The use of ergonomic evaluation tools in manual assembly: a laboratory based intervention study and field study

Al-Saleh, Khalid Saad (2004). The use of ergonomic evaluation tools in manual assembly: a laboratory based intervention study and field study. University of Birmingham. Ph.D.

Full text not available from this repository.

Abstract

The thesis presents ergonomic intervention principles aimed at preventing or reducing musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs). The concept, evidence and impact of MSDs on health and work are described. MSDs risk factors and development models are discussed. A conceptual intervention model is presented and epidemiological consideration in intervention study design is addressed. Assessment techniques for physical, environmental and psychological exposure are described.

The research component of the thesis includes the development of two software programmes which were produced to calculate the outcome measures for the Quick Evaluation Checklist (QEC) and the Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA) tools. The research continued with a two-stage laboratory study aimed at investigating the effect of manual assembly and ergonomic training and intervention on stress and arousal, grip-strength, changes in exposure levels, body parts discomfort and job time. Ten participants assembled 50 finished parts consisting of 16 subassemblies (stage 1). The participants then repeated the task after workstation ergonomic intervention and training. The stress, arousal and grip-strength were measured for every participant before and after performing the task in each stage. Each participant filled in a discomfort questionnaire after performing the task in each stage. The tasks were analysed using QEC and RULA for every participant in every stage. Two different methods for discomfort reporting and a proposed relationship between QEC and RULA are also investigated. The study results show a positive effect for ergonomic intervention and training on stress, arousal, grip-strength, job time and exposure levels. The results favour one method of discomfort reporting over the other and show that the proposed relationship between QEC and RULA should be treated with caution.

The third stage of the research was a study conducted in an automotive plant to investigate the plant’s medical staff perception that more MSDs are reported on a particular assembly line than an other particular assembly line and the only difference between the two lines is the work-surface height. The relationship between QEC and RULA is presented. The study utilised, the plant’s database to obtain sickness absence and work-related injury reporting data, discomfort questionnaire, and QEC and RULA for analysing more than 240 tasks in each line. The study confirms the first perception while presenting other reasons for exposure differences between the two lines in addition to work-surface height. A work-surface height is proposed based on some assumptions and compromises. The study strengthens the laboratory study conclusion regarding QEC and RULA relationship.

Type of Work:

Thesis (Doctorates > Ph.D.)

Award Type:

Doctorates > Ph.D.

Supervisor(s):