4.4 Article

An ergonomic evaluation of a manual metal pouring operation

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL ERGONOMICS
Volume 38, Issue 2, Pages 182-192

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.ergon.2007.02.003

Keywords

foundry; metal pouring operations; MAF; physiological cost; manual material handling; energy expenditure

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Manual material handling is one of the major causes of severe industrial injury. Foundries are an industry where manual material handling is performed routinely. This paper presents a study conducted using a simulated metal pouring operation commonly found in small foundries based on activities. Two laboratory experiments were conducted to evaluate two objectives: (1) to study the effects of different mold heights and carrying distances on physiological responses, and (2) to determine maximum acceptable task frequencies (MAF) for metal pouring. Both objective and subjective measures were used in the study. The objective measures included oxygen uptake, heart rate, and blood pressure while subjective measures included ratings of perceived exertion. Ten healthy males served as participants for these experiments. Results indicated that carrying distance had a significant effect on both heart rate and oxygen consumption. Results also indicated that the participants selected a MAF which was as much as 25% lower than the expectations present at the foundry on which this experiment was modeled. Recommendations for reducing the risk on injury are also discussed in the paper. Relevance to industry Small and medium-sized foundries often have limited resources to deal with occupational safety and health issues. Hence, the results presented in this paper coupled with the engineering and administrative changes, could be used as guidelines for setting good work practices. (C) 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available