Effect of a redesigned two-wheeled container for refuse collecting on mechanical loading of low back and shoulders

被引:20
作者
Kuijer, PPFM
Hoozemans, MJM
Kingma, I
Van Dieën, JH
De Vries, WHK
Veeger, DJ
Van der Beek, AJ
Visser, B
Frings-Dresen, MHW
机构
[1] Univ Amsterdam, Coronel Inst Occupat & Environm Hlth, Acad Med Ctr Res Hlth & Hlth Care, NL-1100 DE Amsterdam, Netherlands
[2] Vrije Univ Amsterdam, Inst Fundamental & Clin Human Movement Sci, Fac Human Movement Sci, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[3] Delft Univ Technol, Dept Mech Engn, Delft, Netherlands
[4] VU Univ Med Ctr, Dept Social Med, Inst Res Extramural Med, Amsterdam, Netherlands
关键词
refuse collecting; intervention; pushing; pulling; physical workload;
D O I
10.1080/0014013031000065619
中图分类号
T [工业技术];
学科分类号
08 ;
摘要
The objective of this study was to compare the mechanical and perceived workload when working with a redesigned two-wheeled container and working with a standard two-wheeled container for refuse collecting. The three changes in the design of the container were a displacement of the position of the centre of mass in the direction of the axis of the wheels, a slight increase in the height of the handle and a slight increase in the horizontal distance between the handle and the wheel-axis, and an increase in the diameter of the wheels. The volume of the container remained 0.240 m(3). Nine refuse collectors performed some of their most frequent daily activities with both types of containers in the laboratory. Kinematics and exerted hand forces were assessed as input for detailed 3D biomechanical models of the low back and shoulder to estimate net moments at the low back and shoulders, compressive forces at the low back and contact forces at the glenohumeral joint. Also, the refuse collectors rated the ease of handling the two-wheeled containers on a five point scale. The use of the redesigned container resulted in a decrease of the exerted hand forces of 27%, decreases in the net moments at the low back and shoulders of 8% and 20%, respectively, and a decrease of 32% of the contact force at the glenohumeral joint when compared to the standard container. However, pulling an empty redesigned container on to the pavement resulted in an increase of the shoulder moment of more than 100%. No differences between container types were found for the compressive forces at the low back. Pushing and pulling with the redesigned container was rated as easier than pushing and pulling with the standard container. No differences in subjective ratings were found for the tasks of turning the container or pulling an empty container onto the pavement. It is concluded that, provided that empty containers are placed back onto the pavement as infrequently as possible, the introduction of the redesigned container could result in a reduction of the low back and shoulder load for refuse collectors.
引用
收藏
页码:543 / 560
页数:18
相关论文
共 44 条
[1]   Factors affecting minimum push and pull forces of manual carts [J].
Al-Eisawi, KW ;
Kerk, CJ ;
Congleton, JJ ;
Amendola, AA ;
Jenkins, OC ;
Gaines, W .
APPLIED ERGONOMICS, 1999, 30 (03) :235-245
[2]  
ANGLIN C, 1997, P 1 C INT SHOULD GRO, P13
[3]   Manual handling techniques: Comparing novices and experts [J].
Authier, M ;
Lortie, M ;
Gagnon, M .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL ERGONOMICS, 1996, 17 (05) :419-429
[4]   Low-back stresses when learning to use a materials handling device [J].
Chaffin, DB ;
Stump, BS ;
Nussbaum, MA ;
Baker, G .
ERGONOMICS, 1999, 42 (01) :94-110
[5]  
De Groot JH, 1998, THESIS DELFT U TECHN
[6]   MECHANICAL LOADING ON THE LOW-BACK IN 3 METHODS OF REFUSE COLLECTING [J].
DELOOZE, MP ;
STASSEN, ARA ;
MARKSLAG, AMT ;
BORST, MJ ;
WOONING, MM ;
TOUSSAINT, HM .
ERGONOMICS, 1995, 38 (10) :1993-2006
[7]   VALIDATION OF A DYNAMIC LINKED SEGMENT MODEL TO CALCULATE JOINT MOMENTS IN LIFTING [J].
DELOOZE, MP ;
KINGMA, I ;
BUSSMANN, JBJ ;
TOUSSAINT, HM .
CLINICAL BIOMECHANICS, 1992, 7 (03) :161-169
[8]  
DONDERS NCG, 1997, TIDSCHRIFT ERGON AUG, P102
[9]  
FAESSEN HGM, 1995, MAXIMUM ACCEPTABLE W
[10]   GUIDELINES FOR ENERGETIC LOAD IN 3 METHODS OF REFUSE COLLECTING [J].
FRINGSDRESEN, MHW ;
KEMPER, HCG ;
STASSEN, ARA ;
MARKSLAG, AMT ;
DELOOZE, MP ;
TOUSSAINT, HM .
ERGONOMICS, 1995, 38 (10) :2056-2064