Advertisement

Push and Pull – Force Measurement Updates, Interpretation of Measurements and Modes, Peculiarities (Curves, Steps, Etc.). Multi-task Analysis

  • Marco Cerbai
  • Marco Placci
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 820)

Abstract

Push and Pull measurement using conventional instruments such as mechanical dynamometers, does not allow to fully appreciate the peculiarities of a path with curves, gradients or variations in the terrain.

High-sampling digital dynamometers allow to accurately observe the performance of the force during push and pull activities.

It’s possible to identify:
  • The Initial Force by recording the peak in the initial phase;

  • The Sustained Force by recording the entire phase after the peak: in this case, the value should be processed as a 50th, 75th or 90th percentile of the sample of data recorded, because the percentile concept approximates the classical interpretation of the Sustained Force, according to proposed criteria by Stover H. Snook and Vincent M. Ciriello, authors of the benchmarks for the push and pull activities of the International Standard ISO 11228-2.

In various measurement experiences carried out in working environments such as urban waste management, hospital departments, or manufacturing departments, it has been observed that sustained force is not constant, but also varies rapidly. These variations are intrinsic to any handling activity, but introduce a further difficulty in defining the value of this factor.

During the shift operators are exposed to multiple handling tasks: it’s important to set up a multitask analysis push and pull activities.

Curves, steps and gradients introduce additional variables to the Multitask Analysis.

The analysis of the various situations allows to create a database of useful data to map the risk in advance.

Keywords

Push and pull Risk assessment High-sampling digital dynamometers Ergonomics Musculoskeletal disorders 

References

  1. 1.
    Snook SH, Ciriello VM (1991) The design of manual handling tasks: revised tables of maximum acceptable weights and force. Ergonomics 34(9):1197–1213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Colombini D, Grieco A, Occhipinti E (1998) Ergonomics: special issue. occupational musculoskeletal disorders of the upper limbs due to mechanical overload. Ergonomics 41:9Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Occhipinti E, Colombini D (2007) Updating reference values and predictive models of the OCRA method in the risk assessment of work-related musculoskeletal disorders of the upper limbs. Ergonomics 50(11):1727–1739CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Waters TR, Putz-Anderson V, Garg A (1994) Application manual for the revised NIOSH Lifting Equation. NIOSH, CincinnatiGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Waters TR, Lu ML, Occhipinti E (2007) New procedure for assessing sequential manual lifting jobs using the revised NIOSH lifting equation. Ergonomics 50(11):1761–1770CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Colombini D, Occhipinti E, Alvarez-Casado E, Waters TR (2017) Manual lifting: a guide to the study of simple and complex lifting tasks. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.EPM IES - Ergonomics of Posture and Movement International Ergonomics SchoolMilanItaly
  2. 2.Safety Work SrlImolaItaly

Personalised recommendations