An Investigation of the Maximum Acceptable Weight of Lift by Indonesian Inexperienced Female Manual Material Handlers

  • Ardiyanto ArdiyantoEmail author
  • Dhanaya A. Wirasadha
  • Novi W. Wulandari
  • I. G. B. Budi Dharma
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 820)


The purpose of this study was to investigate the maximum acceptable weight of lift (MAWL) by Indonesian inexperienced female manual material handlers. Twenty-one females who were selected based on their physical activity categories voluntarily participated in this study. The participants were asked to determine their MAWLs using the psychophysical method for the lifting tasks at two different lifting frequencies: one lift/5 min and 4 lifts/min. The participants’ heart rate was also recorded to be utilized for investigating the physiological responses while lifting the obtained MAWLs. The obtained MAWLs were also compared to the MAWLs of other study populations, using published data. As the results, two-way analysis of variance test result revealed no significant effect of physical activity category on MAWL (p = 0.890). On the other hand, a significant effect on MAWL for the lifting frequency was observed at p < .001. The comparison of MAWLs obtained in this study to other studies showed that no significant differences on MAWL were found between Indonesian and Chinese inexperienced manual handlers for the lifting tasks at one lift/5 min. The significant differences on MAWL were observed between Indonesian inexperienced and American experienced female manual handlers. However, no significant differences were observed for the lifting tasks at 4 lifts/min. Furthermore, the physiological data analysis revealed that the energy expenditures required for lifting at one lift/5 min was significantly less than the physiological limit, while those of lifting at 4 lifts/min was significantly higher than the limit. The results of this study might be utilized as consideration for determining the safety lifting limit for Indonesian inexperienced female manual material handlers.


Lifting Maximum acceptable weight of lift Indonesian inexperienced female manual material handlers Psychophysical approach 



The authors gratefully acknowledge the funding support from Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Universitas Gadjah Mada on this project. We also thank Dr. Titis Wijayanto for letting us using the heart rate monitor during the data collection process. Also, the authors would like to acknowledge the support of Lembaga Pengelola Dana Pendidikan Republik Indonesia in the form of a Travel Grant, which enabled the author to attend this conference.


  1. 1.
    Maiti R (2008) Workload assessment in building construction related activities in India. Appl Ergon 39:754–765CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Deros BM, Daruis DDI, Basir IM (2015) A study on ergonomic awareness among workers performing manual material handling activities. Proc Soc Behav Sci 195:1666–1673CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Smedley J, Egger P, Cooper C, Coggon D (1995) Manual handling activities and risk of low back pain in nurses. Occup Environ Med 52:160–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kuiper JI, Burdorf A, Verbeek JH, Frings-Dresen MH, van der Beek AJ, Viikari-Juntura ER (1999) Epidemiologic evidence on manual materials handling as a risk factor for back disorders: a systematic review. Int J Ind Ergon 24:389–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dempsey PG, Hashemi L (1999) Analysis of workers’ compensation claims associated with manual materials handling. Ergonomics 42:183–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (1981) Work practices guide for manual lifting. US Department of Health and Human Services, Cincinnati, OHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Waters TR, Putz-Anderson V, Garg A, Fine LJ (1993) Revised NIOSH equation for the design and evaluation of manual lifting tasks. Ergonomics 36:749–776CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Snook SH, Ciriello VM (1991) The design of manual handling tasks: revised tables of maximum acceptable weights and forces. Ergonomics 34:1197–1213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Authier M, Lortie M, Gagnon M (1996) Manual handling techniques: comparing novices and experts. Int J Ind Ergon 17:419–429CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Marras WS, Parakkat J, Chany AM, Yang G, Burr D, Lavender SA (2006) Spine loading as a function of lift frequency, exposure duration, and work experience. Clin Biomech 21:345–352. Scholar
  11. 11.
    Evans WA (1990) The relationship between isometric strength of Cantonese males and the US NIOSH guide for manual lifting. Appl Ergon 21:135–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lee KS, Park HS, Chun YH (1996) The validity of the revised NIOSH weight limit in a Korean young male population: a psychophysical approach. Int J Ind Ergon 18:181–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Maiti R, Ray GG (2004) Determination of maximum acceptable weight of lift by adult Indian female workers. Int J Ind Ergon 34:483–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Widodo L, Sukania IW, Kristiani C (2016) Workload analysis of the container unloading process worker. In: Proceeding of 9th international seminar on industrial engineering and management. ER-1-ER-7Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Huda LN, Matondang R (2018) The lean ergonomics in green design of crude palm oil plant. IOP Conf Ser Mater Sci Eng 309:012109. Scholar
  16. 16.
    Deros BM, Daruis DDI, Rosly AL, Aziz IA, Hishamuddin NS, Hamid NHA, Roslin SM (2017) Ergonomic risk assessment of manual material handling at an automotive manufacturing company. PressAcad Proc 5:317–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Shy LH (2008) Ergonomic intervention to reduce the risk of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDS) for manual materials handling tasks. Project report. UTeM MalaysiaGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Armstrong T, Bull F (2006) Development of the world health organization global physical activity questionnaire (GPAQ). J Public Health 14:66–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Karwowski W, Yates JW (1986) Reliability of the psychophysical approach to manual lifting of liquids by females. Ergonomics 29:237–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ciriello VM, Snook SH (1983) A study of size, distance, height, and frequency effects on manual handling tasks. Hum Factors 25:473–483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ciriello VM, Snook SH, Hughes GJ (1993) Further studies of psychophysically determined maximum acceptable weights and forces. Hum Factors 35:175–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ciriello VM (2007) The effects of container size, frequency and extended horizontal reach on maximum acceptable weights of lifting for female industrial workers. Appl Ergon 38:1–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Keytel LR, Goedecke JH, Noakes TD, Hiiloskorpi H, Laukkanen R, van der Merwe L, Lambert EV (2005) Prediction of energy expenditure from heart rate monitoring during submaximal exercise. J Sports Sci 23:289–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wu S-P (1999) Psychophysically determined infrequent lifting capacity of Chinese participants. Ergonomics 42:952–963CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Elizabeth E, Vitriana V, Defi IR (2016) Correlations between muscle mass, muscle strength, physical performance, and muscle fatigue resistance in community-dwelling elderly subjects. Int J Integr Health Sci 4:32–37Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Plamondon A, Larivière C, Delisle A, Denis D, Gagnon D (2012) Relative importance of expertise, lifting height and weight lifted on posture and lumbar external loading during a transfer task in manual material handling. Ergonomics 55:87–102. Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wu S-P (1997) Maximum acceptable weight of lift by Chinese experienced male manual handlers. Appl Ergon 28:237–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ciriello VM (2003) The effects of box size, frequency and extended horizontal reach on maximum acceptable weights of lifting. Int J Ind Ergon 32:115–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Snook SH, Ciriello VM (1974) Maximum weights and work loads acceptable to female workers. J Occup Environ Med 16:527–534Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Mital A (1987) Patterns of differences between the maximum weights of lift acceptable to experienced and inexperienced materials handlers. Ergonomics 30:1137–1147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Legg SJ, Myles WS (1985) Metabolic and cardiovascular cost, and perceived effort over an 8 hour day when lifting loads selected by the psychophysical method. Ergonomics 28:337–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ardiyanto Ardiyanto
    • 1
    Email author
  • Dhanaya A. Wirasadha
    • 1
  • Novi W. Wulandari
    • 1
  • I. G. B. Budi Dharma
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Mechanical and Industrial EngineeringUniversitas Gadjah MadaYogyakartaIndonesia

Personalised recommendations