as a process for detecting potential risks in manual material handling, Journal of Biomechanics, 24, 191-203, 1991. https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9290(91)90177-O
  12. Garg, A., A Metabolic Prediction Model for Manual Materials Handling Jobs, Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, The University of Michigan, Ann arbor, Michigan, U.S.A., 1976.
  13. Garg, A. Chaffin, D. B. and Herrin, G. D., Prediction of metabolic rates for manual materials handling jobs, American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal, 39(8), 661-674, 1978. https://doi.org/10.1080/0002889778507831
  14. Henrikson, J., Knuttgen, H. G. and Bonde-Petersen, F., Perceived exertion during exercise with concentric and eccentric muscle contractions, Ergonomics, 15, 537-544, 1972. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140137208924455
  15. Kim, H. K., Development of a Model for Combined Ergonomic Approaches in Manual Materials Handling Tasks, Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas, USA, 1990.
  16. Laboratory Information Management System, LIMS Version 1.24, AMT System, Columbus, Ohio, U.S.A.
  17. Marras, W. S., Davis, S. W., Miller, R. J. and Mirka, G. A., Apparatus for monitoring the motion components of the spine, U.S. Patent Offices, Serial No. 09/336,896, 1990.
  18. Marras, W. S., Fathallah, F. A., Miller, R. J., Davis, S. W. and Mirka, G. A., Accuracy of a three-dimensional lumbar motion monitor for recording dynamic trunk motion characteristics, International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 9, 75-87, 1992. https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-8141(92)90078-E
  19. Marras, W. S. and Mirka, G. A., Trunk strength during asymmetric trunk motion, Human Factors, 31, 667-677, 1989. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872088903100603
  20. McGil, S. M., Searching for the safe biomechanical envelope for maintaining healthy tissue, Pre-ISSLS Workshop, The Contribution of Biomechanics to the Prevention and Treatment of Low Back Pain, University of Vermont, June 25, 1996.
  21. Mirka, G. A. and Marras, W. S., A stochastic model of trunk muscle contraction during trunk bending, Spine, 18, 1396-1409, 1993. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199318110-00003
  22. Mital, A., Effect of Task Variable Interaction in Lifting and Lowering., Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas, USA., 1980.
  23. Mital, A., Asfour, S. S. and Ayoub, M. M., Physiological Approach in Manual Work Ratw Recommendations and a Comparison with the Psychophysical Approach, Journal of Human Ergology, 11, 143-156, 1982.
  24. NI-DAQ-DA2821, National Instruments Corporation, 11500N Mopac Expwy, Austin, Texas, U.S.A.
  25. NIOSH (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health), Work Practices Guide for Manual Lifting, Department of Health and Human Services Publication No. 81-122, 1981.
  26. Reid, J. G. and Costigan, P. A., Trunk muscle balance and muscular force, Spine, 12, 783-786, 1987. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-198710000-00013
  27. Snook, S. H., The Design of Manual Handling Tasks, Ergonomics, 21(12): 963-985, 1978. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140137808931804
  28. Snook, S. H. and Ciriello, V. M., The design of manual handling tasks: revised tables of maximum acceptable weights and forces, Ergonomics, 34(9), 1197-1213, 1991. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139108964855
  29. Troup, J. D. G., Leskinen, T. P. J., Stalhammar, H. R. and Kuorinka, I. A. A., A Comparison of Intraabdominal Pressure Increases, Hip Torque, and Lumbar Vertebral Compression in different Lifting Technique, Human Factors, 4, 1983.
  30. Waters, T. R., Putz-Anderson, V., Garg, A. and Fine, L. J., Revised NIOSH equation for the design and evaluation of manual lifting tasks, Ergonomics, 36(7), 749-776, 1993. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139308967940

Cited by

  1. The Development of a SVR-based Empirical Model for the Effect of the Unbalanced Floor Height on MVC of Lifting Task vol.29, pp.4, 2014, https://doi.org/10.14346/JKOSOS.2014.29.4.153
  2. Comparison of Biomechanical Stress on Low Back(L5/S1) for One-hand and Two-hands Lowering Activity vol.32, pp.5, 2013, https://doi.org/10.5143/JESK.2013.32.5.413