Literature DB >> 27226675

Analysis of physical demands during bulk bag closing and sealing.

Mahiyar F Nasarwanji1, Leanna M Reardon1, John R Heberger1, Patrick G Dempsey1.   

Abstract

Several tools are sold and recommended for closing and sealing flexible intermediate bulk containers (bulk bags) which are used to transport product that has been mined and processed. However, there is limited information on the risks, physical demands, or the benefits of using one tool over another. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the physical demands involved with two closing methods and several sealing tools in order to provide recommendations for selecting tools to reduce exposure to risk factors for work-related musculoskeletal disorders. In this study, twelve participants completed bag closing and sealing tasks using two different closing methods and eight sealing tools on two types of bulk bags. Physical demands and performance were evaluated using muscle activity, perceived exertion, subjective ratings of use, and time. Results indicate that using the "flowering" method to close bags required on average 32% less muscle activity, 30% less perceived exertion, 42% less time, and was preferred by participants compared to using the "snaking" method. For sealing, there was no single method significantly better across all measures; however, using a pneumatic cable tie gun consistently had the lowest muscle activity and perceived exertion ratings. The pneumatic cable tie gun did require approximately 33% more time to seal the bag compared to methods without a tool, but the amount of time to seal the bag was comparable to using other tools. Further, sealing a spout bulk bag required on average 13% less muscle activity, 18% less perceived exertion, 35% less time, and was preferred by participants compared to sealing a duffle bulk bag. The current results suggest that closing the spout bag using the flowering method and sealing the bag using the pneumatic cable tie gun that is installed with a tool balancer is ergonomically advantageous. Our findings can help organizations select methods and tools that pose the lowest physical demands when closing and sealing bulk bags.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bagging; Bulk bag; Flexible intermediate bulk container; Physical demand; Tools

Year:  2016        PMID: 27226675      PMCID: PMC4870602          DOI: 10.1016/j.ergon.2016.03.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Ind Ergon        ISSN: 0169-8141            Impact factor:   2.656


  6 in total

1.  Normalization of surface EMG amplitude from the upper trapezius muscle in ergonomic studies - A review.

Authors:  S E Mathiassen; J Winkel; G M Hägg
Journal:  J Electromyogr Kinesiol       Date:  1995-12       Impact factor: 2.368

2.  Methodological variance associated with normalization of occupational upper trapezius EMG using sub-maximal reference contractions.

Authors:  Jennie A Jackson; Svend Erik Mathiassen; Patrick G Dempsey
Journal:  J Electromyogr Kinesiol       Date:  2007-12-21       Impact factor: 2.368

Review 3.  Upper limb cumulative trauma disorders for the orthopaedic surgeon.

Authors:  P Houvet; L Obert
Journal:  Orthop Traumatol Surg Res       Date:  2013-01-21       Impact factor: 2.256

4.  Psychophysical bases of perceived exertion.

Authors:  G A Borg
Journal:  Med Sci Sports Exerc       Date:  1982       Impact factor: 5.411

Review 5.  A conceptual model for work-related neck and upper-limb musculoskeletal disorders.

Authors:  T J Armstrong; P Buckle; L J Fine; M Hagberg; B Jonsson; A Kilbom; I A Kuorinka; B A Silverstein; G Sjogaard; E R Viikari-Juntura
Journal:  Scand J Work Environ Health       Date:  1993-04       Impact factor: 5.024

Review 6.  Examining the interaction of force and repetition on musculoskeletal disorder risk: a systematic literature review.

Authors:  Sean Gallagher; John R Heberger
Journal:  Hum Factors       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 2.888

  6 in total
  2 in total

1.  Development of ergonomics audits for bagging, haul truck and maintenance and repair operations in mining.

Authors:  Patrick G Dempsey; Jonisha Pollard; William L Porter; Alan Mayton; John R Heberger; Sean Gallagher; Leanna Reardon; Colin G Drury
Journal:  Ergonomics       Date:  2017-06-18       Impact factor: 2.778

Review 2.  Emerging Ergonomics Issues and Opportunities in Mining.

Authors:  Patrick G Dempsey; Lydia M Kocher; Mahiyar F Nasarwanji; Jonisha P Pollard; Ashley E Whitson
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2018-11-03       Impact factor: 3.390

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.