{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

Reading 1 - Ergonomics Design Philosophy ERGONOMICS AND...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–18. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Background image of page 2
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Background image of page 4
Background image of page 5

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Background image of page 6
Background image of page 7

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Background image of page 8
Background image of page 9

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Background image of page 10
Background image of page 11

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Background image of page 12
Background image of page 13

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Background image of page 14
Background image of page 15

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Background image of page 16
Background image of page 17

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Background image of page 18
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Ergonomics Design Philosophy ERGONOMICS AND HUMAN FACTORS The Scope and Purpose of This Book Since the first edition of this hook, health and safety profeSsionals and the public have become much more familiar with the term ergonomics. In spite of, or perhaps because of, the increasing availability of information on ergonom- ics and its impact, there is still a demand for guidelines that recognize. the capabilities of people in manufacturing systems across the world. In this revised edition of Kodak’s Ergonomic Design for People at Work, we have recognized the increased sophisrication of the book’s users. There is not much basic science, and there is more emphasis on the practical guidelines that are useful to the ergonomist practicing in industry. We have also answered the needs of students by condensng the two volumes of the previous edition into one. This book is intended for use by practitioners of ergonomics in the design of jobs, workplaces, equipment, and the physical environment in the industrial setting. The guidelines in this volume are not specifically relevant to product design but may be applicable in many instances. Although physiological and psychological data have been used to develop the guidelines, results are expressed in terms that engineering, safety, or medical personnel can easily transfer to the plant. Terms such as tench, height, and (tn-nforr Jewel are used throughout the hook wherever possible. The art of applying ergonomics principles to the workplace depends on understanding the limitations of the data available. The information in this hook is suitable for the design of new workplaces, equipment, and processes and for the modification of existing equipment, workplaces, and processes. The guidelines must be interpreted before being used to evaluate. injury risk in existing conditions. The first section in this chapter discusses the scope and focus of applied industrial ergonomics with regard to the fields of human factors engineering and ergonomics, and briefly reviews ergonomics at Eastman Kodak Company. Ergonomics programs in general and two specific examples of programs in other companies are presented in the second section. A problem—solving l i I.- N... 2 Kodak’s Ergonomic Design for People at Work approach to ergonomics follows next. The fourth section of this chapter addresses the questions of whom we design for and how to apply human capacity data to the design of workplaces, environments, equipment, and jobs. Tables of capacity data are included that are hased on studies in many coun— tries, where available. Examples of how the data can be used to determine working height, push force, and acceptable workload are also given. We wrap up with a brief discussion of standards relating to ergonomics and human fac— tors that were in place as of June 2002. The rest of the book provides guidelines for design and methods for ana- lyzing jobs and identifying the level of risk for injury or illness {where available data can be applied). Some case study problems are included to illustrate how the information on capabilities can he applied in the occupational setting to solve problems on the shop floor or in the office. Definitions Ergonomics is a multidisciplinary activity striving to assemble information on people’s capacities and capabilities and to use that information in designing jobs, products, workplaces, and equipment. In the United States, the military and aerospace industries were among the first to accept human factors princi- ples; however, over the past couple of decades other industries have seen the benefits of doing so and have begun to incorporate them into their activities. The terms ergonomics and human factors are sometimes used synony— mously. Both describe the interaction between the operator and the demands of the task being performed, and both are concerned with trying to reduce unnecessary stress in these interactions. ErgonomiCs, however, has tradition— ally focused on how work affects people. This focus includes studies of, among other things, physiological responses to physically demanding work; environmental stressots such as heat, noise, and illumination; complex psy- chomotor assembly tasks; and visual—monitoring tasks. The emphasis has been on methods to reduce fatigue by designing tasks so that they fall within people’s work capacities. In contrast, the field of human factors, practiced in the United States, has traditionally been more interested in the human- machine interface, or human engineering. It has focused on people’s behavior as they interact with equipment and their environment, as well as on human size and strength capabilities relative to product and equipment design. The emphasis of human factors is often on designs that reduce the potential for human error. The Benefits of Ergonomics and Human Factors The benefits of well-designed jobs, equipment, and workplaces are improved productivity, safety, and health, and increased satisfaction for the employ- I. Ergonomics Design Philosophy 3 ees. This is ac by reducing mental demands e.g., K tion is transferred between people, or hetwe -. inspection}. This allows for greater productivity ' ability. As concerns about produciy hieved by ten-roving unnecessary physical effort from jobs or by improving the way in which informa— en product and people, as in and, ultimately, higher prof— 'lt : ity, employee job satisfaction, and health and safety in the workplace have increased, interest in ergonomics has increased as well. Many schools include courses in human factors, often within industrial ogy deyartments, and industrial hygienists are expected les for certification. Medical professionals lyses of jobs to assist them in engineerng or psychol to know some ergonomics p:incip are also recognizing the value of ergonomic ana the rehabilitatitm of people renrning to work after illness. Ergonomics at Eastman Kodak Company Although people have been applying human factors and ergonomics principles in the workplace for many sears, it has only been over the last couple of decades that many industries lave formally recognized the field by establishing internal groups to study ant. address such issues. At Eastman Kodak Com- pany, there has been a grotap investigating and applying the principles of ergonomics and human facrc- 's for almost half a century. In early 195?, Dr. Charles 1. Miller and Harry L. Davis met with Dr. ien the head of Haskell Laboratory at El. duPont had conducted a number of stud- acities of people doing hard began work physiology data as and plans for a broad—spec— y. By 1960, a small laboratory unction formed. it was a joint ng Division of i Lucien Bronha, who was tl de Nemours 5c Co. The Has (ell laboratory ies related to heat stress problems and the cap physical work. Having learned from him, they Collection on jobs at Kodak and formulated ide trum human factors function within the compan had been developed and a human factors group l effort of the Medical Depar' ‘:"1t:l'll" and the Industrial anineeri the Kodak Park Division in Rochester, New York. The group specialized in '3. Workplace and job analysis, tad design within a very large industrial complex I; that manufactures a divers: :y of photographic products, papers, chemicals, and hardware products. Expansion of the group sponding increase in its Rochester to a worldwide :' rena {in 1972) also developed, and the. group eventually split into two sectors, tan factors principles to product design {Human aluating work situ— ate a variety of disciplines resulted in a corre- "-'ivity and a broadening of its scope beyond . The area of product design was one that Li. applies ergonomics and l‘lLll Factors) and another that applies the same principles to ev ations {Ergonomics}. The crgonomists at Eastman Kod and interact closely with manufacturing personnel Safety, industrial f—Iygiene, Epidemiology, industrial Re. ak Company serve the entire corporation as well as with the Medical, lations, Design Engi— 4 Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work neering, Industrial Design, and Industrial Engineering staff groups to identify and resolve potential problems. In 1992, Eastman Kodak formalised its commitment to applying ergo- nomic principles in the workplace by establishing a corporate performance standard that requires all company facilities and processes (worldwide) to be “designed, constructed, operated and maintained to accommodate human capabilities and limitations in order to enhance employee safety, health, and performance.” Around the same time, formal expectations were established about the programs and processes that would be used to focus on proactively improving the workplace environment and concomitantly reducing the risk of musculoskeletal disorders. Each facility and organization is expected to evaluate its performance arguins_t__t;h§_perfmgnaiice standard. Conformance is also forn'iaily evaluated through periodic corpoi‘iiiETfu‘t i‘t‘s. Every few years, the associated programs and processes are revisited and modified based on the company’s experience with them. Currently, the programs and processes used to meet the company‘s performance standard encompass the following basic tenets: 0 Employees should receive training on basic ergonomics principles. The aspects covered in the training depend on the work environment they have. 0 Employees whose activities impact the work environment (e.g., engi— neers, supervisors, maintenance groups, and health and safety profes- sionals) should receive in—depth training commensurate with their activ- ities. o Newly designed or modified workplaces, processes, and equipment should meet established ergonomics or human factors guidelines. 0 A continuous improvement process should be used to reduce fatigue and human error, as well as the risk of injury associated with existing work— places, processes, or equipment. 9 Affected employees should be involved in the planning and implementa— tion of changes to workplaces, equipment, or proCesses. 0 Reports of work—related injuries or illnesses should be followed up with root cause analyses, and the. workplace, process, or equipment should be modified accordingly. Eastman Kodak Company encompasses a wide spectrum of businesses, manufacturing environments, and service organizations. As a result, the manner in which the above tenets are implemented vary from organization to organization, according to their needs and their organizational structure and systems. The information provided here is the basis for much of the training and for the principles used when designing or evaluating workplaces, equip-- ment, or processes. I'ify 'go— nce he ran .nd led cl}: of ICC l. Ergonomics Design Philosophy ERGONOMICS PROGRAM CHARACTERISTICS IN OTHER COMPANIES Influences on Ergonomics Programs The evolution of :J'gonomics efforts, programs, and analysis techniques in ii'tdtlstt'}r has been .. ifected by a number of factors: 0 Application of increased knowledge and awareness gained from research anti experience in both academia and business 0 Integration t i" business initiatives such productivity, quality, and sta- tistically dri‘. en process efforts in order to meet the challenge of compet- itiveness and changes in resource allocation 0 Changes in r.ianagemenn’leadership that may result in changed emphasis or direction 3:? the ergonomics program 0 'l'echnology .'::_l\-'a1'1ces incorporating new or evolved ergonomic solu~ tions, as well as analvses methods within the ergonomics program oSociaI and population changes and diversification (Schwerha and McMullin l'fililll} 9 Globalization of companies and businesses, requirng them to address varied cultur a: differences as well as communication, training, and stan- dardization issues [Joseph 2000} 9 Local, natior :11, and international reguiatory efforts in ergonomics There. are addi zional considerations that are not listed. Some may he. spe- cific to the busines:-- or company, what they produce, and other factors. Regulatory Influe ices Regulatory efforts 2‘. ergonomics have contributed a great deal to ergonomics programming and . {forts being initiated in the United States. hianv companies would not have st: rted an ergonomics effort, let alone go to the extent some programs have, wi ixout the motivation of a regulation. In the United States, the Occupational iafety and Health Administration {05} {A} implemented guidelines and reg: izll'Ol‘}-' efforts Start:_ng in the late 1970s that have affecretl ergonomics programming. Most of these regulations and guidelines were written to be broadly appli- cable across genert-i industry, regardless of the size, nature, or complexity of Operations {thougl‘ at times particular industries have been excluded). The most specific one is the. “Ergonomics Program Management Guidelines for Meatpacking Plants [the (i1.1idelines),"’ published in '1990. Multiyear agree— 6 Kodak’s Ergonomic Design for People at Work ments signed between OSHA and various companies, as well as numerous company—specific orations, have used the meatpacking guidelines. These guidelines and regulatory efforts advocate that an ergonomics program should have the following L ore elements: 0 Management leadership and employee participation c Hazard awariness and identification 9 Training and Education 9 Medical management 0 Job hazard in .ilvsis 4 I-iaxard prevention and controls 0 Program eval ration For more information on regulations and standards in other parts of the world, refer to “.Jnited States and International Standards Related to Ergonomics,” later in this chapter. Level of Responsiveness The continuous dtvelopmcnt and maturation of an ergonomics process is depicted in Figure .i, which considers the level of responsiveness and focus of the ergonomics program and the level of ergonomics assessment tools applied. The level of desired ergtmomics resp(iiisiv'eness_i'eactive, proactive, or strategic—will aid in determining the structure and level of programming required. 'ivpicall}. the initial level of responsiveness toward ergonomics efforts is reactive iii nature. Reactive ergonomics applies intervention efforts after an issue is reci s;-;t‘1ized—-f()r example, to address musculoskeletal disorders {MSDsl or other problems {see Figure 1.2). This application of ergonomics to the individual or group of workers anti their work, workstation, or work area is also known as gr.icroergononiics [Hendrick 198?}. The reactive perspective can be usefully intzmmroacrive and strategic levels of ergonomics responsiveness, with microergonomics serving to determine design and pos- sible system issues tom a historical perspective. The next level oi responsiveness in ergonomics is proactive designed to preempt any MM) 1- vent or problem {see Figure 1.3]. This is accomplished by having the appropriate person or system appiv ergonomics principles in designing products workstations, work areas, plants, programs, and systems For manufacturab‘slitv and to enhance work [Rodgers 'l984i. Proactive ergonomics should he established much as possible at the product and pro— cess deveiopinenr --jvstems level [Wesrgaard and Winkel 199?, 2000; joseph 200i}; Hagg 2000i. Specific svstematic processes should be implemented so that designers, engineers, and support personnel can better work together and communicate both c.rganizarionallv and geographically [joseph 2000}. Gener— i. Ergonomics Design Philosoph; ANALYSIS TOOLS Sociotech nical and Environmental Assessment Potential Ergonomics Problem-Solving Techniques and Engineer Checklists Ergonomics Problem- Solving Techniques Specific Ergonomics Intervention Assessment FIGURE 1.1. The Continuous Er ally, proactive ergonomics e neers, engineers, planners, : solving teams are allowed tr: well (Day 1.998). Proactive ergonomics m: but the two should be intcg efforts in order to gain a his direcrlv interface with partici {see Figure 1.4). The next level of respo efforts, incorporates analysis tal systems of work. This eff} and management (GUAM: g sometimes ()VFTYT-Ell‘iifi dirt macroergonomics, which i sociotechnical systems to tlt drick 2001}. Macroergonon or fixing just the work or we l‘liZEIi'iOI‘I, the socioteel‘rnical were the root causes for the may well arise again or not s Ergonomic Design for People at Wort 1' companies, as well as numerou; e meatpacking guidelines. These hat an ergonomics program shouh e participation standards in other parts of the :rnational Standards Related to ton of an ergonomics process is level oi responsiveness and focus of ergonomics assessment tools isiveness-——reactive, proactive, or :tureland level of programming popstveness toward ergonomics nnics applies intervention efforts address musculoskeletal disorders his application ofergonomics to work, workstation, or work area a 198?}. The reactive perspective 5d strategic levels of ergonomics lg to determine design and pos— re. iomics is proactive—tiesigned to are 1.3}. This is accomplished hv apply ergonomics principles in 3', plants. programs, and svstcms irk (Rodgers '1984). Proactive possible at the product and pro— nd Winkel 199?, 2000; l oscph asses should l 1 ' 3e implemented so IL. ]can better work together and apaicallv ijoseph 2000}. Gener— I. Ergonomics Design Philosophy 7 AMLYSIS TOOLS Sociotechnical and Environmental Assessment Maturation Level Potential Ergonomics Problem-Solving Techniques and Engineer Checklists Parlicipative individual Ergonomics Ergonomics Problem- Investigator Solving Techniques Specific Ergonomics Intervention Assessment roar: IVE ra eglc Microergonomics Macroergonomics WorkM'ork Area Desiganrocessi'System Focused Focused EHGONOMICS RESPONSIVENE5§ FIGURE 1.1. The Continuous Evolvement and Maturation of an Ergonomics Process ally, proactive ergonomics efforts are undertaken by designers, design engi— neers, engineers, planners, and schedulers. However, ergonomics problem-- solving teams are allowed to participate as much as possible in this effort as well (Dav 1.998}. Proactive ergonomics may he seen as separate from reactive ergonomics, but the two should he integrated with past reactive ergonomic. studies and efforts in order to gain a historical perspective. Proactive ergonomics should directlyr interface with participatory ergonomics problem-solving teams as well (see Figure 1.4]. The next level of responsiveness in ergonomics programming, strategic efforts, incorporates analysis of management, sociotechnical, and environmen— tal systems of work. This effort is known as the study of orpauj'éatiggpgi {is-sign and maria 'cmcnt ODA I ' ‘ macroer onomics Hendrick 193? . Com .anies salmfifimiflflmvm e; f j p macroergonomics, which begins with an analysis of the ITClilinIWf sociotechnical systems to the design of work systems, including a systematic analysis oWeWmnvimnmental systems {Hen- drick 200i). Macroetgonomics studies have shown that if microergom'imics. or fixing just the work or work area, is the only approach used Within an orga— nization, the sociotechnical or environmental systems that contributed to or were the root causes for the risk may not be fixed, and therefore the prohlem may well arise again or not he fixed in the first plaCe [Gilmore and Millard 3 Kodak’s Ergonomic Design for People at Work Characteristics of a Reactive Ergonomics Program Program Structure 0 intervention studies aimed at a specific problem, usually at a particular workstation or work area. This effort may be seen as short-lived in that it identifies the problem, solves it, and moves on. 0 Associated programs will be aimed at specific work issues or work areas being studied. => Back schools, awareness training, behavioral safety, work hardening 2:» Productivity enhancements as well as quality management efforts 0 Utilization of participatory ergonomics efforts will be the preferred structure. Analysis Models 9 Individual investigators, outside experts or from within the company, may be used ...
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}