Applied Industrial Ergonomics 4.3 - tcm1038-133720

Disclaimer
The information contained in this manual is based on current, accurate, and reliable
sources relating to ergonomics and other fields of study in human performance. No
warranty, guarantee, or representation is made by Humantech, Inc. as to the absolute
correctness or sufficiency of any representation contained in this manual. Humantech,
Inc. assumes no liability for the use of the information in this manual. In no event shall
Humantech, Inc. be liable for lost profits, special, incidental, direct, indirect, exemplary,
punitive, or consequential damages.
Copyright 2008 by Humantech, Inc.
All rights reserved, including the right of reproduction in whole or in part in any form.
Humantech is a registered trademark of Humantech, Inc.
Applied Industrial Ergonomics Version 4.3
ISBN 978-0-9821894-2-9
Notice
Humantech encourages readers to copy and use the forms in this manual for personal
use. Please note that these forms are copyrighted by Humantech, Inc. and can only be
used under the following circumstances:
Readers may copy forms with the understanding that such copies shall be used
solely for the personal use of the individual in connection with his/her application
of Applied Industrial Ergonomics principles to his/her employment.
The rights granted by this limited license are not transferable to any other
individual or person without Humantechs express written permission.
No forms may be modified without the express written consent of Humantech,

and proper copyright and trademark notices must be kept on all copies of the
forms.
Except for the rights granted above, Humantech reserves any and all copyright
rights, trademark rights, trade secret rights, and all other rights protected under
any doctrine of intellectual property. By way of example, but not limitation,
Humantech retains the exclusive right to
A.
sell or distribute copies of any portion of the Applied Industrial

Ergonomics manual to any third party,
B.
create alterations or derivative works based on the Applied Industrial

Ergonomics manual, and
C. utilize any copy of the Applied Industrial Ergonomics manual for

purposes of consulting, delivering services, or otherwise assisting any
third party.
Visit Humantech online at www.humantech.com for more information.
Contents
Applied Industrial Ergonomics

Chapter 1
Introduction to Occupational Ergonomics...................... 1

Welcome....................................................................................................2
About This Manual.....................................................................................2
Course Objectives .....................................................................................3
Ergonomics is a Process, Not a Program .................................................4
What is Occupational Ergonomics? ..........................................................5
Why Ergonomics? .....................................................................................5
Designing for the 30-Inch View..............................................................6
Ergonomics as a Business Agenda.........................................................10
Applying Human Performance Ergonomics The Tools ........................16
How This Manual is Organized ...............................................................29
References ..............................................................................................30
Chapter 2
Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders..................... 33

About This Chapter..................................................................................34
"Work Doesnt Need to be a Pain!" ........................................................35
Would You Do it This Way?.....................................................................36
Posture, Force, and Frequency...............................................................37
What are Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders?..............................38
WMSDs in Industry..................................................................................40
How Do WMSDs Occur? .........................................................................41
Types of WMSDs.....................................................................................45
References ..............................................................................................54
Chapter 3
Recognizing Ergonomic Issues..................................... 57

Introduction to the Ergonomics Hit List ................................................59
The Hit List "Find It"..............................................................................60
The Hit List "Fix It" ................................................................................71
Ask the Operator .....................................................................................76
Continuous Improvement Process ..........................................................77
The Ergonomics Action Form ..............................................................79
Completing the Ergonomics Action Form................................................81
Avoiding Potential Pitfalls With the Ergonomics Action Form .................88
Chapter 4
Evaluating Ergonomic Risk Factors.............................. 91

Ergonomic Risk Factors Defined.............................................................93
Ergonomic Risk Factor Surveys ..............................................................94
The BRIEF Survey ...............................................................................95
Applying the BRIEF Survey .....................................................................97
Physical Stressors and the BRIEF Survey ............................................111
Scoring the BRIEF Survey.....................................................................113
Completing the BRIEF Survey ..............................................................114
Measuring Risk Reduction.....................................................................118
Avoiding Potential Pitfalls With the BRIEF Survey................................120
References ............................................................................................120
Chapter 5
Prioritizing Ergonomic Risks ...................................... 125

About This Chapter................................................................................126
Introduction to Ergonomic Risk Prioritization.........................................127
Risk Prioritization Tools .........................................................................128
The BEST ..........................................................................................128
Completing the BEST Form...................................................................131
Avoiding Potential Pitfalls With the BEST .............................................138
The EASY ..........................................................................................139
Completing the EASY Form ..................................................................147
Avoiding Potential Pitfalls With the EASY .............................................156
Identifying High Priority Job/Tasks ........................................................156
Chapter 6
Manual Material Handling Analysis ............................. 159

Introduction to Manual Material Handling..............................................161
Risk Factors for the Back ......................................................................162
The Revised NIOSH Lifting Equation ....................................................162
The NIOSH Composite Lifting Index .....................................................178
Uses for the Revised NIOSH Lifting Equation.......................................179
Avoiding Potential Pitfalls With the Revised NIOSH Lifting Equation ...180
Psychophysical Analysis: Push, Pull, and Carry ...................................181
Manual Material Handling Example.......................................................192
Manual Material Handling Analysis Flowchart.......................................196
References ............................................................................................197
ii
2008 Humantech
Contents
Chapter 7
Ergonomic Design Guidelines..................................... 199

Ergonomics in Workstation Design .......................................................201
Design and Build Guidelines .................................................................204
Avoiding Potential Pitfalls With the Design and Build Guidelines .........218
Static Anthropometric Data....................................................................218
References ............................................................................................233
Chapter 8
Cost Justifying Ergonomic Improvements ................. 237

Introduction to Cost Justification ...........................................................239
Ergonomics and Value-Added Analysis ................................................241
Ergonomics and Motion Time Analysis The STEP.........................242
Estimating Ergonomic Improvement Benefits, Cost Recovery..............244
The Cost Justification Worksheet..........................................................246
Avoiding Potential Pitfalls When Cost Justifying With STEP ................253
References ............................................................................................253
Chapter 9
The Job Improvement Process.................................... 255

Introduction to the Job Improvement Process.......................................257
Identify Feasible and Effective Improvements.......................................257
Implement Improvements ......................................................................266
Chapter 10 Performing an Ergonomics Review............................. 271

What is an Ergonomics Review?...........................................................273
Step 1: Select a Job to Review ............................................................274
Step 2: Gather Data..............................................................................275
Step 3: Analyze the Data......................................................................298
Step 4: Complete the Job Improvement Process.................................299
Chapter 11 Surviving the First 90 Days ......................................... 305

The First 90 Days ..................................................................................306
Structuring the Ergonomics Process (Plan) ..........................................308
Initiating Job Improvement, Demonstrating Success (Do) ....................313
Adding Strength and Longevity to the Ergonomics Process .................319
iii
Appendices ....................................................................................... 323

Appendix A: Basis for the BRIEF ..........................................................324
Appendix B: Basis for the Design and Build Guidelines........................328
Index.................................................................................................. 335
iv
2008 Humantech
hapter 1 Introduction to Occupational Ergonomics

Welcome....................................................................................................2
About This Manual.....................................................................................2
Course Objectives .....................................................................................3
Ergonomics is a Process, Not a Program .................................................4
What is Occupational Ergonomics? ..........................................................5
Why Ergonomics? .....................................................................................5
Designing for the 30-Inch View..............................................................6
Ergonomics as a Business Agenda.........................................................10
Applying Human Performance Ergonomics The Tools ........................16
How This Manual is Organized ...............................................................29
References ..............................................................................................30
Welcome
Welcome to the Applied Industrial Ergonomics training class. You will learn,
and more importantly, practice many valuable skills used to improve problem
jobs in a manufacturing/industrial setting. Since this is your class, we want you
to get the most out of it. To ensure that this is a meaningful educational
experience, we recommend that you participate with enthusiasm.
Some ways in which you can positively influence this training include:
If you have a question, ask it!
If you need clarification, get it!
If you have a concern, voice it!
This educational material and the corresponding sessions have been shaped and
refined over the years by participants like you. We hope that at the end of the
training you will formally record your evaluation of this course so that we may
continue to improve.
About This Manual

This manual provides the skills and tools that will allow you to effectively improve
the ergonomics of problem jobs in a manufacturing/industrial setting. It is
intended for individuals responsible for finding and improving problem jobs in
industrial environments, typically ergonomics committee members, site-based
engineers, and health and safety staff.
The accompanying Applied Industrial Ergonomics Toolbox CD-ROM contains a
wealth of information to help you improve problem jobs, including the following:
Blank forms you can print and use
Software and spreadsheets
Time Savings and Cost Justification Microsoft Excel spreadsheet

for evaluating productivity impact of job improvements and
calculating payback periods
Manual Material Handling Guidelines Microsoft Excel spreadsheet
for determining safe limits for lifting, lowering, pushing, pulling, and
carrying tasks
Humantech overview with articles, past newsletters, case studies, and

other useful information if you'd like to learn more about ergonomics
2008 Humantech
Chapter 1: Introduction to Occupational Ergonomics
Course Objectives
After completing this course, you will be able to:
Describe why ergonomics is important to companies
Identify common work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs) and

their signs and symptoms
Quickly and easily identify ergonomic issues and solutions using the
Ergonomics Hit List
Identify ergonomic risk factors using the Baseline Risk Identification of

Ergonomic Factors (BRIEF) Survey
Prioritize jobs based on ergonomic risk factors and other data
Analyze manual material handling tasks with advanced ergonomics

assessment tools including:
Psychophysical analysis guidelines for push, pull, and carry

NIOSH Lifting Equation
Specify basic working heights, reach distances, and force limits using
design guidelines
Cost justify improvements using the Standard Time Efficiency Process

(STEP) methodology
Perform an ergonomics job review using the appropriate methods
Structure the ergonomics process for success in the critical first 90 days
For more information about using this manual, see How This Manual is
Organized on page 29.
Ergonomics is a Process, Not a Program

Ergonomics is a board-accredited profession that has developed significantly
over the past three quarters of a century. The early efforts of human factors
research and human engineering, led by the military, have progressed to a broad
application of ergonomics within industry and culture. More and more companies
are recognizing the benefits of the common sense approach utilized by
ergonomics.
Ergonomics represents a journey of continuous improvement for the workplace.
Figure 1.1 illustrates the ergonomic improvement process. One of the most
significant features of this process is that a basic awareness of ergonomics is
needed to begin. However, once the process has begun, the cycle repeats itself
continually.
Too often, businesses fail to sustain ergonomics efforts because they focus only
on large-scale improvements in the very short term. Participants think they have
to hit a "home run" every time at the plate or else they have failed. This is a
mistake! "Base-hit" improvements, which represent small job enhancements, are
the key to winning with ergonomics. Problems in jobs may have taken 15, 20, or
25 years to develop. It may take 15, 20, or even 25 months to counteract their
effect.
Figure 1.1 Ergonomic Improvement Process
2008 Humantech
What is Occupational Ergonomics?

Occupational ergonomics is the science of improving employee performance and
well-being in relation to job tasks, equipment, and environment. It is a relentless
pursuit and continuous effort to design the workplace for what people do well,
and design against what people do not do well, thereby fitting the job to the
person to enhance human performance.
The desire to improve tools and working conditions is an innate human trait. The
conceptual basis of ergonomics has existed for over 500 years. As a result of a
surge in activities associated with increasing industrialization, the discipline
began to formalize during the twentieth century. The word ergonomics was
created in 1949 to define a growing area of research and engineering interest
involving the interaction of people with industrial and military technology and
demanding physical environments.
The combination of the Greek words ergon, meaning work, and nomos, meaning
laws, resulted in the term we use today. Fundamentally, ergonomics was a
simple and straightforward discipline. Criteria were developed that defined the
limits of human capacity. Descriptive statistics outlined visual and auditory
perception, mental workload limits were roughly defined, human reach and
strength limits were cataloged, and initial work on physiological capacity defined
cardio-pulmonary limits for exertion. Taken together, these laws of work defined
the limits to human capability much like the specifications for a machine define its
limits.
Why Ergonomics?
People are the sole source of productivity in your company. A clever person
could say they are also the soul source of productivity.
Shiny buildings, machines, cute slogans, and fancy boardroom tables wont
make money for your corporationits your people, and their brains and
muscles, working to meet your bottom line. Big-picture strategies do not focus on
the real problems facing the U.S.; on the contrary, they blind us to them.
Whenever someone announces, Lets look at this from 30,000 feet, ask them if
they have been on a plane lately. At 30,000 feet, you cant see anything; your
head, literally and metaphorically, is in the clouds.
Rather, the key to success is at 30 inches. Thats where the power of people
resides. At 30 inches, you can see peoples faces. At 30 inches, people
converse, reach for tools, and sit at computers. At 30 inches, issues are not
abstractions; they must be dealt with conclusively, discretely, and with the tools
at hand.
At 30 inches, ergonomics provides the framework for designing workstation
characteristics (workstation heights, force requirements, etc.) to match human
performance capabilities. Through simple, cost-effective job improvements that
support both task needs and human performance capabilities, the discipline of
ergonomics seeks to eliminate WMSDs, maximize productivity, and enhance
process stability and product quality.
Designing for the 30-Inch View

The rationale for applying ergonomics at the 30-inch level is straightforward and
can be explained through a simple comparison. The reasons for operating a
machine within a specified set of limits are self-evident:
If we operate a machine within the limits of its design, we will achieve

optimal productivity.
If we consistently operate a machine outside of its limits (as a

tachometer indicates when an engine operates outside its limits), the
machine will be unreliable and eventually break down.
Figure 1.2 A Tachometer Indicates Exceeded Limits
We can apply a similar logic to people. Because the ergonomics discipline

provides us with formal definitions of the cognitive, physiological, and
biomechanical capacities of the human, we can apply the information to optimize
productivity while avoiding injury through workplace design:
If task demands and the work environment are designed to

accommodate our biological capacity, the human will achieve optimal
human productivity and minimum error.
If task demands require a person to operate continuously outside of his

or her capacity, the human will perform the work unreliably and may
eventually break down.
Using the model of implementation derived for machines, the contribution of

ergonomics is clear. The knowledge derived from ergonomics allows industry to
design workplace characteristics to match human performance capabilities.
The 30-Inch view of Ergonomics is a way to optimize human performance by
ensuring that the workplace supports both task needs and employee capabilities.
It seeks to maximize productivity and reliability while eliminating WMSDs through
simple, cost-effective job improvements.
2008 Humantech
To combine the principles of ergonomics, design for what people do well and
against what they do not do well. Use the following accepted management tools
to ensure breakthrough improvements in health and safety and in productivity
that drive sustainable bottom-line savings:
Risk management a clear understanding of the problem ensures that

improvement efforts are directed at the highest priority concerns.
Continuous improvement simple and effective problem solving

methods lead to low cost/high impact job improvements.
Engineering design clear specifications ensure that workplace

modifications are optimized.
Cost justification easy to use methods capture the savings from

proposed ergonomic job improvements to ensure project funding.
The 30-Inch View builds on conventional ergonomics activities to achieve new

levels of health and safety excellence, and provides previously unattainable
improvements in productivity. Humantechs proprietary methodologies combine
simple problem solving methods with cost-effective workplace solutions and
innovative cost justification techniques. Three elements of successful
ergonomics include:
A practical approach to workplace assessment and improvement
Innovative techniques to demonstrate business value
Sustainable systems to ensure long-term success
Practical Approach
Simple and effective problem solving methods have been demonstrated through
decades of success in the workplace. Conventional ergonomics approaches
tend to stall as a result of too much analysis, or fail due to a lack of data to drive
the process. Ergonomics at 30 inches employs innovative methodologies to
derive the correct data and to maximize the contribution of ergonomics to your
health and safety and business performance.
This approach quantifies ergonomic risk and identifies opportunities to improve
productivity in one assessment method. Ergonomics must be fully integrated
with improvement initiatives such as Six Sigma and Lean Manufacturing.
Humantech analysis and solutions fit into these approaches to ensure that health
and safety goals are met while driving on-time, on-cost, and on-quality
performance.
Demonstrating Business Value

Cost justification techniques based on standard accounting practices drive
breakthrough improvements in health and safety performance, workers
compensation costs, and productivity. Every workplace improvement project
generates a return on investment (ROI) statement that assures the dollars spent
on workplace modifications are dollars that will contribute to your bottom line.
The business case for conventional ergonomics approaches is based primarily
on measuring the financial benefit of reduced workers' compensation costs
related to WMSDs. These costs are simple to measure with the accurate
recordkeeping systems that industry has developed over the past few decades.
They are an excellent macro-indicator of progress. However, workers'
compensation costs typically cannot be tracked to specific tasks or workstations,
and are rarely useful in cost justifying improvements.
Ergonomics brings a significant amount of visibility to the business value
proposition by quantifying the savings associated with removing barriers to
production. If the design of the workplace is a barrier to the amount of time
employees spend on value-added tasks, there is an opportunity to improve the
performance of your people through ergonomic improvements.
Sustainable Systems
Sustainable improvement begins with a practical approach that delivers a clear
value to the business. Ergonomics builds on these fundamentals by integrating
ergonomics into existing management structures, which may vary from ISO
14001-type environmental management systems to Six Sigma initiatives to Lean
production systemsand transferring skills to ensure long-term success.
Far too often, ergonomic improvements are implemented one by one, with no
focus on addressing system-wide problems. Ergonomics drives workplace
enhancements that organizations can easily replicate across similar problems,
further leveraging company efforts.
2008 Humantech
The Industrial Athlete

One way to think about ergonomics is to look closely at athletic performance.
Athletes are wonderful models for human performance because they push every
element of human capability to the maximum. For instance, a sprinter must have
explosive acceleration, the motivation to practice day after day, someone to help
him perfect his form, and the right equipment to make it to the winners circle. In
short, there are four elements an athlete needs to be successful:
Skill
Will (motivation)
Good coaching
Great equipment
But great equipment is critical. Imagine a world-class sprinter who must compete
in soccer cleats. Racing against a non-athlete (in poor condition with poor form)
in sprinters shoes, the sprinter would likely win the event even with the wrong
shoes for the sport. However, if the race were repeated over and over, many
times a day, day after day, the athletes performance would begin to suffer. At
first, the soccer cleats would be a hassle, but the athlete would fight through and
win. Then the race would become painful, but our athlete is motivated and would
continue to win. Over time, the pain would become chronic (hurting even when
the race is over), and the athlete would lose his edge and perhaps suffer
permanent disability, allowing the non-athlete to beat him at his own sport. Thus,
the importance of having the right equipment for successful human performance
is obvious.
Think of the workplace as the running shoes for an industrial worker. To be
successful, our workers need the right equipment for their sport. If the running
shoes (workplace) are a hassle, the industrial athlete will fight through and get
the job done. Even when work becomes painful, our industrial athlete will
continue to be successful. Its usually only after the pain becomes chronic and
unbearable that the industrial athlete reports the condition.
Figure 1.3 The Ergonomics Continuum
At this point, the industrial athlete may have already developed a WMSD, a
disorder of the muscles, nerves, tendons, ligaments, joints, cartilage, or spinal
discs that is the result of exposure to ergonomic risk factors (force, frequency,
posture) over time.
With the right equipment and solid work processes, the workplace can enable
industrial athletes to achieve new heights in productivity and quality. However,
when the workplace is a burden, the industrial athlete often lags behind in his
production measures and can find himself on the bench with an injury.
Ergonomics as a Business Agenda

Optimizing employee performance to improve productivity while decreasing
injuries makes good business sense. By deploying an effective ergonomics
initiative, companies can achieve sustained improvements in health and safety
performance metrics, workers compensation costs, and productivity.
There are three business drivers that make a compelling argument for
companies to deploy an ergonomics initiative:
Health and safety
Regulatory requirements
Production efficiency
Health and Safety

Reducing work-related musculoskeletal disorders is a common reason that
organizations improve workplace ergonomics. The financial benefit of reduced
workers compensation costs resulting from WMSDs is a business driver for
many ergonomics programs. These losses are common measures determined
from health and safety record keeping systems that industry has developed over
the past few decades.
The following facts illustrate the importance of ergonomic considerations in the
workplace to ensure injury-free employees:
10
WMSDs account for 34% of all lost-workday injuries and illnesses,

according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).
Each year, WMSDs account for more than $15 to $20 billion in workers
compensation costs in the United States.
WMSDs account for $1 of every $3 spent for workers compensation

costs.
2008 Humantech
Costs of specific WMSD incidents vary considerably, particularly by location;

workers compensation systems vary greatly between countries and even by
state in the U.S. The graph below illustrates approximate averages for three
types of WMSDs as reported by various data sources in the U.S.
$30,000
$25,800
$25,000
$20,000
$15,000
$14,000
$12,800
$10,000
$5,000
$Strain/Sprain
Cumulative Trauma
Low Back Injury
Figure 1.4 Approximate Average Costs of WMSDs
Average Cost of Work-Related Strains and Sprains in the U.S.

Strains and sprains are typically defined as occupational injuries that result from
damage to the muscles or ligaments from overexertion or external events such
as tripping.
$8,759 (National Council on Compensation Insurance)
$13,935 (Texas Workers Compensation Research Center)
$15,757 (Injury Facts, National Safety Council)
Average Cost of Work-Related Cumulative Trauma Disorders (CTDs) in the U.S.

Cumulative trauma disorders are typically defined as occupational illnesses that
result from repeated exposure to microtrauma.
$10,000 (Liberty Mutual Group)
$21,812 (Texas Workers' Compensation Research Center)
11
Average Cost of Work-Related Low Back Injuries in the U.S.

Low back disorders often result from repeated trauma from overexertion or poor
working postures, but have been typically defined as occupational injuries.
$33,829 (Texas Workers' Compensation Research Center)
Ergonomics = Fewer WMSDs and Lower Workers Compensation Costs

It is widely accepted that effective ergonomics programs can help companies
limit WMSDs and reduce their workers' compensation costs. A General
Accounting Office (GAO) report published in 1997 studied five businesses that
experienced reductions in workers' compensation costs directly related to
ergonomic improvements. The reductions ranged from 35% to 91% after they
implemented an ergonomics program, resulting in workers' compensation
savings of over $3.5 million dollars per year for the five companies combined.
Figure 1.5 Percentage Reduction in Workers' Compensation Costs for WMSDs
12
2008 Humantech
Regulatory Requirements
Regulations specific to WMSDs and ergonomics are becoming more widespread
and vary considerably by country and state. For instance, the European Union
has established Council Directives related to WMSDs, and each country has
established regulations to comply with the directives.
In the U.S., the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) uses the
General Duty Clause as an enforcement mechanism to ensure that companies
have WMSD prevention programs where appropriate. The General Duty Clause
is contained in the OSH Act of 1971 and states that each employer shall furnish
each employee with a place that is free from recognized hazards likely to cause
death or serious physical harm.
In addition to the Federal OSHA activities, California has enacted the California
State Repetitive Motion Injury (RMI) Standard. This mandatory rule applies to
all jobs with more than one work-related repetitive motion injury. An ergonomics
program must be implemented for all jobs with more than one RMI. The
ergonomics program must include worksite evaluation, controlling exposures that
have caused RMIs, and employee training.
Production Efficiency
The design of workplaces, including elements such as tool selection and
workstation setups, represents performance-shaping factors that determine an
individuals ability to accomplish job tasks in a reliable and efficient manner.
Barriers to performance include fatiguing forces, extended reaches, and
excessive motions. If these barriers are present in jobs, injury rates will increase,
and quality and production will suffer.
A "value-added" analysis illustrates the link between ergonomics and
productivity. The formulas used to quantify the impact of improved ergonomics
differ depending on the type of activityrepetitive versus non-repetitive.
13
Calculating Added Value in Repetitive Activities

Repetitive activities occur in manufacturing plants, distribution centers, call
centers, and many other environments. People are assigned to tasks that they
perform in a predefined manner at a predefined rate. Incremental improvements
to the ergonomics of their workplace designs are magnified hundreds or
thousands of times a day as people repeat the activities.
For example, modifying the reach distance to a parts bin on an assembly line
(addressing an ergonomic risk) can decrease the time spent reaching, a nonvalue-added task, by 0.6 seconds per piece. The time saved becomes
significant when you multiply the 0.6 seconds by 200,000 (number of units
produced per year) and $18 per hour (fully burdened labor rate), to calculate a
$600 savings each year from improving process effectiveness while reducing the
risk of WMSDs.
Measuring savings from incremental ergonomic improvements is important
because the savings add up fast and can be tied to specific improvements.
Reduction in cycle time ranging from 25% to 40% is common when workstations
and job/tasks are redesigned to improve ergonomics.
Calculating Added Value in Non-Repetitive Activities

Non-repetitive activities occur in the office, process industry, laboratories, and
most professional positions. People are responsible for completing activities, but
their output is not measured on a micro basis. Here, the important measure of
value-added is "time on task" or the amount of time people spend on their core
job activities.
Improved ergonomics in the workplace can influence time on task because
people spend more time on those activities that do not cause them discomfort. A
lab technician who reviews hundreds of samples per day at a poorly arranged
microscope workstation will have less time on task than someone who is working
with comfortably designed equipment.
The time on task model is valuable because of the potential savings in human
capital through improved ergonomics. A 2% increase in productivityjust 10
more minutes per day on core job activitiescan contribute $900 per year in
added human capital per person (36 hours per year x $50,000 fully burdened
salary). While 2% makes a significant contribution, studies have shown that a
20% improvement in productivity is a reasonable expectation with improved
office workstations.
14
2008 Humantech
Case Study Examples

Numerous examples demonstrate how improved ergonomics positively affects
the bottom line. Humantech's Web site (www.humantech.com) provides
numerous case studies that quantify the impact of ergonomics on various
performance measures. Three of these are summarized below:
Hamilton Sundstrand used the combined the efforts of training crossfunctional teams and involvement of line employees to improve morale
and workstation conditions. The company's recordable injury rate
decreased from 3.63 (1999) to 0.6 (2006). At the same time, it reduced
its lost workday rate by 84%.
Corning (Goose Creek, SC) improved the manual handling process of

its lens blanks by implementing a transport system to improve safety,
quality, delivery, and cost, which translated into a 75% reduction in
defect rate. Total cost avoidance was $3.6 million per year.
Dow Corning (Hemlock, MI) redesigned its silicone process operation to

reduce manual material handling by 80%. With the improved work area,
productivity has increased by 375%, while labor cost savings were
estimated to be around 300, 000 per year. Additional financial benefits
included increased sales and reduced workers compensation costs.
The following table summarizes the types of improvements these companies

experienced.
Table 1.1 Measurable Benefits from Improved Ergonomics
Company
Workers' Comp.
Productivity
Hamilton Sundstrand
Corning
Dow Corning
Quality
Absenteeism
9
9
9
15
Applying Human Performance Ergonomics The Tools

The past two decades have taught us that using the right tool for the job is critical
to a successful ergonomics process. Using good, proven tools, but for the wrong
purpose, will lead to inefficiencies and a poorly performing ergonomics process.
You can use the tools you will learn about in this course to answer these basic
questions:
Table 1.2 Using Tools to Solve Your Ergonomics Challenges
Question
Tools
Do I have a problem?
Ergonomics Hit List

Ergonomics Action Form
How bad is it?
BRIEF Survey
Psychophysical Analysis
Where should I start?
BEST Assessment
EASY
What should I do about it?
Design and Build Guidelines
Does the solution solve the problem?
BRIEF Survey
How do I pay for it?
STEP
What are the steps to make it happen?
Chapter 9, The Job Improvement

Process
The sections that follow offer a preview of these tools.
16
2008 Humantech
Ergonomics Hit List

The Ergonomics Hit List is an observation tool that helps you identify ergonomic
issues and resolve them. It answers the question "Do I have a problem?"
The Hit List uses a Find It Fix It Check for Success process to apply simple
solutions to obvious challenges. The Hit List is described in Chapter 3,
Recognizing Ergonomic Issues.
Figure 1.6 The Ergonomics Hit List
17
Ergonomics Action Form

The Ergonomics Action Form is used in conjunction with the Ergonomics Hit List
to ensure a participative approach to problem solving. It answers the question
"Do I have a problem?"
The Ergonomics Action Form functions as a tracking form to document
ergonomic improvements. It is described in Chapter 3, Recognizing Ergonomic
Issues.
Figure 1.7 The Ergonomics Action Form
18
2008 Humantech
BRIEF Survey
The BRIEF (Baseline Risk Identification of Ergonomic Factors) Survey is an initial
screening tool that uses a structured and formalized rating system to determine
ergonomic acceptability. It answers the questions "How bad is the problem?"
and "Does the solution solve the problem?"
The BRIEF examines nine body areas for ergonomic risk factors as well as five
physical stressors. The BRIEF Survey is described in Chapter 4, Evaluating
Ergonomic Risk Factors.
Figure 1.8 The BRIEF
19
BEST Assessment
The BEST (BRIEF Exposure Scoring Technique) assessment is a ranking tool for
determining the ergonomic priority of job/tasks based on BRIEF Survey results.
It adjusts for different time exposures to ergonomic risk to determine a job hazard
score, and takes into account any physical stressors present while performing
the job. It answers the question "Where should I start?" This tool is described in
Chapter 5, Prioritizing Ergonomic Risks.
Figure 1.9 The BEST Assessment
20
2008 Humantech
EASY
The EASY (Ergonomic Assessment SurveY) is a ranking tool for determining the
ergonomic priority of job/tasks based on BRIEF Survey results as well as
employee discomfort data and job injury/illness history. It answers the question
"Where should I start?" The EASY is described in Chapter 5, Prioritizing
Ergonomic Risks.
Figure 1.10 The EASY
21

Design and build guidelines are provided for workstations, tools, and equipment
to minimize design incompatibility and to optimize human performance. They
answer the question "What should I do about the problem?"
The design and build guidelines are described in Chapter 7, Ergonomic Design
Guidelines.
Work Reach Guidelines

Criteria
Dimension
Description
A. Horizontal Reach
Precision Tasks
Max. 11" (279 mm)
B. Horizontal Reach HighFrequency ( 2/min.) or

High-Force ( 10 lb or
4.5 kg) Tasks
Max. 16" (406 mm)
Horizontal reach distance from front

edge of workstation to hand
grasping point
C. Horizontal Reach Large

Product Assembly Tasks
Max. 22" (559 mm)
D. Vertical Reach HighFrequency ( 2/min.) or

4.5 kg) Tasks
Max. 62" (1.58 m)
E. Vertical Reach
Infrequent or Low-Force
Tasks
Max. 74" (1.88 m)
Vertical reach distance from

standing surface to hand grasping
point
Figure 1.11 Design and Build Guidelines Example
22
2008 Humantech

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) published the
"Revised NIOSH Equation for the Design and Evaluation of Manual Lifting
Tasks." This model can be used to determine safe lifting and lowering limits
based on task factors including geometry of the lift, frequency of lifting, and load
weight. It answers the questions "How bad is the problem?" and "Does the
solution solve the problem?"
The NIOSH Lifting Calculation is described in Chapter 6, Manual Material
Handling Analysis.
Figure 1.12 Manual Material Handling Guidelines Spreadsheet

NIOSH Lifting Guidelines Sheet
23
Guidelines for pushing, pulling, and carrying tasks are used to determine safe
limits based on person and task characteristics. They answer the questions
"How bad is the problem?" and "Does the solution solve the problem?"
Psychophysical analysis guidelines are described in Chapter 6, Manual Material
Handling Analysis.

Push Guidelines Sheet
24
2008 Humantech
STEP
The STEP (Standard Time Efficiency Process) Analysis is a way to estimate time
savings resulting from ergonomic improvements. It relates reductions in reaching
and walking distances to standard time data. The time savings can then be used
to cost justify investments in ergonomic improvements. The STEP answers the
question "How do I pay for the improvement?"
The STEP Analysis is described in Chapter 8, Cost Justifying Ergonomic
Improvements.
Figure 1.14 Cost Justification Worksheet
25
Using the Right Tool for the Job

Too often, people practicing ergonomics become bogged down with complicated
formulas and assessment methodologies and equipment. They suffer "paralysis
by analysis" and have trouble making gains or improvements. The skilled person
is the one who can identify and efficiently use the right tool for the job. Figures
1.15, 1.16, and 1.17 show how you can determine when to use the tools for
identifying, prioritizing, and resolving ergonomic issues.
Figure 1.15 Using the Right Tool for the Job
26
2008 Humantech
Job Improvement
Process
Clearly Identify the Challenges

- NIOSH Lifting Equation (lifting tasks)
- MMH Guidelines (push, pull, carry)
- Design and Build Guidelines
Brainstorm Controls
- Engineering
- Administrative
- Work Practices
Evaluate Impact of Controls

- BESTTM Assessment (WMSD risk)
- STEPTM (productivity)
Prioritize Controls
Financial Approval
- Cost Justification Worksheet
Implement
Ergonomic Job
Improvements
Key:
BEST Assessment - Prioritizes job/tasks based on exposure to WMSD risk factors
STEP Analysis - Projects impact of job improvements on productivity
NIOSH Lifting Equation - Determines limits for lifting and lowering tasks
MMH Guidelines - Determine limits for push, pull, carry tasks
Design and Build Guidelines - Provides criteria for dimensions and force
Cost Justification Worksheet - Calculates payback period for improvements
Figure 1.16 The Job Improvement Process
27
Figure 1.17 The Implementation Process
28
2008 Humantech
How This Manual is Organized

Ergonomics follows the principles of effective ergonomic risk management. This
approach has been proven successful in hundreds of companies and is
consistent with ergonomics standards and guidelines.
Recognize workplace risk factors that contribute to WMSDs, those tasks

that require forceful exertions, high rates of repetition, and awkward
postures.
Evaluate employee exposure to workplace hazards by comparing job

activities to quantitative guidelines for human performance.
Control workplace hazards found to result in significant risk exposure.
This manual focuses on improving problem jobs. The chapters are organized
according to the principles of ergonomic risk management.
Improving Problem Jobs

Recognition
Chapter 2
Work-Related
Musculoskeletal
Disorders
Chapter 3
Recognizing
Ergonomic Issues
Evaluation
Chapter 4
Evaluating Ergonomic
Risk Factors
Chapter 5
Prioritizing
Ergonomic Risks
Chapter 6
Manual Material
Handling Analysis
Control
Chapter 7
Ergonomic
Design Guidelines
Chapter 8
Cost Justifying
Ergonomic
Improvements
Chapter 9
The Job
Improvement
Process
Putting It
All Together
Chapter 10
Performing an
Ergonomics
Review
Chapter 11
Surviving the
First 90 Days
Figure 1.18 How This Manual is Organized
29
References
Bureau of Labor Statistics, Lost-Worktime Injuries and Illnesses: Characteristics
and Resulting Time Away From Work, USDL 02-196, Washington, D.C.,
2002.
European Agency for Safety and Health at Work, Repetitive Strain Injuries in the
Member States of the European Union, 2002.
General Accounting Office, Worker Protection: Private Sector Ergonomics Yield
Positive Results, 1997.
Health and Safety Statistics, Part 2: Occupational Ill-health Statistics, Health and
Safety Executive, 2001.
National Academy of Sciences, Musculoskeletal Disorders and the Workplace:
Low Back and Upper Extremities, National Academy Press, 2001.
National Safety Council, Injury Facts, 2001 edition.
Occupational Safety and Health Administration, National News Release: USDL
99-3331999, Washington, D.C., 1999.
Preventing Pain Sitting at Your Desk, www.chw.healthinkonline.com/
dohealth/member/vitWellness.asp?wellID=472
30
2008 Humantech
Notes
31
Notes
32
2008 Humantech
hapter 2 Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders

"Work Doesnt Need to be a Pain!" ........................................................35
Would You Do it This Way?.....................................................................36
Posture, Force, and Frequency...............................................................37
What are Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders?..............................38
WMSDs in Industry..................................................................................40
How Do WMSDs Occur? .........................................................................41
Types of WMSDs.....................................................................................45
References ..............................................................................................54
33
About This Chapter

Chapter 2 is part of the Recognition phase of ergonomic risk management.

Recognition
Evaluation
Chapter 4
Risk Factors
Chapter 2
Work-Related
Musculoskeletal
Disorders
Chapter 5
Prioritizing
Ergonomic Risks
Chapter 3
Recognizing
Ergonomic Issues
Chapter 6
Manual Material
Handling Analysis
Control
Chapter 7
Ergonomic
Design Guidelines
Chapter 8
Cost Justifying
Ergonomic
Improvements
Chapter 9
The Job
Improvement
Process
Putting It
All Together
Chapter 10
Performing an
Ergonomics
Review
Chapter 11
Surviving the
First 90 Days
Figure 2.1 Where We Are Now
This chapter describes the different types of work-related musculoskeletal

disorders (WMSDs) and how they occur. You'll find answers to these questions:
34
Why should I recognize WMSDs?
What are WMSDs?
How do I identify common WMSDs and their signs and symptoms?
2008 Humantech
Chapter 2: Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders
"Work Doesnt Need to be a Pain!"

The exertion associated with "putting in a good days work" is a familiar
experience for all of us. In general, we feel pride at having done a good job, and,
although we may be tired, we can still go home and spend an active evening with
our family and friends. A fair effort for a good days work is acceptable.
Dragging ourselves home, with barely enough energy to make it to the couch,
suffering muscle cramps, numbness, and pain, and not being able to get out of
bed in the morning because of pain, is not acceptable. Putting in a good days
work is one thing; punishing our bodies is another. Pain is an early warning sign
that we are doing something wrong.
For example, when we drive a car we are careful to keep the car within an RPM
band that is "safe" for the engine. If we dont, we know that the increased wear
and tear will shorten the life of the engine, and we will be faced with costly
repairs.
Just like cars, people have certain limits. If we work outside those limits, we will
accelerate fatigue in body components, shortening their functional life. This
applies to the heart of a person just as it does to the engine of a car, to our
muscles as it does to the drive train, and to our nervous system as it does to the
electrical system and controls.
If we exceed the capacity of the human for the better part of each day, the
components will decay, become unreliable, and may eventually fail. Just as we
must run machines within their limits, we must also keep people within limits.
Figure 2.2 Human Performance Gap
Pain is an early warning sign that something is potentially wrong with the job or
the way we are performing it. Remember: "Work doesnt need to be a pain!"
35
Would You Do it This Way?

Ergonomics is a common-sense way of looking at the workplace. Keep in mind
that people, not machines, are the sole source of producing products, fixing
equipment, and ensuring product quality.
Every time we look at a job we must remember that people do the job. We must
ask ourselves a fundamental question: Would I do it this way? We must look
for improvements until we can honestly say "we would do it this way".
Figure 2.3 "Would you do it this way?"
By thoughtfully reviewing a workstation layout or the design of a hand tool, we

are often able to intuitively identify what is wrong with the design and begin to
develop solutions.
Ergonomics is an attitude, a way of looking at the workplace.
After reviewing a job, can we honestly answer that this is the most
functional,
comfortable,
safe, and
logical way to do the job?
Or do certain tasks or pieces of hardware stand out as awkward, difficult, or even

painful to use? It is this awkwardness, difficulty, and pain that can lead to
musculoskeletal disorders, or MSDs.
36
2008 Humantech
Posture, Force, and Frequency

Ergonomic issues in the workplace can be summarized as awkward postures,
excessive forces, and extreme frequencies of movement. These are the primary
risk factors for the development of WMSDs (described on the following page).
Just like the fire triangle, in which three componentsfuel, source of ignition, and
oxygencreate fire, postures, forces, and frequencies can work together to turn
small ergonomic issues into big problems and create an Ergonomics Fire
Triangle.
Figure 2.4 The Ergonomics Fire Triangle
Posture
Awkward postures (non-neutral joint positions)
Force
Excessive force (pressure, weight, or grip)
Frequency
Extreme frequency and/or duration of movement
The same risk factors that contribute to WMSDs are also barriers to industrial
performance. Repeatability of manufacturing operations is compromised when
extreme postures are required, and recovery times from high force applications
increase the non-value-added content of job tasks. At a microelement level, the
same motions that contribute to ergonomic risk are the motions that rob
operations of efficiency.
The Ergonomics Fire Triangle reminds us to focus job improvement efforts on the
most critical ergonomic issues.
37
What are Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders?

Without the four elements of skill, will, good coaching, and great equipment, our
industrial athlete cannot be successful. Not only will the industrial athlete be
unsuccessful, he or she may develop a special type of disorder that affects
connective tissues, a work-related musculoskeletal disorder or WMSD.
WMSDs are disorders of the muscles, nerves, tendons, ligaments, joints,
cartilage, or spinal discs that are the result of exposure to ergonomic risk factors
over time. They are not a diagnosis, but a class of disorders with similar
characteristics. The disorders occur as a result of months and years of overuse
of human joints and connective tissues such that they become sore and
sometimes unusable. WMSDs are not the result of an instantaneous or acute
event such as a trip, slip, or fall.
Work-related indicates that they occur in relation to certain activities performed
routinely on the job. The National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health
(NIOSH) defines the link between WMSDs and workplace ergonomic risk
exposures as one of the following:
Musculoskeletal disorders to which the work environment and the

performance of work contribute significantly
or
Musculoskeletal disorders that are made worse or longer lasting by

working conditions (NIOSH, 1997)
Other terms commonly used to refer to these types of disorders include

cumulative trauma disorders, repetitive motion disorders, repetitive strain injuries,
and overuse syndrome.
38
2008 Humantech
The "Trauma Bucket"

An easy way to visualize WMSDs is to think of your body as a bucket.
Microtrauma from your job and from non-job activities drips into your bodys
"trauma bucket." Fortunately, the body can heal with time and safely absorb a
certain amount of trauma (like a healing valve at the bottom of the bucket). But,
if we place more trauma into the bucket than the natural healing process can
absorb, the result is impaired movement, or in the worst cases, a disabling injury.
Figure 2.5 The Trauma Bucket
Every one of us has a trauma bucket of a different size. Just as individuals

respond differently to low-dose exposures to toxins, with some becoming ill very
quickly and others never being affected, people respond differently to
microtrauma from ergonomics hazards. This explains why only some people at a
challenging job develop WMSDs while the rest fight through the hassles and pain
without a recordable injury or illness.
39
WMSDs in Industry
WMSDs are not isolated to any one industrial sector; in fact, we can find
thousands of reported injuries/illness across all sectors. The Bureau of Labor
Statistics (BLS) publishes detailed characteristics for WMSD cases that resulted
in at least one lost day from work. Figure 2.6 below compares the Cumulative
Trauma Incidence Rate for major manufacturing sectors as reported by the BLS.
Incidence rate refers to the number of injuries per 100 full-time employees.
According to the BLS, repetitive motion incidents make up approximately 8% of
all lost workday WMSDs.
Figure 2.6 Repetitive Motion Incidence Rates by Industry Sector (BLS, 2001)
Based on this data, four manufacturing sectors appear to have substantially

different repetitive motion incidence rates:
Food and kindred products
Apparel and textiles
Furniture and fixtures
Rubber and plastics products
These sectors represent industries that rely on high volume, manual work that is
known to be challenging.
40
2008 Humantech
How Do WMSDs Occur?

As the "Trauma Bucket" (Figure 2.5) helps illustrate, WMSDs are based on a
dose and response relationship. Similar to hearing loss, they occur gradually
over a long period of exposure to a low-level harmful agent. A brief exposure to
these agents would not cause harm, but prolonged exposure results in reduced
ability to function.
To control WMSDs, we first must understand the factors that contribute to their
development. Ergonomic risk factors are "conditions of a job, process, or
operation that contribute to the risk of developing Cumulative Trauma Disorders"
(OSHA, 1990). The presence of risk factors does not necessarily predict that an
individual will suffer a health problem as a result of exposure to the risk factor.
Rather, a risk factor is a condition of the workplace that increases ones chance
of developing a WMSD, and to which exposure should be limited, or totally
avoided, in pursuit of a 100% healthy and safe working environment.
A substantial body of credible epidemiological research provides strong evidence
that three physical work-related risk factors contribute to the development of
WMSDs (NIOSH, 1997; NAS 2001): awkward postures, excessive forces, and
extreme frequencies of movement.
Posture
There are certain postures in which the joints can absorb force more easily than
in others. Phrased another way, there are certain postures in which the body is
more susceptible to injury. Typically, the closer to the extremes of a joints range
of movement, the less capable the joint is. An extreme posture by itself may
stress joint components and reduce or occlude blood flow. Consequently, we
attempt to maintain a neutral joint posture while performing our work.
Figure 2.7 illustrates the results of a study that compared the effect of two
different types of pliers: traditional straight handled pliers and bent handled pliers.
Bent handled pliers were provided to one group of trainees to enable a straight
wrist posture. According to the study, approximately 65% of the trainees that
used the traditional straight pliers experienced tenosynovitis, epicondylitis, and
carpal tunnel irritation, as opposed to 10% of the trainees that used the bent
handled tool (Tichauer, 1978).
41
Figure 2.7 Improved Posture Reduced WMSDs
Force
Gripping, pinching, pushing, pulling, and lifting objects place additional force on
the body's joint structures. Increasing these forces requires additional muscle
exertion, and places greater loads on joints and connective tissues. Prolonged
or repeated exertions of this type can cause a feeling of fatigue, and may
contribute to musculoskeletal problems when there is inadequate time for rest or
recovery.
Frequency
An aluminum soda can is a good example of how low forces can damage the
underlying structure when applied repeatedly. Lightly squeezing an aluminum
can will cause the sides to bend inward, but the can will regain its shape. The
force applied was not strong enough to immediately cause damage. However, if
we repeatedly apply this same force, say 100 or 200 times, the can develops a
fatigue debt and a break can occur in the aluminum sides.
It is the same for the human body, but instead of 100 or 200 repetitions, the
frequency is measured in the thousands and tens of thousands of repetitions.
The repeated application of a force that is not strong enough to cause immediate
damage can, over time, induce fatigue in our connective tissues and wear them
out.
Frequency exists on a continuum. At one extreme of the continuum exists high
frequency, or repetition. At the other extreme is the lack of frequency, or
duration. Both high frequency movements and sustained postures can contribute
to fatigue debt. The longer the period of continuous work, the longer the required
recovery or rest time. Tendons and muscles can often recover from the fatigue
debt if sufficient time passes between exertions. Fatigue and muscle-tendon
strain can accumulate if motions are frequently repeated. Effects of repetitive
motions from performing the same work activities increase when awkward
postures and forceful exertions are involved.
42
2008 Humantech
Combination of Risk Factors

As individual risk factors, posture, force, and frequency are all significant. But
when combined, these risk factors become much more important and contribute
to wear and tear injuries at a greater rate than would be intuitive.
One study examined the effects of hand repetition and grasping force on WMSDs
(Silverstein, 1985). The combination of risk factors greatly increases the odds of
developing a WMSD; exposure to either high force or highly repetitive tasks
alone increased the risk of a WMSD by about three times, while exposure to both
high force and highly repetitive tasks increased the risk of WMSDs by 17 times.
Figure 2.8 Odds Ratios for Force, Frequency, and Combined Risk Factors
43
Physical Stressors
Certain physical stressors can accelerate the onset of WMSDs by reducing blood
flow to tissues. The most common physical stressors in the workplace include:
44
Vibration contact with vibrating objects such as grinding tools

(segmental vibration) or while operating heavy equipment (whole-body
vibration). Segmental vibration can lead to reduced blood flow to the
exposed body part, which causes stiffness and numbness in the affected
area. Exposure to whole-body vibration for extended periods of time, as
in driving a truck cross-country, can result in digestive and back
disorders.
Low temperatures regular exposure (more than two hours per day) to
temperatures below 66F. The body responds to prolonged exposure to
low temperatures by limiting blood flow to the extremities. A reduction in
blood flow to the fingers and hands can cause numbness and reduces
grip strength.
Soft tissue compression static force applied to the body for

prolonged periods, for example, resting the elbows on a hard surface
while sitting. The reduction in blood flow is a result of pressure on the
body tissues. This is a concern particularly when blood vessels are
located near the surface of the skin, such as on the back of the hand.
Impact stress a dynamic force applied to the body, for example, using
the hand as a hammer. The body responds to impact stress by limiting
blood flow to the exposed body part.
Glove issues working with gloves that fit poorly or increase the force
needed to grasp objects. Gloves that are too tight restrict blood flow to
the fingers and cause numbness in the fingers. Gloves that are too large
not only limit dexterity, but also result in higher force gripping. Gloves
that decrease the coefficient of friction between the object being handled
and the gloves also increase the amount of force that the operator must
exert in order to handle the object.
2008 Humantech
Types of WMSDs
Three basic types of WMSDs for the upper extremities are tendon disorders,
nerve disorders, and neurovascular disorders. WMSDs also include back
disorders. This section discusses some of the more common WMSDs and their
symptoms and risk factors.
Tendon Disorders
Tendons connect muscles to bones. When we contract muscles in our forearm
(the movers), the tendons (cables) pull on the bones (levers) in our hand and
create movement. These movement mechanics apply to other areas of the body
as well.
Figure 2.9 Lever System of the Hand and Arm
Tendon disorders typically occur at or near the joints where the tendons rub
nearby ligaments and bones. Exposure to non-neutral postures with high force
or high repetition may cause the tendons or tendon sheaths to become inflamed
or irritated. The affected body area may become inflamed as a result of this
contact. Common symptoms are a dull aching sensation over the tendon,
discomfort with specific movements, and tenderness to touch.
45
The following table provides a summary of tendon disorders. The sections that
follow describe them in more detail.
Table 2.1 Risk Factors for Tendon Disorders
Tendon Disorder
Description
Occupational Risk Factors
Tendinitis
Swelling of the tendons
Repetitive and forceful manual

exertions
Tenosynovitis
Swelling of the tendons

and the tendon sheath wall
Extremely repetitive motions
DeQuervain's
disease
Swelling of the tendon and

tendon sheath at the base
of the thumb
Hand twisting with forceful

gripping
Ganglion Cyst
Accumulation of fluid
within the tendon sheath
Repetitive and forceful hand

exertions
Epicondylitis
Irritation of the forearm

tendon near the elbows
Using the arm for impact or

jerky throwing motions,
repeated or forceful forearm
rotation while bending the wrist
Tendinitis
All force from muscles is transmitted through the tendon cables. If we continually
stress the cables, they can become irritated, sore, and swollen, resulting in
tendinitis. Tendinitis is common in the wrist, elbow, and shoulder.
Figure 2.10 Tendinitis Swollen Tendon
46
2008 Humantech
Tenosynovitis
Tenosynovitis, often the result of extremely repetitive motions, is swelling of the
tendons and tendon sheath wall. Tissue builds up on the tendon sheath wall,
causing bumps on the sheath.
Figure 2.11 Tenosynovitis Swollen Synovial Sheath
DeQuervains Disease
DeQuervains disease is a common type of stenosing tenosynovitis (a
combination of tendinitis and tenosynovitis) in which the tendon and tendon
sheath swell at the base of the thumb. It results from excessive hand twisting
with forceful gripping. This disorder is named after the French doctor who first
described it.
Figure 2.12 DeQuervain's Disease
47
Ganglion Cyst
This bump under the skin is caused by the accumulation of fluid within the tendon
sheaths. The fluid accumulates as the result of repetitive and forceful hand
exertions. Balancing heavy trays on a fully extended wrist as restaurant wait
staff often do can lead to ganglion cysts.
Figure 2.13 Ganglion Cyst
Epicondylitis
Tennis elbow, or lateral epicondylitis, is one of the more common WMSDs.
Lateral epicondylitis is irritation of the muscle and tendons that attach to the end
of the humerus (upper arm bone) on the outside of the elbow.
Golfers elbow, or medial epicondylitis, also a common WMSD, is an irritation
of the muscle and tendons that attach to the end of the humerus (upper arm
bone) on the inside of the elbow.
Figure 2.14 The Elbow Joint
48
2008 Humantech
Nerve Disorders
Nerve disorders commonly occur as a result of nerve entrapment or pressure on
the nerve. The entrapment or pressure may be a result of (1) repetitive
cumulative trauma to a muscle over a long period, the resulting muscle swelling
causing pressure on the nerve, or (2) mechanical irritation of the nerve by
surrounding tendons or muscles. The entrapment or pressure on the nerve will
impede blood flow, oxygenation, and nerve signal transmission. Symptoms may
include loss of sensory and motor function.
The following table provides a summary of nerve disorders.
Table 2.2 Risk Factors for Nerve Disorders
Nerve Disorder
Description
Carpal Tunnel
Syndrome
Compression of the
median nerve from
swelling of the finger
flexor tendons in the wrist
Repetitive high force gripping,

gripping with non-neutral wrist
postures
Cubital Tunnel
Syndrome
Compression of the ulnar

nerve from mechanical
stress near the elbow
Repeated or sustained
pressure on the elbow from
hard or sharp edges
49
Carpal Tunnel Syndrome

Tendons leading from the forearm to the fingers, the median nerve, and blood
vessels pass through the carpal tunnel at the wrist. If the tendons and tendon
sheaths running through the carpal tunnel become irritated and begin to swell,
the median nerve may be impinged. Chronic swelling of the finger flexor tendons
can lead to carpal tunnel syndrome.
Carpal tunnel syndrome has become well known due to media exposure.
However, it is a relatively rare disease; less than 5% of all WMSD incidents
resulting in at least one day away from work were reported as carpal tunnel
syndrome by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS, 2001).
Figure 2.15 The Carpal Tunnel
Cubital Tunnel Syndrome

Many people rest their elbows on their work surfaces, sometimes to support the
weight of their head, other times to relieve stress on their back. The ulnar nerve,
which runs near the elbow, can become pressured when the elbow is exposed to
hard surfaces such as unpadded tabletops. This can lead to cubital tunnel
syndrome.
Figure 2.16 The Cubital Tunnel
50
2008 Humantech
Neurovascular Disorders
Neurovascular disorders affect both nerves and nearby blood vessels. They
occur as a result of pressure on these tissues or result from exposure to
vibration. The affected area of the body may experience reduced circulation,
resulting in less oxygen and nutrients to the muscles. Typical symptoms are
pain, numbness, tingling, cold sensitivity, prickly sensations, or skin color
change.
The following table provides a summary of common neurovascular disorders.
Table 2.3 Risk Factors for Neurovascular Disorders
Neurovascular
Disorder
Description
Thoracic Outlet
Syndrome
Compression of the nerves

and blood vessels between
the neck and shoulders
Carrying loads over the

shoulder, frequent reaching
above shoulder level
Hand-Arm Vibration
Syndrome
Reduced blood supply to

the fingers caused by
closure of the digital
arteries
Forceful gripping and

prolonged use of vibrating
tools, including both handheld and stationary tools
Thoracic Outlet Syndrome

Thoracic outlet syndrome is the general term used to describe compression of
the nerves and blood vessels between the neck and shoulders. It can occur
during activities such as frequent reaching above shoulder level or carrying
heavy objects.
Figure 2.17 The Shoulder Girdle
Figure 2.18 Neck Anatomy
51
Hand-Arm Vibration Syndrome

Also known as "white finger syndrome" and "Raynauds Phenomenon of
Occupational Origin," hand-arm vibration syndrome affects the fingers causing
intermittent numbness or tingling, and often the skin turns pale or cold. Other
symptoms are a reduction in grip strength and finger dexterity. It is caused by
forceful gripping and prolonged use of vibrating tools (e.g., pneumatic hammers,
chain saws, power grinders) and is accelerated by exposure to cold
temperatures.
Back Disorders
Back disorders are also classified as work-related musculoskeletal disorders.
The most common areas for injury are related to tendon/ligament, muscle, and
nerves. To understand these types of injuries we should understand the
anatomy and mechanics of the back.
Anatomy of the Back

The figure below illustrates that the back is a flexible, curved column composed
of a series of bones (vertebrae) separated by shock absorbing discs. The
structure is held in compression by a large number of muscles and ligaments. By
acting together, they give the spine the ability to bend and twist. The spine also
protects the spinal cord and acts as a distribution center for the nerves that run
between the brain and the other parts of the body.
Figure 2.19 The Spine
Anatomically, the spine is an unstable structure. We create the illusion of its

stability by using muscle groups in the trunk to keep the back stable.
52
2008 Humantech
Mechanics of the Back

The back can be modeled as a simple lever system that supports the weight of
the upper body as well as any loads supported by the upper body. Since the
muscles that act to balance the upper body are very close to the fulcrum of this
lever system (the base of the spine), the back is at a significant mechanical
disadvantage whenever the load is extended outward.
Types of Back Disorders

Back disorders may include the following:
One-time exertion injuries, those that occur as the result of one

incident, may include both sprains and strains. A sprain is generally
caused by a one-time exertion that tears a ligament, whereas a strain is
generally caused by a one-time exertion that tears a tendon.
Deterioration of the shock-absorbing discs in the lower back results in

degenerative disc diseases. Due to the human anatomical structure,
this weakening typically occurs on the face of the shock absorber near
the nerve roots that feed into and out of the spinal cord. As the shock
absorber bulges, direct contact with the nerve roots can occur.
Figure 2.20 A Leaky Disc Can Put Pressure on Nerves
Herniated/ruptured/bulging discs are caused by degenerative disc

disease or injury to the spine. Disc disease may result from tiny tears or
cracks in the outer shell (capsule) of the disc. The jelly like material
inside the disc may be forced out through the tears or cracks in the
capsule, causing the disk to bulge, break open (rupture), or break into
fragments. The herniated disc itself generally does not cause pain; the
pain usually occurs when the disc presses against a nerve, and the
nerve becomes inflamed and swollen.
Sciatica is a symptom frequently associated with a lumbar herniated

disc. Pressure on one or several nerves that contribute to the sciatic
nerve can cause pain, burning, tingling, and numbness that extends from
the buttock into the leg and sometimes into the foot.
53
References
Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2001, http://www.bls.gov/iif.
National Academy of Sciences, Musculoskeletal Disorders and the Workplace:
Low Back and Upper Extremities, National Academy Press, 2001.
National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), Musculoskeletal
Disorders (MSDs) and Workplace Factors, 1997,
http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ergoosci1.html.
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), 3123: Ergonomics
Program Management Guidelines for Meatpacking plants, Washington, D.C.,
1990.
Silverstein, B.A., The Prevalence of Upper Extremity Disorders in Industry, Ann
Arbor, Center for Ergonomics, University of Michigan, 1985.
Tichauer, E.R., The Biomechanical Basis of Ergonomics, Wiley Interscience,
New York, 1978.
54
2008 Humantech
Notes
55
Notes
56
2008 Humantech
hapter 3 Recognizing Ergonomic Issues

Introduction to the Ergonomics Hit List ................................................59
The Hit List "Find It"..............................................................................60
The Hit List "Fix It" ................................................................................71
Ask the Operator .....................................................................................76
Continuous Improvement Process ..........................................................77
The Ergonomics Action Form ..............................................................79
Completing the Ergonomics Action Form................................................81
Avoiding Potential Pitfalls With the Ergonomics Action Form .................88
57
About This Chapter

Chapter 3 is part of the Recognition phase of ergonomic risk management.

Recognition
Chapter 2
Work-Related
Musculoskeletal
Disorders
Chapter 3
Recognizing
Ergonomic Issues
Evaluation
Chapter 4
Risk Factors
Chapter 5
Prioritizing
Ergonomic Risks
Chapter 6
Manual Material
Handling Analysis
Control
Chapter 7
Ergonomic
Design Guidelines
Chapter 8
Cost Justifying
Ergonomic
Improvements
Chapter 9
The Job
Improvement
Process
Putting It
All Together
Chapter 10
Performing an
Ergonomics
Review
Chapter 11
Surviving the
First 90 Days
This chapter introduces the Ergonomics Hit List and Ergonomics Action
Form, tools you can use to identify ergonomic issues through observation,
generate job improvement ideas, and turn your ideas into an action plan. You'll
find answers to these questions:
58
Why should I recognize ergonomic issues?
What are ergonomic issues?
How can I identify ergonomic issues and job improvements?
2008 Humantech
Chapter 3: Recognizing Ergonomic Issues
Introduction to the Ergonomics Hit List

The Ergonomics Hit List is a simple tool that will help you identify ergonomic
issues and job improvements.
Figure 3.2 The Ergonomics Hit List Card (Front)
When to Use the Hit List

Observation is the most basic form of workplace assessment. The Ergonomics
Hit List is a fundamental observation tool that helps you identify obvious
ergonomic issues in all work situations. Because the Ergonomics Hit List is a
qualitative approach, apply it when the level of necessary detail about the job is
low and when off-the-shelf solutions are readily available.
Limitations of the Hit List

The Ergonomics Hit List does not provide measurable (quantifiable) risk
evaluation, nor does it prioritize jobs for ergonomic intervention. When a high
level of detail about a job is necessary and when off-the-shelf solutions are not
readily available, use other assessment tools such as the BRIEF Survey
(Chapter 4, Evaluating Ergonomic Risk Factors), or the BEST or EASY (Chapter
5, Prioritizing Ergonomic Risks).
59
The Hit List "Find It"

Identifying ergonomic issues is the first step in the ergonomic improvement
process. The Ergonomics Hit List defines ten Find It items, and the Ergonomics
Action Form (see page 79) provides a format for describing them for resolution.
Find It: Ten easy-toremember ergonomic

issues you can identify
through direct observation.
The sections that follow describe each Find It item in detail. Included are
common work-related activities in which the issues are often identified, and
potential ergonomic improvements that can reduce or eliminate the issues.
60
2008 Humantech
Wash Rag
WMSDs can occur without a substantial force component being involved.
Several studies have demonstrated that even the combination of a bent wrist
posture and relatively moderate task frequencies can cause damage.
The Hit List item Wash Rag is the condition of extreme wrist bending, so named
after any posture that we would use to squeeze out a rag. The wrist postures
involved have very exact names describing their movements, including radial and
ulnar deviation, and flexion and extension. Wash Rag provides a simple, easy to
remember way to visualize these postures, all of which we should avoid. A
straight wrist posture is always best.
Figure 3.4 Wash Rag
Common Wash Rag Activities
Potential Improvements
Retrieving parts from bins
Angled and/or low height bins
Screwdriver use
Powered tools
Wrong tool for the job
Pistol grip tools for vertical work activity, inline tools for horizontal work activity
Part installation
Angled worktable, possibly using a jig or

fixture
Keyboarding
Proper keyboard height and angle
61
Elbows Out
The body knows that working with a bent wrist can cause harm. When
confronted with a poor working condition that would require wrist bending, or
Wash Rag, we subconsciously transfer the stress to the elbow by "winging" it out
to the side. The Hit List item Elbows Out reflects this posture.
Elbows Out is an attempt to keep the wrist straight. This is a common defense
mechanism our body uses to avoid ergonomic issues involving the wrists. For
example, Elbows Out is often the result of using screwdrivers to manually drive
screws; employees often "wing out" the elbow during the continuous forearm
rotation involved in the task.
Elbows Out postures can result in the compression of nerves between the
muscles of the forearm and/or inflammation of the tendons at the elbow. For this
reason, elbow soreness or injury often occurs before wrist injury.
Look for the Elbows Out and remember they are associated with poor ergonomic
conditions.
Figure 3.5 Elbows Out
62
Common Elbows Out Activities
Hand starting/threading a bolt or

fastener
Powered tools
Wrong tool for the job
Pistol grip tools for vertical work activity,

in-line tools for horizontal work activity
Using pliers
Angled handle pliers
Opening pressure valves
Motorized valves
Screwdriver use
Battery powered tools, different fastener
2008 Humantech
Shoulder Too High/Too Low

Shoulder Too High/Too Low reminds us that if the shoulder is too high, the job
is too high, and if the shoulder is too low, the job is too low. Our body is very
flexible and we accommodate to the work environment. Yet bending over and
reaching up are high-risk postures that can contribute to WMSDs.
Every working height, reach distance, and placement of tools, equipment, and
controls in the work environment must be designed with every employee in mind,
from the largest to the smallest, and all sizes in between. Simply considering an
average workers size is not sufficient. For example, consider shoe size. If one
employee requires a size seven shoe, and another employee requires a size
eleven, we would not choose an average shoe size of nine to accommodate
them bothsize nine would fit neither. Similarly, we must match workstation and
equipment sizes to the sizes of the operators, or ergonomic issues may result.
Figure 3.6 Shoulder Too High/Too Low
Common Shoulder Too

High/Too Low Activities
High storage of materials
Lower the storage height below shoulder

level, provide rolling stepstools with casters
that lock with applied weight
Low/high work height
Adjustable height tables
Seated computer work
Adjustable height chairs and stools with

footrests for smaller employees
Low/high placement of
switches, levers, buttons
Place switches near elbow height
Retrieving parts from totes
Lower bin heights and arrange in a semi-circle
63
Hungry Head
Most work activities require the employee to see, for example, when assembling
a product, inspecting a completed unit for defects, or looking upstream at an
assembly line to gauge production levels. Hungry Head refers to the search for
visual information. If sight lines are not clear, or areas are poorly lit, the body will
naturally position the eyes to be in the best position to see what they need to
see.
Hungry Head conditions lead primarily to muscular pain in the neck and upper
back/shoulder. Over time, this posture may compress the nerves and restrict
blood flow.
Figure 3.7 Hungry Head
Common Hungry Head

Activities
64
Looking into a microscope or

at a computer monitor
Height-adjustable platforms under

microscopes and monitors, height adjustable
work table
Bent neck doing precision

work (e.g., small part
assembly)
Self-supporting magnifying glasses with task

lighting, angled work area using a jig or fixture
Inspection
Provide task lighting
Reading dials or displays
Proper height and size of dials and displays
General assembly work
Raise and angle work surface
2008 Humantech
Butts Up
The back is constructed to provide a substantial amount of mobility. However, in
return for this mobility, we must accept some shortcomings associated with an
unstable and curved column of support. Loads are unequally distributed in a
curved spine, and high muscle forces are required to stabilize it. Consequently,
the lower back (lumbar area) can be at risk for injury.
Butts Up is a condition of bending over, thus extending the upper body over the
floor. To keep the body from falling over, the spine is transformed into a rigid
cantilever by muscular action. This action can generate extremely high
compressive forces in the lower back muscles and the spinal discs located
between the vertebrae.
What do you observe on the shop floor? If you see a lot of "butts" instead of a lot
of faces, it is because people must bend over to retrieve, handle, or place
materials.
Figure 3.8 Butts Up
Common Butts Up Activities
Lifting bins off floor
Load levelers or lift tables to maintain

consistent retrieval heights
Retrieving boxes of finished parts

off the floor
Raise boxes on tables
Reaching into wire storage crates
Lift and tilt tables
65
Twist and Shout

Parts, tools, and work activities not positioned directly in front of the employee
may introduce body twisting into the operation. Twisting while working generates
shear and compressive forces into the cervical (neck) and lumbar (lower back)
regions of the spinal discs, escalating the chance of injury.
Twist and Shout is the condition of twisting at the neck or back while performing
work activities. This posture may be the result of the physical work arrangement.
For example, the parts necessary to complete an assembly activity may be
located to the side rather than directly in front of the employee. Twist and Shout
may also be the result of poor work practices, such as twisting the body to place
items on a pallet rather than taking a step to assume a more neutral position
before placing the items.
One way to identify Twist and Shout postures is to observe the location of the
shoulders in relation to the hips. If you see that the shoulders are not in the
same line as the hips, you have Twist and Shout postures.
Figure 3.9 Twist and Shout
Common Twist and

Shout Activities
66
Poor placement of
shared tools
Individualized work areas to limit cross-reaching for

commonly used items, proper placement of instruments
(e.g., if used by right hand, place on right side)
Reaching across the

body to retrieve parts
Place part bins on the side of retrieval
Retrieval from bins
Tilting or gravity feed bins
Excessive reaching to
parts
Reduce reach to parts, deliver parts on a gravity slide

closer to the employee
2008 Humantech
Horizontal Distance
Observe how far employees must reach to retrieve tools, gather parts, activate
buttons, flip switches, and lift totes. The farther the reach, the larger the amount
of force required to counterbalance upper body weight.
This force is magnified when lifting is part of the activity. Small loads, held at a
distance, can increase the amount of force on the lower back by as much as 15
times. For example, a 10-pound (4.5 kg) weight held away from the body with
the arms outstretched and the back bent forward generates about 150 pounds
(68 kg) of force on the lower back.
Horizontal Distance is the condition of working far away from the body, either in
front or to the side. If a work activity requires a far reach, the potential for
ergonomic risk to the shoulders and back increases. Horizontal Distance also
increases the time necessary to complete an activity. Reaching may be
necessary, but excessive reaching is wasteful and inefficient. By eliminating or
reducing far reaches, work activities can become faster and easier to perform.
Figure 3.10 Horizontal Distance
Common Horizontal
Distance Activities
Reaching into equipment
Reduce excessive guarding and/or equipment

components to minimize reach distance, install a
tray that loads into equipment for processing
Excessive reaching to part

bins
Bring part bins closer, deliver parts on a gravity

slide, tilt bins
Lack of toe clearance
Provide a toe cutout
Retrieving/placing boxes
on pallets
Swivel top table
67
Sit vs. Stand

To ensure that people can perform a job task consistently time after time while
also minimizing potential ergonomic risk, choose the appropriate working
positionSit vs. Standfor the particular task.
Operations involving high visual attention (critical inspection tasks), fine finger
motion (small parts assembly), and long processing times (all day long) are good
candidates for sitting. For sitting tasks, provide a proper chair with good lumbar
(lower back) support and height adjustability, foot support, and adequate leg
clearance with no leg obstructions.
Standing is a good choice for operations that require operator mobility (taking a
step or two to retrieve parts) or moderate application forces (inserting fasteners
with a powered tool), or where work activity varies from one product to another
(operator works many machines at the same time). Anti-fatigue matting and foot
rails are recommended for stationary workstations.
Sit vs. Stand also helps us to spot poor sitting and standing conditions like the
one pictured below.
Figure 3.11 Sit vs. Stand
68
Common Sit vs. Stand

Activities
Prolonged standing
Provide anti-fatigue matting, foot rail
Thick conveyors (inadequate

knee clearance)
Low profile (thin) conveyors to increase leg

clearance
Knee obstructions
Provide knee clearance, remove excess

guarding
Sitting or standing all day
Sit-stand seating
Sitting all day
Good ergonomic seating with lumbar support
2008 Humantech
Bad Vibes
Exposure to vibration from hand tools can permanently damage the small blood
vessels and nerves in the fingers. Vibration also induces muscle fatigue because
the gripping force required to hold, control, and use the tool is increased.
Although newer tools provide better vibration dampening, regular maintenance is
necessary to ensure that they are operating within their design specifications.
Whole-body vibration has also been shown to increase employee discomfort,
disorientation, and joint degeneration in the feet and knees.
Bad Vibes is a condition in which the employee is exposed to vibration.
Although it is sometimes difficult to observe or precisely measure, ask the
employee if the tool/equipment is causing noticeable vibration.
Figure 3.12 Bad Vibes
Common Bad Vibes

Activities
Tool vibration (e.g., grinders,

sanders)
Vibration-absorbing grips for tools, routine tool

maintenance and bit replacement, provide
tools with built-in vibration dampening
Vibration from large

machining equipment
Separation of floor standing equipment and

adjacent platforms, install anti-vibration pads
under equipment or between equipment and
work platform
Vibratory parts feeders
Isolate parts feeder on separate table
69
Contact
Contact stress is another name for soft tissue compression. Contact occurs
when a hard or sharp piece of equipment or tool edge places pressure on soft
body tissue such as the legs, abdomen, forearms, or palms of the hands. This
contact increases the force component of the job while reducing blood flow to the
affected body area. In addition, contact may lead to skin irritation. Continued
contact may cause blood vessels to compress and the skin to harden.
Operators may sit differently at workstations to avoid contact stress to the legs,
hold tools in awkward positions to avoid a sharp or hard edge, or even reach
farther than normal at a workstation to avoid a pointed workstation corner or
fixture.
Look for, and ask employees about Contact conditions, which often require only
minor adjustments to result in significant improvements to working conditions.
Figure 3.13 Contact
70
Common Contact Activities
Leaning elbows against a

hard table edge
Radius (round) table edge, pad table edge,

add table edge protector
Holding sharp, pointy tool

handles
Rounded tool handle, pad tool handle, replace

tool
Leg interference under the

work table while seated
Remove obstruction, standing workstation
Hand/arm contact with

pointed jigs/fixtures
Round jig/fixture edges
Small tool handles
Larger tool handles, rounded end on tool

handles
2008 Humantech
The Hit List "Fix It"

The three Hit List Fix It items represent solution strategies for resolving
ergonomic issues. These solution strategies, combined with the perspective of
"Would you do it this way?," can be used to pinpoint practical job improvements
that affect operator comfort, health, and performance.
Fix It: Three solution

strategies to identify
low-cost/high-impact
job improvements.
71
Tool/Target
Ergonomic issues are the result of a mismatch between the workstation and the
employee and/or the tool used in the work activity. Changing either the tool that
is used or the target location can improve all ergonomic issues; when an
employee does not use a specific tool, the tool is the employees hand. It is
important to note that ergonomic improvements often occur by changing both the
tool and the target.
Change the Tool

Tools are designed for specific applications in a specified direction. If an
employee uses the wrong tool to complete a task, he or she may resort to nonneutral postures such as wrist deviations and shoulder raising, which increase
the chance of injury. It is important to select and use a tool that is appropriate for
the specific work activity to promote more neutral body postures. Here are
general guidelines for tool selection and design:
Use pistol grip tools when applying force horizontally, on a vertical surface
Use in-line tools when applying force vertically, on a horizontal surface
Lengthen or shorten handles and tool bits to bring the reach to the tool
into the operators Comfort Zone (see the next section)
Provide a secondary tool handle for better control and improved postures
Balance tools and orient them in the direction of use
Change the Target

If the proper tool cannot be used, change the target orientation to fit with the tool
and promote neutral body postures. Ways to modify the target include:
Provide a jig or fixture to orient the part for easy access
Provide adjustable height tables
Establish a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) to ensure that people

use the equipment the way it was designed to be used
Figure 3.15 Change the Tool or Change the Target
72
2008 Humantech
Comfort Zone
Working near the limits of a joints range of motion is difficult and increases
exposure to ergonomic risk. Everyone performs best when working in an area
directly in front of the torso called the Comfort Zone. This area is where we are
the strongest, possess and execute the most control, and have the best visual
acuity. In addition, working inside the Comfort Zone may also reduce the time
necessary to perform a work activity because unnecessary movements are
reduced or eliminated.
The Comfort Zone is made up of the natural, semi-circular movements or
motions of the human body. A combination of both horizontal and vertical
movements, the Comfort Zone extends from the knee (24" or 610 mm) to the
shoulder (62" or 1.58 m), and no more than 20 to either side of the body.
This zone is further optimized for body postures and motion in a region, called
the Optimal Comfort Zone. This region is located a few inches below (38" or
965 mm) and above (49" or 1.25 m) the elbow, and directly in front of the body.
Whenever possible, parts, work activities, critical buttons, and visual displays
should be located within the Optimal Comfort Zone.
Maximum
Optimal
62"
(1.58 m)
49"
(1.25 m)
38"
(965 mm)
24"
(610 mm)
Figure 3.16 Maximum and Optimal Comfort Zones
73
The Comfort Zone and Motion

Motion is any movement a person makes, such as reaching for parts and
bending over to place boxes on a pallet. These motions may be necessary to
complete the work activity, but generally do not add value to the product. Often
termed "non-value-added" or "wasteful" motions, they are the result of arranging
equipment, parts, tools, and supplies without consideration for ergonomic
concerns or specifications. Not only can wasteful motions increase exposure to
ergonomic risk, they can also increase the time necessary to perform the work
activity, and can affect your ability to meet your customers needs.
When tools and workstations are arranged within the Optimal Comfort Zone,
operators and materials have a shorter distance to travel. Eye movements, hand
movements, and body movements are reduced, resulting in less ergonomic risk
and improved efficiency.
Opportunities to eliminate motion can be identified and addressed in everyday
tasks. Consider these guidelines:
74
Keep enough parts in part bins for only an hour or two of production to
minimize the bin sizes, allowing more opportunity to get work items into
the Comfort Zone.
Move materials, controls, and displays closer to their point of use.
Motions can also be combined to result in reduced motions. The motion

of picking up several tools repeatedly can be reduced by combining
multiple tools into one tool. When one tool can do multiple tasks, it can
be picked up once and used for many functions while still in the
operators hand. In addition, a single tool is easier to accommodate in
the Comfort Zone than multiple tools.
Use vertical space in the Comfort Zone as well as horizontal table space.
Placing tools on balancers can position them closer when needed.
Remove unnecessary steps or activities in the job sequence.
Store items at heights that do not increase bending or overhead

reaching.
Position workstation surfaces at heights that promote neutral postures.
2008 Humantech
Dont Give Me Static

Blood flow is critical to maintaining operator performance, connective tissue, and
nerve health. Soft tissue compression, from prolonged static force application
(gripping, carrying, bending over), exposure to vibration (Bad Vibes), or contact
with hard or sharp edges can impede blood flow to the muscles, connective
tissues, and nerves.
Dont Give Me Static is a way to remember that our bodies rely on good blood
flow. Some things we can do to improve operator comfort and productivity
include the following:
Pad hard surfaces and sharp edges that operators may come into
contact with.
Review tasks that require operators to exert force in one position for
more than ten seconds to see if movement or microbreaks can be
introduced.
Look for ways to isolate vibrating tools or add vibration tool wrap.
Use positioning devices to reduce force requirements when objects must

be held for prolonged periods. Figure 3.17 illustrates a tool positioner
that reduces requirements for holding the tool in place.
Ensure that handles have:
Appropriate diameter: 1.2" 1.7" (30 43 mm) diameter round

handles for power grips, 0.3" 0.6" (8 15 mm) diameter for
precision grips
Appropriate length: 3.8" 6.0" (95 152 mm)
Padding (should not add to the diameter beyond guidelines)
Flanges, if force is exerted along the axis of the handle
Figure 3.17 Dont Give Me Static
75
Ask the Operator

Engaging operators in conversation about ergonomic issues is vital to uncovering
the root cause of Find It items and identifying practical Fix It items. The person
doing the job knows more about job tasks and what may work (or not work) than
anyone else. The Ergonomics Hit List can be a means for establishing a
common dialogue in ergonomics. A little education goes a long way in getting
operators involved and contributing to the ergonomic improvement process.
The Ergonomics Action Form (page 79) is a formal mechanism for documenting
ergonomic issues and capturing improvement ideas. Operators often identify
easy, cost-effective job improvements resulting simply from job experience.
The real expert in any operation is the person who does it

every day. Ask the operator to identify ergonomic
problems that you might otherwise miss.
In addition, consider asking operators the following questions to gain greater
insight into the operation:
What is the least desirable or most difficult part of this operation?
While performing this operation, do you experience any pain or

discomfort?
Have there been any ergonomic injuries associated with this operation?
What suggestions do you have for improving this work area?
Are there any quality or production issues associated with this operation?
Ask the Operator: The

most important data
source for identifying and
resolving ergonomic
issues is the operator.
76
2008 Humantech
Continuous Improvement Process

Finding and fixing ergonomic issues is an important step in the ergonomics
process. To ensure that all good improvement ideas are put into place, and
improvement doesnt stop at the first idea, a continuous improvement process is
needed. The back of the Ergonomics Hit List includes key elements to help you
understand how to get the most out of the Find It and Fix It approach.
Check for Success:

Confirm that Fix It
improvements resolve
Find It issues (and
dont create additional
concerns).
The 30-Inch View:

Where people, work,
and the environment
intersect.
FORM: A
reminder to share
successful
improvements
with other areas
that have similar
challenges.
Figure 3.19 The Ergonomics Hit List Card (Back)
77
The 30-Inch View

Within an arms length of every employee are the obstacles to and opportunities
for workplace improvement. A fresh perspective herewhere people, work, and
the environment intersectcan have dramatic and far-reaching effects on the
entire business.
Find It Fix It Check for Success

Continuous improvement has become the mantra of business. Finding low cost
ways to incrementally improve processes has been proven to pay off in the short
term and long run. One key learning from the Kaizen/continuous improvement
community is the need to routinely check for success.
The Find It Fix It approach is a simple and straightforward way to identify and
resolve ergonomic issues. But even the most well thought-out improvements can
come up short or contribute to other challenges that werent anticipated.
Checking for success is a critical step to ensuring that Fix It improvements
resolve the issues and do not create additional concerns.
Fix Once, Repeat Many (FORM)

Companies are discovering that many ergonomic challenges are similar across
different departments, locations, or business units. By taking the time to share
improvements, whether via company conferences, internal web sites, or just plain
networking, they are able to accelerate the ergonomics initiative, and spend more
time implementing improvements and less time assessing challenges. This
technique is known as FORM, or Fix Once, Repeat Many.
Sharing best practices is routine, particularly in global companies. When a best
practices approach is applied to ergonomics, the benefit of workplace improvements becomes clear. Raising an assembly line 8" (203 mm) works just as well
in Los Angeles as it does in Buffalo, Budapest, and New Delhi. In contrast,
instituting job rotation schedules or stretching exercise programs is difficult to
replicate due to the nuances of administering these programs.
The FORM approach to ergonomics problem solving is most effective when
supported by common analysis techniques and centralized access to solutions.
This is why companies are finding that enterprise-wide ergonomics initiatives can
achieve sustained success with an emphasis on sharing solutions.
78
2008 Humantech
The Ergonomics Action Form

Documentation is an important part of an ergonomics process. The Ergonomics
Action Form is a structured worksheet that allows you to capture the presence of
ergonomic issues in an operation along with improvement ideas. The Hit List
"Find It" items are located on the front (Figure 3.20), while the back combines the
"Fix It" items with the Hit List elements of a continuous improvement process
(Figure 3.21).
Figure 3.20 The Ergonomics Action Form (Front)
79
Figure 3.21 The Ergonomics Action Form (Back)
When to Use the Ergonomics Action Form

The Ergonomics Action Form is best used as a first step in participative problem
solving. Because the form is observation-based, multiple operators trained in the
Ergonomics Hit List can provide insight into ergonomic issues and job
improvements without requiring detailed analysis. The Ergonomics Action Form
is an appropriate tool for integration with continuous improvement (Kaizen) and
behavior-observation safety initiatives.
Limitations of the Ergonomics Action Form

The Ergonomics Action Form does not quantify risk factors, and therefore does
not support data-driven prioritizing of problem jobs. For more information about
prioritizing jobs based on ergonomic risk, see Chapter 5, Prioritizing Ergonomic
Risks.
In addition, since issues identified on the Ergonomics Action Form do not have
threshold limits, this tool is difficult to use to specify risk factor reduction goals for
job improvements. For more information about quantitative risk analysis, see
Chapter 4, Evaluating Ergonomic Risk Factors.
80
2008 Humantech
Completing the Ergonomics Action Form

The Ergonomics Action Form formalizes the observations from the Ergonomics
Hit List. It does not generate a risk score, but rather captures observations of
ergonomic issues and improvement ideas and turns them into an action plan.
To complete the Ergonomics Action Form, youll follow these steps:
Step 1 Complete job information.
2 List all major tasks observed.
3 Indicate Hit List items observed.
4 Record comments or notes.
5 Transfer Hit List items observed (from front).
6 Brainstorm and record potential improvements.
7 List the top three improvements.
8 Sign off and follow up.
Step 1: Complete Job Information

First, identify the job the Ergonomics Action Form pertains to by indicating the
following items in the Complete Job Information area of the form. Also record
the current date.
Job name
Site
Department
Station
Shift
Product
81
Step 2: List All Major Tasks Observed

Major tasks are those activities that you observe in a job or operation. Breaking
jobs into tasks is a fairly subjective exercise; a rule of thumb is that there should
be three to ten major tasks in a job. For example, the major tasks for the "Band
Saw" operation are shown below:
Figure 3.22 Major Job Tasks
82
2008 Humantech
Step 3: Indicate Hit List Items Observed

Check the box next to each ergonomic issue observed. In the example below,
six Hit List items were present in the job:
Wash Rag
Shoulder Too High/Too Low
Butts Up
Twist and Shout
Horizontal Distance
Contact
Figure 3.23 Hit List Items Observed
83
Step 4: Record Comments or Notes

Record comments or notes from your observations and interactions with
operators. Typical comments include:
Reports of job-related discomfort
Operator comments on job challenges and potential improvements
Information about forces and loads
Varying conditions, such as product fit challenges related to component

quality
Figure 3.24 Comments or Notes
Step 5: Transfer Hit List Items Observed

Transfer the Hit List items observed (marked in Step 3) from the front of the form.
Figure 3.25 Hit List Items Transferred from Front
84
2008 Humantech
Step 6: Brainstorm and Record Potential Improvements

Engage operators and others to identify potential ergonomic improvements using
the Fix It items from the Ergonomics Hit List to spur ideas. For each potential
improvement, mark the ergonomic issues that will be addressed by the
improvement. Finally, for those items that have approval for moving forward,
write your initials in the box and the date of approval.
Figure 3.26 Record Potential Improvements
Step 7: List the Top Three Improvements

List the top three improvement ideas based on your brainstorming exercise. This
information can be used to communicate effective improvements to other areas
with similar challenges.
Figure 3.27 Top Three Improvements
85
Step 8: Sign Off and Follow Up

Write the name of the person to whom this form will be submitted for approval.
Include a date for following up to confirm that the improvements have been
implemented, and to ensure that no new challenges have been created as a
result of the improvements.
Figure 3.28 The Final Step
The Completed Ergonomics Action Form

The completed Ergonomics Action Form for the Band Saw operation is shown
below.
Figure 3.29 Completed Ergonomics Action Form for Band Saw Operation (Front)
86
2008 Humantech
Figure 3.30 Completed Ergonomics Action Form for Band Saw Operation (Back)
87
Avoiding Potential Pitfalls With the Ergonomics Action Form

The following table lists potential pitfalls you may encounter when using the
Ergonomics Action Form and a recommended approach for each.
Table 3.1 Potential Ergonomics Action Form Pitfalls
Potential Pitfall
Recommended Approach
The ergonomic issues need

to be quantified.
We want the ergonomic
assessment tools in our
process to be objective.
The Ergonomics Action Form
focuses on postures, yet the
job under review has other
ergonomic issues.
Use quantifiable approaches like the BRIEF,

BEST, EASY, and NIOSH Lifting Equation.
Our company has addressed

all the "low-hanging fruit" and
the Ergonomics Action Form
seems too simple and
ineffective.
88
2008 Humantech
Notes
89
Notes
90
2008 Humantech
hapter 4 Evaluating Ergonomic Risk Factors

Ergonomic Risk Factors Defined.............................................................93
Ergonomic Risk Factor Surveys ..............................................................94
The BRIEF Survey ...............................................................................95
Applying the BRIEF Survey .....................................................................97
Physical Stressors and the BRIEF Survey ............................................111
Scoring the BRIEF Survey.....................................................................113
Completing the BRIEF Survey ..............................................................114
Measuring Risk Reduction.....................................................................118
Avoiding Potential Pitfalls With the BRIEF Survey................................120
References ............................................................................................120
91
About This Chapter

Chapter 4 is part of the Evaluation phase of ergonomic risk management.

Recognition
Chapter 2
Work-Related
Musculoskeletal
Disorders
Chapter 3
Recognizing
Ergonomic Issues
Evaluation
Chapter 4
Risk Factors
Chapter 5
Prioritizing
Ergonomic Risks
Chapter 6
Manual Material
Handling Analysis
Control
Chapter 7
Ergonomic
Design Guidelines
Chapter 8
Cost Justifying
Ergonomic
Improvements
Chapter 9
The Job
Improvement
Process
Putting It
All Together
Chapter 10
Performing an
Ergonomics
Review
Chapter 11
Surviving the
First 90 Days
This chapter explains how to use the BRIEF Survey, a tool for identifying
ergonomic risk factors in job/tasks. We'll address these questions:
92
Why should I evaluate ergonomic risk?
What is ergonomic risk?
How do I evaluate ergonomic risk?
2008 Humantech
Chapter 4: Evaluating Ergonomic Risk Factors
Ergonomic Risk Factors Defined

OSHA defines ergonomic risk factors as "conditions of a job, process, or
operation that contribute to the risk of developing Cumulative Trauma Disorders"
(OSHA 3123, 1990). Ergonomic risk factors should be interpreted as one would
consider any other risk factor. The presence of a risk factor does not necessarily
predict that an individual will suffer a health problem as a result of exposure to
the risk factor. Rather, a risk factor is a condition of the workplace that increases
ones chance of developing a WMSD and to which exposure should be limited, or
totally avoided, in pursuit of a goal of a 100% healthy and safe working
environment.
Everybody knows of an Aunt Betty or Uncle Jim who smoked for decades yet
lived to be 90. Being a smoker does not automatically mean you will get lung
cancer, but it has been shown that smoking increases the likelihood of getting
lung cancer. Therefore, smoking is a risk factor.
Similarly, performing a job that requires high force pinch grips and wrist
deviations will not automatically lead to a WMSD, but the likelihood of being
afflicted increases.
Remember that:
Risk factors do not indicate that injury is certain to occur.
The presence of a risk factor does not necessarily mean that an operator
will experience discomfort from a certain task.
Improvements can be made in a job by reducing risk factors.
93
Ergonomic Risk Factor Surveys

There are many ways to analyze jobs for ergonomic risk factors or ergonomic
stressors (Keyserling et al., 1991; Ulin et al., 1992). Job analyses generally take
one of three forms:
Checklist the simplest to conduct, but is not flexible and may not ask
appropriate questions for a particular job. Checklists have been known
to be misused if the user has not been adequately trained.
Interactive form-based takes considerable time and effort to develop

and sometimes has the same challenges as a checklist.
Narrative (open-ended) method thorough, straightforward, easy to

learn and use, and is generally known as an acceptable method of
measuring ergonomic risk in a job.
Conducting a narrative job analysis requires the following steps:

Recognize 1. Collect background job information (preferably via videotape)
2. Break the job into its essential functions
Evaluate
3. Identify risk factors for each task

4. Identify root causes for each risk factor
Control
5. Generate and implement solutions

6. Follow up after solutions have been implemented
This chapter discusses Step 3 in this process, identifying risk factors.
Ergonomic Job Analysis

Ergonomic job analysis is a general term describing a variety of techniques by
which you can identify potential ergonomic issues and job improvements. While
some of these techniques are very involved and can require specialized training,
three techniques are common in industry:
94
Systematic observation requires repeated observation of operator

activities to identify issues and solutions. The Ergonomics Hit List
(Chapter 3) is an adequate tool for systematic observations.
Discomfort survey formalized survey to identify the types of jobrelated discomfort in the working population as well as operatorgenerated ideas for improving their jobs. A discomfort survey form is
provided in Chapter 5, Prioritizing Ergonomic Risks.
Risk factor survey formalized observation tool that identifies specific

risk factors associated with job/tasks and their root causes. The BRIEF
Survey is an example of a risk factor survey.
2008 Humantech
The BRIEF Survey

BRIEF (Baseline Risk Identification of Ergonomic Factors) is an initial screening
tool that uses a structured and formalized rating system to identify ergonomic
acceptability on a task-by-task basis.
Figure 4.2 The BRIEF Survey
95
The BRIEF examines nine body areas for WMSD risk factors:
Left hand/wrist
Right hand/wrist
Left elbow
Right elbow
Left shoulder
Right shoulder
Neck
Back
Legs
The BRIEF also takes into consideration physical stressors that tend to
accelerate WMSDs:
Vibration
Low temperatures
Soft tissue compression
Impact stress
Glove issues
When to Use the BRIEF Survey

Because the BRIEF is a quantifiable method of measuring the amount of
ergonomic risk in a job, apply the BRIEF when a high level of detail is necessary
and/or when readily available off-the-shelf solutions are not feasible. In contrast,
apply the Hit List when the level of necessary detail about the job is low and
when off-the-shelf solutions are readily available. (For more information about
the Hit List, see Chapter 3, Recognizing Ergonomic Issues.)
Limitations of the BRIEF Survey

The BRIEF is designed to analyze a job with specific tasks that are repeated
throughout the cycle. The BRIEF Survey works best in environments where
operators routinely perform job/tasks using repeatable methods or procedures.
96
2008 Humantech
Applying the BRIEF Survey

The BRIEF is a posture- and force-based risk assessment. Posture and force
risk factors are significant by themselves, while duration and frequency risk
factors generally amplify the hazard presented by the posture and force risk
factors.
Because posture and force risk factors are primary to the BRIEF, always start by
identifying postures and forces. While watching a videotape of a task, focus on
the postures and forces of the large body parts first because they are easier to
identify. A good order to follow is to look at the neck, back, and legs, the elbows
and shoulders, and finally the hands and wrists. Many times, the postures and
forces of the hands and wrists are subtle and are best captured by watching the
video in slow motion and occasionally pausing the video.
Only after reviewing the posture and force risk factors, evaluate the frequency
and duration components. These apply to the frequency and duration of risk
factor exertions (a movement that contains a posture risk factor, force risk
factor, or both).
Frequency defined as the frequency of risk factor exertions.

Frequency is an additive measure of various posture and force risk
factors. However, a single exertion that contains both posture and force
risk factors is counted only once. For example, score frequency for the
back if you observed back twisting once and back bending greater than
20 once in the same minute. However, if you observed back twisting
while exerting more than 25 pounds (11.3 kg) once in a minute, do not
score frequency for the back.
Duration is defined as the duration of risk factor exertions. For example,

grasping a handle with both hands using a power grip with more than 10
pounds (4.5 kg) of force for more than 10 seconds would score duration
for the both hands and wrists. Once the exertion ends, start counting
over again. For example, suppose you observed the left arm raised
more than 45 for periods of eight seconds, three times in a minute.
Since no single exertion broke the ten-second mark, do not score
duration for the left shoulder.
Each major joint in the human body has particular strengths and weaknesses.
Knowing that combinations of posture, force, frequency, and duration contribute
to WMSD risk will guide you in the early identification of potentially damaging job
designs.
The following pages detail the risk factors for each of these body areas:
Hands/wrists
Elbows
Shoulders
Neck
Back
Legs
Note: Refer to Appendix A: Basis for the BRIEF for a scientific basis for the
BRIEF Survey.
97
Tendon Mechanics
We use our hands and wrists for virtually every activity in our daily lives. It is
important to remember that they are strongest when they are straight, or in a
"neutral posture". Working outside of this neutral posture while applying a force,
repeating a non-neutral posture, or maintaining a non-neutral posture for a period
of time can lead to WMSDs. Lets take a closer look at the hand and wrist to
determine why non-neutral postures coupled with high forces, frequency, and/or
duration can be detrimental to the wrist.
There are many anatomical features of the hand/wrist, including muscles,
tendons, ligaments, bones, and nerves.
Figure 4.3 Muscle, Tendons, and Bones
Figure 4.4 Nerve and Ligament
98
2008 Humantech
When the wrist bends into non-neutral postures, the median nerve and the
tendons rub over the hard edge of the bones in the wrist which increases the
potential for developing WMSDs such as tendinitis, tenosynovitis, and carpal
tunnel syndrome (described in Chapter 2, Work-Related Musculoskeletal
Disorders).
Figure 4.5 Non-neutral Wrist Postures
As the wrist leaves the straight, or neutral posture, we also lose grip strength.
Figure 4.6 shows that grip strength can decrease by up to 45% (Eastman Kodak,
1986).
Figure 4.6 Grip Strength and Posture
Because of these limitations of the wrist, it is important to remember to:
Keep it straight.
99
Risk Factors for the Hands and Wrists

Posture Risk Factors
100
Flexed > 45
Measured with respect to the

bend across the top of the wrist.
Extended > 45
Measured with respect to the

bend across the top of the wrist.
Ulnar Deviation
Any noticeable deviation

opposite the thumb.
Radial Deviation
Any noticeable deviation toward

the thumb.
2008 Humantech
Force
Pinch Grip
> 2 lb (0.9 kg)
An application of force by the

fingers around an object without
the thumb touching the
forefinger.
When the measured force
exerted is 2 lb or greater. If
there are no measurements, a
guideline is the force required to
write with a pencil.
Finger Press
> 2 lb (0.9 kg)
An application of pressure by
one or more fingers to one face
of an object.
When the measured force
exerted is 2 lb or greater.
Power Grip
> 10 lb (4.5 kg)
Thumb overlapping or touching

the forefinger while exerting > 10
lb.
Duration
> 10 seconds - Any one force or posture risk factor sustained for 10 seconds or
longer.
Frequency
> 30/minute - A cumulative measure of any combination of force and posture risk
factors occurring thirty times per minute or more.
For example, if an operation requires 5 pinch grips, 3 ulnar deviations, 20
flexions, and 2 extensions, all within a minutes time, mark Frequency as a risk
factor for the operation.
101
Risk Factors for the Elbow

Rotated
Forearm
Neutral forearm position is 15

from pronation (palm down).
Rotated forearm is then defined
as rotation + 45 from neutral
position.
Fully Extended
The angle created at the elbow

joint by the forearm and the
upper arm. When that angle
meets or exceeds 135, mark
Fully Extended as a risk factor
for the operation.
Force
> 10 lb (4.5 kg) - A force exerted on or by the arm. This could occur when
picking up an object weighing 10 lb or greater or applying a force of 10 lb or
greater.
Examples:
Picking up a 12 lb (5.4 kg) briefcase off the ground
Using a hammer to drive a nail
Using a screwdriver when the rotational force exceeds 10 lb (4.5 kg)
Note: When exerting force with two arms, the limit is > 15 lb (6.8 kg).
Duration
longer.
Frequency
factors occurring twice per minute or more.
102
2008 Humantech
Risk Factors for the Shoulder

Arm Behind
Body
Marked by the elbow noticeably

crossing the plane created by the
back.
Arm Raised
> 45
The angle of the arm raised 45

or more with respect to the torso.
Shoulders
Shrugged
Marked by any noticeable

deviation of the shoulder joint
raised upward toward the ear.
Force
> 10 lb (4.5 kg) - A force exerted on or by the shoulder. This could occur when
picking up an object weighing 10 lb or greater or applying a force of 10 lb or
greater.
Examples:
Sitting in an office chair with arm rests positioned too high
Reaching overhead, with full extension, to retrieve material on a top shelf
Lifting a heavy (50-lb) box onto a conveyor that is too high
Lifting a heavy suitcase into the trunk of a car
Note: When exerting force with two arms, the limit is > 15 lb (6.8 kg).
Duration
longer.
Frequency
103
Risk Factors for the Neck

104
Flexed > 30
Neck bent > 30 from the torso.
Extended
Any noticeable backward

deviation.
Sideways
Any noticeable sideways

deviation.
Twisted > 20
Neck twisting > 20.
2008 Humantech
Force
> 2 lb (0.9 kg) - A force exerted on or by the neck. This could occur from
wearing personal protective equipment that weighs 2 lb or greater.
Duration
longer.
Frequency
105
Back Biomechanics
The back is an inherently unstable structure. Figure 4.7 gives the illusion that the
back is a nice straight column. We know from architecture that columns offer
support. Support is one of two main functions of the back. Flexibility is the other.
Figure 4.8 shows that the back is actually made up of an "S" curve, which
provides the necessary flexibility. The human back is the best design to handle
the different demands of support (strength) and flexibility (mobility).
Figure 4.7 Spinal Column Back View
Figure 4.8 Spinal Column Side View
A closer look at the spinal column reveals that between each spinal bone
(vertebra) is an intervertebral disc.
Figure 4.9 Vertebrae and Discs
The purpose of these discs is threefold: to act as shock absorbers, to prevent

bone-to-bone contact, and to prevent bone to nerve contact. The shock
absorption quality allows us to bend and twist without injury. But like a car shock
absorber, our discs can also wear out with overuse. Replacement of these parts
isnt as easy as taking our back to the garage.
106
2008 Humantech
Forces on the back, in combination with poor postures, can cause severe
damage to the back. To understand how back injures occur we must understand
how the back functions. The back can be modeled as a simple lever system that
supports the weight of the upper body as well as any loads supported by the
upper body. Since the muscles that act to balance the upper body are very close
to the fulcrum of this lever system (the base of the spine), the back is at a
significant mechanical disadvantage whenever the load is extended outward. The
length of the lever arm for the back muscles is about 2" (51 mm), while the length
of the lever arm for the load can approach 30" (762 mm). The back muscles
must generate forces 10 to 20 times the load being lifted when the torso is bent
forward.
Figure 4.10 The Mechanical Disadvantage of the Back
These forces on the back and, in turn, the discs, can result in bulged, ruptured,
herniated, and slipped discs.
Figure 4.11 Bulged Disc
107
Risk Factors for the Back

108
Flexed > 20
The angle the back is bent

forward from vertical.
Sideways
Any noticeable sideways

deviation.
Extended
Any noticeable backward

bending.
Twisted
Any noticeable back twisting.
Unsupported
No or insufficient lumbar support

while seated.
2008 Humantech
Force
> 25 lb (11.3 kg) - Refers to the weight of an object being handled.
Duration
longer.
Frequency
109
Risk Factors for the Legs

Squat
A bend created at the knee of

45 or less from horizontal.
Kneel
One or both knees touching the

ground.
Unsupported
No foot support while seated.
Force
Foot Pedal > 10 lb (4.5 kg) - A force of 10 lb or greater exerted by the ankle to
activate a foot pedal.
Duration
> 30% of Day - A cumulative measure of any combination of force and posture
risk factors occurring for a total of 30% of the day or more.
Frequency
110
2008 Humantech
Physical Stressors and the BRIEF Survey

A physical stressor increases the force component of the job while reducing
blood flow to the affected body area.
Vibration
Vibration can be characterized as either segmental or whole-body. The body
responds to segmental vibration by limiting blood flow to the exposed body part,
which causes stiffness and numbness in the affected body area. To grip an
object that is constantly in motion, such as a small power tool, and to counteract
the loss of feeling, increased grip force is often required.
Exposure to whole-body vibration for extended periods of time, as in driving a
truck cross-country or operating a fork-truck, can result in digestive and back
disorders. More intense whole-body vibration over a shorter period of time, as in
operating a jack hammer, results in segmental vibration to the hands and wrists,
and may even limit visual acuity.
On the BRIEF Survey, check the Vibration box in the Identify Physical Stressors
section of the form (Step 4) whenever you observe vibration in the operation or
the operator reports it. Write the letter "V" on the body area(s) exposed to the
vibration. For whole-body exposure, circle the figure and write the letter "V" next
to the circle.
Low Temperatures
The body responds to prolonged exposure to low temperatures (below 66F) by
limiting blood flow to the extremities. A reduction in blood flow to the fingers and
hands reduces grip strength and can cause numbness. Working at a shipping
dock or inside a meat packing facility are two examples of operations that may
involve low temperatures.
On the BRIEF Survey, check the Low Temperatures box in the Identify Physical
Stressors section of the form (Step 4) whenever the operator is exposed to
temperatures below 66F for more than two hours per day. For whole-body
exposure, circle the figure and write the letter "L" next to the circle.
Soft Tissue Compression

Soft tissue compression is the restriction of blood flow caused by static force
applied to the body for prolonged periods of time, for example, resting the elbows
on a hard surface while sitting, leaning the forearms on a table edge, or gripping
a sharp handled tool. The reduction in blood flow is a result of pressure on body
tissues. This is a concern particularly when blood vessels are located near the
surface of the skin, as on the back of the hand.
On the BRIEF Survey, check the Soft Tissue Compression box in the Identify
Physical Stressors section of the form (Step 4) whenever you observe it in the
operation or the operator reports it. Write the letter "S" on the body area(s)
exposed to the soft tissue compression.
111
Impact Stress
Impact stress, as in using the hand as a hammer or the torque reaction from
using a tool, is a dynamic force applied to the body. The body responds to
impact stress by limiting blood flow to the exposed body part. Repeated
exposure to impact stress can cause trauma to the tissues, such as bruising.
Repeated exposure to impact stress may cause stiffness and numbness in the
affected body area.
On the BRIEF Survey, check the Impact Stress box in the Identify Physical
Stressors section of the form (Step 4) whenever you observe it in the operation
or the operator reports it. Write the letter "I" on the body area(s) exposed to the
impact stress.
Glove Issues
Glove issues include working with gloves that fit poorly or increase the force
needed to grasp objects. Gloves that are too tight restrict blood flow to the
fingers and cause numbness in the fingers. Gloves that are too large not only
limit dexterity, but they also result in higher force gripping. Gloves that decrease
the coefficient of friction between the object being handled and the gloves also
increase the amount of force that the operator must exert in order to handle the
object.
Examples of glove issues include wearing oversized gloves for tasks that involve
fine finger movements, or wearing plain cotton gloves to lift smooth cardboard
boxes.
On the BRIEF Survey, check the Gloves Issues box in the Identify Physical
Stressors section of the form (Step 4) whenever you observe it in the operation,
or the operator reports that the gloves do not fit properly or make the task more
difficult to perform. Write the letter "G" on the hand(s) exposed to the glove
issues.
112
2008 Humantech
Scoring the BRIEF Survey

After all risk factors have been identified on the BRIEF, you can determine a
score for each body area by adding the number of checked boxes for each body
area. For example, a task was observed to have two posture risk factors for the
neck (flexed 30 and twisted 20) as well as the frequency risk factor (two per
minute) for the neck. Score both posture and frequency for the neck, resulting in
a score of 2. The job is considered medium risk for the neck.
LOW
RISK
MEDIUM
RISK
HIGH
RISK
Score = 0 or 1
Score = 2
Score = 3 or 4
Posture
or Force Only
Posture
or Force + 1
Posture or
Force + Many
Increasing Ergonomic Risk
Figure 4.12 Scoring the BRIEF
The highest possible score for each body area is 4. Scores of 2 or more for any
body area indicate increased risk and should be evaluated further.
113
Completing the BRIEF Survey

To complete the BRIEF Survey, youll follow these steps:
Step 1
Complete job information
Identify risks
Determine risk rating
Identify physical stressors
The following sections step through this process using the "Pallet Loading"
operation as an example.
Note: This example addresses only the Hands & Wrists portion of the BRIEF
Survey for demonstration purposes. When completing a BRIEF, address all
body areas.

First, identify the job the BRIEF pertains to by indicating the following in the
Complete Job Information box. Also record the current date.
114
Job name
Site
Station
Department
Shift
Product
2008 Humantech
Step 2: Identify Risks

Mark the Posture and Force boxes when risk factors are observed for each
body area. (You may also circle the postures observed.) For those body areas
with Posture or Force risk factors, mark Duration and Frequency boxes when
limits are exceeded.
Figure 4.13 Step 2 Identify Risks
For the Pallet Loading operation, these risk factors were observed:
Both the right and left hands and wrists were exposed to non-neutral
postures.
The left hand and wrist used a pinch grip of greater than or equal to
2 lb (0.9 kg).
The right hand and wrist held the risk postures (those circled) for 10
seconds or longer.
The left hand and wrist was observed using a combination of risk
postures (those circled) for 30 times per minute or more.
115
Step 3: Determine Risk Rating

In the Score box, write the number of risk factor categories (0 to 4) checked for
each body part. Using the table, circle the corresponding Risk Rating for each
body part (H, M, L).
Figure 4.14 Step 3 Determine Risk Rating
For the Pallet Loading operation:
116
The left hand/wrist had posture, force and frequency boxes checked,
resulting in a score of 3, high risk.
The right hand/wrist had posture and duration boxes checked, resulting
in a score of 2, medium risk.
2008 Humantech
Step 4: Identify Physical Stressors

Check the boxes for physical stressors observed and use the corresponding
letters to indicate on the body diagram where these stressors occur.
Figure 4.15 Step 4 Identify Physical Stressors
For the Pallet Loading operation:
There was soft tissue compression to the upper legs from leaning
against the pallet.
The operator was exposed to temperatures lower than 66F because

the shipping department is located in the warehouse facility, which is not
climate controlled.
117
Measuring Risk Reduction

A primary advantage of using the BRIEF to evaluate a job is that it provides you
with the ability to quantify improvements. The following example shows how the
BRIEF can be used to measure the effect of an improvement to a workstation.
Example
The completed BRIEF Survey form for the Pallet Loading operation is shown
below. The greatest ergonomic concerns at this workstation were the left
hand/wrist, right elbow, and right shoulder.
Figure 4.16 Completed BRIEF Survey for Pallet Loading
To improve the Pallet Loading workstation, a pallet lift with a swivel top was
installed to minimize reaching across pallets while loading boxes. Figure 4.17
shows the BRIEF completed after the improvements were implemented.
118
2008 Humantech
Figure 4.17 BRIEF Completed After Ergonomic Improvements
Comparing the scores from the first BRIEF to the second clearly shows an
improvement:
Implementation of a combination pallet lift and swivel surface reduced

the BRIEF scores for the right elbow and right shoulder from a high risk
rating to a medium risk rating.
The BRIEF scores for the neck and back were reduced from a medium
risk rating to a low risk rating.
Soft tissue compression to the legs from leaning against the pallet was
eliminated for the pallet loading operation.
Hands & Wrists
Elbows
Shoulders
Left
Right
Left
Right
Left
Right
Neck
Back
Legs
Original
Intervention
Difference
119
Avoiding Potential Pitfalls With the BRIEF Survey

BRIEF, and a recommended approach for each.
Table 4.1 Potential BRIEF Survey Pitfalls
Potential Pitfall
The operation has a very

long cycle time or no
cycle time.
List all tasks involved in the operation. Determine

the tasks of highest concern, based on operator
comments and injury history. Complete the BRIEF
on those high concern tasks.
There are multiple

operators at the same
job.
Find the most experienced operator and complete

the BRIEF on his/her workstation. For comparison,
complete the BRIEF for another operator and
compare the results.
Multiple operators rotate

through the same
workstation.
Find the most experienced operator to use as the

subject. For comparison, complete the BRIEF on
an operator that does the job differently. Complete
the BRIEF based on the entire shift length rather
than the single operator exposure length.
The job cannot be

videotaped (for security
reasons).
Complete the BRIEF in "real time", as you are

watching the operator work. This is less reliable,
but with a cooperative employee, it is possible.
No experienced operators
could be located to
videotape a job/task.
Do not complete the BRIEF using an inexperienced

operator. Return to the job/task after the operators
have accumulated 30 days experience.
References
Armstrong, T.J. et al., Ergonomics Considerations in hand and Wrist Tendinitis, J
Hand Surg, 5, 830-837, 1987.
Armstrong, T. J. et al., Investigation of cumulative trauma disorders in a poultry
processing plant, American Industrial Hygiene Assoc. Journal, 43, 103-115,
1982.
Armstrong, T. J., and Chaffin, D.B., Carpal tunnel syndrome and selected
personal attributes, Journal of Occupational Medicine, 21, 481-486, 1979.
Barnhart, S. et al., Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Among Ski Manufacturing Workers,
Scand J Work Environ Health, 17, 46-52, 1991.
Bernard, B.P., Musculoskeletal Disorders (MSDs) and Workplace Factors,
Washington, DC: National Technical Information Service, 1997.
120
2008 Humantech
Buckle, P. W., et al., Musculoskeletal disorders (and discomfort) and associated

work factors, In N. Corlett, J. Wilson, and I. Manenica, (Eds.), The
Ergonomics of Working Posture, London: Taylor & Francis, 1986.
Burdorf, A. and Sorock, G., Positive and Negative Evidence of Risk Factors for
Back Disorders, Scand J Work Environ Health, 23, 243-256, 1997.
Chaffin, D. B., et al., Occupational Biomechanics, New York: Wiley, 1999.
Chiang, H-C, et al., Prevalence of Shoulder and Upper-Limb Disorders Among
Workers in the Fish-Processing Industry, Scand J Work Environ Health, 19,
126-131, 1993.
Dartiques, J.F. et al., Prevalence and Risk Factors of Recurrent Cervical Pain
Syndrome in a Working Population, Neuroepidemiology, 7, 99-105, 1988.
Eastman Kodak Company, Ergonomic Design for People at Work Volume 2, New
York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1986.
Feldman, R.G. et al., Peripheral Nerve Entrapment Syndromes and Ergonomic
Factors, American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 4, 661-681, 1983.
Genaidy, A.M. et al., Ergonomic Risk Assessment: Preliminary Guidelines for
Analysis of Repetition, Force, and Posture, J Hum Ergol (Tokyo), 1, 45-55,
1993.
Grandjean, E. and Hunting, W., Ergonomics of Posture Review of Various
Problems of Standing and Sitting Posture, Applied Ergonomics, 8.3, 135-140,
1977.
Hales, T.R. and Bernard, B.P., Epidemiology of Work-Related Musculoskeletal
Disorders, Orthop Clin North Am, 4, 679-709, 1996.
Keyserling, W.M., Workplace Risk Factors and Occupational Musculoskeletal
Disorders, Part 2: A Review of Biomechanical and Psychophysical Research
on Risk Factors Associated with Upper Extremity Disorders, Am Ind Hyg
Assoc J, 61, 231-243, 2000.
Keyserling, W.M., Armstrong, T.J., and Punnett, L., Ergonomic job analysis: A
structured approach for identifying risk factors associated with overexertion
injuries and disorders, Appl. Occup. Environ. Hyg., 6(5):353-363, 1991.
Keyserling, W.M., Postural Analysis of the Trunk and Shoulders in Real Time,
Ergonomics, 29, 569-583, 1986.
Kuorinka, I. and Forcier, L., Work Related Musculoskeletal Disorders (WMSDs):
A Reference Book for Prevention, Bristol PA: Taylor & Francis, 1995.
Macfarlane, G.J. et al., Employment and Physical Work Activities as Predictors of
Future Low Back Pain, Spine, 10, 1143-1149, 1997.
Moore, J.S. and Garg, A., Upper Extremity Disorders in a Pork Processing Plant:
Relationships Between Job Risk Factors and Morbidity, Am Ind Hyg Assoc J,
8, 703-715, 1994.
121
Muggleton, J.M. et al., Hand and Arm Injuries Associated with Repetitive Manual
Work in Industry: A Review of Disorders, Risk Factors and Preventative
Measures, Ergonomics, 5, 714-739, 1999.
OSHA, Ergonomics Program Management Guidelines for Meatpacking Plants,
Washington: Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(OSHA 3123), 1990.
Putz-Anderson, V., Cumulative trauma disorders: A manual for musculoskeletal
diseases of the upper limbs, London: Taylor & Francis, 1988.
National Research Council and the Institute of Medicine, Musculoskeletal
Disorders and the Workplace, Washington, DC: National Academy Press,
2001.
Nicholson, A.S. et al., A Guide to Manual Materials Handling, London: Taylor &
Francis, 1997.
Ohlsson, et al., Repetitive Industrial Work and Neck and Upper Limb Disorders in
Females, Am J Ind Med, 27, 731-747, 1995.
Punnett, L. and Keyserling, W.M., Exposure to Ergonomics Stressors in the
Garment Industry: Application and Critique of Job-Site Analysis Methods,
Ergonomics, 7, 1099-1016, 1987.
Punnett, L. et al., Back Disorders and Non-Neutral Trunk Postures of Automobile
Assembly Workers, Scand J Work Environ Health, 5, 337-346, 1991.
Roquelaure, Y. et al., Occupational and Personal Risk Factors for Carpal Tunnel
Syndrome in Industrial Workers, Scand J Work Environ Health, 5, 364-369,
1997.
Silverstein, B.A., The Prevalence of Upper Extremity Cumulative Trauma
Disorders in Industry, Doctoral Dissertation, The University of Michigan, Ann
Arbor, MI, 1985.
Sommerich, C.M. et al., Occupational Risk Factors Associated with Soft Tissue
Disorders of the Shoulder: A Review of Recent Investigations in the
Literature, Ergonomics, 6, 697-717, 1993.
Stetson, D.S. et al., Median Sensory Distal Amplitude and Latency: Comparisons
Between Non-exposed Managerial/Professional Employees and Industrial
Workers, Am J Ind Med, 24, 175-189, 1993.
Ulin, S. and Armstrong, T.J., A strategy for evaluating occupational risk factors of
musculoskeletal disorders, Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 2(1), 1992.
Van Cott, H.P., and Kinkade, R. G., Human Engineering Guide to Equipment
Design, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972.
Viikari-Jantara, E.R.A. The Scientific Basis for Making Guidelines and Standards
to Prevent Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders, Ergonomics, 10, 10971117, 1997.
122
2008 Humantech
Notes
123
Notes
124
2008 Humantech
hapter 5 Prioritizing Ergonomic Risks

Introduction to Ergonomic Risk Prioritization.........................................127
Risk Prioritization Tools .........................................................................128
The BEST ..........................................................................................128
Completing the BEST Form...................................................................131
Avoiding Potential Pitfalls With the BEST .............................................138
The EASY ..........................................................................................139
Completing the EASY Form ..................................................................147
Avoiding Potential Pitfalls With the EASY .............................................156
Identifying High Priority Job/Tasks ........................................................156
125
About This Chapter


Recognition
Chapter 2
Work-Related
Musculoskeletal
Disorders
Chapter 3
Recognizing
Ergonomic Issues
Evaluation
Chapter 4
Risk Factors
Chapter 5
Prioritizing
Ergonomic Risks
Chapter 6
Manual Material
Handling Analysis
Control
Chapter 7
Ergonomic
Design Guidelines
Chapter 8
Cost Justifying
Ergonomic
Improvements
Chapter 9
The Job
Improvement
Process
Putting It
All Together
Chapter 10
Performing an
Ergonomics
Review
Chapter 11
Surviving the
First 90 Days
This chapter describes two tools for prioritizing jobs based on ergonomic risk
the BEST assessment and the EASY. We'll address these questions:
126
Why should I prioritize ergonomic risk?
What is the function of ergonomic risk prioritization?
How do I prioritize jobs based on ergonomic risk?
2008 Humantech
Chapter 5: Prioritizing Ergonomic Risks
Introduction to Ergonomic Risk Prioritization

Risk prioritization is a proven strategy for ensuring that resources are directed at
the jobs and/or tasks that will benefit the most from ergonomic improvements.
Without risk prioritization, ergonomics initiatives tend to become bogged down in
reactionary activities and progress stalls.
Risk or Hazard?
"Risk" and "hazard" are not synonymous:
A hazard is a situation, behavior, physical agent, or substance that can

cause harm. If your workplace is free of hazards, it is by definition a safe
and healthy workplace. If your workplace is not free of hazards, the
potential for harm exists, and it is therefore unsafe. The number of
hazards present, the potential harm those hazards can cause, and the
number of people exposed to the hazards all combine to define the level
of risk.
Risk is defined with three components: the frequency of an event, the

harm or consequence of exposure to the event, and the number of
people exposed per unit of time.
To differentiate between the two, a hazard addresses the presence or absence of

a harmful agent, whereas risk is influenced by multiple factors and is conditional
upon the hazard level. Therefore, to have an effective risk assessment system, it
must combine consequence (symptoms, injury, or illness) with consideration for
exposure.
Principles of Risk Management

Prioritizing ergonomic risks allows you to manage them. There are three
principles of ergonomic risk management:
Ergonomic risks are prioritized and there is a clear identification of highrisk job/tasks. Often, a chart is used to graphically identify those
job/tasks with high, moderate, and low risk exposure.
Ergonomic job improvements are focused on those job/tasks with the

highest risk exposures, not just those with recent injuries.
Once job improvements are implemented and proven successful, they

are replicated to similar jobs with similar risks.
127
Risk Prioritization Tools

There are two tools for prioritizing ergonomic risk. Both tools use information
from a completed BRIEF Survey, however, the tools are suited for different types
of work environments. This chapter explains, in detail, how to use both tools.
The BRIEF Exposure Scoring Technique, or BEST, applies to all

operations in all work environments. It combines the BRIEF scores for
body areas with physical stressor information, and adjusts for different
amounts of work exposure time to determine priorities in work
environments. For more information, see When to Use the BEST on
page 130.
For special situations, in which injury/illness data is attributed to specific

operations and where discomfort information is available from
experienced operators, use the Ergonomic Assessment SurveY, or
EASY. The EASY combines BRIEF Survey scores with injury/illness
data and employee feedback to determine priorities in work
environments. For more information, see When to Use the EASY on
page 141.
The BEST
The BRIEF Exposure Scoring Technique, or BEST builds on the BRIEF
Survey to determine a job hazard score. It adjusts for different time exposures to
ergonomic risk, and takes into account any physical stressors present while
performing the job.
Figure 5.2 The BEST Risk Prioritization Process
128
2008 Humantech
The BEST form builds on BRIEF Survey analysis to determine a job hazard
score. A BRIEF Survey must be completed for a job prior to completing the
BEST form.
Figure 5.3 The BEST
129
When to Use the BEST

Use the BEST to prioritize operations with any of the following characteristics:
Repetitive and/or varied
Frequent and/or infrequent
Varying and/or similar work time exposures
Performed for any number of hours per week
Regular job rotation
Exposure to physical stressors
Limitations of the BEST

The BEST is limited to the ergonomic risk factors addressed in the BRIEF
Survey. It does not address additional body areas, for example the foot, which
could be important in some jobs. It also does not address additional threshold
limits to the BRIEF risk factors, which may be important when distinguishing
ergonomic risk between similar job/tasks or when calculating incremental
improvement when risk factors are reduced, but not reduced to the level of the
BRIEF threshold limits. For example, if you reduce back bending from 60 to
30, the risk factor is reduced but the reduction does not affect the BEST score
for the job.
The BEST Scoring System

The BEST generates a score from 0 to 125, with a higher score representing a
higher priority level. A job hazard score is generated based on:
BRIEF Survey scores
Physical stressors (vibration, low temperatures, soft tissue compression,

impact stress, and glove issues)
Task exposure times
BEST scores are classified as Low, Medium, High, or Very High priority for
ergonomic improvement/intervention as shown in the table below.
Table 5.1 BEST Priority Ranges
Priority
130
Low
Medium
High
Very High
09
10 29
30 49
50 125
2008 Humantech
Completing the BEST Form

To complete the BEST form, youll follow these steps:
Step 1
Complete job information.
Transfer BRIEF scores for each body area.
Determine conversion factors for each body area.
Add conversion factors together.
Summarize physical stressor scores.
Add physical stressor scores together.
Calculate job risk factor score.
Determine time exposure multiplier.
Calculate job hazard score.
The sections that follow step through this process using the "Pin Press" job as an
example.

First, identify the job the BEST pertains to by indicating the following items in the
Complete Job Information area of the form. Also record the current date.
Job name
Site
Station
Department
Shift
Product
131
Step 2: Transfer BRIEF Scores for Each Body Area

The following is a completed BRIEF Survey for the "Pin Press" job. In this job,
the operator uses a press to insert a pin into a small hinge. The operator uses
several bent wrist postures while applying pinch grips. The operator sits
sideways at a conveyor with parts located in a bin across the conveyor.
Figure 5.4 Completed BRIEF Survey for Pin Press
Transfer BRIEF Survey scores for each of the nine body areas. The figure below
shows the transferred BRIEF scores for the Pin Press job.
Figure 5.5 Transferred BRIEF Scores
132
2008 Humantech
Step 3: Determine Conversion Factors for Each Body Area

Determine the appropriate Conversion Factor, or risk weighting, for each BRIEF
score based on the following criteria:
BRIEF
Survey Score
BEST
Conversion Factor
10
Next, for each body area, fill in the conversion factor on the BEST form as
shown.
Figure 5.6 Completed Conversion Factors
Step 4: Add Conversion Factors Together

Add together the conversion factors for the nine body areas determined in Step 3
and record the result in the Add Conversion Factors box.
Figure 5.7 Summed Conversion Factors
133
Step 5: Summarize Physical Stressor Scores

Indicate where physical stressors (vibration, low temperatures, soft tissue
compression, impact stress, and glove issues) were recorded on the BRIEF
Survey, and score each occurrence with 2 points. In our example, only Soft
Tissue Compression was recorded.
Figure 5.8 2 Points for Each BRIEF Physical Stressor
Step 6: Add Physical Stressor Scores Together

Add the physical stressor scores to determine the value for Step 6.
Figure 5.9 Summed Physical Stressor Scores
134
2008 Humantech
Step 7: Calculate Job Risk Factor Score

Add the Conversion Factor total from Step 4 (31) to the Physical Stressor score
total from Step 6 (2) to determine the Job Risk Factor Score (33).
Figure 5.10 Conversion Factors + Physical Stressors = Job Risk Factor Score
Step 8: Determine Time Exposure Multiplier

The total exposure to this job is 3 hours per day, 5 days per week (15 hours per
week). Determine the appropriate multiplier and record it in the box.
Figure 5.11 Time Exposure Multiplier
135
Step 9: Calculate Job Hazard Score

To determine the Job Hazard Score, multiply the Job Risk Factor Score from
Step 7 (33) by the Time Exposure Multiplier from Step 8 (0.8). The result is a
Job Hazard Score of 26.4, making this a medium priority job.
Figure 5.12 Calculated Job Hazard Score
136
2008 Humantech
The Completed BEST Form

The completed BEST form for the Pin Press job is shown below.
Figure 5.13 Completed BEST Form for Pin Press
Remember that the BEST generates a job hazard score, adjusting for different
time exposures. Like the EASY, the BEST is most useful when viewed in
comparison with other jobs scores. For example, if the "Insert Clip" job had a job
hazard score of 52, the job would be considered a Very High risk, versus the Pin
Press job with a job hazard score of 26.4 (Medium).
137
Avoiding Potential Pitfalls With the BEST

BEST and a recommended approach for each.
Table 5.2 Potential BEST Pitfalls
138
Potential Pitfall
The job time varies on a daily

basis.
Use an average job time (use typical days,

ignore abnormal days).
The daily job time is unknown.
Talk with two or more experienced operators to

estimate job time per day.
The job is performed several

times throughout the day.
Use the total time that the job is performed

during the course of a typical day.
The job is not performed

every day.
Use the time that the job is performed during

the course of a typical day.
2008 Humantech
The EASY
The Ergonomic Assessment SurveY (EASY) allows you to identify and rank
job/tasks by degree (frequency and priority) of ergonomic factors.
The EASY combines information from multiple data sourcesan ergonomic risk
summary for the job (BRIEF), injury/illness data (Medical Data form), and
employee discomfort data (Employee Survey)and results in an overall score for
each job. The EASY score will allow you to prioritize job/tasks so that you can
focus your ergonomic improvement efforts on the highest risk jobs first. This
prioritization process is illustrated below:
Figure 5.14 The EASY Risk Prioritization Process
139
The EASY form provides a way to record the presence of risk indicators and tally
an overall EASY score for a job.
Figure 5.15 The EASY Form
140
2008 Humantech
When to Use the EASY

Use the EASY to prioritize operations with any of the following characteristics:
Repetitive and frequent
Similar work exposure times
Performed for a minimum of 20 hours per week
Medical records attribute injuries/illnesses to the specific operation
More than one operator is available to interview regarding physical

discomfort
Note that the EASY is not recommended as a valid prioritization tool for
operations with the following characteristics:
Varied and infrequent
Varying work exposure times
Performed for less than 20 or more than 40 hours per week
Medical records attribute injuries/illnesses to a department or job

classifications
Regular job rotation
Only one operator is available to interview regarding physical discomfort
Limitations of the EASY

The EASY relies on operator input and medical data in addition to information
collected in the BRIEF Survey. Consequently, the quality of the EASY scores is
based on the quality of operator interviews and medical tracking systems. If
WMSDs are not properly diagnosed, or are poorly tracked to jobs and body
areas, the EASY scores will not provide reliable data. In addition, the EASY
does not prioritize well where there is great variation in the content of job/tasks,
as in material handling tasks in warehouses.
141
The EASY Scoring System

The EASY generates a two-part Job EASY Score for each job, for example,
6 2.
The first part of the score ranges from 0 (lowest priority) to 7 (highest priority).
This value is determined from individual scores for each of nine body areas (left
and right hand/wrist, elbow, shoulder, neck, back, and legs) in terms of
ergonomic risk (BRIEF Survey),
injury/illness data (Medical Data form), and
employee discomfort data (Employee Survey).
It reflects the highest score out of all nine body areas.

Figure 5.16 illustrates how the scores of the three data sets combine to result in
this part of the EASY score:
4 points for BRIEF Survey

2 points for Medical Data Form
1 point for Employee Survey
7 points total
Figure 5.16 The EASY 7-Point Scale
142
2008 Humantech
The first part of the Job EASY Score allows you to classify the job as Low,
Medium, or High priority for ergonomic improvement/intervention as described in
Table 5.3.
Table 5.3 EASY Priority Ranges and Criteria
Priority
EASY
Score
Low
0 or 1
All body areas receive an EASY score of 0 or 1. Priority

scores in this range generally indicate that there was no
history of injury/illness for this area, there may be
indications of operator pain or discomfort, and the BRIEF
Survey noted a low risk rating.
Medium
2-4
One or more body areas receive an EASY score of 2, 3, or

4 (no body areas have a score of 5 or greater). This
indicates that either the BRIEF Survey noted a medium or
high risk rating or there are employee reports of pain or
discomfort, history of injury/illness, or both for a body area.
High
>5
One or more body areas receive an EASY score of 5 or

more. Priority scores in this range indicate that the BRIEF
Survey noted a medium or high risk rating and there are
employee reports of pain or discomfort, history of
injury/illness, or both for a body area.
Criteria
The second part of the Job EASY Score ranges from 1 to 9. It indicates the
number of body areas with the highest score. This part of the score allows you to
further prioritize jobs with similar scores.
For example, suppose you have the following EASY results for the Spring Install,
Bracket Install, and Test Lights jobs. The jobs would rank as shown in the
Priority Rank column. Therefore, the Bracket Install job would be your first
priority for ergonomic intervention.
Table 5.4 EASY Priority Ranking
Job
EASY Score
Priority Rank
Spring Install
6-2
Bracket Install
6-4
Test Lights
4-4
143
EASY Input Sources

The EASY combines information from the BRIEF, Medical Data form, and
Employee Survey to calculate an overall risk score for each job.
The BRIEF Survey

A key source of input into the EASY is the BRIEF (Baseline Risk Identification of
Ergonomic Factors). The BRIEF risk factor survey examines nine body areas for
ergonomic risk factors. This survey represents the most in-depth ergonomic
review of the three EASY data sets and is therefore given the highest scoring
weight4 pointsin the EASY scoring system.
A BRIEF score of 2 or more (medium or high risk) for a body area will trigger
circling that body area on the EASY.
Figure 5.17 The BRIEF Survey Form
144
2008 Humantech
Medical Data Form

Injury/illness data is assumed to be accurate and verifiable with appropriate
medical management protocols. It represents a robust data point, but one that is
primarily historical. It is therefore given a scoring weight of 2 points in the EASY
scoring system.
The presence of a recordable WMSD on the OSHA 300 Log in the past three
years that can be tracked to the job/task under review will trigger circling the
associated body area on the EASY.
Figure 5.18 The Medical Data Form
Also note the following when completing a Medical Data form:
Record only ergonomic-related injuries (tendonitis, carpal tunnel

syndrome, strains, sprains, etc.) on the Medical Data form. Do not
record acute injuries (slips, trips, burns, cuts, etc.).
If data on an OSHA 300 Log is incomplete, for example, carpal tunnel

syndrome is recorded, but right or left wrist is not indicated, record both
wrists as being affected.
145
Employee Survey
The Employee Survey is an important input source into the EASY, and is
administered on a one-on-one basis to avoid group bias. However, employee
discomfort information is typically the most subjective of the three data sets and
is therefore given a scoring weight of 1 point in the EASY scoring system.
Any indication of pain or discomfort reported by experienced operators (more
than 30 days at that position) for the job/task under review will trigger circling the
associated body area on the EASY.
Figure 5.19 The Employee Survey Form
146
2008 Humantech
Completing the EASY Form

To complete the EASY, youll follow these steps:
Step 1 Complete job information.
2 Complete the EASY Scoring Matrix (transfer BRIEF, Medical Data
form, and Employee Survey data to EASY form) and calculate an
EASY score for each body area.
3 Determine the Job EASY Score.
The following sections step through this process using the "Spring Install" job as
an example.

First, identify the job the EASY pertains to by indicating the following in the
Complete Job Information box. Also record the current date.
Job name
Site
Station
Department
Shift
Product
147
Step 2: Complete the EASY Scoring Matrix, Calculate Body Area EASY Scores
In Step 2, you'll transfer information from the BRIEF Survey, Medical Data form,
and Employee Survey to the EASY form, which then allows you to calculate the
EASY Score for each of the nine body areas.
Transfer BRIEF Scores
The following is a completed BRIEF Survey for the Spring Install job. In this job,
the operator installs a small spring into the body of a desktop printer. The
operator uses several bent wrist postures while applying pinch grips. The
operator must lean and reach to a bin across the workstation to retrieve the
springs.
Figure 5.20 Completed BRIEF Survey for Spring Install
148
2008 Humantech
A BRIEF score of 2 or more (medium or high risk) triggers circling the body area
on the EASY form. The Spring Install job had several medium or high-risk body
areas:
Left hand/wrist
Left shoulder
Right hand/wrist
Right shoulder
Back
Complete the BRIEF portion of the EASY Scoring Matrix as shown:
Figure 5.21 Completed BRIEF Information
149
Transfer Injury/Illness Data

The OSHA 300 Log was reviewed for the Spring Install workstation and it was
found that one operator received medical treatment for thoracic outlet syndrome
in the left shoulder. Another operator was also treated for tendinitis in the right
wrist.
Spring Install
9/15/08
Assembly
SL
91270
Left Shoulder
Right Wrist
L.
Thoracic Outlet Syndrome

Tendinitis
6/6/08
8/4/08
Figure 5.22 Completed Medical Data Form
150
2008 Humantech
The presence of a recordable WMSD on the OSHA 300 Log in the past three
years that can be tracked to the job/task under review will trigger circling the
body area on the EASY form. The Spring Install job had two WMSDs for the
following body areas:
Left shoulder
Right hand/wrist
Complete the Medical portion of the EASY Scoring Matrix as shown:
Figure 5.23 Completed Medical Information
151
Transfer Employee Discomfort Data

The figure below is the filled in Employee Survey for the "Spring Install" job. The
operator experienced pain in the left elbow, right shoulder, back, and the legs.
Spring Install
Assembly
#2
91270
8 hours
200 Springs per shift
None
9/15/08
SL
10:34 20:45
8 hours
8
2
Grasping small springs

Continually reaching to bins
Move bins closer
9
9
9
9
Figure 5.24 Completed Employee Survey
152
2008 Humantech
Any indication of pain or discomfort given by experienced operators (more than

30 days in that job) of the job/task under review will trigger circling the body area
on the EASY form. The Spring Install operator reported pain in the following
body areas:
Left Elbow
Right Shoulder
Back
Legs
Complete the Employee portion of the EASY Scoring Matrix as shown:
Figure 5.25 Completed Employee Information
153
Calculate EASY Score for Each Body Area

Calculate the EASY Score for each body area by adding up the circled items (for
each area) and recording the result in the EASY Score box.
Figure 5.26 Completed EASY Scores
Step 3: Determine Job EASY Score

The Job EASY score is comprised of two elements:
Highest EASY Score
Number of body areas with that score
For the Spring Install job, the highest EASY score is 6 (left shoulder and right
hand/wrist), indicating that this job is a high priority (see The EASY Scoring
System on page 142 for scoring ranges). Record this number in the Highest
EASY Score box.
Two body areas had an EASY score of 6, so record a 2 in the Number With
This Score box. This part of the EASY score allows you to further prioritize jobs
with similar scores.
Figure 5.27 Completed Job EASY Score
154
2008 Humantech
The Completed EASY

The completed EASY form for the Spring Install job is shown below. The job is a
high priority because the Job EASY Score is 6 2.
Figure 5.28 Completed EASY for Spring Install
Remember that the EASY is a method that identifies and ranks operations by
degree of ergonomic factors. The EASY score is most useful when viewed in
comparison with other jobs EASY scores. For example, if the "Test Lights" job
had an EASY score of 4 4, it would be considered medium priority, versus the
Spring Install job with an EASY score of 6 2, a high priority job.
155
Avoiding Potential Pitfalls With the EASY

EASY, and a recommended approach for each.
Table 5.5 Potential EASY Pitfalls
Potential Pitfall
Medical data is difficult to

track from the OSHA 300 Log
to specific job/tasks.
Perform incident investigations to track

recordable incidents to job/tasks.
There are multiple operators

at some job/tasks but not
others.
Complete an EASY for each job/task

regardless of the number of operators.
Interview all operators if possible, and indicate
pain or discomfort on the Employee Survey
even if only one operator reports it.
Job rotation makes it difficult

to track recordable incidents
to job/tasks.
One approach is to indicate incidents for all

job/tasks through which an injured operator
rotates. Another approach is to use the BEST
rather than the EASY to prioritize risks.
Job/tasks have been modified

(through ergonomic
improvements or otherwise).
If ergonomic risk factors have been eliminated

(according to the BRIEF Survey), historical
injury/illness data for affected body areas no
longer applies.
Could not locate experienced

operators to interview at a
job/task.
Do not interview inexperienced operators.

Return to the job/task after the operators have
accumulated at least 30 days of experience.
Identifying High Priority Job/Tasks

The BEST and EASY methodologies are used for different circumstances and
are based on different scoring systems. The table below summarizes the scoring
levels for high priority job/tasks.
Table 5.6 What Determines BEST and EASY High Priority Jobs?
156
Prioritization Method
Scoring System
High Priority Jobs
BEST
Indicates a job hazard

score from 0 to 125.
A job hazard score of 30 or

more.
EASY
Indicates a score from

1 to 7 for nine body
areas.
One or more body areas

receive an EASY score of 5
or more.
2008 Humantech
Notes
157
Notes
158
2008 Humantech
hapter 6 Manual Material Handling Analysis

Introduction to Manual Material Handling..............................................161
Risk Factors for the Back ......................................................................162
The Revised NIOSH Lifting Equation ....................................................162
The NIOSH Composite Lifting Index .....................................................178
Uses for the Revised NIOSH Lifting Equation.......................................179
Avoiding Potential Pitfalls With the Revised NIOSH Lifting Equation ...180
Psychophysical Analysis: Push, Pull, and Carry ...................................181
Manual Material Handling Example.......................................................192
Manual Material Handling Analysis Flowchart.......................................196
References ............................................................................................197
159
About This Chapter


Recognition
Chapter 2
Work-Related
Musculoskeletal
Disorders
Chapter 3
Recognizing
Ergonomic Issues
Evaluation
Chapter 4
Risk Factors
Chapter 5
Prioritizing
Ergonomic Risks
Chapter 6
Manual Material
Handling Analysis
Control
Chapter 7
Ergonomic
Design Guidelines
Chapter 8
Cost Justifying
Ergonomic
Improvements
Chapter 9
The Job
Improvement
Process
Putting It
All Together
Chapter 10
Performing an
Ergonomics
Review
Chapter 11
Surviving the
First 90 Days
This chapter discusses the NIOSH lifting model and push/pull/carry

guidelines, tools that help you evaluate manual material handling tasks. We'll
address these questions:
160
Why should I analyze manual material handling tasks?
What is the function of manual material handling analysis?
How do I analyze manual material handling tasks?
2008 Humantech
Chapter 6: Manual Material Handling Analysis
Introduction to Manual Material Handling

Manual material handling activities, by nature, involve forces or loads. For
example, lifting and carrying involve manipulating a load, while pushing and
pulling involve applying a force to move an object.
Researchers have developed a number of methods to determine safe loads for
operators including application of biomechanical, psychophysical, and
physiological models.
Biomechanics
Psychophysics
Force Limits
Physiology
Figure 6.2 Force Limits
Force limits are derived from these three fields of scientific study:
Biomechanics. Chaffin (1999) cites a definition of biomechanics: it uses

laws of physics and engineering concepts to describe motion undergone
by the various body segments and the forces acting on them during
normal daily activities. Biomechanics integrates physical and
engineering sciences with biological and behavioral sciences to
determine forces acting on the human body.
Psychophysics. Psychophysical methods utilize people's perception of

maximum allowable loads or forces for a given task. Experiments were
performed giving the subject control of either the weight or force
variables, while all other task variables such as frequency, size, height,
distance, etc., were controlled by the experimenter. According to Snook
(1991), there is a direct relationship between an operators perception of
the muscular effort required and the amount of force. Exceeding the
perceived amount of force could lead to back and shoulder injuries.
Physiology. Physiological methods use whole-body fatigue as the basis

for the amount of weight to be transported over a period of time.
Scientists have determined the acceptable energy expenditure for an 8hour workday to be 3.1 Kcal/min (Waters et al, 1993). Acceptable
weights for lifting/lowering, carrying, and pushing/pulling tasks are
derived by comparing the energy expenditure of the task to the
acceptable energy expenditure.
161

The primary risk factors for the back, like those for the other areas of the body,
are force, frequency, and posture. Increasing the weight of an object,
increasing the frequency at which it must be handled, and forcing an operator
into end ranges of motion to handle the object increase the likelihood of a back
injury. In many cases, manual material handling is unavoidable, which raises
these questions:
How much risk currently exists?
How can that risk be reduced?
The concepts introduced in this chapter will help provide guidelines for answering
these questions.
The Revised NIOSH Lifting Equation

The Revised NIOSH (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health)
Lifting Equation is a tool for assessing the physical stress of two-handed
manual lifting and lowering tasks. The equation is designed for evaluating
single-task and multiple-task lifting and lowering scenarios based on research
that combines biomechanical, psychophysical, and physiological criteria in the
development of a low back injury.
Note: For additional information about the Revised NIOSH Lifting Equation, see
the Applications Manual for the Revised NIOSH Lifting Equation. Humantech's
Web site at www.humantech.com includes a direct link to the manual.
162
2008 Humantech
When to Use the Revised NIOSH Lifting Equation

How can you determine whether the NIOSH Lifting Equation is applicable for the
job or task in question? If lifting/lowering occurs along with any of the conditions
listed below, the NIOSH Lifting Equation is not applicable.
with one hand
for over 8 hours
while seated or kneeling
in a restricted work space
with unstable objects
while carrying, pushing, or pulling
with high speed motion
with wheelbarrows or shovels
with unreasonable foot/floor coupling
in an unfavorable environment
If the equation is applicable, you must determine if the job should be analyzed as
a single-task or multi-task manual lifting job, and if significant control (i.e.,
requiring precision placement of the load) is required at the destination of the lift.
A single-task lifting job is one in which
the task variables (e.g., horizontal location, load weight, etc.) do not
significantly vary from task to task, or
only one task is of interest (e.g., worst case scenario).
Multi-task lifting jobs have variables that vary. Thus, each task must be
analyzed separately to calculate individual LI's, and these LI's are then combined
to determine the cumulative effect of the lifting on the risk of a lower back
disorder.
Note: Refer to The NIOSH Composite Lifting Index on page 178 for information
about assessing a multi-task lifting job.
Measurements should be taken at both the origin and destination of the lift if
significant control is required at the destination. This is usually the case when
one or more of the following is true:
the worker must re-grasp the load at the destination of the lift
the worker must momentarily hold the object at the destination
the worker must carefully position or guide the load at the destination
163
Recommended Weight Limit (RWL)

The Revised NIOSH Lifting Equation uses six task variables and a load constant
of 51 pounds (23.2 kg) to establish a safe lifting limit called the Recommended
Weight Limit (RWL). The six variables account for exposure to force, frequency,
and posture (recall the Ergonomics Fire Triangle in Chapter 2). The RWL is a
"not to exceed" number for the particular task being analyzed. As lifts are
performed toward the task variable limits, the load constant is reduced.
The RWL is defined for a specific set of task conditions as the weight of the load
that 90% of healthy workers could perform over a substantial period of time.
The RWL is defined by the following equation:
RWL = LC x HM x VM x DM x AM x FM x CM
In this equation, LC (Load Constant) = 51 pounds (23.2 kg), and each M is a
multiplier. Refer to the next section, The NIOSH Lifting Variables, for information
about the variables H, V, D, A, F, and C.
Note: For additional information about the multipliers, see the Applications
Manual for the Revised NIOSH Lifting Equation.
164
2008 Humantech
The NIOSH Lifting Variables

The sections that follow describe the NIOSH lifting task variables and how to
obtain measurements for each.
H = Horizontal location
V = Vertical location
D = Travel distance
A = Angle of asymmetry
F = Lifting frequency/duration
C = Coupling classification
V
H
Figure 6.3 NIOSH Lifting Variables
165
Horizontal Location (H)

Horizontal location (H) is measured at the start of the lift. It is the distance from
the midpoint of the line joining the inner ankle bones to a point projected on the
floor directly below the midpoint of the hand grasps (i.e., load center), as defined
by the large middle knuckle of the hand.
TOP VIEW
HORIZONTAL
POINT OF
PROTECTION
VERTICAL
HORIZONTAL
LOCATION
FINISH POINT
H
LATERAL
MID-POINT BETWEEN
INNER ANKLE BONES
D
TRAVEL
DISTANCE
START
POINT
V
VERTICAL
LOCATION
HORIZONTAL
MID-POINT BETWEEN
INNER ANKLE BONES
H
HORIZONTAL
LOCATION
POINT OF PROJECTION
Figure 6.4 Graphic Representation of Horizontal Location

(As Taken From NIOSH)
Ideally, the horizontal distance is 10" (254 mm) or less. Although objects may be
held closer than 10", a notable increase in risk does not exist until the object
reaches a horizontal location of 10". The maximum value of H is 25" (635 mm).
166
If H is less than 10", use H = 10" as your measurement.
If H is greater than 25", the RWL is equal to 0. Objects at a distance of

more than 25" from the ankle midpoint generally cannot be lifted
vertically without a loss of balance.
2008 Humantech
Vertical Location (V)

Vertical location (V) is measured vertically from the floor to the midpoint between
the hand grasps, as defined by the large middle knuckle. The minimum vertical
location is 0" (0 mm), or floor surface, and the maximum is 70" (1.78 m).
If V is less than 0", the RWL is equal to 0.
If V is greater than 70", the RWL is equal to 0.
Ideally, the vertical location is 30" (762 mm); this is considered knuckle height for
a 50th percentile employee.
Travel Distance (D)

Travel distance (D) is the measure of vertical displacement during a lift. For
instance, if you pick up a box at 27" (686 mm) and place it on a shelf at 37"
(940 mm), the vertical travel distance is 10" (254 mm).
Ideally, the vertical travel distance is 10" or less. The minimum vertical travel
distance is 10", and the maximum is 70" (1.78 m). If D is less than 10", use D =
10" as your measurement.
167
Angle of Asymmetry (A)

The angle of asymmetry (A) refers to the amount of back twisting at the
beginning or end of a lift from the sagittal plane (center of the Comfort Zone).
The minimum is 0 and the maximum is 135. Ideally, the angle of asymmetry
is 0.
SAGITTAL
PLANE
TOP VIEW
MID-POINT
BETWEEN INNER
ANKLE BONES
FRONTAL
H
POINT OF
PROJECTION
FRONTAL
PLANE
POINT OF
PROJECTION
ASYMMETRY
LINE
A
ASYMMETRIC
ANGLE
A
SAGITTAL
SAGITTAL
LINE
Figure 6.5 Graphic Representation of Angle of Asymmetry (As Taken From NIOSH)
In many cases of asymmetric lifting, the worker will pivot or use a step turn to
complete the lift. Because this may vary significantly between workers and
between lifts, assume that no pivoting or stepping occurs. This provides the
greatest protection for the worker.
To identify asymmetric lifting, look for workplace conditions where:
168
The origin and destination of the lift are oriented at an angle to one
another
The lifting motion is across the body (e.g., swinging bags or boxes)
The lifting is done to maintain body balance in obstructed workplaces, on

rough terrain, or on littered floors
Operators are under time pressure to perform lifting tasks
2008 Humantech
Lifting Frequency / Duration (F)

Frequency (F) refers to the average number of lifts made per minute, as
measured over a 15-minute period. The minimum frequency is 0.2 lifts per
minute (one lift every 5 minutes), and the maximum is 15 lifts per minute. Ideally,
the frequency of lifting is once every five minutes or less.
For lifts less than 0.2 lifts per minute, use F = 0.2.
For anything greater than 15 lifts per minute, the RWL is equal to 0.
If the worker does not lift continuously during the 15-minute sampling period, use
the following method to determine the correct frequency:
Calculate the total number of lifts performed over the 15-minute period
(i.e., lift rate x work time). For example:
8 min. of lifting (10 lifts/min.) followed by 7 min. of light work
Divide the total number of lifts by 15.

Frequency rate = (10 x 8)/15 = 5.33 lifts/min.
Use the resulting value as the frequency (F) to determine the frequency
multiplier.
If the worker lifts continuously for the 15-minute period, the lifting frequency
would be the actual 10 lifts/minute.
169
Duration is based on the patterns of continuous work-time and recovery-time

periods. A continuous work-time period is defined as a period of uninterrupted
work. Recovery-time is defined as the duration of light-work activity (e.g., sitting
at a desk or table, monitoring operations, light assembly work, etc.) following a
period of continuous lifting.
Duration can be classified into one of three categories: short, moderate, or long.
Short Duration. Lifting tasks that have a work duration of one hour or
less, followed by a recovery time equal to 1.2 times the work time fall into
this category. For example, a 45-minute lifting job must be followed by a
54-minute recovery period before beginning a subsequent lifting session.
If the recovery time is not met, and a subsequent lifting session is
required, the total lifting time must be combined to correctly determine
the duration category. In addition, if the recovery period does not meet
the time requirement, add the work time and the recovery time together
to determine the total duration.
As another example, assume a worker lifts continuously for 30 minutes,
performs a light work task for 10 minutes, and then lifts for an additional
45 minutes. In this case, the recovery time (10 minutes) is less than 1.2
times the initial 30-minute work time (36 minutes). Thus, the two work
times (30 and 45 minutes) must be added together to determine the
duration. Because the total work time exceeds one hour, the job is
classified as moderate duration. On the other hand, if the recovery
period between lifting sessions were increased to 36 minutes, the short
duration category would apply, even though total lifting was greater than
one hour.
170
Moderate Duration. Lifting tasks that have a duration of more than one
hour, but not more than two hours, followed by a recovery period of at
least 0.3 times the work time fall into this category. For example, if a
worker continuously lifts for two hours, a recovery period of at least 36
minutes is required before beginning a subsequent lifting session. If the
recovery time requirement is not met, and a subsequent lifting session
begins, the total work time must be added together.
Long Duration. Lifting tasks that have a duration between two and eight
hours, with standard industrial rest allowances (e.g., morning, lunch and
afternoon rest breaks) fall into this category.
2008 Humantech
Coupling (C)
Coupling is the definition of hand-to-object contact when lifting/lowering. Loads
equipped with proper handles or cutouts not only facilitate lifting, but also reduce
the likelihood that the load will be dropped.
Following are some general guidelines to follow with regard to coupling:
An optimal handle design has a .75 1.5" (19 38 mm) diameter, > 4.5"
(114 mm) length, 2" (51 mm) clearance, cylindrical shape, and a smooth,
non-slip surface.
An optimal handhold cutout has these approximate characteristics: > 3"

(76 mm) height, 4.5" (114 mm) length, semi-oval shape, > 2" (51 mm)
clearance, smooth non-slip surface, and > .43" (11 mm) container
thickness (e.g., double thickness cardboard).
An optimal container design has < 16" (406 mm) width, < 12" (305 mm)
height, and a smooth, non-slip surface.
A worker should be able to clamp the fingers at nearly 90 under the

container, such as is required when lifting a box from the floor.
A container is considered less than optimal if it has a width >16" (406

mm), height >12" (305 mm), rough or slippery surfaces, sharp edges,
asymmetric center of mass, unstable contents, or requires the use of
gloves. A loose object is considered bulky if the load cannot easily be
balanced between the hand grasps.
A worker should be able to comfortably wrap the hand around the object
without excessive wrist deviations or awkward postures. The grip should
not require excessive force.
Coupling is classified as good, fair, or poor, as described in the following table.

Table 6.1 Hand-to-Object Coupling Classification
Good
Fair
Poor
For containers (boxes,

crates, etc.) of optimal
design, "good" coupling
includes handles or
handhold cutouts of
optimal design.
For containers of optimal

design, "fair" coupling
includes handles or
handhold cutouts of less
than optimal design.
Containers of less than

optimal design, or
loose parts or irregular
objects that are bulky,
hard to handle, or
have sharp edges.
For loose parts or irregular

objects not usually
containerized (castings,
stock, supply materials),
"good" coupling is a
comfortable grip in which
the hand can easily wrap
around the object.
For containers of optimal

design with no handles
or handhold cutouts, or
for loose parts or
irregular objects, "fair"
coupling is a grip in
which the hand can flex
about 90.
Lifting non-rigid bags

(i.e., bags that sag in
the middle).
171
Obtaining Your Variable Measurements

Sometimes it is difficult to take measurements of the variables when an operator
is busy working. A recommended approach is to use masking tape to tape lines
on the floor representing the variables that must be measured.
Apply a straight line of tape on the floor connecting the locations of the
operator's two ankles.
Apply a straight line of tape on the floor to indicate the locations of the
operator's middle knuckles of both hands where the object is being lifted.
Apply a straight line of tape connecting the centers of the first two lines of
tape.
These lines of tape can then be used to accurately measure the horizontal
distance and angle of asymmetry if twisting occurs during the lift.
Lifting Index (LI)

The RWL can be compared to the actual weight of the load being lifted to
establish a Lifting Index (LI). The LI is an index of relative physical stress
associated with a particular manual lifting task. To calculate the LI, use the
following equation:
LI = Load Weight / RWL
Red
Yellow
Green
LI 3.0 =
Immediate risk to
most operators
1 < LI < 3.0 = There is
some risk in the lifting task.
LI 1 = The task is
considered low risk.
Figure 6.6 Three Categories of Lifting Index
As the magnitude of the LI increases, the level of the risk for a given employee
increases, and a greater percentage of the workforce is likely to be at risk for
developing lifting-related low back pain and potential low back disorders.
172
2008 Humantech
Interpreting Lifting Equation Results

The RWL is the "not to exceed" number for the particular task being analyzed. In
other words, it is the highest weight at which the working population can safely
perform the lifting task.
For example, if you calculate an RWL of 9 lb (4 kg) for a task, the weight of the
object being picked up should not exceed 9 lb (4 kg). If the weight being handled
exceeds the RWL, target the task for ergonomic improvement to reduce low back
injury risk.
Uses for the RWL include the following:
Use the RWL to set size and weight limits of a product or packaging at a
particular workstation. If a box being handled weighs 20 lb (9 kg), and
the RWL is 18 lb (8.2 kg), a possible solution is to package the box with
fewer items inside to reduce the overall weight.
If the size or weight of an object cannot be changed, try changing other

factors in the lifting equation to increase the RWL. For instance,
increase the vertical distance in a lift from ground level to 32" (813 mm)
(by installing a lift table) to increase the RWL, thereby allowing the
operator to lift more weight safely. The horizontal distance has the
greatest impact on reducing the RWL and should be minimized
whenever possible.
Calculate the RWL for lifting tasks still on the drawing board. Evaluate
the effectiveness of countermeasures before they are implemented.
173
Applying the NIOSH Lifting Equation

The NIOSH Lifting Equation is provided via CD-ROM in a computer spreadsheet
application as part of Humantech's Manual Material Handling Guidelines
Microsoft Excel (for both Macintosh and Windows operating systems)
spreadsheet.
You can use the NIOSH Lifting Guidelines sheet to calculate the RWL and LI for
a lifting task. Simply enter the variables for the task, and the spreadsheet
determines the results for you.

NIOSH Lifting Guidelines Sheet
174
2008 Humantech
The NIOSH Lifting Guidelines sheet consists of five sections:
Job Title. This information does not affect the calculation of the RWL
and Lifting Index, but is useful for documenting the job analysis.
Figure 6.8 NIOSH Lifting Guidelines Sheet Job Title
Model Inputs. There are eight input boxes for entering the task
variables analyzed by the NIOSH Lifting Equation. Each of these
variables is key to the calculation of the RWL and LI.
Figure 6.9 NIOSH Lifting Guidelines Sheet Model Inputs
175
Multipliers. This section displays the multipliers calculated from the

model inputs. These multipliers can help you identify opportunities for
ergonomic intervention because they show the relative gains that can be
realized by addressing each task variable. The closer the multiplier is to
1, the higher the RWL and the lower the LI.
Figure 6.10 NIOSH Lifting Guidelines Sheet Multipliers
176
2008 Humantech
Model Output. This section displays the two main outputs of the NIOSH
Lifting Equation, the RWL and LI, as well as two outputs (FIRWL and
FILI) used for evaluating infrequent lifting tasks (see below).
Figure 6.11 NIOSH Lifting Guidelines Sheet Model Outputs
RWL = (for a specific set of task conditions) the weight of the

load that 90% of healthy workers could perform over a
substantial period of time.
LI = ratio of the load weight to the RWL. It allows different lifting

tasks to be ranked for relative physical stress.
FIRWL, the Frequency Independent Recommended Weight

Limit, and FILI, Frequency Independent Lifting Index, are used to
calculate the RWL and LI for a single (non-repetitive) lift. The
FIRWL and FILI for each task reflect the compressive force and
muscle strength demand for a single repetition of that task (the
Frequency multiplier, or FM, equals 1.0).
177
Recommendations. This section displays a recommendation based on

the LI calculated for the task.
For tasks with an LI of 1.0 or lower, the message "Nominal Risk"

displays, indicating that 90% of healthy workers could perform
this lift.
For tasks with an LI above 1.0, the message "Engineering or

Administrative Controls should be implemented" displays,
indicating an increased level of risk of low back injury.
Figure 6.12 NIOSH Lifting Guidelines Sheet Recommendations
The NIOSH Composite Lifting Index

The NIOSH Composite Lifting Index (CLI) is used to assess the risk of an
operation in which multiple lifts take place, or in which each lift has variables
that vary significantly from one another. This analysis is based on the
following assumptions:
Performing multiple lifting tasks will increase the physical or metabolic

load, and this increased load should be reflected in a reduced
recommended weight limit (RWL) and increased lifting index (LI).
An increase in the LI depends upon the characteristics of the additional

lifting tasks.
An increase in the LI due to the addition of one or more tasks is

independent of the LI of any of the preceding tasks.
The Manual Material Handling Guidelines spreadsheet includes a tab for

calculating the CLI for jobs with up to 10 lifting tasks. This analysis requires the
same data inputs as the NIOSH Lifting Equation, but the model inputs must be
determined for each of the lifting tasks.
Note: For detailed information about how to apply the CLI, see the Applications
Manual for the Revised NIOSH Lifting Equation.
178
2008 Humantech
Uses for the Revised NIOSH Lifting Equation

The NIOSH Lifting Equation has several valuable uses:
Evaluate lifting tasks for acceptable risk. Existing lifting conditions

can be assessed and the load weight compared to the Recommended
Weight Limit (RWL).
Prioritize hazardous jobs for ergonomic intervention. Existing lifting

conditions that are not acceptable can be rank-ordered by degree of risk
based on the Lifting Index (LI).
Evaluate proposed lifting conditions for acceptable risks.

Workstations and processes can be evaluated and corrected at the
design stage, before employees are placed at risk of injury.
Highlight opportunities for reducing lifting hazards. Multipliers

reflect the relative impact of changing the task variables.
179
Avoiding Potential Pitfalls With the Revised NIOSH Lifting

Equation
NIOSH Lifting Equation, and a recommended approach for each.
Table 6.2 Potential NIOSH Lifting Equation Pitfalls
180
Potential Pitfall
The employee performs a

one-handed lift or lower.
Use the BRIEF; NIOSH does not apply to onehanded lifting and lowering.
The employee performs a

variety of different lifting
activities throughout the
workday.
Use the Manual Material Handling Guidelines

spreadsheet (NIOSH CLI Guidelines sheet) to
calculate a CLI for up to ten tasks.
The employee loads an

entire pallet and there is not
enough time to assess every
object location.
Conduct either a worst-case or best-case lifting

scenario:
Worst-case Identify the largest Horizontal
Location with the largest Vertical Location
away from the 30" (762 mm) optimum
location. If the worst position has an
acceptable RWL, the other object locations
are acceptable for the RWL.
Best-case Identify the closest Horizontal
Location with the smallest Vertical Location
away from the 30" (762 mm) optimum
location. If the best position has an
unacceptable RWL, the other object
locations are also unacceptable for the
RWL.
The employee performs only

a single lift once per hour.
Use the spreadsheet (NIOSH Lifting Guidelines

sheet) to calculate a frequency-independent
RWL and LI (FIRWL and FILI).
Assumption: The RWL and

LI are acceptable for this
lifting activity. Therefore this
job is free from ergonomic
risk.
Although the calculated RWL and LI may be

acceptable, the lifting task may still contain
ergonomic risk factors that could lead to a
WMSD.
The task is a lowering task

for which I'd like to calculate
the RWL.
Measure all the task variables at the beginning

of the lower and enter them into the equation.
The travel distance is the change in vertical
height from the origin to the destination of the
lower.
In order to both lift and set

down the object, the
employee must use
significant control.
Measure the variables for the initiation and

completion of the lift and calculate two RWLs.
Use the lower of the two values.
2008 Humantech
Table 6.2 Potential NIOSH Lifting Equation Pitfalls (Cont.)

Potential Pitfall
The employee lifts an object

over a lip or obstruction and
then lowers the object
behind it (e.g., lifting into a
deep bin).
Use two equations:

Evaluate the lift to the top of the lip or
obstruction before lowering begins.
Evaluate the lower from the top of the lip or
obstruction to the bottom of the bin.
The employee lifts and then

carries an object.
Use where the operator holds the object before

carrying it as the destination of the lift to collect
your measurement (i.e., vertical travel
distance).
Psychophysical Analysis: Push, Pull, and Carry

Psychophysical analysis, a method that measures the load an individual
perceives he/she can handle to define human capabilities and limitations, is a
proven method of quantifying manual handling task specifications.
The best-known results of psychophysical analysis are the Design of Manual
Handling Tasks: Tables of Maximum Acceptable Weights and Forces (Snook,
Ciriello, 1991). Snook gathered data on people's perceptions of what they
thought their performance capabilities would be, given a variety of parameters for
pushing, pulling, and carrying tasks. The tables have led to the development
of guidelines for designing and evaluating these types of tasks. The purpose of
the guidelines is to encourage the control of industrial low back pain by reducing
the number of instances, the duration of injuries, and the duplication of injuries.
Guidelines based on the Snook tables for push/pull and carry tasks reside in the
same Humantech spreadsheetManual Material Handling Guidelinesthat
contains the NIOSH Lifting Equation. A separate sheet is provided for each of
the three categories (Push, Pull, and Carry).
181
For example, the Pull Guidelines sheet looks like this:
Figure 6.13 Pull Guidelines Sheet Manual Material Handling Guidelines Spreadsheet
Each sheet lists the maximum acceptable forces, for the specified task and
gender, by the percentage of the industrial population capable of performing the
task. The maximum acceptable forces also take into consideration the
approximate hand height, frequency, and horizontal travel distance of the push,
pull, or carry.
When selecting a value that represents what the majority of the work population
should be capable of performing with minimal risk of injury, Snook (1991) found
that a worker is three times more susceptible to low back injury if performing a
manual handling task that is acceptable to less than 75% of the working
population. Snook also determined that designing the job to fit 75% of the work
force can reduce up to one-third of industrial back injuries. Therefore,
Humantech recommends using the 75% female capability value as a design goal
to minimize the risk of injury to the majority of the work population.
Use caution when evaluating a multiple-component task. The Snook (1991)
analysis provides maximum acceptable weights and forces for individual manual
handling tasks or components (pushing, pulling, carrying). Frequently, industrial
tasks involve combinations of more than one component. Snook (1991) found
that in a multiple-component task, the weight or force of the component with the
lowest percent of population is the best estimate of the maximum acceptable
weight or force for the entire task. Therefore, each component of a combined
task should be analyzed separately using the frequency of the combined task.
182
2008 Humantech
Applying the Guidelines for Pushing, Pulling Tasks

The following two tables serve as starting points in the design process of pushing
and pulling tasks. Limits are provided for several scenarios, referencing the
maximum acceptable force corresponding to 75% of the female population.
Refer to your Applied Industrial Ergonomics Toolbox CD for the complete set
of push/pull guidelines.
Table 6.3 Pushing Limits
Approx. Hand
Location
Push Distance
Frequency
(push/min.)
Initial Force
Sustained Force
Chest
7' (2.1 m)
1/5 min.
53 lb (24 kg)
35 lb (16 kg)
Forearm
7' (2.1 m)
1/5 min.
53 lb (24 kg)
33 lb (15 kg)
Thigh
7' (2.1 m)
1/5 min.
42 lb (19 kg)
29 lb (13 kg)
Chest
25' (7.6 m)
1/30 min.
51 lb (23 kg)
29 lb (13 kg)
Forearm
25' (7.6 m)
1/30 min.
51 lb (23 kg)
29 lb (13 kg)
Thigh
25' (7.6 m)
1/30 min.
44 lb (20 kg)
26 lb (12 kg)
Table 6.4 Pulling Limits

Approx. Hand
Location
Pull Distance
Frequency
(pull/min.)
Initial Force
Sustained Force
Chest
7' (2.1 m)
1/5 min.
53 lb (24 kg)
33 lb (15 kg)
Forearm
7' (2.1 m)
1/5 min.
55 lb (25 kg)
33 lb (15 kg)
Thigh
7' (2.1 m)
1/5 min.
57 lb (26 kg)
29 lb (13 kg)
Chest
25' (7.6 m)
1/30 min.
48 lb (22 kg)
23 lb (14 kg)
Forearm
25' (7.6 m)
1/30 min.
51 lb (23 kg)
23 lb (14 kg)
Thigh
25' (7.6 m)
1/30 min.
53 lb (24 kg)
29 lb (13 kg)
183
Push/Pull Guidelines in the Spreadsheet

The Humantech Manual Material Handling Guidelines spreadsheet includes a
sheet for pushing tasks, and a similar sheet for pulling tasks. For example, the
Push Guidelines sheet looks like this:
Figure 6.14 Push Guidelines Sheet Manual Material Handling Guidelines Spreadsheet
184
2008 Humantech
Push/Pull Guidelines Sheet Input

To use the Push and Pull Guidelines sheets and generate safe pushing and
pulling limits, the following task information must be known or measured:
Gender. Gender of the individual who will be performing the activity.
Height. Location of the hands when pushing or pulling. Choose the

closest, but worst-case hand position to be conservative. For pushing
tasks, the optimum hand position is at forearm height. For pulling tasks,
the optimum hand position is at thigh height.
Percent (%). Percent of the capable population that should be able to

perform this activity. The recommended goal is to design for 75% of the
female population.
Distance (feet/meters). Typical travel (pushing or pulling) distance of

the object. If the travel distance is not available in the drop-down list,
choose the closest, but longer distance to be conservative. The optimum
distance is the shortest.
Frequency (pushes or pulls per minute). Average number of times per

minute the individual pushes or pulls the object. (Some frequencies do
not apply based on the distance pushed, e.g., physically impossible to
push 200 feet (61 m) once every six seconds.) If the frequency is not
available in the drop-down list, choose the closer but higher frequency to
be conservative.
Figure 6.15 Push/Pull Guidelines Sheets Input Options
185
Push/Pull Guidelines Sheet Output

For pushing and pulling tasks, the Manual Material Handling Guidelines
spreadsheet produces a result for both acceptable initial force and acceptable
sustained force.
Initial Force (lb/kg). Force required to transform an object at rest into

motion. The force required to stop an object is directly related to the
starting force. Initial force values are achieved when objects must go
up/down ramps, around corners, and must travel on poor flooring.
Sustained Force (lb/kg). Force required to keep an object in motion.

The sustained force is lower than the Initial Force.
Figure 6.16 Push/Pull Guidelines Sheets Output Values
Applying the Guidelines for Carrying Tasks

The following table serves as a starting point in the design process of carrying
tasks. Limits are provided for several scenarios, referencing the maximum
acceptable force corresponding to 75% of the female population. Refer to your
Applied Industrial Ergonomics Toolbox CD for the complete set of carry
guidelines.
Table 6.5 Carrying Limits
186
Approx.
Carrying Height
Carrying
Distance
Frequency
(carry/min.)
Max Acceptable
Weight of Carry
Elbow
7' (2.1 m)
1 carry/5 min.
35 lb (16 kg)
Hand
7' (2.1 m)
1 carry/5 min.
42 lb (19 kg)
Elbow
7' (2.1 m)
1 carry/30 min.
35 lb (16 kg)
Hand
7' (2.1 m)
1 carry/30 min.
42 lb (19 kg)
Elbow
14' (4.3 m)
1 carry/5 min.
35 lb (16 kg)
Hand
14' (4.3 m)
1 carry/5 min.
37 lb (17 kg)
Elbow
14' (4.3 m)
1 carry/30 min.
35 lb (16 kg)
Hand
14' (4.3 m)
1 carry/30 min.
37 lb (17 kg)
2008 Humantech
Carry Guidelines in the Spreadsheet

The Humantech Manual Material Handling Guidelines spreadsheet includes a
sheet for carrying tasks:
Figure 6.17 Carry Guidelines Sheet Manual Material Handling Guidelines Spreadsheet
187
Carry Guidelines Sheet Input

To use the Carry Guidelines sheet and generate safe carrying limits, the
following task information must be known or measured:
Gender. Gender of the individual performing the activity.
Height. Location of the hands when carrying. Choose the closest, but
worst-case hand position to be conservative. The optimum hand position
is at hand height.
Percent (%). Percent of the capable population that should be able to

perform this activity. The recommended goal is to design for 75% of the
female population.
Distance (feet/meters). Typical travel (carrying) distance of the object.

If the travel distance is not available from the drop-down list, choose the
closest, but longer distance to be conservative. The optimum distance is
the shortest.
Frequency (carries per minute). Average number of times per minute

the individual carries the object. If the frequency is not available in the
drop-down list, choose the closest, but higher frequency to be
conservative.
Figure 6.18 Carry Guidelines Sheet Input Options
Note: The maximum acceptable weight values should be reduced by

approximately 15% when handling boxes without handles, and by approximately
50% when handling objects requiring extended horizontal reaching.
188
2008 Humantech
Carry Guidelines Sheet Output

For carrying tasks, the Manual Material Handling Guidelines spreadsheet
produces a Maximum Acceptable Weight (lb/kg), the maximum safe carrying
weight based on the specified inputs.
Figure 6.19 Carry Guidelines Sheet Output Value
Example Carry Calculation Using Carry Guidelines

Determine the maximum acceptable carrying weight for a female who carries a
30-pound (13.6 kg) tote of automotive parts at elbow height about 12 feet (3.7 m)
every 30 minutes throughout an eight-hour workday.
Step 1: Define the Variables

The variables for this scenario are as follows:
Gender = female
Carrying height = 40" (1.02 m)
Carrying distance = 12' (3.7 m)
Frequency = 1 carry every 30 minutes
Object weight = 30 lb (13.6 kg)
Step 2: Enter Data Into Spreadsheet and Determine Result

Use the Manual Material Handling Guidelines spreadsheet (Carry Guidelines
sheet) to enter the data:
Select Female gender.
Select Elbow Height, the closest value to the carrying height of 40 inches
(1.02 m)
Select Percent. The recommended goal is to design for 75% the female
population.
Select Distance. There is no 12' (3.7 m) value, so select the next closest,
conservative value, 14' (4.3 m).
Select Frequency (1 carry every 30 minutes)
189
Figure 6.20 Result: Maximum Acceptable Weight of Carry = 35 Pounds (16 kg)
Step 3: Determine Course of Action

The object weight (30 pounds or 13.6 kg) does not exceed the Maximum
Acceptable Weight Limit (35 pounds or 15.9 kg). Therefore, no intervention is
necessary at this time.
Measuring Improvement Using Push/Pull/Carry Guidelines

Ergonomic improvements based on push/pull/carry guidelines will minimize the
likelihood of injury due to pushing, pulling, and carrying tasks.
Potential improvements to increase the percentage of employees capable of
performing the pushing, pulling, or carrying activity include:
190
Increasing the percent of employees capable of performing the pushing,

pulling, or carrying activity.
Improving the hand position of the activity.
Reducing the travel distance necessary to move the object.
Limiting the frequency of the material handling activity.
2008 Humantech
Guidelines Limitations
The derivation of the push/pull/carry guidelines involved psychophysical analysis
to measure perceived human limitations and capabilities. Gathering this data
relies on individuals to report when they felt that they were at their pushing,
pulling, and carrying limits. Some of the data points do not follow conventional
logic. For instance, men can generally push more than women, yet there are few
data points that suggest otherwise due to the self-reported information.
Avoiding Potential Pitfalls With Push/Pull/Carry Guidelines

push/pull/carry guidelines, and a recommended approach for each.
Table 6.6 Potential Push/Pull/Carry Guidelines Pitfalls
Potential Pitfall
The employee lifts or lowers an

object.
Use the NIOSH Lifting Equation to

calculate a RWL and LI.
Assumption: The forces and

weights are acceptable for this
manual handling activity. Therefore
this job is free from ergonomic risk.
Although the guidelines may be

acceptable, the lifting task may still
contain ergonomic risk factors that could
lead to a WMSD.
Two employees perform this

activity.
The guidelines are valid only for singleemployee activities.
The employee pushes an object on

a worktable a distance of less than
one foot.
Use the minimum push distance of 7 feet

(2.1 m). It may overestimate the value,
but still provides good information about
what is acceptable to the population.
191
Manual Material Handling Example

An operator performs the following tasks (as shown in Figure 6.21) for an entire
eight-hour shift:
Lift 6 boxes from the ground.
Carry them to a cart located 10' (3.0 m) away.
When the cart is full, push it to a packing station located 24' (7.3 m)
away.
10'
(3.0 m)
DOES NOT
OBSTRUCT VISION
30'30'
(9.1 m)
8"
(203 mm)
V 43"
(1.09 m)
15"
(381 mm)
H
42" (1.07 m)
7"
(178 mm)
Figure 6.21 Lifting, Carrying, and Pushing
To find out if these tasks are within the recommended guidelines, we need the
following information:
Weight of boxes (lb) = 30 (13.6 kg)
Initial force to push cart (lb) = 35 (15.9 kg)
Sustained force to push cart (lb) = 22 (10.0 kg)
Time to load 6 boxes on cart = 20 minutes
Number of times pushing operation is performed in an 8-hour day = 21
Boxes have optimally designed cutouts
There is no twisting involved in the lift
We can divide the operation into three components:
192
Lifting
Carrying
Pushing
2008 Humantech
Lifting
H = 15" (381 mm)
V (origin) = 7" (178 mm)
V (destination) = 43" (1.09 m)
D = 43 - 7 = 36" (914 mm)
F = 6 boxes x 21 times = 126 boxes per shift
An operator works 8 hours from which 30 minutes are usually reserved for a
meal, and there are two breaks of 15 minutes each. Therefore, total working
time is 7 hours.
F = 126 boxes/(7 hours x 60 minutes/hour) = 0.3 lifts/minute
A = 0 (no twisting)
Coupling = good
The task variables do not differ significantly from lift to lift, therefore the NIOSH
Lifting equation for single lifts applies. Entering the variables into the Manual
Material Handling Guidelines spreadsheet results in a RWL of 20.8 lb (9.4 kg).
Figure 6.22 NIOSH Lifting Guidelines Example
193
Carrying
Carry guidelines are obtained from the spreadsheet:
Figure 6.23 Carry Guidelines Example
194
2008 Humantech
Pushing
Current push forces:
35 lb (15.9 kg) initial

22 lb (10.0 kg) sustained
Push guidelines are obtained from the spreadsheet:
Figure 6.24 Push Guidelines Example
Interpretation of Results
The following table compares current weights and forces with recommended
weights and forces, and indicates whether each task is acceptable (within
recommended guidelines).
Table 6.7 Interpretation of Results
Task
Current
Guideline
Acceptable?
Lifting
30 lb (13.6 kg)
20.8 lb (9.4 kg)
No
Carrying
30 lb (13.6 kg)
33 lb (15 kg)
Yes
Pushing
Initial: 35 lb (15.9 kg)

Sustained: 22 lb (10.0 kg)
Initial: 51 lb (23 kg)

Sustained: 29 lb (13 kg)
Yes
195
Material Handling Guidelines

Refer to Chapter 7, Ergonomic Design Guidelines, for guidelines that provide
design and selection criteria for manual material handling.
Manual Material Handling Analysis Flowchart

Refer to the flowchart below to help you determine if the NIOSH Lifting Equation
is applicable to a task, which variables to collect, and the appropriate type of
manual material handling analysis to perform.
Manual Material Handling (MMH) Analysis Flowchart
Complete a
NIOSH Composite
Lifting Index
Identify
job/task
No
Lift or lower,
push, pull,
carry?
Yes
Lift or lower?
No
No
Push/Pull/Carry
Analysis
BRIEF Survey
Yes
Is NIOSH
applicable?*
No
Single task lift?**
Yes
BRIEF Survey
Collect variables only at
lift origin and enter in
MMH spreadsheet
*Not applicable if lifting/lowering :

- with 1 hand
- for over 8 hours
- while seated or kneeling
- in a restricted work space
- unstable objects
Yes
No
- while carrying, pushing, or pulling

- with high speed motion
- with wheelbarrows or shovels
- with unreasonable foot/floor coupling
- in an unfavorable environment
**Task variables do not vary significant from task to task, or only one task is of
interest (e.g., worst-case scenario)
Significant
control
required at lift
destination?
Yes
Collect variables at both

origin and destination and
complete NIOSH Lifting
Equations for both
(2 MMH spreadsheets)
Worker must re-grasp load at lift destination, momentarily hold object at destination, or
carefully position or guide load at destination
Figure 6.25 Manual Material Handling Analysis Flowchart
196
2008 Humantech
References
Chaffin, D. B., et al., Occupational Biomechanics, New York: Wiley, 1999.
Snook, S. H. and Ciriello, V. M., Design of Manual Handling Tasks: Revised
Tables of Maximum Acceptable Weights and Forces, Ergonomics, 30(9),
1991.
Waters, T.R., Putz-Anderson, V., Garg, A., and Fine, L.J., Revised NIOSH
Equation for the Design and Evaluation of Manual Lifting Tasks, Ergonomics,
36(7), 1993.
197
Notes
198
2008 Humantech
hapter 7 Ergonomic Design Guidelines

Ergonomics in Workstation Design .......................................................201
Design and Build Guidelines .................................................................204
Avoiding Potential Pitfalls With the Design and Build Guidelines .........218
Static Anthropometric Data....................................................................218
References ............................................................................................233
199
About This Chapter

Chapter 7 is part of the Control phase of ergonomic risk management.

Recognition
Chapter 2
Work-Related
Musculoskeletal
Disorders
Chapter 3
Recognizing
Ergonomic Issues
Evaluation
Chapter 4
Risk Factors
Chapter 5
Prioritizing
Ergonomic Risks
Chapter 6
Manual Material
Handling Analysis
Control
Chapter 7
Ergonomic
Design Guidelines
Chapter 8
Cost Justifying
Ergonomic
Improvements
Chapter 9
The Job
Improvement
Process
Putting It
All Together
Chapter 10
Performing an
Ergonomics
Review
Chapter 11
Surviving the
First 90 Days
This chapter describes the Design and Build Guidelines. These guidelines
specify ergonomics criteria for workstations, tools, and equipment, thereby
providing a reference point from which to make your workplace design and
purchasing decisions. We'll address these questions:
200
Why should I apply ergonomic design guidelines?
What is the function of ergonomic design guidelines?
How do I apply ergonomic design guidelines?
2008 Humantech
Chapter 7: Ergonomic Design Guidelines
Ergonomics in Workstation Design

The goal of ergonomic design is to optimize the performance of an individual
operation within the context of the overall manufacturing or distribution system in
which it exists. Good ergonomic design of workstations, tools, and equipment
ensures that human performance is part of this optimization.
Workplaces must be designed to meet process requirements while remaining
within human capabilities.
Note: Information in this chapter is simplified for ease of use. The publications
referenced at the end of this chapter, along with Humantechs The Handbook of
Ergonomic Design Guidelines, can provide more in-depth information about
ergonomic design guidelines.
Ergonomic design guidelines translate human performance considerations into
purchasing specifications.
The ergonomic design criteria in this chapter are organized into a series of
Design and Build Checklists on the Applied Industrial Ergonomics Toolbox
CD. You can use the checklists to
evaluate existing workstation designs, tools, and equipment, and thereby

identify root causes of current ergonomic issues, and
evaluate potential ergonomic job improvements to workstations,

including tool and equipment purchases, to confirm that the solution will
resolve the problem.
201
Design Basis for Human Performance

Ergonomic design guidelines are based on studies of population capabilities.
The intent is to set criteria that will optimize performance for most, if not all, of the
working population. The design criteria are based on anthropometry studies of
healthy, working-age adults.
Anthropometry is defined as the science of studying human body
dimensions. The word can be divided into two components:
Anthro
people
metry
the measurement of
There are two basic types of anthropometry:
Functional anthropometry considers human capabilities to perform a

function, such as reaching across a work surface to grasp an object.
Refer to Design and Build Guidelines beginning on page 204.
Information is provided for the North American population.
Static anthropometry considers the fundamental dimensions of the

human body, for example, the length of a persons forearm. Refer to
Static Anthropometric Data on page 218. Information is provided for the
North American, European, Asian, and Latin American populations.
Goals of applying Anthropometry:
Minimize design incompatibility
Optimize human performance
Strength guidelines are calculated from studies of maximum exertion

capabilities for a population. In order to accommodate most healthy, workingage adults, the 5th percentile female data is referenced. These figures are then
reduced by 80% to reflect repetitive activity. The strength guidelines often match
the criteria for the BRIEF Survey but occasionally result in different limits due to
the different approach to setting the limits (figures in the BRIEF Survey reflect the
threshold levels that have been shown in scientific research to increase the
likelihood of WMSD).
202
2008 Humantech
Design for Adjustability

Whenever possible, a range of adjustability should be provided that can meet the
needs of a large group of people. It is often not cost-effective to design for
everyone, so adjustable equipment and workstations are frequently based on the
requirements of 90% of the population. However, this means that the extremely
tall and short individuals will not be accommodated.
Figure 7.2 illustrates the range of people sizes (static anthropometry). Refer to
Static Anthropometric Data beginning on page 218 for data that applies to other
populations.
Figure 7.2 North American Height Dimensions

(Data Includes Wearing Safety Shoes with 1" Soles)
Design for Extremes

In certain situations, design should be based on the extremes. For example,
doors should be high enough for the tallest and largest since everyone else
would then be able to walk through. Similarly, ladder rungs should be strong
enough to hold the largest person. On the other hand, frequently used reference
material should be placed within the reach of the shortest operators, since taller
individuals will be able to reach them.
Do Not Design for the Average

Often, "when you design for the average, you limit the most." Most design
dimensions must accommodate reaches (design for the smallest) or clearances
(design for the largest). Designing for the average typically leaves out the vast
majority of users. For example, imagine if shoes were made only in size 7; while
a small percentage of the population would be accommodated, most of us would
find the solution unacceptable.
203

In this section, you'll find functional design criteria derived from scientific research
in the form of design and build guidelines for the following:
Work reaches
Standing workstations
Seated workstations
Material handling
Force
Standing arm strength
Tools
The Design and Build Checklists on the Applied Industrial Ergonomics

Toolbox CD were designed to provide an easy way to apply the functional
design criteria to new or existing tools, equipment, and workstations. The
checklists consolidate many different design criteria into an easy-to-apply format.
One checklist is provided for each area listed above.
An example of a Design and Build Checklist for tool design and selection is
shown on the following page. It includes areas for documenting the job, the
current measures of the job, whether the job is currently acceptable, and
improvements for enhancing those measures that are not currently acceptable.
When to Use Design and Build Guidelines

If you've identified existing ergonomic risks, what should you do about them?
Addressing the physical aspects of the work environment (seating, work surface
height, reaching, exerted forces, etc.) using the design and build guidelines may
reduce one or more of the ergonomic risk factors. The guidelines formalize the
limits of human capabilities into a format you can easily apply when improving
existing work environments, and when developing purchasing criteria for new
equipment.
Limitations of Design and Build Guidelines

The design and build guidelines are generic and may not adapt easily to your
unique work environment.
204
2008 Humantech
Job
Information:
Identifies
workstation
location and
product
variations
Design
Criteria:
Human
performance
design
considerations
Illustration:
Quick reference
to each of the
design criteria
Figure 7.3 Design and Build Checklist Example
205
Work Reaches
The guidelines below provide criteria for work surface reach dimensions. This
information is useful for laying out work and material storage locations.
Table 7.1 Work Reach Guidelines
Criteria
Dimension
Description
A. Horizontal Reach
Precision Tasks
Max. 11" (279 mm)

4.5 kg) Tasks
Max. 16" (406 mm)
Horizontal reach distance from front

edge of workstation to hand
grasping point

Max. 22" (559 mm)

4.5 kg) Tasks
Max. 62" (1.58 m)
E. Vertical Reach
Tasks
Max. 74" (1.88 m)
Vertical reach distance from

standing surface to hand grasping
point
Figure 7.4 Work Reach Guidelines
206
2008 Humantech
Standing Workstations
The guidelines below provide design criteria for workstations in which the
operator is intended to be standing. They are useful for designing work surface
locations and features.
Table 7.2 Standing Workstation Guidelines
Criteria
Dimension
Description
Optimal Zone
Adj. 38" 47"

(0.97 1.19 m)
Fixed: 42" (1.07 m)
Vertical distance from standing

surface to hand working height
Acceptable Zone
Adj. 30" 57"

(0.76 1.45 m)
Fixed: 42" (1.07 m)
Precision or Visually
Demanding Tasks
Adj. 40" 51"

(1.02 1.30 m)
Fixed: 45" (1.14 m)
A. Hand Working Height
B. Display Height
Adj: 58" 71"

(1.47 1.80 m)
Fixed: 66" (1.68 m)

surface to top of viewable portion
of display screen
C. Optimal Viewing
Distance
Adj: 18" 30"

(457 762 mm)
Fixed: 23" (584 mm)
Horizontal distance from eye to

display screen surface
D. Knee Space Depth
Min. 6" (152 mm)
Beneath the work surface,

horizontal distance from front of
table to back of the workstation
E. Foot Rail Height
6" (152 mm)

surface to top of foot rail
Knee Space Width
Min. 30" (762 mm)

horizontal width across front or
work surface
Figure 7.5 Standing Workstation Guidelines
207
Seated Workstations
The following guidelines provide criteria for workstations in which the operator is
intended to be seated. They are useful for designing work surface locations and
features.
Table 7.3 Seated Workstation Guidelines
Criteria
Dimension
Description

Demanding Tasks
Adj. 27" 36"

(686 914 mm)
Fixed: 36" (914 mm)

B. Display Height
Adj. 35" 46"

(0.99 1.17 m)
Fixed: 46" (1.17 m)

surface to top of viewable portion
of display screen
C. Optimal Viewing
Distance
Adj: 18" 30"

(457 762 mm)
Fixed: 23" (584 mm)
Horizontal distance from eye to

display screen surface
D. Work Surface
Thickness
Max. 2" (51 mm)
Thickness from bottom of work

surface to top of work surface at
its largest dimension anywhere
the knees may contact
E. Knee Space Depth
Min. 18" (457 mm)

horizontal distance from front of
table edge to back of the
workstation
Knee Well Width
30" (762 mm)

horizontal width across front of
work surface
Figure 7.6 Seated Workstation Guidelines
208
2008 Humantech
Material Handling
The guidelines below provide criteria for lifting and lowering dimensions. This
information is useful for designing load sizes and locations.
Table 7.4 Material Handling Guidelines
Criteria
Dimension
Description

Comfort Zone Bottom
Min. 24" (610 mm)

B. Hand Working Height

Comfort Zone Top
Max. 62" (1.58 m)
C. Hand Working Height

Optimal Comfort Zone
Bottom
Min. 38" (965 mm)
D. Hand Working Height

Top
Max. 49" (1.25 m)
Figure 7.7 Material Handling Guidelines
209
Force
Force guidelines are provided to accommodate a full range of healthy, workingage adults. Guidelines include both frequent ( 2 force applications per minute)
and infrequent (< 2 force applications per minute) situations.
Two types of guidelines are provided:
Recommended: to optimize human performance

Acceptable: not-to-exceed
Table 7.5 Finger Push Force Guidelines

Force Exertions:
Finger Push
Frequent ( 2/min)
Infrequent (< 2/min)
Recommended
Acceptable
Recommended
Acceptable
1 index finger
3.4 lb
(1.5 kg)
5 lb
(2.3 kg)
8.6 lb
(3.9 kg)
11.2 lb
(5.1 kg)
2 fingers on
same hand
5.0 lb
(2.3 kg)
7.5 lb
(3.4 kg)
12.5 lb
(5.7 kg)
16.3 lb
(7.4 kg)
2 fingers on
different hands
11.0 lb
(5.0 kg)
16.5 lb
(7.5 kg)
27.5 lb
(12.5 kg)
35.8 lb
(16.3 kg)
Figure 7.8 Finger Push
210
2008 Humantech
Table 7.6 Finger Pull Force Guidelines

Force Exertions:
Finger Pull
Frequent ( 2/min)
Recommended
Acceptable
Recommended
Acceptable
1 finger
3.9 lb
(1.8 kg)
6.0 lb
(2.7 kg)
9.6 lb
(4.3 kg)
12.5 lb
(5.7 kg)
2 fingers on
same hand
8.4 lb
(3.8 kg)
12.5 lb
(5.7 kg)
20.9 lb
(9.5 kg)
27.1 lb
(12.3 kg)
Figure 7.9 Finger Pull
Table 7.7 Thumb Push Force Guidelines

Force Exertions:
Thumb Push
Frequent ( 2/min)
Recommended
Acceptable
Recommended
Acceptable
1 thumb
5.3 lb
(2.4 kg)
8.0 lb
(3.6 kg)
13.3 lb
(6.0 kg)
17.3 lb
(7.8 kg)
2 thumbs
10.0 lb
(4.5 kg)
15.0 lb
(6.8 kg)
25.0 lb
(11.3 kg)
32.5 lb
(14.7 kg)
Figure 7.10 Thumb Push
211
Table 7.8 One-Handed Pinch-Grip Force Guidelines

Force Exertions:
Pinch Grip
Frequent ( 2/min)
Recommended
Acceptable
Recommended
Acceptable
Chuck pinch grip

(with wrist
deviation)
2.0 lb
(0.9 kg)
2.4 lb
(1.1 kg)
4.0 lb
(1.8 kg)
5.1 lb
(2.3 kg)
Chuck pinch grip

(no wrist
deviation)
3.2 lb
(1.4 kg)
4.7 lb
(2.1 kg)
7.9 lb
(3.6 kg)
10.3 lb
(4.7 kg)
Key pinch grip

(with wrist
deviation)
2.0 lb
(0.9 kg)
2.9 lb
(1.3 kg)
4.8 lb
(2.2 kg)
6.3 lb
(2.9 kg)
Key pinch grip (no

wrist deviation)
3.9 lb
(1.8 kg)
6.0 lb
(2.6 kg)
9.7 lb
(4.4 kg)
12.6 lb
(5.7 kg)
Chuck pinch grip: thumb opposing the pads of the index and middle fingers
Wrist deviation: noticeable flexion, extension, ulnar, radial
Key pinch grip: thumb opposing the side of the index finger
Figure 7.11 One-Handed Pinch Grip
212
2008 Humantech
Table 7.9 Power-Grip Force Guidelines

Force Exertions:
Power Grip
Frequent ( 2/min)
Recommended
Acceptable
Recommended
Acceptable
1 hand (with
wrist deviation)
6.4 lb
(2.9 kg)
9.5 lb
(4.3 kg)
15.9 lb
(7.2 kg)
20.7 lb
(9.4 kg)
1 hand (no wrist

deviation)
12.7 lb
(5.8 kg)
19.1 lb
(8.7 kg)
31.8 lb
(14.4 kg)
41.3 lb
(18.7 kg)
2 hands (with
wrist deviation)
9.0 lb
(4.1 kg)
13.5 lb
(6.1 kg)
22.6 lb
(10.2 kg)
29.3 lb
(13.2 kg)
2 hands (no
wrist deviation)
18.0 lb
(8.2 kg)
27.1 lb
(12.3 kg)
45.1 lb
(20.5 kg)
58.6 lb
(26.7 kg)
Wrist deviation: noticeable flexion, extension, ulnar, radial
Figure 7.12 Power Grip
213
Table 7.10 Push/Pull with Grip Force Guidelines

Force Exertions:
Push/Pull
Frequent ( 2/min)
Recommended
Acceptable
Recommended
Acceptable
With 1-handed
grip on plastic
surface
6.7 lb
(3.1 kg)
10.1 lb
(4.6 kg)
16.9 lb
(7.7 kg)
21.9 lb
(10.0 kg)
With 1-handed
grip on rubber
surface
8.0 lb
(3.6 kg)
12.0 lb
(5.4 kg)
20.0 lb
(9.1 kg)
25.9 lb
(11.8 kg)
Figure 7.13 Push/Pull with Grip
214
2008 Humantech
Standing Arm Strength

Standing strength guidelines provide criteria for arm exertions while standing.
Table 7.11 Standing Arm Strength Guidelines
Frequent ( 2/min)
Force Exertions
Recommended
Acceptable
Recommended
Acceptable
A. Push out at
shoulder height
1 hand
6.8 lb
(3.1 kg)
10.2 lb
(4.6 kg)
17.0 lb
(7.7 kg)
22.1 lb
(10.1 kg)
B. Push out at
elbow height
1 hand
7.4 lb
(3.4 kg)
11.1 lb
(5.1 kg)
18.5 lb
(8.4 kg)
24.1 lb
(11.0 kg)
C. Push out at
elbow height
2 hands
11.8 lb
(5.4 kg)
17.7 lb
(8.0 kg)
29.5 lb
(13.4 kg)
38.3 lb
(17.4 kg)
D. Pull in at
shoulder height
1 hand
7.0 lb
(3.2 kg)
10.5 lb
(4.8 kg)
17.6 lb
(8.0 kg)
22.8 lb
(10.3 kg)
E. Pull in at elbow
height 1 hand
7.5 lb
(3.4 kg)
11.2 lb
(5.1 kg)
18.7 lb
(8.5 kg)
24.3 lb
(11.1 kg)
F. Pull in at elbow
height 2 hands
13.1 lb
(5.9 kg)
19.6 lb
(8.9 kg)
32.7 lb
(14.8 kg)
42.4 lb
(19.2 kg)
Figure 7.14 Standing Arm Strength
215
Table 7.11 Standing Arm Strength Guidelines (Cont.)

Frequent ( 2/min)
Force Exertions
Recommended
Acceptable
Recommended
Acceptable
G. Pull down from

overhead
2 hands
17.9 lb
(8.1 kg)
26.8 lb
(12.2 kg)
44.7 lb
(20.3 kg)
58.1 lb
(26.4 kg)
H. Pull up from knee

height 1 hand
6.3 lb
(2.9 kg)
9.5 lb
(4.3 kg)
15.8 lb
(7.2 kg)
20.5 lb
(9.3 kg)
Pull across body

(lateral) at waist
height 1 hand,
elbow fully
extended
2.5 lb
(1.1 kg)
3.8 lb
(1.7 kg)
6.3 lb
(2.9 kg)
8.2 lb
(3.7 kg)
Pull across body

(lateral) at waist
height 1 hand,
elbow at 90
3.3 lb
(1.5 kg)
5.0 lb
(2.3 kg)
8.4 lb
(3.8 kg)
10.9 lb
(4.9 kg)
K. Lift up at shoulder
height 2 hands
4.7 lb
(2.1 kg)
7.0 lb
(3.2 kg)
11.7 lb
(5.3 kg)
15.3 lb
(6.9 kg)
L.
7.7 lb
(3.5 kg)
11.5 lb
(5.2 kg)
19.1 lb
(8.7 kg)
24.9 lb
(11.3 kg)
12.8 lb
(5.8 kg)
19.2 lb
(8.7 kg)
30.0 lb
(13.6 kg)
41.6 lb
(18.9 kg)
I.
J.
Lift up at elbow
height 2 hands
M. Press down at
elbow height
1 hand
I/J
Figure 7.15 Standing Arm Strength (Cont.)
216
2008 Humantech
Tools
The following guidelines provide criteria for tool design and selection.
Table 7.12 Tool Guidelines
Criteria
Dimension
Description
A. Handle Length
3.8" 6.0"
(95 152 mm)
Distance from base to top of

handle
Handle Diameter
1.2" 1.7"
(30 43 mm)
Diameter throughout entire

grasping area
Tool Weight
Max. 4 lb (1.8 kg)
Maximum tool weight
Handle Diameter
0.3" 0.6"
(8 15 mm)
Diameter throughout entire

grasping area
Tool Weight
Max. 1 lb (0.5 kg)
Maximum tool weight
D. Handle Span Fully Closed
Min. 2" (51 mm)
E. Handle Span Fully Open
Max. 3.5" (89 mm)
Distance between the two outer

grasping surfaces of the tool
B. Power Grip
C. Precision Grip
Figure 7.16 Tool Guidelines
217
Avoiding Potential Pitfalls With the Design and Build Guidelines

Design and Build Guidelines and a recommended approach for each.
Table 7.13 Potential Design and Build Guidelines Pitfalls
Potential Pitfall
The plant population includes

very large or very small
individuals.
Measure the capabilities of individuals

representative of the extremes.
Reach distances, work

heights, or force requirements
vary from day to day.
Design for the worst-case scenarios. Be sure to

check the effect on other scenarios so you dont
create a new ergonomic challenge.
Product sizes vary, affecting

working heights.
Investigate multiple working heights using either

height adjustable work surfaces or dedicated
work areas. Investigate raising and lowering the
operator using personal platforms.
There is no work surface front

edge from which to measure
reach distances.
Use the Design and Build diagram to

approximate where to measure from, typically 1
(25 mm) to 5 (127 mm) from the front of the
body).
Static Anthropometric Data

The following sections contain anthropometric data relevant to workplace design
for several geographic populations. As a general rule, when applying
anthropometric data:
1.
Determine the body dimension and type of measurement (static or

dynamic) important to design (for example, elbow height is important in
determining standing work height).
2.
Determine the "principle" that should apply (for example, design for the
extremes, average, or an adjustable range).
3.
Locate the appropriate data. Note that a one-inch allowance for shoes
is included in the anthropometric data.
For some of the following information, the appropriate decision for application
has been suggested or has been incorporated in the data set.
In using the following data, the largest refers to the 95th percentile male, and the
smallest refers to the 5th percentile female.
The information in this section was derived from Body Space Anthropometry,
Ergonomics, and the Design of Work (Pheasant, 1996).
218
2008 Humantech
Sitting Height
Figure 7.17 Sitting Height
Definition
Vertical distance from the sitting surface to the top of

the head, measured with the person sitting erect,
looking straight ahead, knees at right angles.
Application
This measure is useful in determining head clearance

in confined seated spaces or privacy panels.
Percentile Selection
Because this is a clearance measure, accommodate

the largest.
Small Female
Large Male
North American
31.5" (800 mm)
38.4" (975 mm)
European
31.3" (795 mm)
38.0" (965 mm)
Asian
30.7" (780 mm)
37.6" (955 mm)
Latin American
30.5" (775 mm)
37.2" (945 mm)
219
Sitting Minimum Leg Clearance
Figure 7.18 Sitting Minimum Leg Clearance
220
Definition
Vertical distance from the sitting surface to the top of

the thigh at its maximum vertical height, measured with
the person sitting erect with knees at right angles.
Application
This data is necessary to establish the dimensions

below the work surface so that adequate sitting
clearance will be allowed between the top of the thigh
and the bottom of the work surface. It also assists in
determining seat heights.

the largest.
Small Female
Large Male
North American
4.9" (125 mm)
7.3" (185 mm)
European
4.9" (125 mm)
7.3" (185 mm)
Asian
4.1" (104 mm)
6.3" (160 mm)
Latin American
4.5" (114 mm)
6.9" (175 mm)
2008 Humantech
Sitting Knee Height
Figure 7.19 Sitting Knee Height
Definition
Vertical distance from the floor to the uppermost point

on the knee, measured with the subject sitting erect,
knees at right angles.
Application
This measure is useful in determining the clearance

necessary between the knees and the underside of the
work surface when seated.

the largest.
Small Female
Large Male
North American
18.1" (460 mm)
23.8" (605 mm)
European
17.9" (455 mm)
23.4" (594 mm)
Asian
16.1" (409 mm)
21.3" (541 mm)
Latin American
17.1" (434 mm)
22.0" (559 mm)
221
Sitting Popliteal Height
Figure 7.20 Sitting Popliteal Height
222
Definition
Vertical distance from the floor to the underside of the

thigh, measured with the person sitting erect, knees at
right angles, feet on the floor.
Application
This measure is useful in determining work surface

heights and seat height range of adjustability.
Adjustability to accommodate the range of percentiles

is desirable.
Small Female
Large Male
North American
14.2" (361 mm)
19.5" (495 mm)
European
14.0" (356 mm)
19.3" (490 mm)
Asian
12.8" (325 mm)
17.5" (445 mm)
Latin American
13.4" (340 mm)
18.9" (480 mm)
2008 Humantech
Sitting Buttock-Calf Length
Figure 7.21 Sitting Buttock-Calf Length
Definition
Horizontal distance from the plane of the back point of

the buttocks to the back of the leg at the knee,
measured with the subject sitting erect with knees at
right angles.
Application
This data is useful in determining seat pan length. The

angle of the seat and the slope of the front edge of the
seat should be considered.
Accommodate the smallest.
Small Female
Large Male
North American
17.3" (439 mm)
21.9" (556 mm)
European
17.1" (434 mm)
21.7" (551 mm)
Asian
15.2" (386 mm)
19.5" (495 mm)
Latin American
16.1" (409 mm)
20.2" (513 mm)
223
Sitting Elbow Rest Height
Figure 7.22 Sitting Elbow Rest Height
224
Definition
Vertical distance from the sitting surface to the bottom

of the right elbow, measured with the subject sitting
erect with the upper right arm vertical at the side, and
the forearm at a right angle to the upper arm.
Application
This data together with other data and proper

considerations are helpful in determining heights of
armrests, work surfaces, tables, and consoles for
seated operators.

is desirable.
Small Female
Large Male
North American
7.3" (185 mm)
11.6" (295 mm)
European
7.3" (185 mm)
11.6" (295 mm)
Asian
6.5" (165 mm)
11.4" (290 mm)
Latin American
6.7" (170 mm)
9.2" (234 mm)
2008 Humantech
Sitting Eye Height
Figure 7.23 Sitting Eye Height
Definition
Vertical distance from the sitting surface to the inner

corner of the eye, measured with the subject sitting
erect.
Application
The value of this measurement is in determining sight

lines and optimum fields of vision for the seated
operator.

is desirable.
Small Female
Large Male
North American
27.2" (691 mm)
33.9" (861 mm)
European
27.0" (686 mm)
33.3" (846 mm)
Asian
26.0" (660 mm)
33.1" (841 mm)
Latin American
25.9" (658 mm)
32.5" (826 mm)
225
Sitting Shoulder Height
Figure 7.24 Sitting Shoulder Height
226
Definition
Vertical distance from the sitting surface to the

uppermost point on the lateral edge of the shoulder,
measured with the subject sitting erect.
Application
This is important for shelf height.
Because reach is the operative factor, accommodate

the smallest.
Small Female
Large Male
North American
20.1" (511 mm)
25.8" (655 mm)
European
19.9" (505 mm)
25.4" (645 mm)
Asian
20.1" (511 mm)
25.8" (655 mm)
Latin American
20.4" (518 mm)
24.7" (627 mm)
2008 Humantech
Standing Height
Figure 7.25 Standing Height
Definition
Distance from the standing surface to the top of the

head, measured with the individual standing erect.
Remember to compensate for operators standing on
tip-toes, reaching up, raising during walking, or
standing on objects (such as a pallet) on top of the
standing surface.
Application
Overhead clearance for fixtures.

the largest.
Small Female
Large Male
North American
60.8" (1.54 m)
74.6" (1.89 m)
European
60.3" (1.53 m)
74.0" (1.88 m)
Asian
58.3" (1.48 m)
70.9" (1.80 m)
Latin American
58.4" (1.48 m)
70.4" (1.79 m)
227
Standing Eye Height
Figure 7.26 Standing Eye Height
228
Definition
Distance from the standing surface to the eyes,

measured with the individual standing erect.
Application
Standing display heights and sight access over

obstructions.

is desirable.
Small Female
Large Male
North American
56.7" (1.44 m)
70.2" (1.78 m)
European
56.3" (1.43 m)
69.7" (1.77 m)
Asian
53.4" (1.36 m)
65.6" (1.67 m)
Latin American
54.1" (1.37 m)
65.5" (1.66 m)
2008 Humantech
Standing Shoulder Height
Figure 7.27 Standing Shoulder Height
Definition

shoulders, measured with the individual standing erect.
Standing shoulder height defines the top of the Comfort
Zone (bottom is knee height).
Application
Manual material handling below shoulder level will

reduce the likelihood of WMSDs.

is desirable.
Small Female
Large Male
North American
49.2" (1.25 m)
62.0" (1.57 m)
European
48.8" (1.24 m)
61.4" (1.56 m)
Asian
44.3" (1.13 m)
57.3" (1.46 m)
Latin American
47.6" (1.21 m)
59.2" (1.50 m)
229
Standing Elbow Height
Figure 7.28 Standing Elbow Height
230
Definition
Distance from the standing surface to the bottom of the

elbow, measured with the forearm horizontal and the
individual standing erect. Standing elbow height
defines the top of the optimal Comfort Zone (bottom is
hand rest height).
Application
Conveyor and access heights. A range should be

selected, if possible. If fixed, choose large and provide
platforms for smaller persons.

is desirable.
Small Female
Large Male
North American
38.2" (970 mm)
47.8" (1.21 m)
European
37.6" (955 mm)
47.5" (1.21 m)
Asian
35.3" (897 mm)
43.5" (1.10 m)
Latin American
36.8" (935 mm)
45.1" (1.15 m)
2008 Humantech
Standing Hand Rest Height
Figure 7.29 Standing Hand Rest Height
Definition
Distance from the standing surface to the operators

palm, measured with the arm held straight down and
the hand extended to a horizontal position. Hand rest
height defines the bottom of the optimal Comfort Zone
(top is standing elbow height).
Application
Hand rail heights can be designed from this measure.

is desirable.
Small Female
Large Male
North American
27.3" (693 mm)
33.7" (856 mm)
European
27.0" (686 mm)
33.5" (851 mm)
Asian
26.6" (676 mm)
33.1" (841 mm)
Latin American
28.7" (729 mm)
35.8" (909 mm)
231
Standing Knee Height
Figure 7.30 Standing Knee Height
232
Definition

knee, measured with the individual standing erect.
Knee height defines the bottom of the Comfort Zone
(top is shoulder height).
Application
Material handling tasks should be designed no lower

than this height.
Because this is a reach measure, accommodate the

largest.
Small Female
Large Male
North American
19.1" (485 mm)
24.8" (630 mm)
European
17.3" (439 mm)
22.0" (559 mm)
Asian
15.7" (399 mm)
20.1" (511 mm)
Latin American
16.6" (422 mm)
20.8" (528 mm)
2008 Humantech
References
3D Static Strength Prediction ProgramTM (3D SSPP), University of Michigan, Ann
Arbor, MI.
Bhattacharya, A. & McGlothlin, J. (ed.), Occupational Ergonomics: Theory and
Applications, Marcel Dekker, New York, 1996.
Chaffin, D.B., et al., Occupational Biomechanics, Wiley, New York, 1999.
Corlett, E.N. and Clark, T.S., The Ergonomics of Workspaces and Machines, 2nd
ed., Taylor & Francis, London, 1995.
Department of Trade and Industry, Government Consumer Safety Research,
Strength Data for Design Safety Phase 1, October 2000,
http://www.dti.gov.uk (January 2008).
Department of Trade and Industry, Government Consumer Safety Research,
Strength Data for Design Safety Phase 2, June 2002,
http://www.dti.gov.uk (January 2008).
Diffrient, N., Tilley, A., Bardagjy, J., Humanscale 1/2/3, MIT Press, Cambridge,
MA, 1974.
Eastman Kodak Company, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, 2nd ed., John
Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, NJ, 2003.
Helander, M., A Guide to the Ergonomics of Manufacturing, Taylor & Francis,
Philadelphia, 1997.
Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, BSR:HFES 100: Human Factors
Engineering of Computer Workstations, Human Factors and Ergonomics
Society, Santa Monica, CA, 2002.
Karwowksi, W., and Marras, W., The Occupational Ergonomics Handbook, CRC
Press LLC, Boca Raton, FL, 1999.
Konz, S. and Johnson, S., Work Design Industrial Ergonomics, Holcomb
Hathaway, Scottsdale, AZ, 2000.
Kroemer, K., Kroemer, H., Kroemer-Elbert, K., Ergonomics How to Design for
Ease and Efficiency, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1994.
Kroemer, K.H.E. and Grandjean, E., Fitting the Task to the Human, Taylor &
Francis, Philadelphia, PA, 1997.
Peebles, L. and Norris, B., ADULTDATA: The Handbook of Adult Anthropometric
and Strength Measurements Department of Trade and Industry, London,
1998.
233
Pheasant, S., and Haslegrave, C.M., Bodyspace: Anthropometry, Ergonomics,

and the Design of Work, Taylor & Francis, Philadelphia, PA, 2006.
Salvendy, C., Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics, John Wiley & Sons,
Inc., Hoboken, NJ, 2006.
Sanders, M. and McCormick, E., Human Factors in Engineering and Design, 7th
ed., McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, NY, 1993.
Woodson, W., Tillman, B., Tillman, P., Human Factors Design Handbook,
McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, NY, 1992.
234
2008 Humantech
Notes
235
Notes
236
2008 Humantech
hapter 8 Cost Justifying Ergonomic Improvements

Introduction to Cost Justification ...........................................................239
Ergonomics and Value-Added Analysis ................................................241
Ergonomics and Motion Time Analysis The STEP.........................242
Estimating Ergonomic Improvement Benefits, Cost Recovery..............244
The Cost Justification Worksheet..........................................................246
Avoiding Potential Pitfalls When Cost Justifying With STEP ................253
References ............................................................................................253
237
About This Chapter


Recognition
Chapter 2
Work-Related
Musculoskeletal
Disorders
Chapter 3
Recognizing
Ergonomic Issues
Evaluation
Chapter 4
Risk Factors
Chapter 5
Prioritizing
Ergonomic Risks
Chapter 6
Manual Material
Handling Analysis
Control
Chapter 7
Ergonomic
Design Guidelines
Chapter 8
Cost Justifying
Ergonomic
Improvements
Chapter 9
The Job
Improvement
Process
Putting It
All Together
Chapter 10
Performing an
Ergonomics
Review
Chapter 11
Surviving the
First 90 Days
This chapter describes the STEP analysis, a tool that allows you to project
motion savings from ergonomic improvements. You'll also learn how to estimate
the benefits of improvements and how long it will take to recover the initial cost of
your ergonomic investments. You'll find answers to these questions:
238
Why should I cost justify ergonomic improvements?
What is the function of cost justification?
How do I cost justify ergonomic improvements?
2008 Humantech
Chapter 8: Cost Justifying Ergonomic Improvements
Introduction to Cost Justification

Cost justification is a normal business process in any company with mature
financial systems. It is a means for managers and executives to weigh the costs
and benefits of various improvement initiatives to optimize the companys
resource investment. By boiling everything down into a single metric (dollars), it
ensures that all requests for funds are fairly considered with an apples-to-apples
comparison.
Within a site, managers must consider the relative merit of ergonomic
improvements against other potential improvements. In todays ultra-competitive
business environment, managers are much more likely to support ergonomic
improvements if they can fit them into the accepted cost justification process.
This allows them to do what they think is right without having to defend system
decisions to others who only look at the numbers.
Cost justifying ergonomic improvements can have a major impact on site
manager and staff enthusiasm. Managers are challenged every day to do more
with less, yet are measured on how quickly they can improve productivity and
quality. Ergonomics is an undiscovered tool managers can use to positively
affect their performance measures.
Financial Benefits of Health and Safety Improvements

Ergonomics has been proven to have positive effects on health and safety
performance and the related costs. Improved health and safety has both direct
and indirect financial benefits. Direct costs are those that can be tracked to a
WMSD incident, including:
Direct medical costs
Workers compensation payments
Indirect costs are those that increase when WMSDs occur but arent considered
a direct cost. Some suggest that indirect costs can be as much as four to seven
times direct costs, but this is difficult to substantiate. Indirect costs may include:
Occupational health staff time costs for treating WMSDs, completing

paperwork, and assisting with return to work
Costs associated with recruiting and training replacement workers
Supervisor time cost to complete incident investigations and paperwork
Unfortunately, while the direct and indirect health and safety costs can be
substantial, they do not fit well into typical cost justification systems. Improved
health and safety can dramatically impact the bottom line, but companies often
do not track these costs to the plant, department, and workstation level.
239
The easiest way to use health and safety costs to justify ergonomic
improvements is to gather historic data for the operation that will be affected.
This may require working with various departments and outside vendors such as
third party administrators, but it can be done in many cases.
Keep in mind that there are no simple, scientifically reliable means to predict and
quantify health and safety cost reductions from reduced ergonomic risk. As
illustrated by the case studies on your Applied Industrial Ergonomics Toolbox
CD, experience has shown that reduced risk leads to lower workers
compensation costs, but the equation simply doesnt exist to use these financial
benefits in a proactive manner to cost justify improvements at the workstation
level.
Financial Benefits of Performance Improvements

Ergonomics has been proven to impact production performance and the related
costs. Improved production leads to cost savings in many areas including:
Quality
Delivery
Productivity
Using quality and delivery improvements to cost justify ergonomic improvements

can be useful in some situations, such as when managements attention is
focused on quality or delivery challenges. However, these cost measures usually
suffer from the same barriers as health and safety cost savingsthey are not
typically tracked to specific operations and there is no simple, scientifically
reliable means to predict and quantify savings.
Productivity improvements have proven to be the most straightforward means of
cost justifying ergonomic improvements. Productivity is measured at the
workstation level, so it fits easily into typical cost justification processes. Also, it
is simple to predict and quantify the productivity impact of ergonomic
improvements.
Ergonomics can affect productivity in two main ways: elimination of non-valueadded tasks and reduction in motion waste. Methods for identifying and
quantifying time savings as a result of elimination or reduction of non-valueadded motions are discussed in the next two sections.
240
2008 Humantech
Ergonomics and Value-Added Analysis

Value-added work includes those tasks and operations that make the product
more valuable to the customer. For example, joining two components with a
fastener is considered a value-added step since the customer would be willing to
pay more for the assembled product than for a bag of unassembled components.
Non-value-added work includes those tasks and operations that do not affect
the dollar amount a customer is willing to pay for your product. An example of
non-value-added work is conveying parts to the assembly line. Even though the
activities involved in bringing the parts to the assembly line may be necessary in
the production process, they are considered non-value-added because the
conveyance does not directly affect the value to the customer.
It is estimated that as much as 95% of manufacturing time falls into the nonvalue-added category (Suzaki, 1987). The intention of value-added analysis is to
identify those non-value-added activities that can be reduced or eliminated. It is
not expected that any production process can achieve 100% value-added, but
even incremental reductions in non-value-added tasks can reduce costs
significantly.
Many ergonomic risks occur during non-value-added activities. Performing a
value-added analysis on a job is one way to identify opportunities for ergonomic
improvement.
241
Ergonomics and Motion Time Analysis The STEP

Motion study has long been used by industrial engineers to improve operations
and determine appropriate workloads. This analysis method requires operations
to be divided into tasks, task elements, and basic motions. Then, the basic
motions can be used to generate a predicted time for the operation. Techniques
for motion study such as Methods Time Measurement (MTM) are complex,
require trained users to ensure accuracy, and often require special software
packages to ensure data integrity as operations are modified over time.
Many tasks that can be improved for motion time also contribute to ergonomic
risks. For example, tasks that require extended reaching can be improved from a
motion time standpoint by moving the objects closer. This will also reduce
ergonomic risk; back bending, raised shoulders, and extended elbows are all
associated with extended reaching. Motion time analysis can be used to
calculate time savings resulting from ergonomic improvements.
Humantech has developed the STEP Analysis (Standard Time Efficiency
Process) as a simple alternative to industrial engineering methods. STEP, a
motion economy tool, should not be used to set time standards. Rather, it is
used to estimate the motion time savings from ergonomic improvements, given
the improvements reduce a reach or eliminate walking steps. The method can
be used to project the productivity impact of these improvements.
The strength of the STEP is its relative ease of usewithin minutes, an
ergonomics team can estimate motion time savings for a given improvement and
the productivity impact can be calculated.
When to Use the STEP Analysis

The STEP is best used when individual ergonomic improvements have been
specified in enough detail that changes to reaching and working distances can be
projected. It can be used to determine the relative effect of alternative
improvements, or to estimate time savings from job improvements.
Limitations of the STEP Analysis

The STEP evaluates only reaching and walking motions. It is not a replacement
for Methods-Time Measurement (MTM) or time study to predict, establish, or
modify cycle and Takt (theoretical target time to produce one product ordered by
the customer) times.
242
2008 Humantech
How the STEP Works

Motion time savings resulting from ergonomic improvements can be estimated in
terms of:
Reductions in reaching
Elimination of walking
Figure 8.2 STEP Zones
Each STEP zone corresponds to a time penalty. Reaching to the farthest zone
will take more time than reaching to the next closest zone. The time penalties
were calculated using the MTM technique and vary by 0.2 seconds for each zone
based on round-trip movements.
Table 8.1 STEP Zones
STEP Zone
Penalty (seconds)
Neutral
0"6"
6"12"
12"18"
18"24"
24"30"
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
243
STEP analysis assigns time savings for each step eliminated for walking tasks.
The first step, used to begin walking, corresponds to 0.8 seconds. Subsequent
steps correspond to 0.5 seconds.
Figure 8.3 STEP Penalties for Walking
Estimating Ergonomic Improvement Benefits, Cost Recovery

Cost justification is based on a simple concept: the benefit of an improvement
should outweigh the cost. This is referred to as the "benefit to cost ratio".
Cost justification of capital improvements can be very complex, as the cost of
money over time and the timing of savings realized from the benefits must be
factored in. Typically, financial analysts can assist with these complex equations;
they just need to know the costs and the benefits in dollar terms.
Costs are fairly simple to quantify, but calculating dollar benefits can be difficult.
There may be reductions to historic costs associated with health and safety,
quality, or delivery. These can be estimated if the current costs are understood
and there is an acceptance that the ergonomic improvements will reduce these
costs.
244
2008 Humantech
Projecting Productivity Impact

The easiest and most effective way to estimate benefits of ergonomic
improvements is to focus on productivity impact. Time savings from eliminating
non-value-added tasks and reducing motion times can be used to project effects
on productivity. A conservative productivity impact is calculated by multiplying
the projected productivity impact by 65%. This accounts for the following:
Relative lack of precision of the STEP Analysis (compared to MTM and

other motion analysis techniques)
Inefficiency of translating time savings into productivity gains
Projected
Productivity Impact
(total time savings)

(total operation time)
x 100
Conservative
Productivity Impact
(total time savings x 0.65)

(total operation time)
x 100
Figure 8.4 Productivity Impact Equation
Calculating the Payback Period

To cost justify ergonomic improvements, you can calculate the payback period.
Payback period refers to the amount of time that savings must accumulate to
pay back the initial investment cost. Payback period is typically expressed in
years or months.
To calculate a payback period, an annual savings calculation is needed as well
as the cost of the investment. Calculate annual savings by multiplying the
productivity impact by the fully burdened direct labor cost of the operation.
Benefits burdens typically range from 25% to 33% of the hourly wage; a
conservative measure is recommended.
Annual Savings
(productivity impact) x (annual direct cost)
Payback Period
(Years)
(cost of improvement)
(annual savings)
Figure 8.5 Payback Period Calculation
245
The Cost Justification Worksheet

Your Applied Industrial Ergonomics Toolbox CD contains the Cost
Justification Worksheet, which combines the elements of non-value-added
analysis and STEP Analysis to help you calculate a Payback Period.
The worksheet is divided into two sections:
Use the Job Improvements section to project time savings.
Use the Cost-Benefit Analysis section to calculate a payback period.
The worksheet also enables you to calculate several interim measures such as
time savings per unit and time savings per day.
Note: Yellow areas in the worksheet indicate data input fields.
246
2008 Humantech
Using the Job Improvement Section

The Job Improvement section of the Cost Justification Worksheet looks like this:
Figure 8.6 Cost Justification Worksheet Job Improvement Section
247
To complete the Job Improvement section, you'll follow these four steps:
Step 1 Complete job description.
2 Complete job task information.
3 List job improvements.
4 Enter STEP zone information for each job improvement.
Step 1: Complete Job Description

Fill in the job description information at the top left of the worksheet.
Figure 8.7 Job Description
248
2008 Humantech
Step 2: Complete Job Task Information

Fill in the job task information at the top right of the worksheet.
Figure 8.8 Job Task Information
Step 3: List Job Improvements

List job improvements on the left side of the worksheet. List all improvements
that will reduce motion times (reaching and walking), and any tasks that will be
eliminated.
Figure 8.9 Job Improvements
249
Step 4: Enter STEP Zone Information for Each Job Improvement

For each job improvement, indicate the following:
Current and proposed STEP zones, Reach From and Reach To

(reaching)
Current and proposed Position Step and Full Steps (walking)
Current and proposed Task Time in seconds (for eliminated job tasks)
Number of Times Per Cycle the reach, walk, or eliminated task occurs
Figure 8.10 STEP Zone Information
250
2008 Humantech
Interpreting Motion Time Savings Data

The projected and conservative motion time savings are calculated based on the
job improvement information you enter. The conservative motion time savings
corresponds to 65% of the projected motion time savings. This reflects the lack
of precision in the STEP Analysis, and the inefficiency of directly converting
motion time savings into productivity impacts.
Figure 8.11 Motion Time Savings Projections
251
Using the Cost-Benefit Analysis Section

The second half of the Cost Justification Worksheet calculates the payback
period of the job improvements based on the projected motion time savings, the
cost of the improvements.
Note that one additional data points is required, Cost of Improvement(s), which
includes the cost of purchased items, cost of any contracted services and inhouse services to complete the installation, and costs associated with operator
training and production downtime.
Figure 8.12 Cost Justification Worksheet Cost-Benefit Analysis Section
252
2008 Humantech
Interpreting Cost-Benefit Data

The Cost-Benefit Analysis section provides you with six interim measures and
two payback calculations.
Total Time Savings Per Unit Amount of time saved per unit (seconds)
per job.
Total Time Savings Per Day Amount of time saved per day per job
(minutes). Note that this may include multiple shifts, if applicable.
Additional Time Available Total time savings (hours) when taking all
jobs and all shifts into account.
Additional Volume Potential Number of additional units that could be

produced each year if all time saved is put toward additional production.
Potential % of Cycle Time Saved Time savings divided by the cycle

time (percentage).
Annual Motion Savings Dollar value of motion savings, based on the

fully burdened labor rate.
Payback Period (months) Number of months it will take for the motion
savings to pay for the improvements.
Payback Period (years) Number of years it will take for the motion
savings to pay for the improvements.
Avoiding Potential Pitfalls When Cost Justifying With STEP

The following table lists potential pitfalls you may encounter when cost justifying
ergonomic improvements using the STEP Analysis and a recommended
approach for each.
Table 8.2 Potential STEP Cost Justification Pitfalls
Potential Pitfall
After reducing the amount of

reaching and walking, the cycle time
hasn't changed.
Production standards reflect a variety of

factors, including contractual obligations,
and normal procedures should be used
to change cycle times when motion and
task time savings are realized.
Production demand is already being

met, no need to increase production.
Use the extra time resulting from your

efforts to improve the process or product
(additional quality checks, cleaning, etc.).
Making more product may not help

because there is a bottle-neck
elsewhere on the line.
References
Suzaki, Kiyoshi, The New Manufacturing Challenge, The Free Press, New York,
NY, 1987.
253
Notes
254
2008 Humantech
hapter 9 The Job Improvement Process

Introduction to the Job Improvement Process.......................................257
Identify Feasible and Effective Improvements.......................................257
Implement Improvements ......................................................................266
255
About This Chapter


Recognition
Chapter 2
Work-Related
Musculoskeletal
Disorders
Chapter 3
Recognizing
Ergonomic Issues
Evaluation
Chapter 4
Risk Factors
Chapter 5
Prioritizing
Ergonomic Risks
Chapter 6
Manual Material
Handling Analysis
Control
Chapter 7
Ergonomic
Design Guidelines
Chapter 8
Cost Justifying
Ergonomic
Improvements
Chapter 9
The Job
Improvement
Process
Putting It
All Together
Chapter 10
Performing an
Ergonomics
Review
Chapter 11
Surviving the
First 90 Days
This chapter presents a variety of tools and techniques you can use in your
organization to ensure that effective ergonomic improvements are identified and
implemented. It follows a step-by-step process that uses the tools presented
throughout this manual. You'll find answers to these questions:
256
Why should I use a process for improving problem jobs?
What is the function of the job improvement process?
How do I apply the job improvement process?
2008 Humantech
Chapter 9: The Job Improvement Process
Introduction to the Job Improvement Process

The goal of ergonomics is to maximize productivity and reliability while
eliminating work-related musculoskeletal disorders. Assessing jobs and risk
factors and identifying improvements are important elements in this process, but
these do not complete the journey; implementing effective improvements remains
an important step.
The job improvement process consists of two primary activities:
Identify effective and feasible improvements
Implement the selected improvements
Ergonomic improvements are effective when they reduce the likelihood of

WMSDs while improving productivity and reliability. This is best accomplished by
reducing exposure to ergonomic risk factors. Consequently, ergonomic
assessments are sometimes necessary to clearly identify the presence of risk
factors; this becomes the problem statement to answer the question "Does the
solution resolve the problem?"
Ergonomic improvements are feasible when they present an acceptable cost to
the business. Improvements are often very inexpensive, in which case feasibility
is a given. In other cases, improvements require funding and must be cost
justified. A key step in cost justifying ergonomic improvements is productivity
impact analysis. This answers the question "How do I pay for it?"
Once you have identified effective and feasible improvements, carefully consider
the implementation process; starting with an action plan, the individual changes
must be put into place and their use ensured. Then confirm the effectiveness of
the improvements to ensure that the solution really does resolve the problem
(and does not create any new problems). This implementation process answers
the question "What are the steps to make it happen?"
Identify Feasible and Effective Improvements

Figure 9.2 (on the next page) illustrates the steps involved in identifying feasible
and effective improvements. A more detailed discussion of each step follows.
257
Job Improvement
Process

Brainstorm Controls
- Engineering
- Administrative
- Work Practices

Prioritize Controls
Financial Approval
Implement
Ergonomic Job
Improvements
Key:
BEST Assessment - Prioritizes job/tasks based on exposure to WMSD risk factors
STEP Analysis - Projects impact of job improvements on productivity
NIOSH Lifting Equation - Determines limits for lifting and lowering tasks
MMH Guidelines - Determine limits for push, pull, carry tasks
Design and Build Guidelines - Provides criteria for dimensions and force
Cost Justification Worksheet - Calculates payback period for improvements
258
2008 Humantech

The first step in the job improvement process is to clearly identify the root causes
of the identified ergonomic issues. The goal is to establish an agreed-upon list of
problems that contribute to the ergonomics challenges, usually identified using
the BRIEF Survey.
Several of the ergonomic analysis tools used in this course can be useful to
relate workplace factors to ergonomic issues. These tools enable an objective
assessment of contributing task factors.
Table 9.1 Ergonomic Analysis Tool Uses
Analysis Tool
Use to identify task factors that contribute to

(Chapter 6)
Exceeding lifting limits, such as the horizontal

distance or vertical travel distance.
Push/Pull/Carry Analysis
(Chapter 6)
Exceeding material handling limits, such as carry

distances or handle height for pushing.
Design and Build

Guidelines (Chapter 7)
Exceeding dimension or strength limits, such as

the horizontal reach distance or the type of grip
used.
Two other ways to identify root causes and agree on the most important task
factors are defined below. These techniques are subjective in nature; there is no
right or wrong answer.
Employee involvement Nobody knows the jobs like the operators.

Employees in jobs with ergonomic issues should be asked to participate
in identifying possible contributing factors. Supervisors, maintenance
staff, and area engineers often can also add valuable insight.
Pareto analysis This technique applies the "80/20" rule to determine

the 20% of contributing factors that affect 80% of the ergonomic issues
experienced by operators. The goal is to examine all potential
contributing factors and agree upon the most import ones, those that, if
improved, will substantially reduce the ergonomic issue.
259
Brainstorm Controls
One useful technique for developing job improvements that address specific
ergonomic challenges is brainstorming. Brainstorming involves bringing several
people together to generate ideas. Careful process management and the
absence of evaluation during the idea generation stage maximize creativity.
Here are some general guidelines for brainstorming:
260
Strive to generate as many high-quality recommendations as possible in

an efficient manner. Set a time limit, generally no more than 45 minutes
per operation.
The brainstorm team should include representatives from operators,

supervisors, maintenance, engineers, and health and safety. Five to six
people is an ideal number of participants.
A brainstorm leader is needed to provide information, keep people

focused, and maintain the flow of ideas.
Begin the brainstorm session by viewing videotape of the job and

assessment findings. Take into consideration the tasks performed, risk
factors, critical dimensions, operator discomfort, and any other relevant
information.
The leader should facilitate the group and write down all ideas on a
white-board or flip chart so they are visible to everyone.
As the ideas begin to develop more slowly, the leader should prompt the
group by focusing on specific issues. Slow motion video can help bring
the focus in on a particular concern.
The golden rule in brainstorming is "No Idea is a Bad Idea". Respect

everyones input and build on those ideas that are less than ideal to
generate more effective improvements.
2008 Humantech
Hierarchy of Controls
Control of ergonomic risk factors should follow this hierarchy:
1. Engineering controls the preferred method for reducing or eliminating
ergonomic risk factors. Engineering controls are changes to the
equipment, tools, controls, piece presentation, workstations, and work flow
that eliminate or significantly reduce risk factors.
2. Administrative controls changes to task responsibilities that reduce
exposure to ergonomic risk factors. Examples include job rotation, job
task enlargement, work pace, alternative tasks, and rest breaks. These
controls are dependent upon good planning and consistent
implementation by leaders. They do not eliminate ergonomic risk factors
but may reduce risk exposures to an acceptable level.
3. Work practices changes to procedures and work methods that reduce
exposure to ergonomic risk factors. Examples include appropriate use of
material handling aids, proper positioning of adjustable work tables, and
improved sequencing of tasks to minimize manual handling. These
controls are dependent upon individual work behaviors and require
continual and ongoing supervision, monitoring, and correction by leaders.
They do not eliminate ergonomic risk factors but may reduce some
contributing factors.
Pros and Cons Associated with Control Types

The table below provides some advantages and disadvantages of each of the
three control types. The overall goals should be the protection of workers from
harm.
Table 9.2 Pros and Cons of Control Types
Control Approach
Pros
Cons
Engineering
controls
Eliminate or reduce the

hazard, reduce long-term
cost
Can require a high initial

expense and can be slow
to achieve
Administrative
controls
Can be immediately
implemented, reduce
employee risk exposure
Do not eliminate the risk,

effectiveness depends on
correct implementation,
can be disruptive to
management practices
Work practices
modifications
Involve more personnel in

reducing ergonomic risk
exposure
Do not eliminate the risk,

can require ongoing
training expenses,
effectiveness depends on
employee acceptance
261
An example list of refined brainstorm ideas for a packing operation is shown in

Figure 9.3. This list summarizes the best ideas, eliminating those determined to
be infeasible.
Refined Brainstorm Ideas

1. Powered flipper to eliminate manual flipping
2. Pad table edge to eliminate soft tissue compression
3. Pop up ball table to reduce force required to transfer packed boxes
4. Self-inking stamp to eliminate reach to ink pad
5. Height adjustable table to enable comfortable working heights
6. Diverter arm on table to minimize reach distance
7. Foot rail to increase operator comfort
Figure 9.3 Example List of Refined Brainstorm Ideas

Once a list of engineering, administrative, and work practices controls has been
developed, determine the impact of each for both ergonomic risk reduction and
motion time savings. You can use the tools listed below to evaluate the impact of
controls.
Table 9.3 Ergonomic Analysis Tool Uses
262
Analysis Tool
Use to evaluate impact of

controls on
BEST Assessment (Chapter 5)
Reducing WMSD exposures
STEP Methodology (Chapter 8)
Estimating motion and cycle time
NIOSH Lifting Equation (Chapter 6)
Lifting and lowering tasks
Push/Pull/Carry Analysis (Chapter 6)
Material handling tasks
Design and Build Guidelines (Chapter 7)
Meeting human performance

design criteria
2008 Humantech
Prioritize Controls
Compare the impact of each control to the cost (time and money) for
implementation planning. The Recommendation Priority Matrix (Figure 9.4) is
based on four regions described in the table below. Improvements are typically
implemented in the order of the regionseasy and high impact (Region 1), easy
and low impact (Region 2), difficult and high impact (Region 3), and finally, if new
designs are being implemented, difficult and low impact (Region 4).
Table 9.4 Recommendation Priority Matrix Regions
Region
Description
Region 1 controls eliminate or significantly reduce exposure to major

ergonomic hazards within a relatively short time, and can be
implemented at a relatively low cost. Implement these controls
immediately.
Region 2 controls eliminate or reduce exposure to moderate and

minor ergonomic hazards within a relatively short time, and can be
implemented at a relatively low cost. They are designated as
continuous improvements due to the lower ergonomic impact.
Region 3 controls eliminate or significantly reduce exposure to major

ergonomic hazards within a longer time period, or at a higher
implementation cost. Implementation should proceed based on site
capital improvement plans.
Region 4 controls eliminate or reduce exposure to moderate and

minor ergonomic hazards within a longer time period, or at a higher
implementation cost. They are typically implemented when
considering new designs.
Figure 9.4 Recommendation Priority Matrix
263
An example recommendation priority matrix (using the refined list of brainstorm

ideas presented in Figure 9.3) is shown below.
Refined Brainstorm Ideas

1. Powered flipper to eliminate manual flipping
2. Pad table edge to eliminate soft tissue compression
3. Pop up ball table to reduce force required to transfer packed boxes
4. Self-inking stamp to eliminate reach to ink pad
5. Height adjustable table to enable comfortable working heights
6. Diverter arm on table to minimize reach distance
7. Foot rail to increase operator comfort
3
5
1
6
2
7
Figure 9.5 Example Recommendation Priority Matrix
264
2008 Humantech
Financial Approval
Region 1 improvements (easy and high impact) can typically be approved without
detailed financial analysis. Region 3 improvements (difficult and high impact)
often require a capital appropriations request to secure funding. While different
in every company, financial approval requires:
A reasonable estimate of the total cost of the improvement, including

purchased items, installation services, lost production for downtime, and
operator training.
A reasonable estimate of the annual savings anticipated from the

improvement. This typically includes workers compensation costs, labor
costs, and costs related to poor quality.
Humantechs Cost Justification Worksheet is provided on the Applied

Industrial Ergonomics Toolbox CD to assist with this step. This tool focuses
on productivity impact, projected savings from quality, workers compensation,
absenteeism, etc. You can sometimes estimate these figures based on company
experience. Refer to Chapter 8, Cost Justifying Ergonomic Improvements, for
information about how to calculate payback periods resulting from motion time
savings.
265
Implement Improvements
This section includes a step-by-step procedure for implementing improvements.
The procedure begins with a clear understanding of the problem and an agreedupon set of improvements.
Figure 9.6 The Implementation Process
266
2008 Humantech
Develop an Action Plan

An action plan combines an implementation schedule with task responsibilities.
It can be used to plan and communicate job improvement activities.
A responsibility matrix with milestone goals is a useful way to chart an action
plan. Following is an example of a responsibility matrix using the Region 1
improvements from the previous example.
Table 9.5 Responsibility Matrix
Action Item
Benefits
Person to
Complete
Target
Completion Date
Powered flipper
Eliminate manual flipping
J. Fox
Feb. 28
Pad table edge
Eliminate soft tissue

compression
W. Smith
Feb. 4
Diverter arm on
table
Minimize reach distance
J. Fox
Mar. 15
267
Implement Controls
Implementation can range from simple adjustments, to existing work cells, to
procurement of customized tools and equipment. Use the Ergonomics Action
Form (Chapter 3) for simple solutions.
For improvements beyond simple solutions, you may need to work with an
outside vendor. Following is a list of activities that may be necessary to design,
build, and install vendor-supplied custom solutions.
268
Set initial performance specifications Document the performance

expectations in terms of production rate, quality expectations, and
ergonomic risk. This activity should include input from both the health
and safety and manufacturing groups.
Draft bid documents Include illustrations of the intended approach

with human performance specifications such as reach dimensions and
force applications.
Identify vendors and distribute bid documents Use existing vendors

that you have found to be effective, and solicit interest from specialty
vendors if appropriate.
Evaluate vendor concepts Evaluate against the bid documents as

well as the initial performance expectations.
Develop final concept and performance specifications Based on

vendor bids, draft final concept and performance expectations. This
activity should include input from both the health and safety and
manufacturing groups.
Select vendor Identify the best solution using normal vendor

evaluation protocols.
Work with vendor on final design Ask the selected vendor to tour the
area where the solution will be installed. This activity should include
input from both EHS and manufacturing groups.
Prototype performance test and improvement Perform an

ergonomic design review during prototype performance testing. Be sure
to capture operator feedback for enhancements. Work with the vendor
to specify design improvements.
Equipment documentation Obtain the necessary documentation from

the vendor to support the operation phase:
Spare parts
Maintenance schedule
Operational instructions
Install hard goods Coordinate with the vendor to install the hardware
and perform final run-off tests.
2008 Humantech
Ensure Use
Ergonomic solutions are most effective when supported by mechanisms to
ensure they are used as intended. These mechanisms typically include:
1. Operator training in the process changes and how to use the added
equipment to ensure that all personnel have the information they need to
meet production and quality goals with the modified tool, equipment, and
workstation components.
2. Supervisory support during the learning curve period to ensure that all
personnel are successful in meeting production and quality goals with the
modified tool, equipment, and workstation components.
3. Updated process documentation such as work instructions and Job
Safety Analyses.
Confirm Effectiveness
The final step in the implementation process is confirming effectiveness of
engineering, administrative, and work practices controls. A formal evaluation
against the final performance specifications (production rate, quality
expectations, and ergonomic risk) is recommended, along with feedback from
operators. Tools used to confirm risk reduction include those listed in table 9.3
(page 262).
If improvements do not resolve the ergonomic issues, revisit the job as a whole
using the steps in the Identify Feasible and Effective Improvements phase (page
257). If the improvements are confirmed to be successful, revisit the list of
prioritized challenges and initiate the job improvement process once again.
Apply continuous improvement procedures to improved workstations to assist in
working out any production issues that may arise from changed processes. In
addition, take advantage of successful improvements and leverage your efforts
by applying the FORM (Fix Once, Repeat Many) philosophy (page 78) to similar
challenges.
269
Notes
270
2008 Humantech
10
hapter 10 Performing an Ergonomics Review

What is an Ergonomics Review?...........................................................273
Step 1: Select a Job to Review ............................................................274
Step 2: Gather Data..............................................................................275
Step 3: Analyze the Data......................................................................298
Step 4: Complete the Job Improvement Process.................................299
271
About This Chapter

Chapter 10 is part of Putting it All Together.

Recognition
Chapter 2
Work-Related
Musculoskeletal
Disorders
Chapter 3
Recognizing
Ergonomic Issues
Evaluation
Chapter 4
Risk Factors
Chapter 5
Prioritizing
Ergonomic Risks
Chapter 6
Manual Material
Handling Analysis
Control
Chapter 7
Ergonomic
Design Guidelines
Chapter 8
Cost Justifying
Ergonomic
Improvements
Chapter 9
The Job
Improvement
Process
Putting It
All Together
Chapter 10
Performing an
Ergonomics
Review
Chapter 11
Surviving the
First 90 Days
This chapter describes the steps involved in completing an ergonomics review of

a job. It also describes where the various tools discussed in this manual come
into play during the review process. We'll address these questions:
272
Why should I perform an ergonomics review?
What is the function of an ergonomics review?
How do I apply the steps involved in an ergonomics review?
2008 Humantech
Chapter 10: Performing an Ergonomics Review
What is an Ergonomics Review?

An ergonomics review is an assessment of job/tasks that leads you through the
Recognition, Evaluation, Control process to achieve effective and efficient
ergonomic improvements.
Performing an ergonomics review includes these four steps:
Step 1 Select a job to review
2 Gather data
3 Analyze the data
4 Complete the job improvement process
Following these steps will ensure that ergonomic improvements are implemented
according to the principles of ergonomics (described in Chapter 1). The
ergonomics review applies accepted management tools in a consistent process
to achieve repeatable results.
Risk management a clear problem statement ensures that solutions

reduce risks.
Continuous improvement a participative problem solving process

captures the best insight from everyone involved, from shop floor
operators to maintenance and engineering staff.
Engineering design human performance specifications ensure that all

operators (not just those present at the time) will benefit from the
ergonomic improvements.
Cost justification savings are projected in advance of investments,

providing a means for fulfilling cost justification requirements.
273
Step 1: Select a Job to Review

In the ergonomic sense of the word, we will describe a "job" as a certain set of
tasks that must be completed regularly in a set amount of time.
There are several ways to determine if a job is a good candidate for an
ergonomic review:
Examine medical data from the past. If numerous injuries or illnesses

have resulted from performing the job, the job may benefit from a review.
Interview operators and get their opinions as to which job is the most
difficult in the plant and why.
Visually assess jobs in the plant, looking for awkward postures (like
those found on the BRIEF), high forces, frequencies, and/or durations of
these awkward postures or high forces.
Ideally (as is the case in the EASY), we would use all of this information to help
determine which job or jobs are the ones most in need of an ergonomics review.
274
2008 Humantech
Step 2: Gather Data

Whether you are going to perform a BRIEF, an EASY, or a BEST assessment, it
will be necessary to gather several pieces of information about the job. You will
need to:
Obtain job information
Perform task analysis
Videotape the job
Take still pictures
Interview the operator
Gather medical data
Take workplace measurements
Obtain Job Information

In order to document the job under review, obtain the following pieces of
information from the supervisor of the department in which the job is located.
Job name
Department
Shift length
Production standards (i.e., number of parts produced per shift)
Production mix (the types of parts made at the workstation)
Rotation schedule (Do the operators at this workstation participate in a

rotation schedule?)
Total exposure time at this workstation per shift (not including breaks,
lunch, time at other jobs)
275
Perform Task Analysis

Task analysis is simply dividing one individuals job into its main tasks. For
example, a person feeding a molding machine may complete the following tasks
for one job cycle:
1. Pull material on table
2. Cut material with knife
3. Transfer cut material to molding machine
4. Activate molding machine
5. Return to work bench
We can examine each task for the requirements that may pose ergonomic risks.
This points us further to identifying the source of the risk factors identified in the
BRIEF Survey. For example, in the job described above, one of the risk factors
cited was wrist flexion > 45. It may be obvious that cutting the material with the
knife is a source of this risk factor, but the task analysis reveals that activating
the molding machine is also a source of this risk factor. Therefore, to eliminate
this risk factor from the job, both of these sources must be addressed.
Videotape the Job

A good videotape is often the most important piece of job documentation you can
obtain during an ergonomics review. The videotape of a job gives you
information about the postures the operator assumes, the methods used, and the
cycle length. Videotape can also show you any difficulties that the operator has
in performing the job. Played back in slow motion, videotape provides, by far, the
best means to analyze hand manipulations and postures.
Videotapes are also a valuable source of audio information recorded during the
analysis, for example, questions about job and injury history, job changes,
operator comments, etc. It is essential to get a high-quality videotape record of
any job being analyzed.
There are three major considerations when videotaping a job:
276
Viewing angle
Field of view (wide-angle or close-up)
How much footage to shoot
2008 Humantech
Viewing Angle
Viewing angle is simply where you position the camcorder relative to the operator
when you shoot the tape. Some viewing angle choices are to the operators side,
in front of the operator, behind the operator, and above the operator when
possible. Unfortunately, the viewing angles used are often dictated by the
workstation layout. In general, the more views you can get of a job, the easier
and more thorough the analysis.
Side View
When videotaping a job, use at least two different viewing angles. Choose one
of the angles so that the operator is seen from the side (as shown below). A side
view of the operator is useful for measuring forward bending of the back and
neck, and forward reaching with the arms.
Figure 10.2 Side View
277
Front or Rear View

A front or rear view of the operator is useful for assessing lateral bending of the
neck, elevation of the arms to the side (elbows out), and neck twisting. In
addition, the front view is often the most useful view for analyzing hand
manipulations and postures.
Figure 10.3 Front View
278
2008 Humantech
Overhead View
Sometimes a catwalk or upper floor will allow you to capture an overhead view so
that the operator is seen from the top. Overhead views can help you determine
work reach requirements, process flow, and workstation layout.
Figure 10.4 Overhead View
279
Field of View
In addition to the angle of view, you must also choose the field of view. This is
simply the choice between taking a wide-angle shot or a close-up shot. In all
cases you should use both types of view, but the nature of the job will often
determine which type you will emphasize. Both options have their pros and
cons.
Wide-Angle View
Wide-angle views show most or all of the operators body. They are required to
assess trunk, arm, and neck postures. If a job consists of whole-body exertions,
such as lifting and carrying, the wide-angle view is the view of choice.
A wide-angle view also allows you to capture the overall workstation layout, part
bins, and tool storage areas. Even when a job involves mostly light hand work
while seated at a bench, use at least one wide-angle view to record the posture
of the operators body in relation to the workbench and the seat.
Figure 10.5 Wide-Angle View
280
2008 Humantech
Close-Up View
A close-up view zooms in and concentrates on one small part of the operator or
workstation. The close-up view is ideal for analyzing hand exertions and
postures or a specific feature of the workstation. If a job involves fine hand
manipulations, get a close-up view of the operators hands for at least one
complete job cycle.
A potential drawback to the close-up view is that body parts other than those
singled out are not visible. For example, a close-up of an operators hands might
reveal that a pinch grip was being used, but the analyst would not be able to see
that the operators elbows were raised to shoulder height at the same time.
Figure 10.6 Close-Up View
281
How Much Footage to Shoot

Consider these guiding principles when determining the appropriate amount of
footage to shoot:
Obtain enough footage to see all aspects of the job you want to
analyze. Be sure to include tasks that may not be performed on every
single cycle, such as getting new boxes of stock and disposing of empty
boxes. In some cases, it may be necessary to ask the operator to stage
one or more of their infrequent activities, such as changing stock, if you
think it may present a hazard. Some of the most stressful aspects of
jobs occur during the irregularly-performed tasks.
Represent all of the different working conditions encountered on

the job. For example, consider a job in which an operator unloads
boxes stacked several layers high on a pallet. Ideally, you would like to
have a continuous tape of the operator unloading an entire pallet since
the operators back and arm postures will be much different depending
on how high the boxes are stacked. Unfortunately, these types of jobs
often have such long cycle times that it is impractical to videotape an
entire cycle uninterrupted. As a compromise, shoot some footage when
the pallet is nearly full, some when the pallet is about half full, and some
when the pallet is nearly empty. This system will show you the range of
postures and lifting conditions.
Try to tape at least three complete cycles of a job from two different
viewing angles. For short-cycle jobs, such as taking a part off a line
and putting it into a box, this is easy. For long-cycle jobs, such as the
pallet unloading job described above, try changing the angle of view
several times while taping the same cycle of the job.
It is better to take too much tape than too little. If you have too much
tape, you can edit some out; if you dont have enough, its back out to the
plant floor for more.
Additional Videotaping Tips

A few more ideas for effective videotaping are:
282
Talk through the operation to the camera. Describe the operation as you
are taping it. Mention any concerns you have, or any solution ideas that
come to you. Interview the operator on tape; ask them about problems
with the job and any potential solutions.
Either use the time and date feature on the camcorder to annotate the
tape, or hold up cards with the job name and other relevant information
written on them. This comes in handy when you want to use the tape for
future reference to compare a "before and after" job change.
Auto-focus cameras often change focus when stray people or vehicles

enter the field of view. If you must shoot across an aisle or in a hightraffic area, you may want to turn off the auto-focus once you have
focused in on your subject.
2008 Humantech
Videotaping Tip Summary

Keep these general tips in mind when videotaping:
Use at least two viewing angles, preferably the side view and front (or
back) view.
Use both wide-angle and close-up views.
Videotape at least three job cycles for each view, if possible.
Always videotape more of the job than you think you need.
Videotaping Do's and Don'ts

Do
Always ask the operator before
taping
Use high quality video tape
Get at least three job cycles on tape
Have extra disks and batteries for
camera
Videotape in sequence of job
production
Record date and time on tape or film
Thank the operator for participating
Don't
Start shooting video without asking
the operator
Use only one shot/view of
workstation
Force operators to participate in
review
Move camera unnecessarily
Interfere with normal job operation
Stand in high-traffic aisles while
taping
Forget to charge the batteries
Videotaping Tools
The tools you'll need for videotaping are:
8mm, VHS, or VHS-c video camera
Battery charger
Charged batteries
Blank videotapes
Some examples of video camera models with all of the necessary functions and
features are:
Sony Handycam Model CCD TRV 308
Sharp Hi-8 Viewcam Model VL-AH151U
Canon Hi-8 Camcorder Model ES8400V
Video cameras are widely available at retail stores. You may also find the
following three Web sites helpful in locating a video camera:
www.bestbuy.com
www.walmart.com
www.target.com
283
Take Still Photos

Good photos are very important in the analysis documentation process. They
will allow you to illustrate your results and observations in meetings and
presentations. Digital photos prove to be the most useful because they can be
modified and easily included in reports and presentations. Photos provide closeups of body postures and part manipulations. It is, therefore, important to obtain
as many photos as possible.
The major considerations when taking photos of a job are:
Lighting and viewing angles/field of view
Photo quality
Number of photos to shoot
Lighting and Viewing Angles/Field of View

Good photos are typically the result of good equipment. A high quality digital
camera with auto-focus is a must for consistently high quality photos.
First, make sure there is sufficient light on the subject matter. Most digital
cameras have a built-in flash. Place the camera in "auto-flash" mode so that you
always have the proper lighting. A flash is usually necessary when shooting
slides because the ambient lighting at most industrial operations is insufficient for
taking photos.
Once assured of your light source, you can concentrate on the viewing angles
and fields of view needed. The viewing angles and fields for photos are identical
to those used for videotape footage (i.e., side, front, rear, and overhead angles).
The auto-focus feature allows you to quickly center on an object and capture a
series of postures or movements in rapid succession.
Photo Quality
Most digital cameras give you a choice as to the quality of the photo. Standard
and Fine are two common settings. In most cases, the Standard setting will
allow you to get the most photos on the disk (or memory stick) while still
maintaining adequate quality. Some cameras also allow you to choose image
size, ranging from 640 x 480 pixels (standard) to 1216 x 912 pixels; 640 x 480
will usually suffice. However, if you will be editing the photo, you may want to
choose a higher quality/higher image size.
Number of Photos to Shoot

As many as 100 photos and as few as 15 may be taken during an ergonomic
analysis; however, about 30 photos per analysis is usually sufficient. Two or
three shots from each angle and field of view are a minimum. Also, be sure to
take photos of parts bins, tools, personal protective equipment, and displays. As
a general rule of thumb, obtain as many photos as possible because you can
always use extra photos when presenting your solutions or when training other
personnel.
284
2008 Humantech
Still Photo Do's and Don'ts

Do
Have extra disks and batteries for
camera
Zoom in on various body areas
(hands, back, neck)
Take photos of the workstation (front
and side views)
Take photos of tools and all
equipment
Don't
Use only one shot/view of
workstation
Force operators to participate in
review
Take only a few pictures
Take only close-up pictures
Forget to charge the batteries
Still Photo Tools

The tools you'll need for taking still photos are:
Digital camera (with blank disks or memory stick)
Battery charger
Charged batteries
Some examples of digital cameras with all of the necessary functions and
features are:
Sony Mavica Model MVC-FD75
Fuji FinePix Model A200
Canon PowerShot Model A40
Digital cameras are widely available at retail stores. You may also find the
following three Web sites helpful in locating a digital camera:
www.bestbuy.com
www.walmart.com
www.target.com
285
Interview the Operator

Communicating with operators can dramatically increase the effectiveness of the
ergonomics review. Let them know what you are going to do and try to relieve
any apprehension associated with recording their job. Always try to be as nondisruptive as possible. Operators are excellent sources of information about
jobs. They can typically provide information about the following:
The most difficult part of the job
Improvements that have been made in the past
New improvement ideas
Length of time (months/years) at the job
Discomfort or pain associated with the job
Tasks that are normally repeated throughout the process
Tasks that occur only occasionally
Interviewing Do's and Don'ts

Do
Introduce yourself and explain what
you hope to do
Ask the operator to walk you through
the job tasks
Ask the operator for improvements
Step through each body part when
asking about pain or discomfort
Ask open-ended questions
286
Don't
Interfere with normal job operation
Discuss personnel/staffing issues
Ask leading questions about pain or
discomfort
Ask general questions
Interview the operator in a group
setting
2008 Humantech
Interviewing Tools
Humantech has developed an Employee Survey to help in the interviewing
process (see Figure 10.7). This form is the same form used to complete the
EASY methodology of risk prioritization. However, two additional pages are
available on which you can record more than one operators pain or discomfort
data and the operators' typical tasks (see Figures 10.8 and 10.9).
Figure 10.7 Employee Survey
287
Figure 10.8 Employee Survey, Second Page
288
2008 Humantech
Figure 10.9 Routine Job Elements Form
289
Gather Medical Data

Although medical information may be disclosed during the operator interview, a
good place to get more detailed and accurate information is the OSHA 300 Log.
Just as in the EASY methodology, focus on recordable WMSDs that have
occurred in the last 24 months.
Medical Data Do's and Don'ts

Do
290
Enlist the help of plant medical

personnel
Focus only on WMSDs as opposed to
acute injuries like trips and falls
Determine which body areas were
affected and indicate left and/or right
sides of the body
Don't
Focus on the person to which the

injury/illness happened
Discuss medical data with anyone
not directly involved in the
ergonomics review process
2008 Humantech
Medical Data Tools

Humantech has developed a Medical Data form to help in gathering medical
information. This form is the same form used to complete the EASY
methodology of risk prioritization.
Figure 10.10 Medical Data Form
291
Take Workplace Measurements

Another important aspect of data collection is taking accurate measurements of
the workplace. The measurements fall into two categories:
Dimensions
Weights and forces
Dimensions
Measurements of workplace dimensions are needed for many aspects of
ergonomic analysis, including judging the suitability of the workplace for
operators of different sizes, assessing the placement of critical objects relative to
preferred work reach zones, and accurately describing lifting tasks for analysis
using the NIOSH lifting calculation.
Because workplace dimensions are central to most ergonomic analyses, one of
the first steps in performing an ergonomic analysis is to prepare a detailed plan
and elevated sketch of the workplace, showing the important dimensions.
Following are some of the dimensions that should be measured:
Bench height
Control locations
Reach distances
Part stacking/palletizing
Carry distances
Seat height
Cart locations
Sight distances
Lift locations and distances
Product dimensions
This list is by no means exhaustive. Measure any dimension that you think might
be useful to know!
The most useful tool for taking these measurements is a 20-foot retractable metal
measuring tape. It is often a good idea to take these measurements while the
operator is on break, so that you can take as many as you like without
interrupting the operator. However, some measurements, like reach distances
and most of the NIOSH Lifting Equation variables, must be taken when the
operator is present at the workstation.
292
2008 Humantech
Weights and Forces

Weight and force measurements are essential for performing lifting analyses
using the NIOSH Lifting Equation, and for applying the push/pull guidelines and
the BRIEF.
Some weights and forces that should be measured are:
Part weights
Tool weights
Grip forces
Push/pull forces (sliding or dragging objects such as carts, etc.)
Control manipulation forces (levers, palm buttons, triggers, etc.)
These weights and forces can be taken with strain gauges, force measuring
equipment, and scales.
To measure the grip forces that the operator must exert during the job, you can
do either of the following:
Have the operator squeeze or pinch the grip dynamometer as hard as he

or she normally would have to in order to complete the task. Get the
force requirements from several operators and use the average. Note
that the operator might squeeze or pinch a little harder than necessary.
Try the job yourself and then squeeze or pinch the grip dynamometer as
hard as you had to in order to complete the task. Try it several times and
use the average.
Remember that it is not critical to get an exact measurement. For the BRIEF,
you only need to know if the pinch grip exceeds two pounds (0.9 kg) or if the
power grip exceeds ten pounds (4.5 kg). You may want to obtain a more
accurate measurement if you are planning on taking force measurements both
before and after the ergonomic "fix" is put into place.
Workplace Measurement Do's and Don'ts

Do
Record the dimensions and weight of
any item with which the operator
interfaces
Note if the operator is outside the 5th
to 95th percentile range
Record the forces required to perform
each task involved in the job
Don't
Estimate when measurement is
possible
Ask to measure the operator
Forget to measure and weigh
equipment, tools, or parts that are
not used frequently
293
Workplace Measurement Tools

The tools you'll need to take workplace measurements are:
20-foot tape measure
Scale
Push/pull gauge (see below)
Grip meter (pinch and power grips, Figures 10.14 through 10.16)
Sketch pad (or "Current Workstation Drawing" forms, Figures 10.17

through 10.19)
Some examples of push/pull gauges with all of the necessary functions and
features are shown below:
Figure 10.11
AliMed Pocket Push-Pull Force
Gauge (www.alimed.com)
Figure 10.12
Chatillon Force Gauge DFM
Series (www.itinscale.com)
Figure 10.13
HMC Int'l. Div. Inc. Push-Pull
Gauge Model DPG-PP*
(www.hmc-international.com)
*This force gauge only measures forces up to 35 pounds (15.9 kg).
294
2008 Humantech
Some examples of Jamar grip dynamometers are shown below. All three are
available at www.rehaboutlet.com.
Figure 10.14
Jamar Hand
Dynomometer
Figure 10.15
Jamar Pinch Gauge
Figure 10.16
Jamar Hand Evaluation Kit
The figures on the following pages show examples of data collection forms that
will aid in drawing workstations.
295
Figure 10.17 Current Workstation Drawings Plan View
296
2008 Humantech
Figure 10.18 Current Workstation Drawings Elevation View
297
Figure 10.19 Current Workstation Drawings Tool/Part Detail
Step 3: Analyze the Data

Once you have gathered all the necessary information, you can analyze the data
to determine the ergonomic acceptability associated with the job. The following
tools are available for this purpose:
298
BRIEF Survey (Chapter 4) to identify ergonomic acceptability on a taskby-task basis
EASY (Chapter 5) to determine priorities in work environments in which

operators perform the same job/task for at least 20 hours per week
BEST assessment (Chapter 5) to determine priorities in work

environments in which operators perform the same job/task for less than
20 hours per week
2008 Humantech
Step 4: Complete the Job Improvement Process

Now it's time to complete the rest of the job improvement process.
Identify
Job/Tasks
Ergonomics
Hit ListTM
Job/tasks with
potential risks
Clear risks with

simple, effective
solutions?
Yes
Implement
Ergonomic Job
Improvements
No
BRIEFTM
Survey
Job/tasks with
risks identified
Simple, effective
solutions?
Yes
Implement
Ergonomic Job
Improvements
No
EASYTM Prioritization
or
BESTTM Assessment
Highest risk
job/tasks
Job Improvement
Process
Job Improvement
Process

Brainstorm Controls
- Engineering
- Administrative
- Work Practices

Prioritize Controls
Financial Approval
Implement
Ergonomic Job
Improvements
299
Remember that Chapter 9, The Job Improvement Process, presented a variety of

tools and techniques to ensure that effective improvements are identified and
implemented. It follows a step-by-step process that uses the tools presented
throughout this course. The steps are divided into two primary activities:
Identify feasible and effective improvements
Implement the selected improvements
The following two sections are a review of these activities.
Identify Feasible and Effective Improvements

Ergonomic improvements are feasible when they present an acceptable cost to
the business. Ergonomic improvements are effective when they reduce the
likelihood of WMSDs while improving productivity and reliability.
The first step is to clearly identify the root causes of the identified ergonomic
issues. The goal is to establish an agreed-upon list of problems that contribute
to the ergonomics challenges, usually identified with the BRIEF Survey. Other
tools that can be used in this step include:
The next step is to brainstorm controls. Implement engineering controls first,

administrative controls next, and finally, work practice controls. The goal of
brainstorming is to generate as many ideas as possible. See chapter 9 for a list
of brainstorming guidelines.
Once the ideas are written down, evaluate the impact of each idea. Tools you
can use for this purpose are:
300
2008 Humantech
The impact of each control should be compared to the cost (time and money) for
implementation planning (prioritize controls). The Recommendation Priority
Matrix has four regions:
High impact/easy to implement ideas (Region 1)
Low impact/easy to implement ideas (Region 2)
High impact/difficult to implement ideas (Region 3)
Low impact/difficult to implement ideas (Region 4)
Implement the ideas in Region 1 first, moving then to the ideas in Region 2 while,
at the same time, beginning work on the ideas in Region 3. Consider Region 4
ideas only if a new line or new facility is being planned.
Most likely, you will need to obtain financial approval for Region 3 ideas. A
reasonable estimate of the total cost of the improvement should include
purchased items, installation services, lost production for downtime, and operator
training. Managers may also require a reasonable estimate of the annual
savings anticipated from the improvement. This typically includes workers
compensation costs, labor costs, and costs related to poor quality.
301
Implement Improvements
At this stage, the ideas are actually put into place.
Figure 10.21 From Job Improvement to Implementation
The first step in this phase is to develop an action plan. An action plan
combines an implementation schedule with task responsibilities. It can be used
to plan and communicate job improvement activities. A responsibility matrix with
milestone goals is a useful way to chart an action plan.
The next step is implementation. Implementation can range from simple
adjustments to existing work cells to procurement of customized tools and
equipment. Use the Ergonomics Action Form (Chapter 3) for simple solutions.
302
2008 Humantech
For improvements beyond simple solutions, you may need to work with an
outside vendor. The following activities may be necessary to design, build, and
install vendor-supplied custom solutions. For more detailed information about
these steps, see Chapter 9, The Job Improvement Process.
Set initial performance specifications
Draft bid documents
Identify vendors and distribute bid documents
Evaluate vendor concepts
Develop final concept and performance specifications
Select vendor
Work with vendor on final design
Prototype performance test and improvement
Equipment documentation
Install hard goods
Ergonomic solutions are most effective when supported by mechanisms to

ensure they are used as intended. These mechanisms typically include
operator training in the process changes and added equipment, close
supervision during the learning curve period, and updating process
documentation such as work instructions and Job Safety Analyses.
The final step in the implementation process is to confirm effectiveness of
engineering, administrative, and work practices controls. A formal
evaluation against the final performance specifications (production rate, quality
expectations, and ergonomic risk) is recommended, along with feedback from
operators. Tools available for this purpose include the following:
303
Notes
304
2008 Humantech
11
hapter 11 Surviving the First 90 Days

The First 90 Days ..................................................................................306
Structuring the Ergonomics Process (Plan) ..........................................308
Initiating Job Improvement, Demonstrating Success (Do) ....................313
Adding Strength and Longevity to the Ergonomics Process .................319
305
About This Chapter

Chapter 11 describes key activities for the first 90 days of implementing an
effective ergonomics process.

Recognition
Chapter 2
Work-Related
Musculoskeletal
Disorders
Chapter 3
Recognizing
Ergonomic Issues
Evaluation
Chapter 4
Risk Factors
Chapter 5
Prioritizing
Ergonomic Risks
Chapter 6
Manual Material
Handling Analysis
Control
Chapter 7
Ergonomic
Design Guidelines
Chapter 8
Cost Justifying
Ergonomic
Improvements
Chapter 9
The Job
Improvement
Process
Putting It
All Together
Chapter 10
Performing an
Ergonomics
Review
Chapter 11
Surviving the
First 90 Days
Upon completion of this chapter, you'll be able to answer these questions:
Why should I be concerned about the first 90 days?
What are key activities in the first 90 days?
How do I ensure an excellent start to an ergonomics process?
The First 90 Days

After implementing an ergonomics process, the first 90 days should move you
toward your goal of an effective, efficient, and sustainable ergonomics process
that follows the Plan-Do-Check-Act continuous improvement cycle.
During the first three months of an ergonomics initiative, you'll make critical
decisions (Plan), and initiate the job improvement process and demonstrate
success (Do). It is important not to expect a world-class ergonomics process at
the end of 90 days, but you can expect to be moving toward that goal.
This chapter is geared toward a facility that does not already have an ergonomics
process in place. If you already have an ergonomics process in place, use this
chapter to help you develop your process further. Also refer to the next section,
Determining Process Maturity Level.
306
2008 Humantech
Chapter 11: Surviving the First 90 Days
Determining Process Maturity Level

If you already have an ergonomics process in your facility, it is useful to know how mature that
process is. Use the table below to determine the level of maturity and where you would like the
process to be. The levels are defined as follows:
Level 5 = World-Class
Level 4 = Excellent
Level 3 = Systematic
Level 2 = Fundamental
Level 1 = Basic
Table 11.1 Process Maturity Level Characteristics

Level Typical Characteristics
5
Non-manufacturing areas (offices, laboratories, product design for manufacturing) are fully
integrated into the ergonomics process
Management leads by example
Ergonomics is viewed as a competitive advantage
Ergonomics is integrated into processes of support organizations
An Ergonomics Management System is in place with these elements:
activities are part of performance criteria for key individuals (engineers, operations managers)
all people in key roles are trained
an information system supports solution sharing
an annual ergonomic improvement plan is established and followed
Ergonomics activities are predominately proactive

A change management system is functioning and effective
Top management sets expectations for a high level of performance
Policies and line management drive the ergonomic improvement activities to:
follow a risk management approach
apply a phase design review process for new equipment and processes
apply a job improvement process with impact vs. difficulty evaluation
Formal ergonomics methods are applied to support an effective improvement process:

application of ergonomic design criteria
productivity impacts can be projected
risk reduction can be projected
Some ergonomic improvements are shared within facilities

Employees are trained and there is an employee involvement process
Line organization is responsible for ergonomics activities
Ergonomics organization/team, engineers, supervisors/managers are trained with skills to:

analyze methods that enable problem job prioritization
apply anthropometry data to fit jobs and the workplace to people
follow step-by-step job improvement process to ensure solutions are directed at problems
Ergonomic improvement efforts are primarily reactive (incidents drive improvement activities)
WMSD incident information is systematically collected and shared
An organization for managing ergonomics (committee) exists with basic awareness training
A return-to-work process is in place
WMSD statistics are gathered but data may not be shared
New employee training exists and addresses ergonomics
Regulatory requirements are being met
Management is aware of WMSD issues
307
Structuring the Ergonomics Process (Plan)

The key elements of the Plan phase are:
Identify applicable regulations and define current status
Identify trends and site needs
Establish goals and measures
Establish improvement plans
Provide adequate resources to support the process
This section describes important considerations in how you structure your

ergonomics process, and details to consider in formulating your approach.
There are different ways to structure the ergonomics process. Regardless of
how the process is structured, an Ergonomics Process Owner is necessary. The
Ergonomics Process Owner has a different role and a different set of
responsibilities depending on whether a team is formed to help support the
Ergonomics Process Owner.
When the Ergonomics Process Owner is supported by a team, he or she is
responsible for coordinating and facilitating all elements of the ergonomics
process. Some responsibilities include the following:
308
Develop a plan to direct the implementation of the ergonomics process
Ensure all applicable components of the process are implemented and

sustained
Track metrics and progress regularly
Report progress to site management at least quarterly
Periodically review and analyze workplace incident data to determine

trends
2008 Humantech
The ergonomics team is responsible for risk assessment and identification, and
the individuals on the team serve as resident subject matter experts. The teams
responsibilities include the following:
Evaluate workstations and tasks for ergonomic risk factors
Rank and select jobs or operations with the most risk factors
Develop and prioritize corrective actions for the presence, severity, or

exposure to the risk factors
Confirm reduction of identified risk factors
Provide information and assistance to area employees and managers to

address risk factors
Document improvements
Assist with the investigation of WMSD injuries by conducting risk

evaluations
Note: If the Ergonomics Process Owner is not supported by a formalized team,

he/she takes on the responsibilities of the Ergonomics Process Owner and the
ergonomics team, delegating to appropriate personnel.
Which path is right for you? There are several considerations to take into
account when making this decision. For example:
The size of your facility
The number of different products leaving the facility
Whether your plant is unionized (unions usually require a team, or at

least a union representative along with the Ergonomics Process Owner)
The amount of time the Ergonomics Process Owner can devote to

ergonomics
The amount of time others in the plant can to devote to ergonomics
309
Key Questions for the Plan Phase

Depending on which path your organization takes, there are several questions
(listed in Table 11.2 below) that the Ergonomics Process Owner must answer
during the Plan phase. Further discussion follows to help you find answers to
some of these questions.
Table 11.2 Key Planning Questions
Ergonomics Process Owner
Ergonomics Process Owner + Team
Who should be involved in the

process?
Does the facility have medical
personnel on site?
Does the facility have a dedicated
maintenance person or staff?
Is there a union?
Involve a cross section of the plant
Who should be on the team?

Does the facility have medical personnel
on site?
Does the facility have a dedicated
maintenance person or staff?
Is there a union?
Involve a cross section of the plant
What can I expect from each person?

How much time can each person
dedicate to the ergonomics process?
How can I keep people involved?
Does your company have an intranet?
Does the plant have bulletin boards
that people read?
Does the plant have a weekly or
monthly newsletter?
How involved should participants be?
How much time can you devote to
ergonomics?
How much time can others devote to
ergonomics?
How many people are on the team?

How large is the plant?
Are there entirely separate departments
making different products?
Are there many different types of
products made at your facility?
What should the team be doing?
How involved in the planning process do
you want them to be?
Do you want the team to focus only on
job improvements?
Do you want the team to also focus on
risk assessment and prioritization?
What should be done in a meeting and
how long should it last?
Are you planning to do ergonomics
activities between meetings?
Does the team have time between
meetings to complete assignments?
Is there an agenda for the meeting?
How often should the team meet?
Are you planning to do ergonomics
activities between meetings?
Does the team have time between
meetings to complete assignments?
Is there an agenda for the meeting?
310
2008 Humantech
Finding the Answers

This section may help you find answers to questions presented in Table 11.2.
Who should be on an ergonomics team?

The ergonomics team should include a representative from each of the following
departments:
Hourly employees. Hourly employees are valuable assets because

they are the experts at the jobs you are trying to improve. They know the
details of each task, the order in which the task must be performed and,
most importantly, what can be done to improve the job.
Maintenance. Maintenance personnel are also vital to the ergonomics

team because they often make physical changes to workstations, or
build new ones.
Engineers. Engineers can help the ergonomics team design the work
area and provide specifications for existing workstations. Engineers also
understand the inner workings of the machinery and tooling in a facility.
Environmental Health and Safety. EH&S personnel can provide

essential information on known safety issues. Ergonomics is often
based in Health and Safety. For this reason, it is especially important to
include a representative from this department on the team.
Quality. A strong ergonomics process and effective ergonomics team

can improve product quality, while a poorly functioning team may
adversely affect it. It is important to have a quality professional available
to ensure the continued excellent quality of your product.
Medical. If your plant has a nurse, he or she will be able to tell the team
which jobs have a track record of WMSDs. One of the tools you can use
to prioritize jobs is the EASY. The EASY uses the BRIEF data,
employee data, and medical data for a given job. The medical data is
available only from those in the medical department. If the plant is small,
Human Resources may also act as recordkeeper of ergonomic injuries
and illnesses.
Labor/union leadership. If your facility is unionized, a union/labor

representative on the team can ensure that no union regulations are
violated.
Department management. Managers can help with cost justification

and can shed light on how to sell improvements to other managers.
What should the ergonomics team be doing?

As mentioned earlier, the purpose of the ergonomics team is to support the
Ergonomics Process Owner. The team should focus mostly on the Plan and Do
phases of the Plan-Do-Check-Act continuous improvement cycle.
311
What should be done in a meeting and how long should it last?

Because this time together is valuable, be careful how you spend it; plan ahead
of time what you will be discussing and deciding in meetings so that they are the
most productive they can be.
How often should the ergonomics team meet?

At first, the ergonomics team should meet frequently until each person is
comfortable with how the process works and understands his or her role and
responsibilities. Once the ergonomics process is underway, the team may meet
less frequently.
Example
Company ABC is a small medical device manufacturing facility with 200
employees. The Ergonomics Process Owner is part of the Health and Safety
Department and has decided to form an ergonomics team to share some of the
responsibilities. Following are her answers to the questions above.
Who should be on the team?

"We have an on-site nurse and a maintenance department. We are not
unionized. I will also include two operators, an engineer, a quality manager, and
two managers from the areas that I feel will benefit the most from the ergonomics
process."
How many people should be on the team?

"My list above includes a cross section of the plant. Including myself, there are
nine people."
What should the team be doing?

"I want to include the team in the planning phase to ensure that all ideas are
heard and there is support among the team members. I would like the team to
perform assessments and prioritize the jobs in the facility."
What should be done in a meeting and how long should it last?

"Ive talked with the managers of all team members and they are prepared to
allow the team members to spend at least one day per month on ergonomics. I
will have the team members complete the videotaping and risk assessment
outside of the meeting so that we can use the meeting to brainstorm ideas and
give progress reports. I anticipate that most meetings will take about an hour. I
will ensure that there is an agenda for every meeting and that we stick to the
agenda."
How often should the team meet?

"During the first 90 days, I plan to hold meetings twice per month to make sure
that everyone is clear on their roles and responsibilities. After the 90-day period,
I plan to hold meetings once per month."
312
2008 Humantech
Mission Statements
Creating a mission statement for those involved in the ergonomics process keeps
everyone on track and should be completed early in the Plan phase. Take a few
moments at the beginning of the ergonomics process to draft a mission
statement. Following are a few tips for drafting a mission statement.
A good mission statement should accurately explain why the ergonomics

team exists and what it hopes to achieve in the future. It articulates the
team's essential nature, its values, and its work.
The mission statement should be a brief paragraph that is free of

jargon. Avoid the kind of shorthand that you may be in the habit of using
with others who work in your facility, but is unfamiliar to anyone outside
the team.
At a minimum, the mission statement should answer three key questions:
What are the opportunities or needs that we exist to address?

What are we doing to address these needs?
What principles or beliefs guide our work?
Initiating Job Improvement, Demonstrating Success (Do)

The key elements of the Do phase are:
Establish a support infrastructure
Provide training for skills and awareness
Ensure corrective action plans are implemented to reduce risk factors
Evaluate new products, technologies, and workstations
Manage WMSD health effects
This section describes important factors to consider to leverage the enthusiasm

that will be generated. It describes how to achieve initial success, and the
importance of broadcasting that success to ensure that it will happen again.
Start Small
Start with a small project that has some "low-hanging fruit" (low cost, high impact
solutions). Choose a workstation that is fairly high profile that you know can be
fixed quickly and inexpensively, and at which you can lower the ergonomic risk to
the operator.
Start small so that you (and your team) can have a success under your belt
before tackling more difficult and more complicated problems. It is not
recommended that you start the process by completing a BRIEF on every job in
your facility. Doing so will require a substantial amount of time and has been
known to cause "paralysis by analysis."
313
You can prioritize the jobs in your facility by determining which jobs are high risk
(a posture coupled with either a force, frequency, or duration), if there has been
an ergonomic related injury at the job, and if the job is known to cause pain to
employees. Once that basic information has been gathered, it is easy to
prioritize the jobs in the facility in broad terms. Once you (or the team) have a
good idea which jobs pose the highest risk, you can perform the EASY or BEST
assessment on those jobs, and continue with the job improvement process.
Leverage Enthusiasm to Amplify Ergonomic Success

Excitement and enthusiasm are critical components for any ergonomic
improvement initiative. Without them, an initiative becomes just another
"program of the month," failing to drive measurable improvements and lacking
the resources to be successful.
Ergonomics is perfectly positioned in many companies to disappointbut can be
turned around to exceed expectations with the alignment of three critical groups:
Shop floor operators
Engineering and maintenance personnel
Business leadership
Although enthusiasm for ergonomics often extends well beyond these groups,
the active participation and support of these particular functions will amplify the
success your ergonomics initiative is already achieving.
Build Shop Floor Enthusiasm

Ergonomics is relatively simplefind workplace challenges and fix them. Yet
many ergonomics initiatives end up complicated by tricky assessment forms and
costly software programs. The majority of the workforce is left out of
improvement activities because individuals lack specialized knowledge or
computer access to participate in the ergonomics process.
Observation-based ergonomics assessments like the "Find It and Fix It"
approach (Chapter 3) allow all levels of employees to participate in ergonomics
and contribute to immediate, evident improvements. The pride and satisfaction
that comes from contributing to improvement breeds enthusiasm and spreads
involvement, leading to a greater impact without requiring individual heroic effort.
Observation-based assessments combine simple observation methods with costeffective solution strategies. They focus on the most important ergonomic
issuesawkward postures, forceful exertions, and high rates of repetitionand
create a common language, enabling the entire organization to work together to
solve problems. Most importantly, the assessments ensure that improvements
target the most critical ergonomic issues to optimize the impact of every dollar
spent.
314
2008 Humantech
Tap into Excitement for Enhanced Performance

Engineering and maintenance personnel are often the missing link in a struggling
ergonomics program. Identifying the greatest ergonomic hazards and formulating
high impact improvement plans have no affect if the plans are never
implemented. Engaging representatives from these critical functions is an
important strategy for success.
Engineers and maintenance staff must balance their work demands for health
and safety projects, manufacturing excellence initiatives, and routine "daily
improvements." They are focused on performance metricstypically productivity
and quality measuresthat the company deems important. Consequently, it can
be challenging to generate excitement among these individuals for health and
safety projects. Capturing the impact of ergonomics on productivity and quality
has proven to be an effective means for generating the missing excitement.
An effective ergonomics initiative includes techniques for quantifying productivity
and quality gains in addition to driving health and safety improvements. These
techniques are fully integrated into ergonomics training courses and become part
of every improvement project. Simple tools, such as the Standard Time Efficiency
Process (STEP) methodology (Chapter 8), turn projecting the impact of
improvement on performance from a chore into a celebration.
Amplify Ergonomic Success

Another important strategy for success is aligning business leadership with the
ergonomics initiative. Shop floor enthusiasm will drive improvements and
engineers and maintenance staff will invest in performance-enhancing projects,
but management systems integration is necessary for sustained success. After
all, management controls the budget and determines where resources will be
deployed.
Management systems integration requires developing an ergonomics process
that can be managed like any other initiative, which typically requires widened
accountability and clear role definitions. In addition, leveraging Human
Resources mechanisms, such as performance plans and promotion criteria,
ensures that ergonomics is seen as important to the business and treated as
such.
Achieving this integration with management systems requires looking at your
ergonomics initiative in a whole new light. Become familiar with management's
goals and priorities, and determine where ergonomics fits in. Companies with a
successful ergonomics process have positioned ergonomics as a contributor to a
wide variety of critical business goals including these:
Workers compensation costs
Injury and illness rates
Productivity improvements
Lean Manufacturing metrics
"Employer of choice" initiatives
First-time yield (quality)
315
Broadcast Victories
Once the small project you started with is complete, its time to broadcast your
victories to the rest of the plant and to other related facilities. There are several
ways to do this, including the following:
Highlight the project in your company newsletter.
Post before and after photos with a small explanation on bulletin boards
around the plant.
Present to management the risks identified and what you did to control
them using before and after pictures.
Post a red flag at the workstation while it is being improved, and change
the flag to green when improvements are complete. Rely on word of
mouth or post pictures so that others in the plant know the success you
and your team achieved.
Post the project (with photos) on the company Web site, explaining what
the ergonomic risks were and how you reduced/eliminated them.
One or any combination of these ideas will broadcast your success. Be sure not
to overlook broadcasting, as future funding for other ergonomics projects may
depend on how well you perform this step.
Example
Below is an example of a case study that can be placed in a company newsletter
or on your Web site. A shorter version may be placed on a bulletin board in the
plant.
Ergonomic Improvements Reduce Cycle Time and Increase Productivity
A plant assembles laptops on a continuous-flow line. At one particular
workstation, the operator installs one laptop display screen every 35 seconds,
eight hours per day. The job consists of five distinct tasks.
An ergonomic risk analysis identified that the left hand, right hand, right elbow,
neck, and back are at significant ergonomic risk. Two workstation improvements
were recommended to reduce ergonomic risk:
316
Provide two auto-fed screwdrivers.
Move the parts storage within easy reach.
2008 Humantech
The workstation design template is shown below along with the projected time
savings in Table 11.3.
SCREWDRIVER
CLUTCH COVER
STORAGE
14"
11"
DISPLAY
STORAGE
Figure 11.2 Existing Workstation Layout
AUTO-FED
SCREWDRIVER
16" MAX
DISPLAY STORAGE
OVER LINE
12"
CLUTCH COVER
STORAGE
Figure 11.3 Improved Workstation Layout
317
Table 11.3 Projected Time Savings from Ergonomic Improvements

Current Task Time
Task Time with

Improvements
Install center hinge cover
4.6
4.6
Drive two screws to center hinge cover
9.4
2.3
Install display
8.6
8.3
Drive two screws to display clutches
9.4
2.3
Close display and activate line
0.8
0.8
Operator recovery (rest)
2.2
2.7
35 seconds
21 seconds
Task
Total time for the display install job
The job improvements will decrease the cycle time by 40% and significantly
reduce the ergonomic risk for the right wrist, right elbow, and back.
Assuming the cost of operators to this company is $10 per hour ($8 per hour
wage plus a 25% benefits burden), these simple improvements can save the
company $160 per week in labor costs. Thats $8,000 per year in productivity
gains, providing a return on investment of 167% in the first year on a $3,000
investment.
318
2008 Humantech
Adding Strength and Longevity to the Ergonomics Process

Once the initial project is complete, documented, and broadcasted, do not let the
process stall. Use the same excitement that was generated at the end of that
project to start the next one. It is vital that the process does not lose momentum.
You now need to add strength and longevity to ensure that ergonomics is a
continuous process, not a program.
How to Sustain Your Process

To add strength to your ergonomics process, review what worked well in the
project and what did not. With that knowledge, you can repeat the project
successes and change the aspects of the project that could have gone better.
Following is a list of activities that may have been part of your process. Use the
list to judge how well each part worked for your organization.
1 = Strongly Disagree
2 = Somewhat Disagree
3 = Neutral
4 = Somewhat Agree
5 = Strongly Agree
Activity
Rating
1.
Risk factors for WMSDs were identified accurately.
2.
Signs and symptoms for WMSDs were recorded.
3.
Shop floor employees were interviewed for possible ideas to reduce

ergonomic risk factors.
4.
The BRIEF was filled out accurately and in a timely manner.
5.
Jobs were prioritized using the EASY or BEST, and high risk jobs were
controlled first.
6.
The NIOSH Lifting Equation was used to determine the level of risk in
the lifting task.
7.
A brainstorm session, including representatives from a cross section of

the plant, was held to identify controls that would help reduce or
eliminate ergonomic risk factors.
8.
Workstation design guidelines were used to determine proper heights,

reaches, and forces.
9.
Brainstorm ideas were prioritized according to impact and difficulty.
10. Cost justification models were used to cost justify improvement ideas.
11. An implementation plan was formed describing who is doing what and
when it will be done.
12. The job improvement process was followed and completed.
13. All successes were documented and repeated as often as possible.
14. Successes were broadcast to the plant and other related facilities.
15. All data was gathered in a timely fashion.
319
Potential Pitfalls That May Stall an Ergonomics Process

The following table lists potential pitfalls you may encounter as you move ahead
with your ergonomics process, and a recommended approach for each.
Table 11.4 Potential Ergonomics Process Pitfalls
320
Potential Pitfall
The structure of the

ergonomics process is not
formalized.
Use either the team approach or assign an

ergonomics process owner. Formalize the
process, describing the roles and responsibilities
for each person.
An ergonomics team or
process owner is not aware
of the process goal.
Create a mission statement that describes the

goals of the ergonomics process.
Ergonomics team members

take on more responsibility
that they have time for.
Ensure that participants understand their roles

and responsibilities and have the time to commit
to the process. If they dont, consider another
person.
Ergonomics process owners

take on more responsibility
that they have time for.
Ensure that the ergonomics process owner can

devote at least one day per week to the
ergonomics process.
There are too many people

on the ergonomics team.
Limit the team to 5-10. If more people are

needed on the team, try dividing the team into
groups that function separately but report to a
steering committee.
Meetings are not productive.
Set an agenda for the meeting and stick to it.

Ensure that all team members are participating in
a positive way.
Management is not willing to

support the ergonomics
process with money for
improvements.
Cost justify all improvements using the STEP

methodology or by showing how many dollars
were spent on injuries in the past.
The ergonomics process has

lost momentum.
Jump-start the process by getting the employees

involved. Use the Find It and Fix it approach to
quickly find and solve ergonomic challenges.
Highlight the results on bulletin boards
throughout the plant.
We (I) dont know where to

start.
Refer to the flowcharts presented in Chapter 1

("Using the Right Tool for the Job") and Chapter
9 ("The Job Improvement Process").
Meetings do not occur due

to time constraints.
Schedule meetings at the same date, time, and

place each month. Take into consideration
production schedules. For example, if you know
that the end of each month is very busy, hold
meetings either at the beginning of the month, or
toward the middle.
2008 Humantech
Notes
321
Notes
322
2008 Humantech
Appendices
Appendix A: Basis for the BRIEF ..........................................................324
Appendix B: Basis for the Design and Build Guidelines........................328
323
Appendix A: Basis for the BRIEF

Humantechs BRIEF Survey is based on published scientific references. The
sources for these references are listed for each risk factor and assumptions
made to simplify the survey. For full reference information, see References on
page 120.
Risk Factors for the Hands and Wrists
Category
Risk Factor
References
Posture
Flexed > 45
Barnhart, S. et al., 1991

Punnett, L. and Keyserling, W.M., 1987
Extended > 45
Barnhart, S. et al., 1991

Kuorinka, I. and Forcier, L., 1995
Ulnar Deviation
Muggleton, J.M. et al., 1999

Punnett, L. and Keyserling, W.M., 1987
Radial Deviation
Armstrong, T.J. et al., 1982

Pinch Grip > 2 lb

(0.9 kg)
Putz-Anderson, V., 1988

Roquelaure, Y. et al., 1997
Finger Press > 2 lb

(0.9 kg)
Armstrong, T.J. and Chaffin, D.B., 1979

Power Grip > 10 lb

(4.5 kg)
Armstrong, T.J. et al., 1987

Stetson, D.S. et al., 1993
Duration
> 10 seconds
Chaffin, D.B. and Andersson, G.B.J., 1988

Frequency
> 30/minute

National Research Council and the Institute
of Medicine, 2001
Force
Risk Factors for the Elbows
324
Category
Risk Factor
References
Posture
Rotated Forearm
Feldman, R.G. et al., 1983

Silverstein, B.A., 1985
Fully Extended

Silverstein, B.A., 1985
Force
> 10 lb (4.5 kg)
Nicholson, A.S. et al., 1997
Duration
> 10 seconds
Frequency
> 2/minute
2008 Humantech
Appendices
Risk Factors for the Shoulders

Category
Risk Factor
References
Posture
Arm Behind Body
Arm Raised > 45
Shoulders Shrugged
Force
> 10 lb (4.5 kg)
Nicholson, A.S. et al., 1997
Duration
> 10 seconds
Frequency
> 2/minute
Chiang, H-C, et al., 1993


Sommerich, C.M. et al., 1993
Risk Factors for the Neck

Category
Risk Factor
References
Posture
Flexed > 30
Bernard, B.P., 1997

Ohlsson, et al., 1995
Extended
Dartiques, J.F. et al., 1988

Hales, T.R. and Bernard, B.P., 1996
Sideways
Bernard, B.P., 1997
Twisted > 20
Bernard, B.P., 1997
Force
> 2 lb (0.9 kg)
Bernard, B.P., 1997

Chaffin, D.B., et al., 1999
Duration
> 10 seconds
Bernard, B.P., 1997

Viikari-Jantara, E.R.A., 1997
Frequency
> 2/minute
Bernard, B.P., 1997

325

Category
Risk Factor
References
Posture
Flexed > 20
Burdorf, A. and Sorock, G., 1997

Punnett, L. et al., 1991
Sideways

Genaidy, A.M. et al., 1993
Extended
Keyserling, W.M., 1986
Twisted
Burdorf, A. and Sorock, G., 1997

Unsupported

Grandjean, E. and Hunting, W., 1977
Force
> 25 lb (11.3 kg)
Macfarlane, G.J. et al., 1997

National Research Council and the
Institute of Medicine, 2001
Duration
> 10 seconds

Frequency
> 2/minute

Risk Factors for the Legs
326
Category
Risk Factor
References
Posture
Squat
Kneel
Buckle, P.W., et al., 1986

Unsupported
Force
Foot Pedal > 10 lb

(4.5 kg)
Van Cott, H.P., and Kinkade, R.G., 1972
Duration
> 30% of day
Buckle, P.W., et al., 1986
Frequency
> 2/minute
2008 Humantech
Appendices
Physical Stressors
Risk Factor
References
Vibration

National Research Council and the Institute of
Medicine, 2001
Low Temperatures

Soft Tissue Compression

Moore, J.S. and Garg, A., 1994
Impact Stress

Glove Issues

327
Appendix B: Basis for the Design and Build Guidelines

Humantechs Design and Build Guidelines are based on published scientific
references. The textbook sources for these references are listed for each set of
design criteria and assumptions made to simplify the checklists. For full
reference information, see References on page 233.
Work Reach Guidelines
328
Criteria
Dimension
References
A. Horizontal Reach
Precision Tasks
Max. 11" (279 mm)

4.5 kg) Tasks
Max. 16" (406 mm)

Max. 22" (559 mm)

4.5 kg) Tasks
Max. 62" (1.58 m)
E. Vertical Reach
Tasks
Max. 74" (1.88 m)
3D Static Strength Prediction

Program (3D SSPP), University
of Michigan
Diffrient, N., Tilley, A., Bardagjy,
J., 1974
Eastman Kodak Company, 2003
Konz, S. and Johnson, S., 2000
Kroemer, K., Kroemer, H.,
Kroemer-Elbert, K., 1994
Kroemer, K.H.E. and Grandjean,
E., 1997
Pheasant, S., and Haslegrave,
2006
Woodson, W., Tillman, B.,
Tillman, P., 1992
2008 Humantech
Appendices
Standing Workstation Guidelines

Criteria
Dimension
References
Optimal Zone
Adj. 38" 47"

(0.97 1.19 m)
Fixed: 42" (1.07 m)
Acceptable Zone
Adj. 30" 57"

(0.76 1.45 m)
Fixed: 42" (1.07 m)
Demanding Tasks
Adj. 40" 51"

(1.02 1.30 m)
Fixed: 45" (1.14 m)
B. Display Height
Adj: 58" 71"

(1.47 1.80 m)
Fixed: 66" (1.68 m)
C. Optimal Viewing
Distance
Adj: 18" 30"

(457 762 mm)
Fixed: 23" (584 mm)
D. Knee Space Depth
Min. 6" (152 mm)
E. Foot Rail Height
6" (152 mm)
Knee Space Width
Min. 30" (762 mm)

of Michigan
Corlett, E.N. and Clark, T.S.,
1995
Human Factors and Ergonomics
Society, 2002 (Industry
standard)
Kroemer, K.H.E. and
Grandjean, E., 1997
2006
Tillman, P., 1992
Seated Workstation Guidelines

Criteria
Dimension
References

Demanding Tasks
Adj. 27" 36"

(686 914 mm)
Fixed: 36" (914 mm)
B. Display Height
Adj. 35" 46"

(0.99 1.17 m)
Fixed: 46" (1.17 m)
C. Optimal Viewing
Distance
Adj: 18" 30"

(457 762 mm)
Fixed: 23" (584 mm)
D. Work Surface
Thickness
Max. 2" (51 mm)
E. Knee Space Depth
Min. 18" (457 mm)
Knee Well Width
30" (762 mm)

of Michigan
Corlett, E.N. and Clark, T.S.,
1995
Diffrient, N., Tilley, A., Bardagjy,
J., 1974
Helander, M., 1997
Human Factors and Ergonomics
Society, 2002
2006
Sanders, M. and McCormick, E.,
1993
Tillman, P., 1992
329
Material Handling Guidelines
Criteria
Dimension
References

Comfort Zone Bottom
Min. 24" (610 mm)
B. Hand Working Height

Comfort Zone Top
Max. 62" (1.58 m)
C. Hand Working Height

Bottom
Min. 38" (965 mm)
D. Hand Working Height

Top
Max. 49" (1.25 m)

of Michigan
Helander, M., 1997
2006
Sanders, M. and McCormick, E.,
1993
Finger Force, Grip Force, and Arm Strength References:
Bhattacharya, A. & McGlothlin, J., 1996

Department of Trade and Industry, Government Consumer Safety Research, 2000
Karwowski, W., Marras, W., 1999
Peebles, L. and Norris, B., 1998
Finger Force Guidelines
Force Exertions:
Finger Push
Recommended
Acceptable
Recommended
Acceptable
1 index finger
3.4 lb
(1.5 kg)
5 lb
(2.3 kg)
8.6 lb
(3.9 kg)
11.2 lb
(5.1 kg)
2 fingers on
same hand
5.0 lb
(2.3 kg)
7.5 lb
(3.4 kg)
12.5 lb
(5.7 kg)
16.3 lb
(7.4 kg)
2 fingers on
different hands
11.0 lb
(5.0 kg)
16.5 lb
(7.5 kg)
27.5 lb
(12.5 kg)
35.8 lb
(16.3 kg)
Force Exertions:
Finger Pull
Frequent ( 2/min)
Recommended
Acceptable
Recommended
Acceptable
1 finger
3.9 lb
(1.8 kg)
6.0 lb
(2.7 kg)
9.6 lb
(4.3 kg)
12.5 lb
(5.7 kg)
2 fingers on
same hand
8.4 lb
(3.8 kg)
12.5 lb
(5.7 kg)
20.9 lb
(9.5 kg)
27.1 lb
(12.3 kg)
Force Exertions:
Thumb Push
330
Frequent ( 2/min)
Frequent ( 2/min)
Recommended
Acceptable
Recommended
Acceptable
1 thumb
5.3 lb
(2.4 kg)
8.0 lb
(3.6 kg)
13.3 lb
(6.0 kg)
17.3 lb
(7.8 kg)
2 thumbs
10.0 lb
(4.5 kg)
15.0 lb
(6.8 kg)
25.0 lb
(11.3 kg)
32.5 lb
(14.7 kg)
2008 Humantech
Appendices
Grip Force Guidelines

Force Exertions:
Pinch Grip
Frequent ( 2/min)
Recommended
Acceptable
Recommended
Acceptable
Chuck pinch grip

(with wrist
deviation)
2.0 lb
(0.9 kg)
2.4 lb
(1.1 kg)
4.0 lb
(1.8 kg)
5.1 lb
(2.3 kg)
Chuck pinch grip

(no wrist
deviation)
3.2 lb
(1.4 kg)
4.7 lb
(2.1 kg)
7.9 lb
(3.6 kg)
10.3 lb
(4.7 kg)
Key pinch grip

(with wrist
deviation)
2.0 lb
(0.9 kg)
2.9 lb
(1.3 kg)
4.8 lb
(2.2 kg)
6.3 lb
(2.9 kg)
Key pinch grip (no

wrist deviation)
3.9 lb
(1.8 kg)
6.0 lb
(2.6 kg)
9.7 lb
(4.4 kg)
12.6 lb
(5.7 kg)
Force Exertions:
Power Grip
Frequent ( 2/min)
Recommended
Acceptable
Recommended
Acceptable
1 hand (with
wrist deviation)
6.4 lb
(2.9 kg)
9.5 lb
(4.3 kg)
15.9 lb
(7.2 kg)
20.7 lb
(9.4 kg)
1 hand (no wrist

deviation)
12.7 lb
(5.8 kg)
19.1 lb
(8.7 kg)
31.8 lb
(14.4 kg)
41.3 lb
(18.7 kg)
2 hands (with
wrist deviation)
9.0 lb
(4.1 kg)
13.5 lb
(6.1 kg)
22.6 lb
(10.2 kg)
29.3 lb
(13.2 kg)
2 hands (no
wrist deviation)
18.0 lb
(8.2 kg)
27.1 lb
(12.3 kg)
45.1 lb
(20.5 kg)
58.6 lb
(26.7 kg)
Force Exertions:
Push/Pull
Frequent ( 2/min)
Recommended
Acceptable
Recommended
Acceptable
With 1-handed
grip on plastic
surface
6.7 lb
(3.1 kg)
10.1 lb
(4.6 kg)
16.9 lb
(7.7 kg)
21.9 lb
(10.0 kg)
With 1-handed
grip on rubber
surface
8.0 lb
(3.6 kg)
12.0 lb
(5.4 kg)
20.0 lb
(9.1 kg)
25.9 lb
(11.8 kg)
331
Standing Arm Strength Guidelines

Frequent ( 2/min)
Force Exertions
Recommended
Acceptable
Recommended
Acceptable
A.
Push out at
shoulder height
1 hand
6.8 lb
(3.1 kg)
10.2 lb
(4.6 kg)
17.0 lb
(7.7 kg)
22.1 lb
(10.1 kg)
B.
Push out at
elbow height
1 hand
7.4 lb
(3.4 kg)
11.1 lb
(5.1 kg)
18.5 lb
(8.4 kg)
24.1 lb
(11.0 kg)
C.
Push out at
elbow height
2 hands
11.8 lb
(5.4 kg)
17.7 lb
(8.0 kg)
29.5 lb
(13.4 kg)
38.3 lb
(17.4 kg)
D.
Pull in at
shoulder height
1 hand
7.0 lb
(3.2 kg)
10.5 lb
(4.8 kg)
17.6 lb
(8.0 kg)
22.8 lb
(10.3 kg)
E.
Pull in at elbow
height 1 hand
7.5 lb
(3.4 kg)
11.2 lb
(5.1 kg)
18.7 lb
(8.5 kg)
24.3 lb
(11.1 kg)
F.
Pull in at elbow
height 2 hands
13.1 lb
(5.9 kg)
19.6 lb
(8.9 kg)
32.7 lb
(14.8 kg)
42.4 lb
(19.2 kg)
G.
Pull down from

overhead
2 hands
17.9 lb
(8.1 kg)
26.8 lb
(12.2 kg)
44.7 lb
(20.3 kg)
58.1 lb
(26.4 kg)
H.
Pull up from knee

height 1 hand
6.3 lb
(2.9 kg)
9.5 lb
(4.3 kg)
15.8 lb
(7.2 kg)
20.5 lb
(9.3 kg)
I.
Pull across body

(lateral) at waist
height 1 hand,
elbow fully
extended
2.5 lb
(1.1 kg)
3.8 lb
(1.7 kg)
6.3 lb
(2.9 kg)
8.2 lb
(3.7 kg)
Pull across body

(lateral) at waist
height 1 hand,
elbow at 90
3.3 lb
(1.5 kg)
5.0 lb
(2.3 kg)
8.4 lb
(3.8 kg)
10.9 lb
(4.9 kg)
K.
Lift up at
shoulder height
2 hands
4.7 lb
(2.1 kg)
7.0 lb
(3.2 kg)
11.7 lb
(5.3 kg)
15.3 lb
(6.9 kg)
L.
Lift up at elbow
height 2 hands
7.7 lb
(3.5 kg)
11.5 lb
(5.2 kg)
19.1 lb
(8.7 kg)
24.9 lb
(11.3 kg)
M.
Press down at
elbow height
1 hand
12.8 lb
(5.8 kg)
19.2 lb
(8.7 kg)
30.0 lb
(13.6 kg)
41.6 lb
(18.9 kg)
J.
332
2008 Humantech
Appendices
Tool Guidelines
Criteria
Dimension
Description
A. Handle Length
3.8" 6.0"
(95 152 mm)
B. Power Grip
Handle Diameter
1.2" 1.7"
(30 43 mm)
Tool Weight
Max. 4 lb (1.8 kg)
C. Precision Grip
Handle Diameter
0.3" 0.6"
(8 15 mm)
Tool Weight
Max. 1 lb (0.5 kg)
D. Handle Span Fully Closed
Min. 2" (51 mm)
E. Handle Span Fully Open
Max. 3.5" (89 mm)
Chaffin, D.B., Andersson,

G.B.J., and Martin, B., 1999
Eastman Kodak Company,
2003
Helander, M., 1997
Karwowksi, W.,and Marras,
W., 1999
Konz, S. and Johnson, S.,
2000
Kroemer, K.H.E. and
Grandjean, E., 1997
Salvendy, G., 2006
Tillman, P., 1992
333
Notes
334
2008 Humantech
Index
Index
Back
anatomy, 52
biomechanics, 53, 106
disorders, 53
injury facts, 10
risk factors, 108, 162
Baseline Risk Identification of Ergonomic
Factors (BRIEF), 95
and physical stressors, 111
applying, 97
completing, 114
limitations, 96
potential pitfalls, 120
scoring, 113
survey form, 95, 144
when to use, 96
BRIEF Exposure Scoring Technique
(BEST), 128
and physical stressors, 134
completing, 131
limitations, 130
scoring, 130
survey form, 128
when to use, 130
Continuous Improvement Process
and the Hit List, 77
Controls
hierarchy, 261
pros and cons, 261
Cost Justifying Ergonomic Improvements
payback period, 245
productivity impact, 245
worksheet, 246
force, 210
limitations of, 204
material handling, 209
seated workstations, 208
standing arm strength, 215
standing workstations, 207
tools, 217
when to use, 204
work reaches, 206
Disorders
back, 52
nerve, 49
neurovascular, 51
tendon, 45
Ergonomic Assessment Survey (EASY), 139
completing, 147
limitations, 141
scoring, 142
survey form, 139
when to use, 141
Ergonomics
and value-added analysis, 241
as a business agenda, 10
cost justifying improvements, 239
defined, 5
evaluating risk factors, 93
fire triangle, 37
four-step review process, 273
identifying issues, 59
in design, 201
prioritizing risks, 127
process overview, 4
regulatory compliance, 13
risk vs. hazard, 127
tools overview, 16
Ergonomics Action Form, 79
completing, 81
limitations, 80
when to use, 80
Ergonomics Process
adding strength and longevity, 319
overview, 4
structuring, 308
Forms
BEST assessment, 128
BRIEF, 95
EASY, 139
employee survey, 146
ergonomics action, 79
medical data, 145
335
Hit List, 59
"find it" items, 60
"fix it" items, 71
ask the operator, 76
bad vibes, 69
butts up, 65
comfort zone, 73
contact, 70
continuous improvement process, 77
don't give me static, 75
elbows out, 62
horizontal distance, 67
hungry head, 64
limitations, 59
shoulder too high/low, 63
sit vs. stand, 68
tool/target, 72
twist and shout, 66
wash rag, 61
when to use, 59
Work Doesn't Need to be a Pain!, 35
Would you do it this way?, 36
Job Improvement Process, 257
Lifting Index (LI), 172
Manual Material Handling
example, 192
introduction, 161
NIOSH composite lifting index, 178
NIOSH Lifting Equation, 162
push, pull, carry guidelines, 181
spreadsheet, 174
NIOSH Lifting Equation, 162
applying, 174
composite lifting index, 178
interpreting results, 173
lifting index (LI), 172
recommended weight limit (RWL), 164
uses for, 179
variables, 165
when to use, 163
Physical Stressors, 44
and the BEST, 134
and the BRIEF, 111
for push/pull tasks, 183

limitations, 191
measuring improvement with, 190
Recommended Weight Limit (RWL), 164
Risk Factors
back, 108
defined, 93
elbow, 102
hand and wrist, 100
legs, 110
neck, 104
shoulder, 103
Standard Time Efficiency Process (STEP)
cost justification worksheet, 246
how it works, 243
limitations, 242
when to use, 242
zones, 243
Workplace Design Dimensions
sitting buttock-calf length, 223
sitting elbow rest height, 224
sitting eye height, 225
sitting height, 219
sitting knee height, 221
sitting leg clearance, 220
sitting popliteal height, 222
sitting shoulder height, 226
standing elbow height, 230
standing eye height, 228
standing hand rest height, 231
standing height, 227
standing knee height, 232
standing shoulder height, 229
Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders
(WMSDs)
back, 52
defined, 38
in industry, 40
injury facts, 10
nerve, 49
neurovascular, 51
risk factors, 93
tendon, 45
Push/Pull/Carry Guidelines, 181

for carry tasks, 186
336
2008 Humantech

Applied Industrial Ergonomics 4.3 - tcm1038-133720

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Applied Industrial Ergonomics 4.3 - tcm1038-133720

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Disclaimer

No forms may be modified without the express written consent of Humantech,

sell or distribute copies of any portion of the Applied Industrial

create alterations or derivative works based on the Applied Industrial

C. utilize any copy of the Applied Industrial Ergonomics manual for

Visit Humantech online at www.humantech.com for more information.

Applied Industrial Ergonomics

Introduction to Occupational Ergonomics...................... 1

Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders..................... 33

Recognizing Ergonomic Issues..................................... 57

Applied Industrial Ergonomics

Evaluating Ergonomic Risk Factors.............................. 91

Prioritizing Ergonomic Risks ...................................... 125

Manual Material Handling Analysis ............................. 159

Ergonomic Design Guidelines..................................... 199

Cost Justifying Ergonomic Improvements ................. 237

The Job Improvement Process.................................... 255

Chapter 10 Performing an Ergonomics Review............................. 271

Chapter 11 Surviving the First 90 Days ......................................... 305

Applied Industrial Ergonomics

Appendices ....................................................................................... 323

hapter 1 Introduction to Occupational Ergonomics

Applied Industrial Ergonomics

If you have a question, ask it!

If you need clarification, get it!

If you have a concern, voice it!

About This Manual

Blank forms you can print and use

Software and spreadsheets

Time Savings and Cost Justification Microsoft Excel spreadsheet

Humantech overview with articles, past newsletters, case studies, and

Chapter 1: Introduction to Occupational Ergonomics

Describe why ergonomics is important to companies

Identify common work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs) and

Identify ergonomic risk factors using the Baseline Risk Identification of

Prioritize jobs based on ergonomic risk factors and other data

Analyze manual material handling tasks with advanced ergonomics

Psychophysical analysis guidelines for push, pull, and carry

Cost justify improvements using the Standard Time Efficiency Process

Perform an ergonomics job review using the appropriate methods

Applied Industrial Ergonomics

Ergonomics is a Process, Not a Program

Figure 1.1 Ergonomic Improvement Process

Chapter 1: Introduction to Occupational Ergonomics

What is Occupational Ergonomics?

Applied Industrial Ergonomics

Designing for the 30-Inch View

If we operate a machine within the limits of its design, we will achieve

If we consistently operate a machine outside of its limits (as a

Figure 1.2 A Tachometer Indicates Exceeded Limits

We can apply a similar logic to people. Because the ergonomics discipline

If task demands and the work environment are designed to

If task demands require a person to operate continuously outside of his

Using the model of implementation derived for machines, the contribution of

Chapter 1: Introduction to Occupational Ergonomics

Risk management a clear understanding of the problem ensures that

Continuous improvement simple and effective problem solving

Engineering design clear specifications ensure that workplace

Cost justification easy to use methods capture the savings from

The 30-Inch View builds on conventional ergonomics activities to achieve new

A practical approach to workplace assessment and improvement

Innovative techniques to demonstrate business value

Sustainable systems to ensure long-term success