Documents Schaub, Karlheinz 5 results

"A new procedure for determining the risk of injury associated with manual pushing and pulling was developed based upon characteristics of the user population (i.e. age, gender and stature) and task requirements (i.e. working height, task frequency and travel distance). The procedure has been integrated into international (ISO, 2004) and European (CEN, 2004) standards for determining recommended force limits for pushing and pulling that can be adapted to suit the user population. These limits consider the muscular strength of the intended target population, as well as the compressive loads on the lumbar spine. Examples are provided to demonstrate variability of the proposed ‘safety' limits for different task scenarios."

"Increasingly in the recent years, passengers' services are extended into the ascent and descent flight phases on short distance flights. Trolleys containing the required meal and beverage items are used for these service operations and pushed or pulled along the aisles of the aircraft. Flight attendants reported about increased musculo-skeletal disorders and had been complaining about high physical workload from handling trolleys. In order to ensure acceptable load levels for pushing or pulling operations of trolleys, the physical capabilities of the collective “flight attendants” had been investigated by means of force measurements at maximum voluntary contraction (MVC) level and associated relevant anthropometrical and biometrical data. CEN and ISO standards as well as international and national German methods were used to derive recommended force limits for pushing/pulling operations with respect to the physical capabilities of the target group “flight attendants”. Comparing these recommended limits with the force requirements per shift under various conditions of trolley handlings (inclination of the floor, type and weight of trolley, mode of handling, frequency of operation) showed that especially for higher floor inclinations and trolley weights, flight attendants work (substantially) above recommended limits. It became also apparent that the handling of half-size trolleys is unexpectedly high demanding due to high vertical force components, caused by the unfavorable location of their center of gravity."

"Flight attendants report on high physical load and complaints particularly focussing on the lower back. These findings are mainly ascribed to pushing and pulling of trolleys during the ascent and descent flight phases. Within an interdisciplinary experimental study, the load on the lumbar spine of flight attendants during trolley handling aboard aircraft was analysed based on laboratory measurements regarding posture and exerted forces as well as on subsequent biomechanical model calculations. Forces and moments of force at the lumbosacral disc were quantified for 458 manoeuvres performed by 25 flight attendants in total (22 female, 3 male).Lumbar load varies according to handling mode (pushing, pulling), floor gradient (0°, 2°, 5°, 8°), trolley type (half-, full-size trolley), trolley loading (empty, medium, full) and, in addition, according to individual execution technique. For each of the resulting 48 task configurations, lumbar load was evaluated with respect to potential biomechanical overload by applying work-design recommendations for disc compression and moment of force. Irrespective of floor inclination, trolley weight and individual performance, pushing of small trolleys is combined with acceptable lumbar load, pulling with critical load. Pushing or pulling large trolleys occasionally yield to critical lumbar load, in particular, when heavy or heaviest containers are moved on relatively steep or steepest surfaces.To diminish overload risk relevantly, top-edge grasp positions should be avoided for pulling of half-size trolleys, whereas for the other cases, grasping at the upper edge of the trolley is recommended."

"The musculoskeletal loads from moving trolleys aboard aircraft were assessed by observation of trolley handling on planes and by physical workload analyses of pushing and pulling of trolleys in a laboratory set up. Trolley handling by a total of 15 female flight attendants was observed on 10 short- and medium-distance flights in different types of aircraft. About 25 selected flight attendants (22 females; 3 males) of five German airlines took part in the laboratory study, which comprised three-dimensional (3D) measurements of posture and hand forces during pushing and pulling of trolleys in a variety of configurations. From the on-flight observations performed, between 150 and 250 trolley movements can be projected for a work shift. The greatest physical workload is to be expected at the beginning of service: The trolleys are fully laden then, and the cabin floor can still be inclined up to 8°, as the aircraft is still climbing, particularly on short-distance flights. The laboratory investigation revealed that the musculoskeletal workload from pushing and pulling depends essentially on the trolley load and on the gradient of the cabin floor. In addition, the degree of stressing depends significantly on the trolley type, mode of handling and personal dexterity. The up/down force component perpendicular to the direction of motion often achieved considerable amplitudes-in some cases equal to or exceeding the force in the direction of movement. The posture analysis demonstrated that pulling forced the flight attendants to adopt ergonomically unfavourable postures such as pronounced flexion of the back, particularly among female subjects. The highest values for flexion of the back occurred while pulling the half-size trolley. The results demonstrate that female flight attendants are likely to overload themselves if they frequently have to move heavily laden trolleys unaided on an inclined cabin floor."

"Production planners in the automotive industry are already being confronted with the problem of steadily increasing age of workers performing assembly jobs which frequently involve highly repetitive, short-cycle operations, and this problem seems likely to become more acute in the future. Two diametrically opposed solutions are being used: (1) Older workers are phased out under early retirement schemes (before musculoskeletal problems arise), and preference is given to younger workers, in many cases on a temporary, subcontracted basis. (2) Ergonomic and medical danger points in assembly processes are identified and eliminated by modification of the work model, irrespective of whether older or younger workers are involved.The results of a case study at 256 work stations on an assembly line for middle class cars manufactured by a globally active corporation are reported. The following interactions were noted: The age of the assembly workers influences the choice of workplace. Older workers are to be found mainly in jobs with a ‘very favourable' expert rating, younger workers in jobs with ‘(very) unfavourable' ratings. Accordingly, age and job strain are in this case not independent variables. Older workers still complain of lumbar spine symptoms despite low demands imposed by their present jobs. This seems to indicate long-term cumulative effects. A major aspect however is that the spine symptoms are often induced multifactorial and rely not or not alone on work conditions. Head–neck–shoulder symptoms occur more frequently in older workers working under unfavourable conditions. Symptoms affecting the head–neck–shoulder region, the lumbar spine and the upper limbs are co-variable with body height and body mass index.For the collective study, it was appropriate to avoid potential impairment of physical performance more or less completely by allotting jobs causing less strain to older workers."