29 100 60591 https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/61c15b5d2c1bf49ead38a23cd9618864.pdf b8173bd3672d5e3d48be46ab8b967e78 PDF Text Text State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource The Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891, consists of 484 items, all but a few of which are manuscript scores. Due to the fragile condition of some of the scores, not every score was digitized. As a result, there are only 472 digitized scores in this digital collection. Two of the additional documents received with the collection were also digitized and the digital collection includes digital copies of documents, portraits, and correspondence about the Praeger family generously provided by the great, great grandson of Ferdinand Praeger, Andrew Leach. This is the largest collection of Praeger's musical manuscripts in the world. Nearly all the scores are in Praeger's own hand. The majority of the works are for piano, but the collection also includes chamber music for strings, large ensemble works, vocal works, and sketches. Praeger was born in Leipzig on January 22, 1815, to a Dutch father and an English mother. As a child, he studied cello, piano, and violin. His father, Heinrich Aloys Praeger (1783-1854) worked as a musician, composer, and conductor. In 1831, at the age of 16, Praeger became a music teacher at The Hague and continued to study piano, violin, and composition. He moved to London in 1834, working as a teacher and traveling to give piano recitals, many of which included his own works. Praeger became the London correspondent for Robert Schumann's music journal, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, in 1842. His contributions included highlights of London musical events, reviews of performances, and general discussions about current musical topics. Praeger's compositions were performed in cities across Europe, including Paris, Leipzig, Berlin, Hamburg, and Meiningen. Praeger is perhaps best known today for his connection with Richard Wagner. Following Wagner's death, Praeger wrote the book Wagner, as I Knew Him, which quickly became controversial and was pulled from publication. Wagner followers disputed the book, claiming that Praeger exaggerated his role in Wagner's life and portrayed Wagner in a negative way. The collection has been described in a finding aid available at <a href="http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml">http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml</a> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource University at Buffalo Libraries believe this work to be in the U.S. public domain. This work may not be in the public domain in other countries. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Ballet Louis XIV : air historique Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource For piano. Caption title. Holograph (Ink). Corrections on inserts pasted on both pages. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource [18--] Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 46, Box 1 Item 026 ubmu0046_026.pdf Alternative Title An alternative name for the resource. The distinction between titles and alternative titles is application-specific. Uniform title: Ballet Louis XIV Alternate title: Air historique Alternate title: Ballet Louis Quatorzième Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. scores (documents for music) Extent The size or duration of the resource. [2] p. of manuscript music, 34 cm. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/NoC-US/1.0/">NO COPYRIGHT – UNITED STATES</a>. The organization that has made the Item available believes that the Item is in the Public Domain under the laws of the United States, but a determination was not made as to its copyright status under the copyright laws of other countries. The Item may not be in the Public Domain under the laws of other countries. Please refer to the organization that has made the Item available for more information. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/3794187c8a34745b7dc01a3118b99066.pdf d174f3f045399fec9f70b0920dcd4015 PDF Text Text State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource The Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891, consists of 484 items, all but a few of which are manuscript scores. Due to the fragile condition of some of the scores, not every score was digitized. As a result, there are only 472 digitized scores in this digital collection. Two of the additional documents received with the collection were also digitized and the digital collection includes digital copies of documents, portraits, and correspondence about the Praeger family generously provided by the great, great grandson of Ferdinand Praeger, Andrew Leach. This is the largest collection of Praeger's musical manuscripts in the world. Nearly all the scores are in Praeger's own hand. The majority of the works are for piano, but the collection also includes chamber music for strings, large ensemble works, vocal works, and sketches. Praeger was born in Leipzig on January 22, 1815, to a Dutch father and an English mother. As a child, he studied cello, piano, and violin. His father, Heinrich Aloys Praeger (1783-1854) worked as a musician, composer, and conductor. In 1831, at the age of 16, Praeger became a music teacher at The Hague and continued to study piano, violin, and composition. He moved to London in 1834, working as a teacher and traveling to give piano recitals, many of which included his own works. Praeger became the London correspondent for Robert Schumann's music journal, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, in 1842. His contributions included highlights of London musical events, reviews of performances, and general discussions about current musical topics. Praeger's compositions were performed in cities across Europe, including Paris, Leipzig, Berlin, Hamburg, and Meiningen. Praeger is perhaps best known today for his connection with Richard Wagner. Following Wagner's death, Praeger wrote the book Wagner, as I Knew Him, which quickly became controversial and was pulled from publication. Wagner followers disputed the book, claiming that Praeger exaggerated his role in Wagner's life and portrayed Wagner in a negative way. The collection has been described in a finding aid available at <a href="http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml">http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml</a> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource University at Buffalo Libraries believe this work to be in the U.S. public domain. This work may not be in the public domain in other countries. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource L'aveu Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource For piano. Cover title. Holograph (Ink). Corrections on inserts pasted on p. 3-4. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource [18--] Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 46, Box 1 Item 025 ubmu0046_025.pdf Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. scores (documents for music) Extent The size or duration of the resource. 5 p. of manuscript music, 28 cm. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/NoC-US/1.0/">NO COPYRIGHT – UNITED STATES</a>. The organization that has made the Item available believes that the Item is in the Public Domain under the laws of the United States, but a determination was not made as to its copyright status under the copyright laws of other countries. The Item may not be in the Public Domain under the laws of other countries. Please refer to the organization that has made the Item available for more information. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/45f58792f79398d419defc8c9e6c09fc.pdf e56c57d70f8843333e3150061ecb85be PDF Text Text State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 ��State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 ��State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource The Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891, consists of 484 items, all but a few of which are manuscript scores. Due to the fragile condition of some of the scores, not every score was digitized. As a result, there are only 472 digitized scores in this digital collection. Two of the additional documents received with the collection were also digitized and the digital collection includes digital copies of documents, portraits, and correspondence about the Praeger family generously provided by the great, great grandson of Ferdinand Praeger, Andrew Leach. This is the largest collection of Praeger's musical manuscripts in the world. Nearly all the scores are in Praeger's own hand. The majority of the works are for piano, but the collection also includes chamber music for strings, large ensemble works, vocal works, and sketches. Praeger was born in Leipzig on January 22, 1815, to a Dutch father and an English mother. As a child, he studied cello, piano, and violin. His father, Heinrich Aloys Praeger (1783-1854) worked as a musician, composer, and conductor. In 1831, at the age of 16, Praeger became a music teacher at The Hague and continued to study piano, violin, and composition. He moved to London in 1834, working as a teacher and traveling to give piano recitals, many of which included his own works. Praeger became the London correspondent for Robert Schumann's music journal, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, in 1842. His contributions included highlights of London musical events, reviews of performances, and general discussions about current musical topics. Praeger's compositions were performed in cities across Europe, including Paris, Leipzig, Berlin, Hamburg, and Meiningen. Praeger is perhaps best known today for his connection with Richard Wagner. Following Wagner's death, Praeger wrote the book Wagner, as I Knew Him, which quickly became controversial and was pulled from publication. Wagner followers disputed the book, claiming that Praeger exaggerated his role in Wagner's life and portrayed Wagner in a negative way. The collection has been described in a finding aid available at <a href="http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml">http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml</a> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource University at Buffalo Libraries believe this work to be in the U.S. public domain. This work may not be in the public domain in other countries. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Andantino Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource For piano. Title from initial tempo marking. Holograph (Ink), with additional markings in pencil. Corrections on inserts pasted on p. [1]. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource [18--] Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 46, Box 1 Item 024 ubmu0046_024.pdf Alternative Title An alternative name for the resource. The distinction between titles and alternative titles is application-specific. Uniform title: Andantino, piano, C major Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. scores (documents for music) Extent The size or duration of the resource. [7] p. of manuscript music, 30 cm. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/NoC-US/1.0/">NO COPYRIGHT – UNITED STATES</a>. The organization that has made the Item available believes that the Item is in the Public Domain under the laws of the United States, but a determination was not made as to its copyright status under the copyright laws of other countries. The Item may not be in the Public Domain under the laws of other countries. Please refer to the organization that has made the Item available for more information. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/323caf392c07fb919c72f8376338a137.pdf 5facf48009276db333b78d039b3b48f2 PDF Text Text State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource The Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891, consists of 484 items, all but a few of which are manuscript scores. Due to the fragile condition of some of the scores, not every score was digitized. As a result, there are only 472 digitized scores in this digital collection. Two of the additional documents received with the collection were also digitized and the digital collection includes digital copies of documents, portraits, and correspondence about the Praeger family generously provided by the great, great grandson of Ferdinand Praeger, Andrew Leach. This is the largest collection of Praeger's musical manuscripts in the world. Nearly all the scores are in Praeger's own hand. The majority of the works are for piano, but the collection also includes chamber music for strings, large ensemble works, vocal works, and sketches. Praeger was born in Leipzig on January 22, 1815, to a Dutch father and an English mother. As a child, he studied cello, piano, and violin. His father, Heinrich Aloys Praeger (1783-1854) worked as a musician, composer, and conductor. In 1831, at the age of 16, Praeger became a music teacher at The Hague and continued to study piano, violin, and composition. He moved to London in 1834, working as a teacher and traveling to give piano recitals, many of which included his own works. Praeger became the London correspondent for Robert Schumann's music journal, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, in 1842. His contributions included highlights of London musical events, reviews of performances, and general discussions about current musical topics. Praeger's compositions were performed in cities across Europe, including Paris, Leipzig, Berlin, Hamburg, and Meiningen. Praeger is perhaps best known today for his connection with Richard Wagner. Following Wagner's death, Praeger wrote the book Wagner, as I Knew Him, which quickly became controversial and was pulled from publication. Wagner followers disputed the book, claiming that Praeger exaggerated his role in Wagner's life and portrayed Wagner in a negative way. The collection has been described in a finding aid available at <a href="http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml">http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml</a> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource University at Buffalo Libraries believe this work to be in the U.S. public domain. This work may not be in the public domain in other countries. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Andante and allegro Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource For piano. Cover title. Holograph (Ink). End of Andante (p. [5]): Nov. 1, 1890. Final two measures of Allegro corrected on insert. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1890 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 46, Box 1 Item 023 ubmu0046_023.pdf Alternative Title An alternative name for the resource. The distinction between titles and alternative titles is application-specific. Uniform title: Andante and allegro, piano, G major Alternate title: Andante und allegro Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. scores (documents for music) Extent The size or duration of the resource. [6], 3 p. of manuscript music, 31 cm. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/NoC-US/1.0/">NO COPYRIGHT – UNITED STATES</a>. The organization that has made the Item available believes that the Item is in the Public Domain under the laws of the United States, but a determination was not made as to its copyright status under the copyright laws of other countries. The Item may not be in the Public Domain under the laws of other countries. Please refer to the organization that has made the Item available for more information. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/7fe89829980456c4732ff1cc85f36143.pdf 9ec4172949ce685324c8c6b22479ed8e PDF Text Text State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource The Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891, consists of 484 items, all but a few of which are manuscript scores. Due to the fragile condition of some of the scores, not every score was digitized. As a result, there are only 472 digitized scores in this digital collection. Two of the additional documents received with the collection were also digitized and the digital collection includes digital copies of documents, portraits, and correspondence about the Praeger family generously provided by the great, great grandson of Ferdinand Praeger, Andrew Leach. This is the largest collection of Praeger's musical manuscripts in the world. Nearly all the scores are in Praeger's own hand. The majority of the works are for piano, but the collection also includes chamber music for strings, large ensemble works, vocal works, and sketches. Praeger was born in Leipzig on January 22, 1815, to a Dutch father and an English mother. As a child, he studied cello, piano, and violin. His father, Heinrich Aloys Praeger (1783-1854) worked as a musician, composer, and conductor. In 1831, at the age of 16, Praeger became a music teacher at The Hague and continued to study piano, violin, and composition. He moved to London in 1834, working as a teacher and traveling to give piano recitals, many of which included his own works. Praeger became the London correspondent for Robert Schumann's music journal, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, in 1842. His contributions included highlights of London musical events, reviews of performances, and general discussions about current musical topics. Praeger's compositions were performed in cities across Europe, including Paris, Leipzig, Berlin, Hamburg, and Meiningen. Praeger is perhaps best known today for his connection with Richard Wagner. Following Wagner's death, Praeger wrote the book Wagner, as I Knew Him, which quickly became controversial and was pulled from publication. Wagner followers disputed the book, claiming that Praeger exaggerated his role in Wagner's life and portrayed Wagner in a negative way. The collection has been described in a finding aid available at <a href="http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml">http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml</a> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource University at Buffalo Libraries believe this work to be in the U.S. public domain. This work may not be in the public domain in other countries. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Andante [in E flat major] Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource For piano. Title from initial tempo marking. Holograph (Ink). Corrections on inserts pasted throughout. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource [18--] Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 46, Box 1 Item 022 ubmu0046_022.pdf Alternative Title An alternative name for the resource. The distinction between titles and alternative titles is application-specific. Uniform title: Andantes, piano, E♭ major Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. scores (documents for music) Extent The size or duration of the resource. [4] p. of manuscript music, 31 cm. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/NoC-US/1.0/">NO COPYRIGHT – UNITED STATES</a>. The organization that has made the Item available believes that the Item is in the Public Domain under the laws of the United States, but a determination was not made as to its copyright status under the copyright laws of other countries. The Item may not be in the Public Domain under the laws of other countries. Please refer to the organization that has made the Item available for more information. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/2f99de2eb36088a21f7d3dace7b651c0.pdf 414d2fe58f12646606202e049122a87b PDF Text Text State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource The Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891, consists of 484 items, all but a few of which are manuscript scores. Due to the fragile condition of some of the scores, not every score was digitized. As a result, there are only 472 digitized scores in this digital collection. Two of the additional documents received with the collection were also digitized and the digital collection includes digital copies of documents, portraits, and correspondence about the Praeger family generously provided by the great, great grandson of Ferdinand Praeger, Andrew Leach. This is the largest collection of Praeger's musical manuscripts in the world. Nearly all the scores are in Praeger's own hand. The majority of the works are for piano, but the collection also includes chamber music for strings, large ensemble works, vocal works, and sketches. Praeger was born in Leipzig on January 22, 1815, to a Dutch father and an English mother. As a child, he studied cello, piano, and violin. His father, Heinrich Aloys Praeger (1783-1854) worked as a musician, composer, and conductor. In 1831, at the age of 16, Praeger became a music teacher at The Hague and continued to study piano, violin, and composition. He moved to London in 1834, working as a teacher and traveling to give piano recitals, many of which included his own works. Praeger became the London correspondent for Robert Schumann's music journal, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, in 1842. His contributions included highlights of London musical events, reviews of performances, and general discussions about current musical topics. Praeger's compositions were performed in cities across Europe, including Paris, Leipzig, Berlin, Hamburg, and Meiningen. Praeger is perhaps best known today for his connection with Richard Wagner. Following Wagner's death, Praeger wrote the book Wagner, as I Knew Him, which quickly became controversial and was pulled from publication. Wagner followers disputed the book, claiming that Praeger exaggerated his role in Wagner's life and portrayed Wagner in a negative way. The collection has been described in a finding aid available at <a href="http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml">http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml</a> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource University at Buffalo Libraries believe this work to be in the U.S. public domain. This work may not be in the public domain in other countries. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Andante [in A minor] Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource For piano. Title from initial tempo marking. Holograph (Ink). "Composed for and dedicated to H.P. Dickenson Esqr."--Caption : 17/6 .90. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1890 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 46, Box 1 Item 021 ubmu0046_021.pdf Alternative Title An alternative name for the resource. The distinction between titles and alternative titles is application-specific. Uniform title: Andantes, piano, A minor Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. scores (documents for music) Extent The size or duration of the resource. [2] p. of manuscript music, 30 cm. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/NoC-US/1.0/">NO COPYRIGHT – UNITED STATES</a>. The organization that has made the Item available believes that the Item is in the Public Domain under the laws of the United States, but a determination was not made as to its copyright status under the copyright laws of other countries. The Item may not be in the Public Domain under the laws of other countries. Please refer to the organization that has made the Item available for more information. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/5c81b88f0c0967c8ab82cc9075bf034b.pdf 00a649d623f3e52cfe0b5817ff415903 PDF Text Text State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource The Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891, consists of 484 items, all but a few of which are manuscript scores. Due to the fragile condition of some of the scores, not every score was digitized. As a result, there are only 472 digitized scores in this digital collection. Two of the additional documents received with the collection were also digitized and the digital collection includes digital copies of documents, portraits, and correspondence about the Praeger family generously provided by the great, great grandson of Ferdinand Praeger, Andrew Leach. This is the largest collection of Praeger's musical manuscripts in the world. Nearly all the scores are in Praeger's own hand. The majority of the works are for piano, but the collection also includes chamber music for strings, large ensemble works, vocal works, and sketches. Praeger was born in Leipzig on January 22, 1815, to a Dutch father and an English mother. As a child, he studied cello, piano, and violin. His father, Heinrich Aloys Praeger (1783-1854) worked as a musician, composer, and conductor. In 1831, at the age of 16, Praeger became a music teacher at The Hague and continued to study piano, violin, and composition. He moved to London in 1834, working as a teacher and traveling to give piano recitals, many of which included his own works. Praeger became the London correspondent for Robert Schumann's music journal, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, in 1842. His contributions included highlights of London musical events, reviews of performances, and general discussions about current musical topics. Praeger's compositions were performed in cities across Europe, including Paris, Leipzig, Berlin, Hamburg, and Meiningen. Praeger is perhaps best known today for his connection with Richard Wagner. Following Wagner's death, Praeger wrote the book Wagner, as I Knew Him, which quickly became controversial and was pulled from publication. Wagner followers disputed the book, claiming that Praeger exaggerated his role in Wagner's life and portrayed Wagner in a negative way. The collection has been described in a finding aid available at <a href="http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml">http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml</a> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource University at Buffalo Libraries believe this work to be in the U.S. public domain. This work may not be in the public domain in other countries. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Ancient minuet [in A minor] Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource For piano. Caption title. Holograph (Ink). Caption: 11/12 88. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1888 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 46, Box 1 Item 020 ubmu0046_020.pdf Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. scores (documents for music) Extent The size or duration of the resource. 1 p. of manuscript music, 31 cm. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/NoC-US/1.0/">NO COPYRIGHT – UNITED STATES</a>. The organization that has made the Item available believes that the Item is in the Public Domain under the laws of the United States, but a determination was not made as to its copyright status under the copyright laws of other countries. The Item may not be in the Public Domain under the laws of other countries. Please refer to the organization that has made the Item available for more information. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/69743ecb1e0f05bfda7091bee0c5f7b5.pdf 00a15f499a40fcbd1360fac20b9898be PDF Text Text State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource The Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891, consists of 484 items, all but a few of which are manuscript scores. Due to the fragile condition of some of the scores, not every score was digitized. As a result, there are only 472 digitized scores in this digital collection. Two of the additional documents received with the collection were also digitized and the digital collection includes digital copies of documents, portraits, and correspondence about the Praeger family generously provided by the great, great grandson of Ferdinand Praeger, Andrew Leach. This is the largest collection of Praeger's musical manuscripts in the world. Nearly all the scores are in Praeger's own hand. The majority of the works are for piano, but the collection also includes chamber music for strings, large ensemble works, vocal works, and sketches. Praeger was born in Leipzig on January 22, 1815, to a Dutch father and an English mother. As a child, he studied cello, piano, and violin. His father, Heinrich Aloys Praeger (1783-1854) worked as a musician, composer, and conductor. In 1831, at the age of 16, Praeger became a music teacher at The Hague and continued to study piano, violin, and composition. He moved to London in 1834, working as a teacher and traveling to give piano recitals, many of which included his own works. Praeger became the London correspondent for Robert Schumann's music journal, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, in 1842. His contributions included highlights of London musical events, reviews of performances, and general discussions about current musical topics. Praeger's compositions were performed in cities across Europe, including Paris, Leipzig, Berlin, Hamburg, and Meiningen. Praeger is perhaps best known today for his connection with Richard Wagner. Following Wagner's death, Praeger wrote the book Wagner, as I Knew Him, which quickly became controversial and was pulled from publication. Wagner followers disputed the book, claiming that Praeger exaggerated his role in Wagner's life and portrayed Wagner in a negative way. The collection has been described in a finding aid available at <a href="http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml">http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml</a> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource University at Buffalo Libraries believe this work to be in the U.S. public domain. This work may not be in the public domain in other countries. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Ancient maypole dance Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource For piano. Caption title. Holograph (Ink). Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource [18--] Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 46, Box 1 Item 019 ubmu0046_019.pdf Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. scores (documents for music) Extent The size or duration of the resource. 3 p. of manuscript music, 31 cm. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/NoC-US/1.0/">NO COPYRIGHT – UNITED STATES</a>. The organization that has made the Item available believes that the Item is in the Public Domain under the laws of the United States, but a determination was not made as to its copyright status under the copyright laws of other countries. The Item may not be in the Public Domain under the laws of other countries. Please refer to the organization that has made the Item available for more information. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/122d8f15b45647f6935852e429832593.pdf 5533eb36382913553ff349e046f219b6 PDF Text Text State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource The Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891, consists of 484 items, all but a few of which are manuscript scores. Due to the fragile condition of some of the scores, not every score was digitized. As a result, there are only 472 digitized scores in this digital collection. Two of the additional documents received with the collection were also digitized and the digital collection includes digital copies of documents, portraits, and correspondence about the Praeger family generously provided by the great, great grandson of Ferdinand Praeger, Andrew Leach. This is the largest collection of Praeger's musical manuscripts in the world. Nearly all the scores are in Praeger's own hand. The majority of the works are for piano, but the collection also includes chamber music for strings, large ensemble works, vocal works, and sketches. Praeger was born in Leipzig on January 22, 1815, to a Dutch father and an English mother. As a child, he studied cello, piano, and violin. His father, Heinrich Aloys Praeger (1783-1854) worked as a musician, composer, and conductor. In 1831, at the age of 16, Praeger became a music teacher at The Hague and continued to study piano, violin, and composition. He moved to London in 1834, working as a teacher and traveling to give piano recitals, many of which included his own works. Praeger became the London correspondent for Robert Schumann's music journal, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, in 1842. His contributions included highlights of London musical events, reviews of performances, and general discussions about current musical topics. Praeger's compositions were performed in cities across Europe, including Paris, Leipzig, Berlin, Hamburg, and Meiningen. Praeger is perhaps best known today for his connection with Richard Wagner. Following Wagner's death, Praeger wrote the book Wagner, as I Knew Him, which quickly became controversial and was pulled from publication. Wagner followers disputed the book, claiming that Praeger exaggerated his role in Wagner's life and portrayed Wagner in a negative way. The collection has been described in a finding aid available at <a href="http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml">http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml</a> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource University at Buffalo Libraries believe this work to be in the U.S. public domain. This work may not be in the public domain in other countries. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Ancien menuet [in G major] Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource For piano. Caption title. Holograph (Ink). Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource [18--] Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 46, Box 1 Item 018 ubmu0046_018.pdf Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. scores (documents for music) Extent The size or duration of the resource. [2] p. of manuscript music, 31 cm. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/NoC-US/1.0/">NO COPYRIGHT – UNITED STATES</a>. The organization that has made the Item available believes that the Item is in the Public Domain under the laws of the United States, but a determination was not made as to its copyright status under the copyright laws of other countries. The Item may not be in the Public Domain under the laws of other countries. Please refer to the organization that has made the Item available for more information. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/fce36bf5774a8e5023414bf363d37d39.pdf 6a6c1c8b732e2f8e1748aa7184a978c6 PDF Text Text State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource The Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891, consists of 484 items, all but a few of which are manuscript scores. Due to the fragile condition of some of the scores, not every score was digitized. As a result, there are only 472 digitized scores in this digital collection. Two of the additional documents received with the collection were also digitized and the digital collection includes digital copies of documents, portraits, and correspondence about the Praeger family generously provided by the great, great grandson of Ferdinand Praeger, Andrew Leach. This is the largest collection of Praeger's musical manuscripts in the world. Nearly all the scores are in Praeger's own hand. The majority of the works are for piano, but the collection also includes chamber music for strings, large ensemble works, vocal works, and sketches. Praeger was born in Leipzig on January 22, 1815, to a Dutch father and an English mother. As a child, he studied cello, piano, and violin. His father, Heinrich Aloys Praeger (1783-1854) worked as a musician, composer, and conductor. In 1831, at the age of 16, Praeger became a music teacher at The Hague and continued to study piano, violin, and composition. He moved to London in 1834, working as a teacher and traveling to give piano recitals, many of which included his own works. Praeger became the London correspondent for Robert Schumann's music journal, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, in 1842. His contributions included highlights of London musical events, reviews of performances, and general discussions about current musical topics. Praeger's compositions were performed in cities across Europe, including Paris, Leipzig, Berlin, Hamburg, and Meiningen. Praeger is perhaps best known today for his connection with Richard Wagner. Following Wagner's death, Praeger wrote the book Wagner, as I Knew Him, which quickly became controversial and was pulled from publication. Wagner followers disputed the book, claiming that Praeger exaggerated his role in Wagner's life and portrayed Wagner in a negative way. The collection has been described in a finding aid available at <a href="http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml">http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml</a> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource University at Buffalo Libraries believe this work to be in the U.S. public domain. This work may not be in the public domain in other countries. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Alte litanei Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource For piano. Caption title. Holograph (Ink). Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource [18--] Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 46, Box 1 Item 017 ubmu0046_017.pdf Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. scores (documents for music) Extent The size or duration of the resource. 1 p. of manuscript music, 29 cm. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/NoC-US/1.0/">NO COPYRIGHT – UNITED STATES</a>. The organization that has made the Item available believes that the Item is in the Public Domain under the laws of the United States, but a determination was not made as to its copyright status under the copyright laws of other countries. The Item may not be in the Public Domain under the laws of other countries. Please refer to the organization that has made the Item available for more information. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/457777aad462f202a470bbaf89084287.pdf 3b11990c91048049babee985bacd50af PDF Text Text State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource The Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891, consists of 484 items, all but a few of which are manuscript scores. Due to the fragile condition of some of the scores, not every score was digitized. As a result, there are only 472 digitized scores in this digital collection. Two of the additional documents received with the collection were also digitized and the digital collection includes digital copies of documents, portraits, and correspondence about the Praeger family generously provided by the great, great grandson of Ferdinand Praeger, Andrew Leach. This is the largest collection of Praeger's musical manuscripts in the world. Nearly all the scores are in Praeger's own hand. The majority of the works are for piano, but the collection also includes chamber music for strings, large ensemble works, vocal works, and sketches. Praeger was born in Leipzig on January 22, 1815, to a Dutch father and an English mother. As a child, he studied cello, piano, and violin. His father, Heinrich Aloys Praeger (1783-1854) worked as a musician, composer, and conductor. In 1831, at the age of 16, Praeger became a music teacher at The Hague and continued to study piano, violin, and composition. He moved to London in 1834, working as a teacher and traveling to give piano recitals, many of which included his own works. Praeger became the London correspondent for Robert Schumann's music journal, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, in 1842. His contributions included highlights of London musical events, reviews of performances, and general discussions about current musical topics. Praeger's compositions were performed in cities across Europe, including Paris, Leipzig, Berlin, Hamburg, and Meiningen. Praeger is perhaps best known today for his connection with Richard Wagner. Following Wagner's death, Praeger wrote the book Wagner, as I Knew Him, which quickly became controversial and was pulled from publication. Wagner followers disputed the book, claiming that Praeger exaggerated his role in Wagner's life and portrayed Wagner in a negative way. The collection has been described in a finding aid available at <a href="http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml">http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml</a> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource University at Buffalo Libraries believe this work to be in the U.S. public domain. This work may not be in the public domain in other countries. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Allegretto scherzando Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource For piano. Cover title. Holograph (Ink). Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource [18--] Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 46, Box 1 Item 016 ubmu0046_016.pdf Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. scores (documents for music) Extent The size or duration of the resource. [6] p. of manuscript music, 29 cm. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/NoC-US/1.0/">NO COPYRIGHT – UNITED STATES</a>. The organization that has made the Item available believes that the Item is in the Public Domain under the laws of the United States, but a determination was not made as to its copyright status under the copyright laws of other countries. The Item may not be in the Public Domain under the laws of other countries. Please refer to the organization that has made the Item available for more information. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/5671e84c381d9c4cc616451cb63b2cfa.pdf 702036428da4a3366f573619c9745b2b PDF Text Text State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource The Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891, consists of 484 items, all but a few of which are manuscript scores. Due to the fragile condition of some of the scores, not every score was digitized. As a result, there are only 472 digitized scores in this digital collection. Two of the additional documents received with the collection were also digitized and the digital collection includes digital copies of documents, portraits, and correspondence about the Praeger family generously provided by the great, great grandson of Ferdinand Praeger, Andrew Leach. This is the largest collection of Praeger's musical manuscripts in the world. Nearly all the scores are in Praeger's own hand. The majority of the works are for piano, but the collection also includes chamber music for strings, large ensemble works, vocal works, and sketches. Praeger was born in Leipzig on January 22, 1815, to a Dutch father and an English mother. As a child, he studied cello, piano, and violin. His father, Heinrich Aloys Praeger (1783-1854) worked as a musician, composer, and conductor. In 1831, at the age of 16, Praeger became a music teacher at The Hague and continued to study piano, violin, and composition. He moved to London in 1834, working as a teacher and traveling to give piano recitals, many of which included his own works. Praeger became the London correspondent for Robert Schumann's music journal, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, in 1842. His contributions included highlights of London musical events, reviews of performances, and general discussions about current musical topics. Praeger's compositions were performed in cities across Europe, including Paris, Leipzig, Berlin, Hamburg, and Meiningen. Praeger is perhaps best known today for his connection with Richard Wagner. Following Wagner's death, Praeger wrote the book Wagner, as I Knew Him, which quickly became controversial and was pulled from publication. Wagner followers disputed the book, claiming that Praeger exaggerated his role in Wagner's life and portrayed Wagner in a negative way. The collection has been described in a finding aid available at <a href="http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml">http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml</a> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource University at Buffalo Libraries believe this work to be in the U.S. public domain. This work may not be in the public domain in other countries. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Allegro maestoso [in D major] Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource For piano. Title from initial tempo marking. Holograph (Ink). Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource [18--] Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 46, Box 1 Item 015 ubmu0046_015.pdf Alternative Title An alternative name for the resource. The distinction between titles and alternative titles is application-specific. Uniform title: Allegro maestoso, piano, D major Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. scores (documents for music) Extent The size or duration of the resource. [3] p. of manuscript music, 31 cm. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/NoC-US/1.0/">NO COPYRIGHT – UNITED STATES</a>. The organization that has made the Item available believes that the Item is in the Public Domain under the laws of the United States, but a determination was not made as to its copyright status under the copyright laws of other countries. The Item may not be in the Public Domain under the laws of other countries. Please refer to the organization that has made the Item available for more information. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/1bfbe067f7c9a7a7349b0bd8c74db050.pdf c8e73bef8a3e3a94e8dd59950fc08c5c PDF Text Text State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource The Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891, consists of 484 items, all but a few of which are manuscript scores. Due to the fragile condition of some of the scores, not every score was digitized. As a result, there are only 472 digitized scores in this digital collection. Two of the additional documents received with the collection were also digitized and the digital collection includes digital copies of documents, portraits, and correspondence about the Praeger family generously provided by the great, great grandson of Ferdinand Praeger, Andrew Leach. This is the largest collection of Praeger's musical manuscripts in the world. Nearly all the scores are in Praeger's own hand. The majority of the works are for piano, but the collection also includes chamber music for strings, large ensemble works, vocal works, and sketches. Praeger was born in Leipzig on January 22, 1815, to a Dutch father and an English mother. As a child, he studied cello, piano, and violin. His father, Heinrich Aloys Praeger (1783-1854) worked as a musician, composer, and conductor. In 1831, at the age of 16, Praeger became a music teacher at The Hague and continued to study piano, violin, and composition. He moved to London in 1834, working as a teacher and traveling to give piano recitals, many of which included his own works. Praeger became the London correspondent for Robert Schumann's music journal, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, in 1842. His contributions included highlights of London musical events, reviews of performances, and general discussions about current musical topics. Praeger's compositions were performed in cities across Europe, including Paris, Leipzig, Berlin, Hamburg, and Meiningen. Praeger is perhaps best known today for his connection with Richard Wagner. Following Wagner's death, Praeger wrote the book Wagner, as I Knew Him, which quickly became controversial and was pulled from publication. Wagner followers disputed the book, claiming that Praeger exaggerated his role in Wagner's life and portrayed Wagner in a negative way. The collection has been described in a finding aid available at <a href="http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml">http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml</a> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource University at Buffalo Libraries believe this work to be in the U.S. public domain. This work may not be in the public domain in other countries. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Allegro maestoso [in E flat major] Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource For piano. Cover title. Holograph (Ink). Caption: 21/1 91. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1891 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 46, Box 1 Item 014 ubmu0046_014.pdf Alternative Title An alternative name for the resource. The distinction between titles and alternative titles is application-specific. Uniform title: Allegro maestoso, piano, E♭ major Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. scores (documents for music) Extent The size or duration of the resource. [5] p. of manuscript music, 31 cm. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/NoC-US/1.0/">NO COPYRIGHT – UNITED STATES</a>. The organization that has made the Item available believes that the Item is in the Public Domain under the laws of the United States, but a determination was not made as to its copyright status under the copyright laws of other countries. The Item may not be in the Public Domain under the laws of other countries. Please refer to the organization that has made the Item available for more information. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/8f90a668393d5a84e47864f830faba90.pdf c8bbe1fbda14f2689ba9855f03516468 PDF Text Text State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource The Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891, consists of 484 items, all but a few of which are manuscript scores. Due to the fragile condition of some of the scores, not every score was digitized. As a result, there are only 472 digitized scores in this digital collection. Two of the additional documents received with the collection were also digitized and the digital collection includes digital copies of documents, portraits, and correspondence about the Praeger family generously provided by the great, great grandson of Ferdinand Praeger, Andrew Leach. This is the largest collection of Praeger's musical manuscripts in the world. Nearly all the scores are in Praeger's own hand. The majority of the works are for piano, but the collection also includes chamber music for strings, large ensemble works, vocal works, and sketches. Praeger was born in Leipzig on January 22, 1815, to a Dutch father and an English mother. As a child, he studied cello, piano, and violin. His father, Heinrich Aloys Praeger (1783-1854) worked as a musician, composer, and conductor. In 1831, at the age of 16, Praeger became a music teacher at The Hague and continued to study piano, violin, and composition. He moved to London in 1834, working as a teacher and traveling to give piano recitals, many of which included his own works. Praeger became the London correspondent for Robert Schumann's music journal, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, in 1842. His contributions included highlights of London musical events, reviews of performances, and general discussions about current musical topics. Praeger's compositions were performed in cities across Europe, including Paris, Leipzig, Berlin, Hamburg, and Meiningen. Praeger is perhaps best known today for his connection with Richard Wagner. Following Wagner's death, Praeger wrote the book Wagner, as I Knew Him, which quickly became controversial and was pulled from publication. Wagner followers disputed the book, claiming that Praeger exaggerated his role in Wagner's life and portrayed Wagner in a negative way. The collection has been described in a finding aid available at <a href="http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml">http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml</a> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource University at Buffalo Libraries believe this work to be in the U.S. public domain. This work may not be in the public domain in other countries. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Allegretto grazioso Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource For piano. Title from initial tempo marking. Holograph (Ink). Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource [18--] Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 46, Box 1 Item 013 ubmu0046_013.pdf Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. scores (documents for music) Extent The size or duration of the resource. [4] p. of manuscript music, 31 cm. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/NoC-US/1.0/">NO COPYRIGHT – UNITED STATES</a>. The organization that has made the Item available believes that the Item is in the Public Domain under the laws of the United States, but a determination was not made as to its copyright status under the copyright laws of other countries. The Item may not be in the Public Domain under the laws of other countries. Please refer to the organization that has made the Item available for more information. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/59b0febf2b7f854cc6dc3c4c9b08e9b4.pdf 0b972050d75566966e7e7640e24a74cb PDF Text Text State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource The Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891, consists of 484 items, all but a few of which are manuscript scores. Due to the fragile condition of some of the scores, not every score was digitized. As a result, there are only 472 digitized scores in this digital collection. Two of the additional documents received with the collection were also digitized and the digital collection includes digital copies of documents, portraits, and correspondence about the Praeger family generously provided by the great, great grandson of Ferdinand Praeger, Andrew Leach. This is the largest collection of Praeger's musical manuscripts in the world. Nearly all the scores are in Praeger's own hand. The majority of the works are for piano, but the collection also includes chamber music for strings, large ensemble works, vocal works, and sketches. Praeger was born in Leipzig on January 22, 1815, to a Dutch father and an English mother. As a child, he studied cello, piano, and violin. His father, Heinrich Aloys Praeger (1783-1854) worked as a musician, composer, and conductor. In 1831, at the age of 16, Praeger became a music teacher at The Hague and continued to study piano, violin, and composition. He moved to London in 1834, working as a teacher and traveling to give piano recitals, many of which included his own works. Praeger became the London correspondent for Robert Schumann's music journal, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, in 1842. His contributions included highlights of London musical events, reviews of performances, and general discussions about current musical topics. Praeger's compositions were performed in cities across Europe, including Paris, Leipzig, Berlin, Hamburg, and Meiningen. Praeger is perhaps best known today for his connection with Richard Wagner. Following Wagner's death, Praeger wrote the book Wagner, as I Knew Him, which quickly became controversial and was pulled from publication. Wagner followers disputed the book, claiming that Praeger exaggerated his role in Wagner's life and portrayed Wagner in a negative way. The collection has been described in a finding aid available at <a href="http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml">http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml</a> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource University at Buffalo Libraries believe this work to be in the U.S. public domain. This work may not be in the public domain in other countries. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Allegretto [in G minor] Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource For piano. Title from initial tempo marking. Holograph (Ink). Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource [18--] Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 46, Box 1 Item 012 ubmu0046_012.pdf Alternative Title An alternative name for the resource. The distinction between titles and alternative titles is application-specific. Uniform title: Allegrettos, piano, G minor Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. scores (documents for music) Extent The size or duration of the resource. [4] p. of manuscript music, 31 cm. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/NoC-US/1.0/">NO COPYRIGHT – UNITED STATES</a>. The organization that has made the Item available believes that the Item is in the Public Domain under the laws of the United States, but a determination was not made as to its copyright status under the copyright laws of other countries. The Item may not be in the Public Domain under the laws of other countries. Please refer to the organization that has made the Item available for more information. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/9ff49642a7f27e4cf0f1266c0f3574b2.pdf c6bcb77d073172050ad4ec0461521f10 PDF Text Text State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource The Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891, consists of 484 items, all but a few of which are manuscript scores. Due to the fragile condition of some of the scores, not every score was digitized. As a result, there are only 472 digitized scores in this digital collection. Two of the additional documents received with the collection were also digitized and the digital collection includes digital copies of documents, portraits, and correspondence about the Praeger family generously provided by the great, great grandson of Ferdinand Praeger, Andrew Leach. This is the largest collection of Praeger's musical manuscripts in the world. Nearly all the scores are in Praeger's own hand. The majority of the works are for piano, but the collection also includes chamber music for strings, large ensemble works, vocal works, and sketches. Praeger was born in Leipzig on January 22, 1815, to a Dutch father and an English mother. As a child, he studied cello, piano, and violin. His father, Heinrich Aloys Praeger (1783-1854) worked as a musician, composer, and conductor. In 1831, at the age of 16, Praeger became a music teacher at The Hague and continued to study piano, violin, and composition. He moved to London in 1834, working as a teacher and traveling to give piano recitals, many of which included his own works. Praeger became the London correspondent for Robert Schumann's music journal, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, in 1842. His contributions included highlights of London musical events, reviews of performances, and general discussions about current musical topics. Praeger's compositions were performed in cities across Europe, including Paris, Leipzig, Berlin, Hamburg, and Meiningen. Praeger is perhaps best known today for his connection with Richard Wagner. Following Wagner's death, Praeger wrote the book Wagner, as I Knew Him, which quickly became controversial and was pulled from publication. Wagner followers disputed the book, claiming that Praeger exaggerated his role in Wagner's life and portrayed Wagner in a negative way. The collection has been described in a finding aid available at <a href="http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml">http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml</a> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource University at Buffalo Libraries believe this work to be in the U.S. public domain. This work may not be in the public domain in other countries. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Allegretto [in A flat major] Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource For piano. Title from initial tempo marking. Holograph (Ink). Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource [18--] Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 46, Box 1 Item 011 ubmu0046_011.pdf Alternative Title An alternative name for the resource. The distinction between titles and alternative titles is application-specific. Uniform title: Allegrettos, piano, A♭ major Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. scores (documents for music) Extent The size or duration of the resource. [2] p. of manuscript music, 35 cm. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/NoC-US/1.0/">NO COPYRIGHT – UNITED STATES</a>. The organization that has made the Item available believes that the Item is in the Public Domain under the laws of the United States, but a determination was not made as to its copyright status under the copyright laws of other countries. The Item may not be in the Public Domain under the laws of other countries. Please refer to the organization that has made the Item available for more information. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/269fb593d88904c7060a59800abb3635.pdf a46747422f81e1c65edc273c4cbb132d PDF Text Text State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource The Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891, consists of 484 items, all but a few of which are manuscript scores. Due to the fragile condition of some of the scores, not every score was digitized. As a result, there are only 472 digitized scores in this digital collection. Two of the additional documents received with the collection were also digitized and the digital collection includes digital copies of documents, portraits, and correspondence about the Praeger family generously provided by the great, great grandson of Ferdinand Praeger, Andrew Leach. This is the largest collection of Praeger's musical manuscripts in the world. Nearly all the scores are in Praeger's own hand. The majority of the works are for piano, but the collection also includes chamber music for strings, large ensemble works, vocal works, and sketches. Praeger was born in Leipzig on January 22, 1815, to a Dutch father and an English mother. As a child, he studied cello, piano, and violin. His father, Heinrich Aloys Praeger (1783-1854) worked as a musician, composer, and conductor. In 1831, at the age of 16, Praeger became a music teacher at The Hague and continued to study piano, violin, and composition. He moved to London in 1834, working as a teacher and traveling to give piano recitals, many of which included his own works. Praeger became the London correspondent for Robert Schumann's music journal, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, in 1842. His contributions included highlights of London musical events, reviews of performances, and general discussions about current musical topics. Praeger's compositions were performed in cities across Europe, including Paris, Leipzig, Berlin, Hamburg, and Meiningen. Praeger is perhaps best known today for his connection with Richard Wagner. Following Wagner's death, Praeger wrote the book Wagner, as I Knew Him, which quickly became controversial and was pulled from publication. Wagner followers disputed the book, claiming that Praeger exaggerated his role in Wagner's life and portrayed Wagner in a negative way. The collection has been described in a finding aid available at <a href="http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml">http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml</a> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource University at Buffalo Libraries believe this work to be in the U.S. public domain. This work may not be in the public domain in other countries. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Albumblatt, Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource For piano. Cover title. Cover: Juni 1888. Holograph (Ink) , 50 measures. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1888 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 46, Box 1 Item 010 ubmu0046_010.pdf Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. scores (documents for music) Extent The size or duration of the resource. [2] p. of manuscript music, 31 cm. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/NoC-US/1.0/">NO COPYRIGHT – UNITED STATES</a>. The organization that has made the Item available believes that the Item is in the Public Domain under the laws of the United States, but a determination was not made as to its copyright status under the copyright laws of other countries. The Item may not be in the Public Domain under the laws of other countries. Please refer to the organization that has made the Item available for more information. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/7438901a454c181e26eeee7a3e2e5ee3.pdf a90ab80332b6353552c46cbcb5502fde PDF Text Text State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource The Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891, consists of 484 items, all but a few of which are manuscript scores. Due to the fragile condition of some of the scores, not every score was digitized. As a result, there are only 472 digitized scores in this digital collection. Two of the additional documents received with the collection were also digitized and the digital collection includes digital copies of documents, portraits, and correspondence about the Praeger family generously provided by the great, great grandson of Ferdinand Praeger, Andrew Leach. This is the largest collection of Praeger's musical manuscripts in the world. Nearly all the scores are in Praeger's own hand. The majority of the works are for piano, but the collection also includes chamber music for strings, large ensemble works, vocal works, and sketches. Praeger was born in Leipzig on January 22, 1815, to a Dutch father and an English mother. As a child, he studied cello, piano, and violin. His father, Heinrich Aloys Praeger (1783-1854) worked as a musician, composer, and conductor. In 1831, at the age of 16, Praeger became a music teacher at The Hague and continued to study piano, violin, and composition. He moved to London in 1834, working as a teacher and traveling to give piano recitals, many of which included his own works. Praeger became the London correspondent for Robert Schumann's music journal, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, in 1842. His contributions included highlights of London musical events, reviews of performances, and general discussions about current musical topics. Praeger's compositions were performed in cities across Europe, including Paris, Leipzig, Berlin, Hamburg, and Meiningen. Praeger is perhaps best known today for his connection with Richard Wagner. Following Wagner's death, Praeger wrote the book Wagner, as I Knew Him, which quickly became controversial and was pulled from publication. Wagner followers disputed the book, claiming that Praeger exaggerated his role in Wagner's life and portrayed Wagner in a negative way. The collection has been described in a finding aid available at <a href="http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml">http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml</a> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource University at Buffalo Libraries believe this work to be in the U.S. public domain. This work may not be in the public domain in other countries. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Album leaf [in E flat major] Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource For piano. Caption title. Additional title in caption indecipherable. Holograph (Ink) , 51 measures. Caption: May 88. Corrections on inserts pasted on p. [1]. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1888 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 46, Box 1 Item 009 ubmu0046_009.pdf Alternative Title An alternative name for the resource. The distinction between titles and alternative titles is application-specific. Uniform title: Albumblatt, piano, E♭ major Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. scores (documents for music) Extent The size or duration of the resource. [2] p. of manuscript music, 31 cm. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/NoC-US/1.0/">NO COPYRIGHT – UNITED STATES</a>. The organization that has made the Item available believes that the Item is in the Public Domain under the laws of the United States, but a determination was not made as to its copyright status under the copyright laws of other countries. The Item may not be in the Public Domain under the laws of other countries. Please refer to the organization that has made the Item available for more information. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/f7d7c54e3366f5abe92d5cccfb0ddee7.pdf 4cee389ce7c8058cfd42e03fc8adb030 PDF Text Text State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource The Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891, consists of 484 items, all but a few of which are manuscript scores. Due to the fragile condition of some of the scores, not every score was digitized. As a result, there are only 472 digitized scores in this digital collection. Two of the additional documents received with the collection were also digitized and the digital collection includes digital copies of documents, portraits, and correspondence about the Praeger family generously provided by the great, great grandson of Ferdinand Praeger, Andrew Leach. This is the largest collection of Praeger's musical manuscripts in the world. Nearly all the scores are in Praeger's own hand. The majority of the works are for piano, but the collection also includes chamber music for strings, large ensemble works, vocal works, and sketches. Praeger was born in Leipzig on January 22, 1815, to a Dutch father and an English mother. As a child, he studied cello, piano, and violin. His father, Heinrich Aloys Praeger (1783-1854) worked as a musician, composer, and conductor. In 1831, at the age of 16, Praeger became a music teacher at The Hague and continued to study piano, violin, and composition. He moved to London in 1834, working as a teacher and traveling to give piano recitals, many of which included his own works. Praeger became the London correspondent for Robert Schumann's music journal, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, in 1842. His contributions included highlights of London musical events, reviews of performances, and general discussions about current musical topics. Praeger's compositions were performed in cities across Europe, including Paris, Leipzig, Berlin, Hamburg, and Meiningen. Praeger is perhaps best known today for his connection with Richard Wagner. Following Wagner's death, Praeger wrote the book Wagner, as I Knew Him, which quickly became controversial and was pulled from publication. Wagner followers disputed the book, claiming that Praeger exaggerated his role in Wagner's life and portrayed Wagner in a negative way. The collection has been described in a finding aid available at <a href="http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml">http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml</a> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource University at Buffalo Libraries believe this work to be in the U.S. public domain. This work may not be in the public domain in other countries. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Album leaf Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource For piano. Caption title. Holograph (Ink). "Composed for Miss Maggie Oakey, April 1884"--Caption. Corrections on inserts pasted on both pages. Possibly incomplete. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1884 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 46, Box 1 Item 008 ubmu0046_008.pdf Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. scores (documents for music) Extent The size or duration of the resource. [2] p. of manuscript music, 35 cm. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/NoC-US/1.0/">NO COPYRIGHT – UNITED STATES</a>. The organization that has made the Item available believes that the Item is in the Public Domain under the laws of the United States, but a determination was not made as to its copyright status under the copyright laws of other countries. The Item may not be in the Public Domain under the laws of other countries. Please refer to the organization that has made the Item available for more information. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/29138d117dc89bd407605af1312f40cf.pdf d1503722532e101b86f0ba434767503b PDF Text Text State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource The Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891, consists of 484 items, all but a few of which are manuscript scores. Due to the fragile condition of some of the scores, not every score was digitized. As a result, there are only 472 digitized scores in this digital collection. Two of the additional documents received with the collection were also digitized and the digital collection includes digital copies of documents, portraits, and correspondence about the Praeger family generously provided by the great, great grandson of Ferdinand Praeger, Andrew Leach. This is the largest collection of Praeger's musical manuscripts in the world. Nearly all the scores are in Praeger's own hand. The majority of the works are for piano, but the collection also includes chamber music for strings, large ensemble works, vocal works, and sketches. Praeger was born in Leipzig on January 22, 1815, to a Dutch father and an English mother. As a child, he studied cello, piano, and violin. His father, Heinrich Aloys Praeger (1783-1854) worked as a musician, composer, and conductor. In 1831, at the age of 16, Praeger became a music teacher at The Hague and continued to study piano, violin, and composition. He moved to London in 1834, working as a teacher and traveling to give piano recitals, many of which included his own works. Praeger became the London correspondent for Robert Schumann's music journal, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, in 1842. His contributions included highlights of London musical events, reviews of performances, and general discussions about current musical topics. Praeger's compositions were performed in cities across Europe, including Paris, Leipzig, Berlin, Hamburg, and Meiningen. Praeger is perhaps best known today for his connection with Richard Wagner. Following Wagner's death, Praeger wrote the book Wagner, as I Knew Him, which quickly became controversial and was pulled from publication. Wagner followers disputed the book, claiming that Praeger exaggerated his role in Wagner's life and portrayed Wagner in a negative way. The collection has been described in a finding aid available at <a href="http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml">http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml</a> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource University at Buffalo Libraries believe this work to be in the U.S. public domain. This work may not be in the public domain in other countries. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Adagio religioso Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource For piano. Caption title. Holograph (Ink). Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource [18--] Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 46, Box 1 Item 007 ubmu0046_007.pdf Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. scores (documents for music) Extent The size or duration of the resource. [2] p. of manuscript music, 31 cm. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/NoC-US/1.0/">NO COPYRIGHT – UNITED STATES</a>. The organization that has made the Item available believes that the Item is in the Public Domain under the laws of the United States, but a determination was not made as to its copyright status under the copyright laws of other countries. The Item may not be in the Public Domain under the laws of other countries. Please refer to the organization that has made the Item available for more information. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/62819f8608e6e08d34c8d92c311a4607.pdf 94b5f7fd9a73cb0c9cce61bcc5919524 PDF Text Text State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource The Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891, consists of 484 items, all but a few of which are manuscript scores. Due to the fragile condition of some of the scores, not every score was digitized. As a result, there are only 472 digitized scores in this digital collection. Two of the additional documents received with the collection were also digitized and the digital collection includes digital copies of documents, portraits, and correspondence about the Praeger family generously provided by the great, great grandson of Ferdinand Praeger, Andrew Leach. This is the largest collection of Praeger's musical manuscripts in the world. Nearly all the scores are in Praeger's own hand. The majority of the works are for piano, but the collection also includes chamber music for strings, large ensemble works, vocal works, and sketches. Praeger was born in Leipzig on January 22, 1815, to a Dutch father and an English mother. As a child, he studied cello, piano, and violin. His father, Heinrich Aloys Praeger (1783-1854) worked as a musician, composer, and conductor. In 1831, at the age of 16, Praeger became a music teacher at The Hague and continued to study piano, violin, and composition. He moved to London in 1834, working as a teacher and traveling to give piano recitals, many of which included his own works. Praeger became the London correspondent for Robert Schumann's music journal, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, in 1842. His contributions included highlights of London musical events, reviews of performances, and general discussions about current musical topics. Praeger's compositions were performed in cities across Europe, including Paris, Leipzig, Berlin, Hamburg, and Meiningen. Praeger is perhaps best known today for his connection with Richard Wagner. Following Wagner's death, Praeger wrote the book Wagner, as I Knew Him, which quickly became controversial and was pulled from publication. Wagner followers disputed the book, claiming that Praeger exaggerated his role in Wagner's life and portrayed Wagner in a negative way. The collection has been described in a finding aid available at <a href="http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml">http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml</a> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource University at Buffalo Libraries believe this work to be in the U.S. public domain. This work may not be in the public domain in other countries. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Adagio and allegro con fuoco Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource For piano. Caption title. Holograph (Ink). Caption: 8/4 91. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1891 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 46, Box 1 Item 006 ubmu0046_006.pdf Alternative Title An alternative name for the resource. The distinction between titles and alternative titles is application-specific. Uniform title: Adagio and allegro con fuoco, piano Alternate title: Adagio und allegro con fuoco Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. scores (documents for music) Extent The size or duration of the resource. [2], 4 p. of manuscript music, 31 cm. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/NoC-US/1.0/">NO COPYRIGHT – UNITED STATES</a>. The organization that has made the Item available believes that the Item is in the Public Domain under the laws of the United States, but a determination was not made as to its copyright status under the copyright laws of other countries. The Item may not be in the Public Domain under the laws of other countries. Please refer to the organization that has made the Item available for more information. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/7d10f8b3c1a17dba9c5e6a73e620328b.pdf 8ae2e0945c3242337be43a48c5840232 PDF Text Text State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource The Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891, consists of 484 items, all but a few of which are manuscript scores. Due to the fragile condition of some of the scores, not every score was digitized. As a result, there are only 472 digitized scores in this digital collection. Two of the additional documents received with the collection were also digitized and the digital collection includes digital copies of documents, portraits, and correspondence about the Praeger family generously provided by the great, great grandson of Ferdinand Praeger, Andrew Leach. This is the largest collection of Praeger's musical manuscripts in the world. Nearly all the scores are in Praeger's own hand. The majority of the works are for piano, but the collection also includes chamber music for strings, large ensemble works, vocal works, and sketches. Praeger was born in Leipzig on January 22, 1815, to a Dutch father and an English mother. As a child, he studied cello, piano, and violin. His father, Heinrich Aloys Praeger (1783-1854) worked as a musician, composer, and conductor. In 1831, at the age of 16, Praeger became a music teacher at The Hague and continued to study piano, violin, and composition. He moved to London in 1834, working as a teacher and traveling to give piano recitals, many of which included his own works. Praeger became the London correspondent for Robert Schumann's music journal, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, in 1842. His contributions included highlights of London musical events, reviews of performances, and general discussions about current musical topics. Praeger's compositions were performed in cities across Europe, including Paris, Leipzig, Berlin, Hamburg, and Meiningen. Praeger is perhaps best known today for his connection with Richard Wagner. Following Wagner's death, Praeger wrote the book Wagner, as I Knew Him, which quickly became controversial and was pulled from publication. Wagner followers disputed the book, claiming that Praeger exaggerated his role in Wagner's life and portrayed Wagner in a negative way. The collection has been described in a finding aid available at <a href="http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml">http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml</a> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource University at Buffalo Libraries believe this work to be in the U.S. public domain. This work may not be in the public domain in other countries. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Adagio and allegro agitato Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource For piano. Cover title. Adagio caption: "17th Aug 88", Allegro agitato caption: "Jan. 1891". Holograph (Ink). Sections are numbered separately. Corrections on insert pasted on p. 4 of Allegro agitato. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1888-1891 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 46, Box 1 Item 005 ubmu0046_005.pdf Alternative Title An alternative name for the resource. The distinction between titles and alternative titles is application-specific. Uniform title: Adagio and allegro agitato, piano Alternate title: Adagio und allegro agitato Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. scores (documents for music) Extent The size or duration of the resource. 3, 6 p. of manuscript music, 31 cm. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/NoC-US/1.0/">NO COPYRIGHT – UNITED STATES</a>. The organization that has made the Item available believes that the Item is in the Public Domain under the laws of the United States, but a determination was not made as to its copyright status under the copyright laws of other countries. The Item may not be in the Public Domain under the laws of other countries. Please refer to the organization that has made the Item available for more information. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/04edcbae07058d865ca5f430626303cb.pdf 1ed1e50ca894737aaa25ecf0055a24f1 PDF Text Text State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource The Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891, consists of 484 items, all but a few of which are manuscript scores. Due to the fragile condition of some of the scores, not every score was digitized. As a result, there are only 472 digitized scores in this digital collection. Two of the additional documents received with the collection were also digitized and the digital collection includes digital copies of documents, portraits, and correspondence about the Praeger family generously provided by the great, great grandson of Ferdinand Praeger, Andrew Leach. This is the largest collection of Praeger's musical manuscripts in the world. Nearly all the scores are in Praeger's own hand. The majority of the works are for piano, but the collection also includes chamber music for strings, large ensemble works, vocal works, and sketches. Praeger was born in Leipzig on January 22, 1815, to a Dutch father and an English mother. As a child, he studied cello, piano, and violin. His father, Heinrich Aloys Praeger (1783-1854) worked as a musician, composer, and conductor. In 1831, at the age of 16, Praeger became a music teacher at The Hague and continued to study piano, violin, and composition. He moved to London in 1834, working as a teacher and traveling to give piano recitals, many of which included his own works. Praeger became the London correspondent for Robert Schumann's music journal, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, in 1842. His contributions included highlights of London musical events, reviews of performances, and general discussions about current musical topics. Praeger's compositions were performed in cities across Europe, including Paris, Leipzig, Berlin, Hamburg, and Meiningen. Praeger is perhaps best known today for his connection with Richard Wagner. Following Wagner's death, Praeger wrote the book Wagner, as I Knew Him, which quickly became controversial and was pulled from publication. Wagner followers disputed the book, claiming that Praeger exaggerated his role in Wagner's life and portrayed Wagner in a negative way. The collection has been described in a finding aid available at <a href="http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml">http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml</a> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource University at Buffalo Libraries believe this work to be in the U.S. public domain. This work may not be in the public domain in other countries. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Adagio [in F sharp minor] Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource For piano. Caption title. Holograph (Ink). Bottom of p. 1-2 partially missing. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource [18--] Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 46, Box 1 Item 004 ubmu0046_004.pdf Alternative Title An alternative name for the resource. The distinction between titles and alternative titles is application-specific. Uniform title: Adagios, piano, F♯ minor Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. scores (documents for music) Extent The size or duration of the resource. [3] p. of manuscript music, 31 cm. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/NoC-US/1.0/">NO COPYRIGHT – UNITED STATES</a>. The organization that has made the Item available believes that the Item is in the Public Domain under the laws of the United States, but a determination was not made as to its copyright status under the copyright laws of other countries. The Item may not be in the Public Domain under the laws of other countries. Please refer to the organization that has made the Item available for more information. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/1dff05fcc2fdea3b23f900f37eb5381e.pdf 9cabb6153f4a7ee5099cf1c371c516a1 PDF Text Text State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource The Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891, consists of 484 items, all but a few of which are manuscript scores. Due to the fragile condition of some of the scores, not every score was digitized. As a result, there are only 472 digitized scores in this digital collection. Two of the additional documents received with the collection were also digitized and the digital collection includes digital copies of documents, portraits, and correspondence about the Praeger family generously provided by the great, great grandson of Ferdinand Praeger, Andrew Leach. This is the largest collection of Praeger's musical manuscripts in the world. Nearly all the scores are in Praeger's own hand. The majority of the works are for piano, but the collection also includes chamber music for strings, large ensemble works, vocal works, and sketches. Praeger was born in Leipzig on January 22, 1815, to a Dutch father and an English mother. As a child, he studied cello, piano, and violin. His father, Heinrich Aloys Praeger (1783-1854) worked as a musician, composer, and conductor. In 1831, at the age of 16, Praeger became a music teacher at The Hague and continued to study piano, violin, and composition. He moved to London in 1834, working as a teacher and traveling to give piano recitals, many of which included his own works. Praeger became the London correspondent for Robert Schumann's music journal, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, in 1842. His contributions included highlights of London musical events, reviews of performances, and general discussions about current musical topics. Praeger's compositions were performed in cities across Europe, including Paris, Leipzig, Berlin, Hamburg, and Meiningen. Praeger is perhaps best known today for his connection with Richard Wagner. Following Wagner's death, Praeger wrote the book Wagner, as I Knew Him, which quickly became controversial and was pulled from publication. Wagner followers disputed the book, claiming that Praeger exaggerated his role in Wagner's life and portrayed Wagner in a negative way. The collection has been described in a finding aid available at <a href="http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml">http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml</a> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource University at Buffalo Libraries believe this work to be in the U.S. public domain. This work may not be in the public domain in other countries. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Adagio [in E flat major] Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource For piano. Caption title. Holograph (Ink). Caption: 9/5 90. Corrections on inserts pasted on p. [1, 3]. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1890 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 46, Box 1 Item 003 ubmu0046_003.pdf Alternative Title An alternative name for the resource. The distinction between titles and alternative titles is application-specific. Uniform title: Adagios, piano, E♭ major (1890) Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. scores (documents for music) Extent The size or duration of the resource. [3] p. of manuscript music, 31 cm. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/NoC-US/1.0/">NO COPYRIGHT – UNITED STATES</a>. The organization that has made the Item available believes that the Item is in the Public Domain under the laws of the United States, but a determination was not made as to its copyright status under the copyright laws of other countries. The Item may not be in the Public Domain under the laws of other countries. Please refer to the organization that has made the Item available for more information. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/bec8d7c5a82b3d68b889af128a2b7156.pdf 80f1a8113b8084f2f2888b0eb833a054 PDF Text Text State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource The Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891, consists of 484 items, all but a few of which are manuscript scores. Due to the fragile condition of some of the scores, not every score was digitized. As a result, there are only 472 digitized scores in this digital collection. Two of the additional documents received with the collection were also digitized and the digital collection includes digital copies of documents, portraits, and correspondence about the Praeger family generously provided by the great, great grandson of Ferdinand Praeger, Andrew Leach. This is the largest collection of Praeger's musical manuscripts in the world. Nearly all the scores are in Praeger's own hand. The majority of the works are for piano, but the collection also includes chamber music for strings, large ensemble works, vocal works, and sketches. Praeger was born in Leipzig on January 22, 1815, to a Dutch father and an English mother. As a child, he studied cello, piano, and violin. His father, Heinrich Aloys Praeger (1783-1854) worked as a musician, composer, and conductor. In 1831, at the age of 16, Praeger became a music teacher at The Hague and continued to study piano, violin, and composition. He moved to London in 1834, working as a teacher and traveling to give piano recitals, many of which included his own works. Praeger became the London correspondent for Robert Schumann's music journal, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, in 1842. His contributions included highlights of London musical events, reviews of performances, and general discussions about current musical topics. Praeger's compositions were performed in cities across Europe, including Paris, Leipzig, Berlin, Hamburg, and Meiningen. Praeger is perhaps best known today for his connection with Richard Wagner. Following Wagner's death, Praeger wrote the book Wagner, as I Knew Him, which quickly became controversial and was pulled from publication. Wagner followers disputed the book, claiming that Praeger exaggerated his role in Wagner's life and portrayed Wagner in a negative way. The collection has been described in a finding aid available at <a href="http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml">http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml</a> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource University at Buffalo Libraries believe this work to be in the U.S. public domain. This work may not be in the public domain in other countries. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Adagio [in E flat major] Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource For piano. Title from initial tempo marking. Holograph (Ink). Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource [18--] Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 46, Box 1 Item 002 ubmu0046_002.pdf Alternative Title An alternative name for the resource. The distinction between titles and alternative titles is application-specific. Uniform title: Adagios, piano, E♭ major Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. scores (documents for music) Extent The size or duration of the resource. [2] p. of manuscript music, 38 cm. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/NoC-US/1.0/">NO COPYRIGHT – UNITED STATES</a>. The organization that has made the Item available believes that the Item is in the Public Domain under the laws of the United States, but a determination was not made as to its copyright status under the copyright laws of other countries. The Item may not be in the Public Domain under the laws of other countries. Please refer to the organization that has made the Item available for more information. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/65c2772ede7b3c9ab87aec980b5198f7.pdf 695b22e4410bc1061daa013b975c346f PDF Text Text State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 �State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource The Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891, consists of 484 items, all but a few of which are manuscript scores. Due to the fragile condition of some of the scores, not every score was digitized. As a result, there are only 472 digitized scores in this digital collection. Two of the additional documents received with the collection were also digitized and the digital collection includes digital copies of documents, portraits, and correspondence about the Praeger family generously provided by the great, great grandson of Ferdinand Praeger, Andrew Leach. This is the largest collection of Praeger's musical manuscripts in the world. Nearly all the scores are in Praeger's own hand. The majority of the works are for piano, but the collection also includes chamber music for strings, large ensemble works, vocal works, and sketches. Praeger was born in Leipzig on January 22, 1815, to a Dutch father and an English mother. As a child, he studied cello, piano, and violin. His father, Heinrich Aloys Praeger (1783-1854) worked as a musician, composer, and conductor. In 1831, at the age of 16, Praeger became a music teacher at The Hague and continued to study piano, violin, and composition. He moved to London in 1834, working as a teacher and traveling to give piano recitals, many of which included his own works. Praeger became the London correspondent for Robert Schumann's music journal, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, in 1842. His contributions included highlights of London musical events, reviews of performances, and general discussions about current musical topics. Praeger's compositions were performed in cities across Europe, including Paris, Leipzig, Berlin, Hamburg, and Meiningen. Praeger is perhaps best known today for his connection with Richard Wagner. Following Wagner's death, Praeger wrote the book Wagner, as I Knew Him, which quickly became controversial and was pulled from publication. Wagner followers disputed the book, claiming that Praeger exaggerated his role in Wagner's life and portrayed Wagner in a negative way. The collection has been described in a finding aid available at <a href="http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml">http://purl.org/net/findingaids/view?docId=ead/music/ubmu0046.xml</a> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource University at Buffalo Libraries believe this work to be in the U.S. public domain. This work may not be in the public domain in other countries. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Adagio [in C major] Subject The topic of the resource Music--Manuscripts Piano music Description An account of the resource For piano. Caption title. Holograph (Ink). Dedication in German at bottom of p. [1]: "To Julius, 16 April 1891". Corrections on insert pasted on p. [1]. Paper torn, bottom right corner missing. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Praeger, Ferdinand, 1815-1891 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1891 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 46, Box 1 Item 001 ubmu0046_001.pdf Alternative Title An alternative name for the resource. The distinction between titles and alternative titles is application-specific. Uniform title: Adagios, piano, C major (1891) Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. scores (documents for music) Extent The size or duration of the resource. [2] p. of manuscript music, 35 cm. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Ferdinand Praeger Collection of Scores, circa 1829-1891 Mus. Arc. 46 LIB-MUS025 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/page/NoC-US/1.0/">NO COPYRIGHT – UNITED STATES</a>. The organization that has made the Item available believes that the Item is in the Public Domain under the laws of the United States, but a determination was not made as to its copyright status under the copyright laws of other countries. The Item may not be in the Public Domain under the laws of other countries. Please refer to the organization that has made the Item available for more information. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/77be5d54636c35a981af7fb0998bc297.pdf 8c2d2267611dc3a6959b36448d85c0ee PDF Text Text Dr. Rodgers was invited to speak and give workshops at many conferences including the ones listed below. Following are cover pages, syllabi and agendas for these workshops. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ACSM American Occupational Health Conference Meetings American Society of Biomechanics AOMA National Convention AOTA Can AM Applied Ergonomic Conference ASSE Back Pain Bristol Myers Squibb Health and Safety Conference Brouha Work Physiology Symposium CAIRE CANAM Delaware Occupational Medical Association ErgoCon Ergonomics to Enhance the Bottom Line Genesee Valley Chapter Arthritis Informational Meeting Genesee Valley Safety Conference Greater Rochester Area Rehabilitation Group How To Ergonomics IAPA IBM US Safety Industrial and Technical Conference Industrial Rehabilitation Symposium International Symposium on Global Rehabilitation Trends Lifting and Low Back Pain Seminar Making Your Workplace Safer Meeting Planners Conference NE Safety Health and Environmental Conference NIOSH Ergonomic Conference Orthopedic Therapy Clinic Physical Medicine Institute Reducing Work Injuries and Illness Through Ergonomics Repetitive Motion Injuries Seminar Rochester Area Rehabilitation Professionals Meeting Rochester Safety Council and OSHA SAE-ASSE �• • • • • • • • • Safety Environmental and Health Communications Seminar for Professional Physical Therapy - Wash U Society of Behavioral Medicine Solid Waste Recycling Conference and Tradeshow Strategies to Reduce Employee Medical Costs Symposium on standards for occupational exposures to hot environments Wisconsin PT Association Wisconsin Safety Council Work Physiology Industrial and Occupational Applications �Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Consultant In Ergonomics 169 Huntington Hills - Center Rochester, New York 14622 (716) 544-3587 (716) 266-8749 (FAX) 1997 ACSM Annual Meeting, Denver, CO, May 28-31 Occupational Physiology Interest Group Colloquim: A Template for Occupational Workplace Analysis for the Exercise Scientist Return to Work and Placement and Other Avenues to Effect Work-Related Issues in the Occupational Setting - Suzanne H. Rodgers, PhD, Consultant in Ergonomics, Rochester, NY A. Work Fitness and Work Tolerance 1. Fitness - Short Duration, Heavy Effort 2. Tolerance - Sustained Effort Over Hours, Days, Weeks B. Factors Determining Successful Return to Work or Job Placement 1. Autonomy - Control of Work Pattern 2. Worker Knowledge of Limits - Can Detect Early Signs of Fatigue 3. Administrative Understanding - Risk Factor Knowledge, Flexibility in Providing Temporary Placements to Reduce Injury Exacerbation 4. Medical Understanding - Knowledge of Preventive and Restorative Roles of Exercise in Injury/Illness Management C. Value to Employer of Effective Exercise and Ergonomics Processes 1. Ergonomics Problems are Process Problems 2. Eliminate Excessively-Demanding Jobs 3. Reduce Workers' Compensation Costs and Absenteeism - Decreased Lost Time, Earlier Return to Work 4. Reduce Fatigue - Improved, Sustained Performance, Focus on Quality Not Discomfort Flexibility in Multi-Skilling the Workforce More 5. 3/26/97 SHR L �: Suzanne H. Rodgers, PhD. Consultant In Ergonomics/Human Factors 169 Huntington Hills ROCHESTER, NEW YORK 14622 Job and Work Capacity Evaluation as a Preventive Tool Talk to the American Occupational Health Conference Meetings, Houston, TX, May 3, 1990, Afternoon Session by Sue Rodgers, Ph.D., Consultant in Ergonomics, Rochester, NY A. Overexertion Injuries and Physiological Fatigue .L The Four Components of Physiological Muscle Fatigue a. Force or Effort Intensity- Fiber Recruitment, Circulatory Effects b. Continuous Duration of Effort Before Relaxation - Circulatory Effects, Substrate Depletion, Oxygen Debt c. Frequency ofActivation of Muscle - Recovery Time, Circulatory Responses to Increased Acid in Environment d. Tota/Work or Effort Time per Shift- Metabolic and Cardiovascular Demands, Recovery Time Between Shifts, Cumulative Effects/Aggravation 2. Factors That Determine Effort Intensity for Major Muscle Groups a. Neck/Shoulders b. Back c. Arms/Elbows d. Hands/Wrists/Fingers e. Legs/Knees f. Ankles/Feet/foes .1. Interactions of Force. Frequency, and Duration - Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique a. Rating Scheme b. Problem Example - Overhead Handling 4. Work Time Effects - Aerobic Demands a. Whole and Upper Body Work Capacities b. Metabolic and Heart Rate Responses to Overhead Handling c. Acceptable Load as a Function of Work Time 5. Designing Jobs Ergonomically to Accommodate the Capacities of Most Workers a. % Strength vs Duration and Frequency- Grip, Other Muscle Groups b. Weight Lifted in Manual Handling Tasks c. Metabolic Guidelines �,. 0 Occupational Applications of Biomechanics Keynote address to the American Society of Biomechanics· 13th Annual Meeting at the University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont, August 23-25, 1989 Outline A. Videotape Review_ of 8 Industrial or Service Sector Jobs B. Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique - Fatigue Model Basis C. Application to Repetitive Tasks - Muscle vs Tendon/Joint Basis D. Determining Effort Intensity - Importance of Biomechanics E. Need for Further Biomechanics Research in Applied Ergonomics Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D C ONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE. EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544.3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �Occupational Ergonomics Matching Job Demands and Worker Capabilities 6-Hour Seminar for the April, 1986 AOMA National Convention in Denver, Colorado Faculty: Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. , Consultant in Ergonomics/Human Factors, Rochester, New York David M. Kiser, Ph.D. , Group Leader of the Ergonomics Section, Health and Environment Laboratories, Eastman Kodak Company, Rochester, New York Donald Day, Exercise Physiologist and Ergonomist, Safety Services, Eastman Kodak, Windsor, Colorado· April 29, 1986 '\ �Acknowledgements · The anthropometric and reach/height interaction data on pages 13, 15, 17, 19, and 20 are token from the Eastmon Kodak Human Factors Section's Ergonomic Design for People at �vork, Volume 1 published by Lifetime Learning (now part of Van Nostrand Reinhold) in 1983. The material on pages 37, 38, 49, and 50-52 is from S.H. Rodgers, Working with Backoche, published by Perinton Press in 1985. Other material is either referenced or prepared by Dr. Rodgers. Permission to reproduce unreferenced material should be obtained from her. 1/31/86 SHR �Occupational Ergonomics Seminar • Table of Contents Topic Page Acknowledgements Table of Contents Goals of the Seminar - Ergonomics and Occupational t'ledicine Postural Dernands an,j Job Performance Static t'luscle vv'ork - Intensity/Duration vv'ork/Recovery Needs for Static Work Human Variab1lity Anthropometric Data Height and Reach Interaction , General Guidelines for Using Anthropometric Data Case Study - Assembly Line Workplaces Work Restrictions and Workplace Design # 1 2 3 5 6 8 12 14 ' 19 21 23 26 Repetitive Work and Risk Factors for Repetitive Motions DisordersFactors Affecting Grip Strength Case Study: Tool Use Work Restrictions and Repetitive Work 27 28 31 34 �-1anual Handling Task Design and Evaluation Forces - Design Guidelines Acceptable Lifts - NI0SH Guidelines Frequent Lifts Case Study: Manual Handling 'w'ork Restrictions and Manual Handling . 35 40 42 49 50 53 Paced V1ork/Time Pressure Case Study: Paced Work - Food Service Wcirk .Restrictions and Mental/Perceptual Work 54 57 59 Ergonomics Bit,Hography / Faculty Resurnes 64 66 '�. �AOMA Occupational Ergonomics Seminar Goals: To increase awareness of iob demands that contribute to occupational illness, injury and stress. To learn ergonomics principles can be applied to workplace, environment, tool, and job design in order to reduce occupational illness and disability. To examine common medical restrictions from work . To evaluate their appropriateness as well as other approaches to help return peopl e to work after illness or injury. 1/15/86 SHR ��Ergonomics Job Sati sf action Productivity Quality ... - . � Safety Work Programs SIS Program: A Practical Problem-Solving Approach to Ergonomics, AOTA Can/Am Conference, 2:30 to 5:00 PM, July 10, 1994, Boston, MA Outline A. B. C. D. The Fatigue Model for Injury Prevention Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique Manual Handling Analyses Problem Solving for Cost-Effective Risk Reduction Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY TllROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. lRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT ANO .PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Consultant In Ergonomics 169 Huntington Hills - Center Rochester, New York 14622 (716) 544-3587 (716) 266-8749 (FAX) Lessons Learned: Ergonomics in the Trenches Keynote Presentation to the 3rd Annual Applied Ergonomics Conference on March 15th, 2000, Los Angeles, CA A. 32 Years in a Nutshell 1. I learn something new every day. I have probably made every mistake in the book, but have done that in a supportive atmosphere. 2. The experts are the people doing the jobs. One cannot understand a job without going into the workplace and gathering information from the people who do it. 3. My job as a consultant/trainer is to teach the workers and support staff to help themselves and to teach the designers to think like ergonomists 4. The best solutions are found when workers and support staff analyze jobs together. They approachjobs more globally. 5. Keep asking ''Why?'' respectfully, until the entire surround of the job is clear (psychosocial and physical environment). 6. There are many ways to improve problem jobs. My job is to keep options open until someone else identifies an effective solution that they can live with. They must take ownership if the program is to thrive. 7. I have tremendous respect for the people who work in manufacturing and service jobs, construction and skilled trades, and in offices across North America. They do high quality work, sometimes in difficult settings, and they often do not mention their discomfort or fatigue because they take pride in their work. Our job should be to make it easy for them to do their best work with a low risk for injuries and illnesses to occur. Ergonomics is the way that goal can be accomplished. �B. Lessons Learned in the T�enches . .. ·"' 1. Workplace Evaluations - Job Analyses a. Always make sure that someone is with you who really knows the job and the people doing it. b. Always introduce yourself and explain why you are there. Meet with the team leader or supervisor ahead of time so they know why you are there and that you will be talking with the workers. c. Make yourself the student of the person who does the job. Have them show you what they do and ask respectful questions to learn more. d. Observe what happens when things are going well, and what happens when problems occur on the job. If no problems occur, ask what could go wrong and how frequently it happens. e. Learn what the quality requirements are, and review the quality data posted in the workplace to see if ergonomics problems may contribute to errors. f. If videotapes are needed for further job analysis or for presentations of problems and solutions at later sessions, give the plant a simple, but thorough, set of instructions for how to take them and let them keep control of them. If necessary, stay after hours to do your own analysis of them if there is a reluctance to have the tapes leave the plant. Always show the whole body on the videos; only zero in on a specific body part for short periods. g. When in a plant, observe the ceiling and roof support, HVAC, cranes, and other facility designs before making suggestions to change the location or orientation of a workplace. Ask people on the floor, engineers, and mechanics about the design constraints in the workplace area. h. Remember that there is always a reason why people do what they do. If they are not wearing protective equipment or following a standard operating procedure, there is usually a good reason why. We need to identify that reason and fix it rather than focusing on worker behavior modification and punishment. �1. J. After evaluating a job or doing a risk assessment, always share your ideas for improvements with the workers in order to be sure you had all of the relevant information. But, do not suggest that there is only one way to improve the situation or that they can expect a specific piece of equipment in a short time. Emphasize the strategy rather than a piece of equipment: e.g., making lifts above knee height rather than putting in a lift table. Stimulate their creativity to;find 3 ways they could lift above their knee height with a budget of $ 200 apiece for the improvements. Never write a report without first sitting down with the people who will be funding the changes and reviewing the risks, the strategies for reducing the risk for injury, and why you have chosen the solution that will be in the final report. Leave room for additional suggestions from the managers and supervisors. 2. Office Ergonomics a. People cannot see themselves when they are working at a desk or computer. Teach them to watch each other and write down what they see or use a checklist to describe the postures. b. Instead of telling people to sit up straight and not do what they are doing (like sitting on a foot), try to figure out why ? they are doing that, or what benefit they get from doing it. Observe carefully and then look for the driving factors. c. Remember that many of the postural variations ones sees in the office setting are driven by visual comfort needs. Evaluate the person's preferred reading distance using hard copy at their workplace, and then compare that distance to the distance their eyes are from the hard copy if they sit in an upright posture. d. Avoid the fallacy that every backache needs a chair, every wrist problem needs a wrist rest or keyboard tray, and every neck and shoulder pain needs a monitor stand. Define what is causing the postural or visual discomfort and fix that, often with a rearrangement of items in the workplace. 3, �e. Avoid the situation where the only way a person can get a decent chair is to have back pain. Phase in ergonomically-designed chairs and equipment on an announced schedule; doing this over 3 years has been found to be acceptable in some companies once the reasons for who got first attention were made clear. f. Initiate a Lending Library for other workplace assist devices, such as document holders, monitor stands, footrests, etc. Have people evaluate their workplace before borrowing an item from the Library so the appropriate type of assist is found. If, after using a particular assist for a week, the worker is able to work more comfortably, the department can buy the assist from the Library or from an office supplies store with whom the company has a contract. g. Simplicity in the design of the office workplace is preferable to having 6 degrees of adjustability in every chair, keyboard support, worksurface, and monitor support. People rarely change much except the height of the chair once they are in their workplace, and even that is not changed often if they share the workplace with another person on a second shift. h. It is difficult to design an office unless you know what people are doing. The need for certain features will be best determined by the tasks being done, yet the choice of furniture and space is usually made on the basis of the office hierarchy. 3. Ergonomics in Workplace, Equipment, Environment, and Job Design a. The goal is to design so that the largest majority of the potential workforce is accommodated. If one has to compromise, one compromises towards the existing workforce's capabilities. b. Workers don't get angry if you make it easier for them to reach their production goals and to be able to do quality work. Pay systems and accounting practices may make these improvements Lj, �c. d. e. f. g. undesirable, however, so solutions have to be worked out with all interested parties involved. The largest satisfier in most jobs is when the worker has control over the way he or she performs the job. If the desired productivity is known, the quality needs are clear, and the safety requirements are defined, most people can accomplish their tasks in a way that minimizes their fatigue over the shift. If they are forced into a non-optimal work pattern by line speed, semi automation, or enforcement of a particular work pattern that someone else had determined to be optimal, they often experience more stress and fatigue on the job. A designer should understand the potential jobs that will be done before designing a piece of equipment or a workplace. Simulations of workplaces or equipment that are made without identifying the tasks to be performed in them are likely to have problems when they are installed in the plant. The instruction booklets for equipment and for training people on production machines are a gold mine for identifying ergonomics problems before one even goes to the floor. Ergonomics is not very effective if it becomes part of a sign-off function in a design process. Designers should learn to think like ergonomists and learn the value of soliciting input from the people who will operate the equipment once it is on the floor. This should be done in the very early stages of design; a post mortem on the previous equipment or layout should also be done. Ergonomics guidelines should be incorporated into the whole design, not patched in after the equipment has been prototyped. Materials flow is often considered separate from ergonomics when a work area is being laid out, yet they are inextricably linked. Minimizing non-value-added handling tasks along a production line is desirable, but it also has ergonomic consequences for the workers if things go wrong on the line. There must be design contingencies to allow the workers to C �,. .. , I J Practical Ergonomics in the Workplace ASSE Triad Chapter Professional Development Conference April 13th, 1989, Ramada Inn Airport, Greensboro, NC _j Morning Session Syllabus _J A. Introduction and Overview B. Posture and Productivity ___j C. Back Anatomy and Related Risk Factors .. _j D. Ergonomic Approach to Job Design/Materials Handling _j E. Overview of Repetitive Motions Problems 7 _j Specializing In Ergonomics and Musculoskelelal Managemenl Programs __J • .J I O,ulu1hio.l !Bwmul'ut11Uli, £1,ui. P.O. Box 526 Oak Ridge, N.C. 27310 Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" Carole Hunter, M.S./L.P.T. President 919-643-7706 FAX:919-643-9646 t. AWARENESS SEMINARS Z. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS Cynthia L. Lewis, M.S./L.P.T. FAX: 919,643,9646 C7111 sc.t�7 • 189 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER. N.Y. 14622 �GENESEE VALLEY CHAPTER NEWSLETTER December, 2001 ____!..-._________ "PRACTICAL ERGONOMI Green Lantern Inn At the intersection of NYRoute31F (East Church Street) and NY Route 250 (South Main Street) AMERICAN SO OF SAFETY ENG GENESEE VALLEY FAIRPORT, 01 MONDAY, DECE Am ·can Society of Safety Engineers ne ee Valley Chapter kbriar Drive esfer, NY 14616-2350 ,J ·•. �BACK PAIN - '84 September 6-7, 1984 Sheraton-Atlanta Hotel Atlanta, GA Conference Agenda Wednesday, Septembers, 1984 OPTIONAL SESSION I 1 (2:00 PM - 5:00 PM) PIEDHORT ROOK Management strategies for the severely disabled • pain clinics • counseling• rehabilitation Gary W. Jay, MD Thursday, September 6, 1984 GENERAL SESSIONS (8:30 AM - 12:00 PM) ATLARTA BALLROOM ORE 8:30 - 8:45 • Welcome and announcements 8:45 - 9:15 • Marketing: increasing revenue by effec tively sel ling your services Ron Porter, RPT 9: 15 - 9:45 • How to recognize and manage psychogenic back pain Floyd P. Garrett, MD 9:45 - 10:15 ••Coffee Break•• ATLDTA BALLROON FOIBR 10:15 - 10:45 • The Back School approach - how to organize and implement a successful program Nancy Selby 10:45 - 12:00 • Making sense or controversies in diagnosis and treatment • Diagnostic procedures • Inversion therapy •· Chymopapain • Common drugs Henry L. Feffer, MD - Moderator Richard E. Hester, D C Gary W. Jay, MD Ron Porter, RPT 12:00 - 1:00 ••Lunch** ATLARTA B.ALLROOHS TRUE & FOUR �• Controversies in treatment (continued) o Manipulation o TENS and acupuncture o Case discussions by a panel of experts 1:00 - 2:30 ••Coffee Break•• ATLARTl BALLROOM FOID 2:30 - 3:00 3:00 - 3:30 • Widening the scope or your services: a multidisciplinary approach Gary W. Jay, MD 3:30 - 4:00 • Legal perils: strategies to help you avoid common back pain liabilities Richard Galiher, Jr., JD 4:00 - 5:00 • Back pain in court: mock trial helps protect you and your patients Richard Galiher, Jr., JD WINE & CHEESE RECEPTION (6:00 PM - 7:00 PM) ATLJIITA BALLROOMS TBBBI & FOUR Friday, September 1, 1984 GENERAL SESSIONS (8:30 AM - 10:45 AM) ATLAIITl BALLROOM ORE • The legalities of psychiatric claims: planning your strategy Merton Marks, JD 8:30 - 9:45 ••Coffee Break•• .ITLARTl BALLROOM FOIBR 9:45 - 10:15 10:15 - 10:45 • Workers' compensation: practical tips to guide you through the disability evaluation process Merton Marks, JD CONCURRENT WORKSHOPS (10:45 AM - 12:15 AM) COAST.IL ROOM • WS# 1 Reimbursement: ensuring you get every penny you're entitled to from third party payers Kenneth Roberge, BS, MBA CUHBBILABD ROOM • WS# 2 Workplace back pain: practical strategies to help cut the cost to employers Helen Abrahams, RN �PIBDMOIT ROOM • ws, BLUE RIDGE A • WS# 4 3 Hospital back clinics: how to start one and successfully market it to your community Nancy Selby Educational materials that work : creating aids for your back school or industrial setting Ron Porter, · RPT **Lunch** lTLARTl BALLROOMS THREE & FOUR 12: 15 - 1: 45 CONCURRENT WORKSHOPS (1:45 PM - 3:15 PM) COMBERLDD ROOM • WS# 6 Practical ergonom ics: applications that correct workplace hazards Suzanne Rodgers, PhD PIEDMONT ROOM • WS# 8 Creating and implementing effec tive exercise programs for pa tients and employees Ron Porter, RPT COASTAL BOOM • WSI 9 Industrial clinics: practical tips from a successful Midwestern hospital Jan R. Douglas, MPH, OTR • WS# 10 Psychological testing: what do the MMPI and other tests really tell us? Floyd P. Garrett, MD BLUE RIDGE A ••coffee Break•• ATLARTA BALLROOM FOYER 3:15 - 3:30 GENERAL SESSION (3:30 ATLARTA BALLROOM ORE 3:30 - 4:15 4:15 - 4:45 PM - 4:30 PM) • Simple strategies for incorporating effective patient education into your practice· Nancy Selby • Wrap-up and adjourn �"'Suzanne H. Rodgers, PhD. Consultant In Ergonomics/Human Factors 169 Huntington Hills ROCHESTER, NEW YORK 14622 Bristol-Myers Squibb Health and Safety Conference, Saddlebrook, FL, November 13-15, 1991 Ergonomics Table of Contents Topic Page Ergonomic Goals The Costs of Poor Design General Industry Ergonomics Guideline Thoughts on Ergonomics Programs and Processes Anthropometric Data Standing Height and Reach Interaction Work/Recovery Curves Ergonomic Job Analysis Form Table 2: Examples of Muscle Effort Levels Risk Factors for Repetitive Tasks/Grip Strength Risk Factor Analysis Form Occasional Lift Guidelines S.H. Rodgers' Bibliography 1 2 4 5 8 9 1O 11 14 15 16 17 18 Acknowletlgements The illustrations on pages 9 and 17 are used with permission from Eastman Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volumes 1 and 2 published by Van Nostrand Reinhold. The illustration on page 8 is from Working ,With Backache by S. H. Rodgers. Information on page 11 has been developed in conjunction with Dr. Inger Williams. Work/recovery curves based on those on page 10 have been published by Thieme Publishers in Seminars in Occupational Medicine in March 1987. The analytical technique on page 11 has been published by Hanley and Belfuss in a 1988 Occupational Medicine: State of the Art Review edition on Worker Fitness Evaluations. The outline on page 4 is adapted from a draft copy of a proposed ergonomics guideline for general industry by OSHA written in September, 1990. All other material in this syllabus is by Dr. S.H. Rodgers and permission to reproduce it must be obtained from her. (716) 544-3587 �Brouha Work Physiology Symposium State College, PA - September 9-12, 1985 Hospital Patient Tray Assembly - Paced Work and Low Back Pain I. A. B. The Job - Film Perceived Problem/Union Grievance Duration/Volume/Turnover II. Conveyor Pacing .A. Conveyor Rate - Setting vs Actual B. Error Rates - Quality Control c. Other Ways to Stop the Line III. Analysis of Job Factors Contributing to Back Discomfort A. Postures B. Pacing - Time in Station C. Visibility of Menu D. Workplace Orientation IV. A. B. C. D. Problem Resolution Conveyor Pacing Use of Stools Menu Design Work Distribution 9/5/85 S.H. Rodgers �Tray Loading and Unloading Rates I. Existing Job A. Conveyor Speed Maximum = B. Loading Rate 8 trays/minute average Range = 1 to 15/minute C. Unloading Rate Range Errors = = = = = 0.4 feet/second 20 trays per minute 7 to 8/minute average 3 to 12/minute 15% of trays Other errors detected on patient floors Time in Station: 5 seconds on average Time to Put Items on Tray: 2 to 11 seconds Time from Menu 3 feet Away to Tray Past Worker: 7.5 seconds at 8 travs/minute II. Recommended Changes A. Reduce Conveyor Speed by 20-25% 1. 15 trays per minute maximum rate 2. Time in Station: about 6 seconds on average 3. Time from Menu 3 Feet Away to Past Worker = 9 seconds at 8 trays/minute 4. Probable Decreased Error Rate 5. Decreased Twisting - Probable Reduced Back Discomfort 6. Anticipated 15-20% Improvement in Productivity B. C. D. III. 1. 2. Provide Chairs for Checkers and Try Them at Some Other Stations Balance Chair Use with Required Reaches, Need to Turn Let Employees Find Best Use for Chairs on the Line Form�t Changes and Type Size Changes on Menu Rebalancing of Some Line Assignments Follow Up A. B. C. Reduced Low Back Discomfort Improved Quality of Trays - Fewer Errors Job Reputation Improved - Improved Job Satisfaction 9/5/85 S.H. Rodqers �JUICES Cranberry Grape REGULAR Tomato Soup of the Day Served with Crackers * Manhattan Clam Chowder * Chicken a la King Over Rice Apple Appetizer- Gouda Cheese and Crackers DINNER ENTREES Prune Fruit Select ion- Citrus Sections DAILY SPECIALS * Eggs Scrambled with Mushrooms Home Fried Potatoes Vegetable- * Seasoned Broccoli Cuts TODAY'S SALADS CHOICE OF POTATO/STARCH Whipped Potatoes VEGETABLES Ital Ian 1000 Island French Low Calorie Red Cabbage Slaw with Pineapple DESSERT CHOICES * Individual Vanilla Tart w Vanilla Wafer Applesauce BEVERAGES Coffee * Tea Decaf. Coffee Iced Tea Whole Milk * 2%Milk Skim Milk Ice Cream Water Ice Gelatin ACCOMPANIMENTS Cream Lemon Sugar Salt Pepper Ketchup Mustard Mayonnaise NAME Rm ____ DIET NAME _____________ Rm ____ Hi .�ro Drink Skim Milk AFTERNOON NOURISHMENT Cinnamon Danish * Beans O'Brien -Snaps/ Peppers/Lima Beans DRESSINGS Tossed Fruit Juice �ilk JUICES * Orange Baked Fish Creole Quiche Lorraine BREADS Pineapple * Baked Lasagna LUNCHEON ENTREES White * Wheat Soft Roll * Margarine Butter JUICES Lemonade ._,, tr.-r,,1'\.I r,.U I REGULAR Hot Cereal- * Oat Bran DINNER SALAD DRESSINGS * Tossed Italian 1000 Island French Low Calorie DESSERT CHOICES Ice Cream Water Ice Gelatin * Fruit Cocktail Pineapple Whip BRE.IIDS White * Wheat Soft Rol 1 * Margarine Butter BEVERAGES ACCOMPANIMENTS Coffee * Tea Decaf. Coffee Iced Tea Whole Ml lk 2% Milk Skim Milk Cream Lemon Sugar Salt Pepper Ketchup Mustard Mayonnaise COLO CEREALS Cornflakes Rice Krlspies 40% Bran Flakes Puffed Rice Raisin Bran Cheerios Special K Al 1 Bran Shredded Wheat Puffed Wheat BEVERAGES * Coffee Tea Decaf. Coffee Whole Milk * 2% Milk Skim Milk Cocoa BREADS * Toasted White Toasted Wheat English Muffin Toasted Bagel Croissant * Margarine Butter Cream Cheese Preserves ACCOMPANIMENTS Cream Lemon Sugar Salt Pepper Ketchup Rm ____ NAME Rm ____ NAME _____________ Rm ____ NAME Rm ____ . NAME DIET Fruit Juice Milk Skim Ml lk Ht Pro Drink Ginger Ale Diet Soda Cola Crackers DIET Fruit Juice HI Pro Drink �Carefully Circle Choices By 12:00 Noon Carefully Circle Choices By 12:00 Noon CHILLED FRUIT AND JUICES )range �pple Grape Prune Tomato Grapefruit ,tewed Prunes Grapefruit Sections Fresh Fruit :ornflakes lice Krispies [0% Bran Cheerios Special K All Bran Cream of Wheat TO START YOUR DAY Scrambled Egg made from modified egg fat substitute Pancakes or French Toast Syrup READS BEVERAGES CONDIMENTS oasted White oasted Wheat Coffee Decaf Coffee Tea Decaf Tea Margarine Jelly nglish Muffin · oasted Bagel Skim Milk Creamer �AME.._. ________ )IET Mashed Potato Baked Potato Rice Italian 1000 Island French Zero Tossed LF VEGETABLE CHOICES Wax Beans Mixed Vegetable Broccoli LF DRESSINGS LF DINNER SALAD Tossed Fruited Cherry Gelatin DESSERT CHOICES Fruit Cocktail BREADS BEVERAGES CONDIMENTS Salt Pepper Sugar White Wheat Soft Roll lemon Juice Ketchup Margarine Coffee Decaf Coffee Tea Decaf Tea Cream lemon Sugar Salt Pepper Ketchup Mustard Mayonnaise --- RM LF POTATO OR STARCH Shepard's Pie Corn Spinach Green Beans TODAYS LF SALADS Iced Tea Skin-t Milk FAT CONTROLLED -------------- NAME DIET --- RM Baked Ham Spaghetti With Meat Sauce LF VEGETABLE CHOICES FAT CONTROLLED ------ LF DINNER ENTREES Onion Sliced Turkey Pineapple lemonade Grape LF LUNCHEON ENTREES Puffed Rice Puffed Wheat Raisin Bran Oatmeal JUICES SOUP OF THE DAY (With Crackers) CEREAL • Carefully Circle Choices By 12:00 Noon • JUICES Cranberry ,, UINNt:H ....u1\llvn LF DRESSINGS Italian 1000 Island French Zero DESSERT CHOICES Pear Halves BREADS. BEVERAGES CONDIMENTS White Wheat Soft Roll Coffee Decaf Coffee Tea Decaf Tea Cream Lemon Sugar Salt Pepper Ketchup Mustard Mayonnaise Margarine Iced Tea Skim Milk FAT CONTROLLED NAME________ DIET ------- --- RM �Suzanne H. Rodgers, PhD. Consultant In Ergonomics/Human Factors 169 Huntington Hills ROCHESTER, NEW YORK 14622 "Doing It Right the First Time" -Teaching Ergonomics Design Principles to Company Engineers Brouha Conference, Spring Hill, TN, September 2-4, 1992 A. Reactive vs. Proactive Approaches 1. Drivers for Retrofitting 2. Drivers for New Design 3. Using Reactive Projects to Illustrate Need for Proactive Approaches B. Building a Design Team 1. Sources of Designs 2. Site Visits - Gathering Information - Questions 3. Myths That Must Be Addressed 4. Establishing Communication Links C. Approaches to New Design 1. Review of Existing Designs 2. Design Guidelines - Where to Be, How Serious if Not in that "Space" 3. Ergonomics from the Ground Up - Conceptual Level 4. When to Automate 5. Review Processes 8/27/92 SHR/bl (716) 544-3587 �. .· . . . · · ... · :· · . .. · ' .. . . • . · · · • < . a h ll O r B 7 199 .: .. ·. , . . . workPh_ysiology SyrnpqS'jfrrh . .,. . . . . .. ·. . . . �· . . . . .. . . . . . : . .. � ·. . • . <· . .· .·•·• . .. . . . . ·', ..) . . . • . i . .: .·>['u cle n.·.·:B ro ·u htl . . . . . . •· · •.·11th j\nnUal Meetirig· < /. ,· · ..·.·.•· · ·. NI.OSH Research . Labo�atori�s: ·. . . ... . . .. ·. "' :_ ·.1095 Wi llo. wdale Road . • · · . . _ , . _ · · ·Morgantown; West\�irginia _.· ·' . · . · . :::-; · _· _ · :· :·__ ·_ ·.: .-S,eptember 3.to·s-,.·: i'?9ti . .. . ,:• . '. : . - . . . . ' · · · ·_ . : · . . , Hosted by the N�tj.o�al� Instittite for Oc�upationai Safety and Health. · ; .. . . . . . : . . ... ·. , .. . . . . . . . . �2003 Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium Research and Practice Williamsville, NY September 10th -September 12th , 2003 �Chronology of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposiums Year Location Hosts 1961 Washington, D.C. Initial Organizers (Davis, Miller, Pierce, P.Smith, etc) H.Davis, C.I. Miller P. Smith A. Henschel H.Davis and C. Miller T. Yoder, R. Lucas S.Snook J. Brown· 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 ( Rochester, NY Haskell Laboratories, DuPont, Wilmington, DE NIOSH, Cincinnati, OH Kodak, Rochester, NY Eli Lilly & Co., Indianapolis, IN Boston, MA, Liberty Mutual Toronto, Ontario, Canada, Ontario Ministry of Labour Kansas City, Western Electric/AT&T 1969* Washington, DC, St Louis Univ Medical School 1970 in St Louis, MO 1971** Quebec, Canada, Ontario Ministry of Labour, Alcan Ann Arbor, Ml, Center for Occupational 1972 Ergonomics Fairborn, OH, Webb Associates 1973 Cincinnati, OH, NIOSH 1974 University Park, PA, Penn State 1975 Atlanta, GA, Georgia Tech 1976 Indianapolis, IN, Eli Lilly 1977 Kodak, Rochester, NY 1978 Estes Park, CO, IBM 1979 Cambridge, MA, Liberty Mutual 1980 NIOSH, Cincinnati, OH 1981 Texas Tech, Lubbock, TX 1982 Western Electric, Hopewell, NJ 1983 1984 Kodak, Rochester, NY 1985 Penn State Univ., University Park, PA Deere & Co., Moline, IL 1986 1987 Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA Jackson, TN, Jackson Clinic 1988 1989 Estes Park, CO, Kodak Colorado General Motors, Oklahoma City, OK 1990 Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 1991 1992 Spring Hill, TN, Saturn Corporation University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 1993 Yellow Springs, OH, Anthropology Research 1994 Associates Toyota, Georgetown, KY 1995 Auburn Engineers, Auburn University, AL 1996 NIOSH, Morgantown, WV 1997 Seattle Center, Seattle, WA - 3 consultants 1998 University of Windsor, Windsor, Ontario, 1999 Canada Univ. of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 2000 Hewlett Packard InkJet Plant, Corvalis, Oregon, 2001 Oregon State State Compensation Insurance Fund, Clayton 2002 Group, and University of California, San Francisco, CA Univ. at Buffalo; SUNY, Amherst, NY 2003 F.Damon A. Lind J. Brown D. Chaffin, G. Herrin P. Webb F. Dul<es-Dobos E. Kaman T. Sadowsky T. Yoder & H. Fouchee S. Rodgers and P. Champney J. Morrison S. Snook H. Buescher, D. Badger J. Smith H. Foushee D. Kiser and P. Champney J.L. Pytel & A. Freivalds G. Lovested & H. Hohensee K.H.E. Kroemer B. Erb D.Day W. Young B. Marras M. Gladde.n T. Cook J. Annis M. Gladden M. Seay & D. Alexander, R. Thomas T. Pizatella & J. McGlothlin --�: W. Brough; I. Chong, P. Champney S. Dutta J.W. Yates J. Buresh, S. Middleton, and J. Woldstad R.J. Banks, C.Shulenberger, and I. Janowitz V. Paquet and S. Rodgers *At this meeting, participants adopted Dr. Brouha's name for identification of the conferences. ** Winter meeting �Registered Attendees 2003 Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium Shona Anderson President Anderson Ergonomics Consulting Inc. 279 Hampstead Way NW Calgary, Alberta T3A6E6 Canada ph: (403) 241-7887 fax; (403) 547.-6174 shona@andersoi1 °ergo.ca Anthony D. Banks Ergonomist Eastman Kodak Company 1669 Lake Avenue Rochester, NY 14652-4387 Office (585) 477 - 5328 Fax: (585) 477-4304 Marty Barnes Motorola, Inc. Jamison Road Elma, NY martha.barnes@motorola.com Isaac Barsky Department of. Industrial and Manufacturing Systems Engineering University of Windsor 230 Essex Hall 401 Sunset Avenue Windsor,. Ontario Canada N9B 3P4 Phone: (519) 253-3000 x. 2607 barsky@uwindsor.ca Valerie Beecher Duke University Occupational and Environmental Safety Office Ergonomics Division 2200 W. Main Street Wachovia Bldg. Box 3834, Durham, NC 27710 Telephone 919-286-1722 X272 Fax (919) 286-6763 valerie.beecher@duke.edu Ann Bisantz 342 Bell Hall Department of Industrial Engineering University at Buffalo, State University of New York Buffalo, NY 14260 Phone: (716) 645-2357 x 2474 bisantz@eng.buffalo.edu Lisa Brooks Group Leader - H&S Regulatory Affairs International Paper (901) 419-3943 Lisa.Brooks@ipaper.com Colin Drury 342 Bell Hall Department of Industrial Engineering University at Buffalo, State University of New York Buffalo, NY 14260 Phone: (716) 645-2357 x 2474 drury@buffalo.edu ;-. David Feathers RERC UD Department of Industrial Engineering University at Buffalo, State University of New York feathers@eng.buffalo.edu Ken Glass HSE Coordinator, Global Manufacturing & Technology Shops Division Eastman Kodak Company 2400 Mt. Read Blvd. Rochester, NY 14650-3053 Office 585 - 726 -2643 Fax 585 - 726 -6793 email: kenneth.glass@kodak.com �Katie Marshall Center for Integrated Manufacturing Studies· 133 Lomb Memorial Drive Rochester, NY 14623 Phone (585) 475-5390 Fax (585) 475-5455 marshall@reman.rit.edu Matt Marshall Department Industrial & Systems Engineering Rochester Institute of Technology (585)475-7260 mmmeie@rit.edu Vic Paquet 342 Bell Hall Department of Industrial Engineering University at Buffalo, State University of New York Buffalo, NY 14260 Phone: 716-645-2357 x 2474 vpaquet@eng.buffalo.edu Hemant Prabhu Department of Industrial Engineering University at Buffalo, State University of New York Buffalo, NY 14260 Phone: 716-645-2857 x 2474 hemantp@yahoo.com Randy Raybourn The University of Michigan Center for Ergonomics 1205 Beal Avenue, IOE Building Ann Arbor, Ml 48109-2117 Phone: (734) 763-0567 Fax: (734) 764-3451 E-mail:rrabourn@umich.edu Sue Rodgers Ergonomics Consultant 160 Huntington Hills, Center Rochester, NY 14622 SHRODGERS@aol.com John Rosecrance Environmental & Radiological Health Sciences 1681 Campus Delivery Colorado State University Fort Collins, CO 80523 Phone: 970-491-1405 Fax: 970-491-2940 john.rosecrance@colostate.edu Diane Stinson HealthWorks Ergonomics and Injury Prevention Consultants 220 1010-8th Avenue SW Calgary, AB Candada, T2P 1J2 Phone: (403) 234-8222 Fax: (403) 234-8268 Email:dstinson@healthworks.ca Robert (Rob) Thomas Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849-5346 (334) 844-1420 rthomas@ehg.auburn.edu �Agenda -� , ) ____ _ Note: DL - Discussion Leader Tuesday, September 9th 6:00-9:00 PM Welcome Reception (Eagle House Restaurant, a brief walk from the Hampton Inn) Wednesday, September 10th 7:30-8:15 AM Morning Welcome, Sign in, and Breakfast 8:15-8:30 AM Opening Remarks (Victor Paquet) 8:30-10:00 AM Round Robin Introduction of Attendees 10:00-10:15 AM Break 10,15 - 12:00 PM Discussions and Presentations • Proactive Ergonomics (DL - Isaac Barsky and Sue Rodgers) 12:00-1_:00 PM Lunch (at the Hampton Inn) 1:00-3:00 PM Discussions • Endpoints in Fatigue (DL -.Sue Rodgers) • Video-based Job Analysis Strategies for Ergonomics Practice (DL - Victor Paquet) • Fatigue Modeling for Rest Allowance Requirements (DL Hemant Prabhu) 3:00-3:15 PM Break 3:15-5:00 PM Discussions • Effectiveness of Train the Assessor Courses (DL - Shona Anderson) • Productivity in Offices (DL - Diane Stinson) Thursday, September 11th 8:15-9:15 AM Future of "Brouha" and Plans for 2004 9:15-10:00 AM Presentation . Pre-placement Use of Nerve Conduction Tests in Manufacturing (DL- Johrt Rosecrance) 10:00-1 O: 15 AM Break 10:15-12:00 AM Discussion Job Rotation: Research Findings and Current Practices 12:00-1 :00 PM Lunch 1:15-2:00 PM Use of New Athropometric Data (DL � Ann Bisantz) 2:00-4:00 Tours of Industry or UB Research Labs 4:00-9:00 PM Trip to.Niagara Falls and Dinner �Friday, September 12th 8:30-10:00 AM • • 10:00-i 0:15 10:15-12:00 i \ '-) Discussions Academic Programs in Ergonomics (DL � Rob Thomas) Future of Work (DL·- Colin Drury) Break Discussions Ergonomics Legislation, what works for whom and when · (Conference Call with Lisa Brooks) • A variety of topics brought by attendees to share with the group such as ergonomics in poultry processing, environmental issues that impact health and wellbeing, and more. • 12:00-2:00 PM Lunch, Tour of UB IE Department, Student Poster Session of Research Projects 2:00-2:30 PM Closing Remarks �Applied Ergonomics : Elements of Successful Occupational Programs, su:zanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. a CAIRE Confere,nce PreConference, February 28, 1996 at the Hyatt Regency in Dallas, TX Schedule 8:30 Intrcxluctions - Overview of Course 9:00 Securing Management Commitment and Employee Involvement 10:00 Job Analysis Techniques - Fatigue Analysis, Checklists, Accident Analysis, ADA Analyses, Survey Techniques, Problem Solving - Driving Factor and Root Cause Analyses 10:30 Break 10:45 Continue Job Analysis Techniques 11:45 Lunch 1:00 Problem Solving: Case Studies 2:00 Return to Work and Medical Management Approaches - Ergonomics1 ,Role 2:45 Break 3:00 Assessing the Effectiveness of an Ergonomics Process 3:30 Discussion, Questions, Case Studies As Requested by Attendees 4:30 Adjourn Synopsis The goal of this seminar is to share experiences in the setting up of effective ergonomics programs and processes in companies, the service sector, municipalities, etc.. The topics covered will include: approaches to secure management commitment and employee involvement and ownership of the ergonomics improvements; a variety of approaches for assessing job demands and relating them to appropriate capacity data to determine the risk for overexertion injuries or overload; where ergonomics can help in medical management and return-to-work issues; and how the effectiveness of ergonomics programs and processes can be assessed. Attendees are encouraged to share examples from their own practices, and several job analyses will be done to illustrate the evaluation techniques. "'° '� L�.II�� Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D Consultant in Ergonomics f HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN lfi!l IltJNTlNr.TnN !111.LS U ROCHF.STF.R, NF.W YORK 14622 1'/im11•: (7Hl) 544-35R7 O Fax: (716) 26fi-1174!l �Applied Ergonomics: Elements of Successful Occupational Programs Table of Contents Topic Table of Contents Acknowledgements Securing Management Commhment A Functional Job Analysis Technique Work/Recovery Curves Ergonomic Job Analysis - Fatigue Table 2: Examples of Muscle Effort Levels Table 1: Risk Factor Analysis ANSI Z365 Draft Checklist OSHA March 95 Checklist Risk Factors for Upper Extremity Discomfort Figure 1: Risk Factors for Low Back Pain Computer Workplace Posture Checklist Self-Help to Increase Seated Comfort Risk Factors for Discomfort Accident Analysis - Ergonomic Approach Standing Arm Reach Envelopes Lifting Guidelines - Eastman Kodak Job Analysis Techniques and Solution Strategies Return-to-Work and Medical Management Assessing the Effectiveness of an Ergonomics Process Summary of Job Analysis Techniques Resource Materials - S. H. Rodgers Extra Forms Startin� Paee # 1 1 1 6 25 26 27 28 29 32 44 45 47 49 51 52 56 57 58 60 64 70 74 75ff Acknowledgements The article on pages 6�24 was published by Hanley and Belfuss in Philadelphia in a monograph on Ergonomics edited by J.S.Moore and A. Garg and part of the series Occupational Medicine: State of theArt Reviews, Volume 7(4), Oct-Nov, 1992. The work/recovery curves on page 25 are based on muscle fatigue studies by W. Rohmert summarized in Applied Ergonomics in 1973 with some limits set by more recent research. The ANSI draft ergonomics checklist is from the January 1, 1996 draft of the proposed standard on the control of cumulative trauma disorders. The OSHA ergonomics checklist is from the March, 1995 draft of a proposed ergonomics standard for general industry. The computer workplace ergonomics material on pages 47-49 has been developed in conjunction with Dr. Inger M. Williams of Fairport, NY. The standing arm reach curves are from Volume 1 of Ergonomic Design for People at Work by Eastman Kodak Company (1983), New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, and the lifting guidelines are from Volume 2 ( 1986) of the same work. All other material in this syllabus is the property of Dr. Rodgers, and permission to reproduce it must be obtained from her at 169 Huntington Hills, Rochester, NY 14622; (716) 544-3587. �Ergonomics: Work, Rest, Leisure An Occupational Therapy Perspective Institute #1 O CANAM Conference Boston,· MA July 8, 1994 Sue Rodgers, PhD 169 Huntington Hills - Center Rochester, N.Y. 14622 Offi.ce:(716) 544-3587 Melanie Ellexson, MBA, OTR, FAOTA 16246 Prince Drive South Holland, IL 60473 Office: (708) 596-2111 Barbara L. Komblau, JD, OTR, DAAPM __ 10350 Old Cutler Road Miami, FL 33156 Office: (305) 949-4000 X 1201 �Schedule for a 1-Day Institute (#10) on Ergonomics: Work, Rest, Leisure - An Occupational Therapy Perspective, AOTA Can/Am Conference, July 8,1994, Boston, MA, with Melanie T. Ellexson, MBA,OTR, FAOTA, Barbara J. Kornblau, JD, OTR and Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. 9:00 - 10:00 Regulations - B. Kornblau 10:00 - 10:45 Risk Factors - S. Rodgers 11:00 - 12:30 Ergonomic Worksite Evaluations M. Ellexson and S. Rodgers 1:30 - 2:30 Hazard Prevention and Control - Panel 2:30 - 3:00 Medical Management/ Return to Work 8. Kornblau and M. Ellexson 3:15 - 3:45 Training and Education - Panel 3:45 - 4:30 Checklists/ Screening Tests - M. Ellexson and B. Kornblau 4:30 - 5:00 Summary of Program Elements �Ergonomics and Rehabilitation To Work Talk to the Delaware Occupational Medical Association on May 16, 1985, Wilmington, DE Outline I. Ergonomics and Occupational Health A. Definition of Ergonomics a. How Ergonomics Can Help the Occupational Physician or Nurse II. Ergonomics and A. Types of Jobs B. Grip Strength C. Techniques to III. A. a. C. Repetitive Motions Disorders Where These Problems Are Seen and Factors Affecting It Reduce Stress in Repetitive Tasks Ergonomics and Low Back Pain Occupational Low Back Pain Factors That Aggravate Low Back Pain Symptoms Techniques to Reduce Stress in Lifting, Handling, and Postural ·rasks Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �.l •·· �llzanne H. Rodgers, �h.D. ·. \' .--lfmsultant In Ergonomics .�9 Huntington Hills - Center Rochester, New York 14622 (716) 544-3587 (716) 266-8749 (FAX) Workshop 5: An Ergonomic Approach to Accident Analysis ErgoCon '98, Wednesday May 6, 1998, 1:30 to 5:00 PM A. Why Should We Look at Injury and Illnesses Accidents from an Ergonomics Perspective ? 1. Multiple Factors Contribute - Rarely Domino Effect 2. Opportunities Missed to Improve Job If Only Treat Behaviors 3. Get Away From Blame and Focus on Continuous Improvement B. Gathering Data at the Site of the Accident/Injury 1. Non-Threatening Approach - Assume There is a Reason for Errors 2. 4 Areas for Investigation - Person, Task, Environment, Organizational Situation 3. Practice Questions Using Case Studies 4. Measurements Needed C. Job/fask Demands Analyses 1. Defining Tasks That Should Be Improved 2. Upper Limits versus Job Design Issues (Interactions) 3. What Is "Heavy"? D. Finding Feasible and Cost-Effective Solutions to Reduce Risk 1. Using Measurement Data and Interview Data to Establish Root Causes 2. Job Design and Workplace Design Issues 3. Defining the Seriousness of the Problem and the Probable Risk Reduction With the Proposed Change 4/14/98 SHR 0 0 0 �i� ,.. ---- --- -f �Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Consultant In Ergonomics 169 Huntington Hills - Center Rochester, New York 14622 (716) 544-3587 (716) 266-8749 (FAX) Avoiding Exposure in Manufacturing: Update on Ergonomics for Materials Handling Talk for the Conference on Ergonomics to Enhance the Bottom Line, sponsored by STEPS Industrial Rehabilitation Clinics, July 8th, 1993, Oakbrook, IL Outline A. R�_view of the 1981 and 1991 NIOSH Guidelines for Manual Lifting · B. Defining How Much of a Proble,n a Lift May Be . . i.. C. Defining How to Improve th.e Lifting Situation Cost Eff�ctively D. Materials Handling Situations NofCovered in the NIOSH Guides �Chapter Arthritis Informational Meeting ' depetitive Movement/Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Brighton Presbyteri en Church, November 3, 1990 Ergonomics Designing for People Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �Ergonomics and Loss Control Talk to the Genesee Valley Safety Conference 11/16/83 (716) 544-3587 I. Signage A. Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Factors in Sign Design CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS 1. Size "'HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" . _ 2. Shape - Stereotypes 3. Letter Size 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS 4. Space Around Letters ROCHESTER, NEW YORK 14622 5. Contrast 6. Color 7. Information 8. Coding - International Signs B. Factors in Sign Placement 1. Lighting 2. Deterioration 3. Other Signs in Area - Information 4. Correspondence of Arrows with Turns II. Hand Characteristics and Manual Handling A. Importance of Handgrip in Manual Handling 1. 2. 3. 4. B. III. Types of Handholds Pinch vs Grip - Distributions of Grip Strength Grip Strength and Span Effects of Wrist Angle on Grip Strength Effect of Gloves on Grip Strength 1. Reduction of Strength 2. Importance in the Design of Handling Tasks Manual Handling Capability A. Lifting 1. NIOSH Guidelines 2. Frequency Effects 3. Design vs Compliance 4. General Guidelines for the Design of Lifting Tasks B. Pushing and Pulling 1. Whole Body 2. Arms 3. Intensity and Duration Relationship �A Ergonomics Talk by Suzanne H. Rodgers, PhD, Consultant in Ergonomics, to the Greater Rochester Area Rehabilitation Group Monday, November 20, 1989 at the Gateway Inn Conference Center, Henrietta, NY Outline I. II. Ill. IV. V. VI. What is Ergonomics ? - National Trends Work Capacities - Designing for Most People Job Demands - Fatigue Potential Analyzing Repetitive Tasks Analyzing Lifting Tasks Examples of Ergonomics Improvements to Difficult Jobs Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEAL TH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Consultant In Ergonomics 169 Huntington Hills - Center Rochester, New York 14622 (716) 544-3587 (716) 266-8749 (FAX) Ergonomics in the Management of Upper Extremity Disorders Keynote Address to the Conference on How To Ergonomics: Ergonomic Assessment and Equipment at the Gateway Conference Center, Rochester, NY, April 15, 1999 Outline of Talk A. The "Epidemic" in Work-Related Upper Extremity Disorders 1. Why are there so many more cases reported ? 2. How has work changed over the last 2 decades ? 3. What is the role of ergonomics in abating the problem ? B. Ergonomics and Better Job and Workplace Design 1. Defining good designs by understanding human capabilities 2. Quantifying poor designs and their impacts before changing them 3. The importance of the problem solving process in finding solutions to ergonomics problems C. Ergonomic Equipment - The Educated Consumer 1. Not every symptom requires an equipment "fix" - Offices 2. Define job requirements before deciding on a piece of equipment - Offices, Manufacturing 3. The value of a good mechanic in solving a workplace problem 4. Choosing equipment for purchase - Manufacturing, Offices D. Managing Upper Extremity Disorders 1. Involvement of employees and education about risk factors 2. Early detection of problems through "continuous improvement" approach to job and workplace designs 3. Provision of control by the employee over the way the job is done; latitude in technique used as long as productivity, quality, and safety goals are met i •,,., �iuzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. :onsultant In Ergonomics t 69 Huntington Hills - Center lochester, New York 14622 (716) 544-3587 (716) 266-8749 (FAX) Workshop on An Ergonomic Approach to Analyzing Workplace Accidents IAPA Conference in Toronto, Canada on April 12, 2000, 9:00 AM to 12:15 PM A. Why Shoul4 We Look at Injury and Illnesses Accidents from an Ergonomics. Perspective ? 1. Multiple Factors Contribute - Rarely Domino Effect 2. Opportunities Missed to Improve Job If Only Treat Behaviors 3. Get Away From Blame and Focus on Continuous Improvement B. Gathering Data at the Site of the Accident/Injury 1. Non-Threatening Approach - Assume There is a Reason for Errors . 2. 4 Areas for Investigation - Person, Task, Environment, Organizational Situation 3. · Practice Questions Using Case Studies 4. Measurement� Needed C. Jobffask Demands Analyses 1. Defining Tasks That Should Be Improved 2. Upper Limits versus Job Design Issues (Interactions) 3. What Is "Heavy" ? D. Finding Feasible and Gast-Effective Solutions to Reduce Risk 1. Using Measurement Data and lnterview Data to Establish Root Causes 2. Job Design and Workplace Design Issues · 3. Defining the Seriousness of the Problem and the Probable Risk Reduction With the Proposed Change �1zanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Consultant In Ergonomics ·i9 Huntington Hills - Center Rochester, New York 14622 (716) 544-3587 (716) 266-8749 (FAX) An Ergonomic Approach to Analyzing Workplace Accidents The field of ergonomics and industrial safety complement each other in trying to find ways to reduce injury and illness risk in the workplace. While industrial safety has focused on identification of hazards, education, protective equipment, and guarding against hazards, ergonomics emphasizes job, workplace, equipment, and environmental design fo reduce overload, simplicity rather than complexity in equipment and information design, and assists to aid people at work (such as manual handling assists, special tools, automation or semi-automation, and computer-aided processes). In evaluating accident reports on-site, however, one often sees a large number of strain and sprain events that follow this pattern: Accident type: Injury type: Body part: Unsafe act: Hazardous condition: Recommended action: Lift, lower, push, pull Strain/sprain Low back Didn't lift properly Heavy weight Lift properly A similar pattern is found for repetitive tasks where upper extremity problems have been found: Accident type: Injury type: Body part: Unsafe act: Hazardous condition: Recommended action: Repetitive motions Inflammation Hand and wrist Rushed High repetition rate Rotate with less hand-intensive task Even some laceration and contusion injuries follow somewhat predictable patterns in accident reporting, such as: Accident type: Body part: Unsafe act: Stfl!ck against Elbow Not paying proper attention �2 Hazardous condition: Congested work area Recommended action: Pay proper attention Some accident analysis methods try to dig deeper for root causes, but they often stop once responsibility has been assigned for the hazardous condition or unsafe act. Often an action is identified that will reduce the risk for future accidents, but too often the outcome may be to reinforce or give training, tell the injured person to follow the standard operating procedure (SOP), or to tell them to wear protective equipment to protect against a cut or bum. ·, \ ,'. The field of human reliability is part of human factors and ergonomics and has mostly been developed by psychologists and engineers working in military and in space (and other unusual environments) programs. It focuses on, and has developed ways of defining, error-free performance for critical systems where an error could result in a castastrophic situation. A very simplified way of looking at human reliability concepts is to acknowledge that a person's risk of making an error depends on individual factors (including knowledge, skill, and capabilities), on task demands (what the job or equipment requires the person to do), on the environment _ in wlµch the work is �one (this would be the physical environment, such as - · � . temperature, lighting, workplace layout); and on the organizational factors . :_ present (such as policies for training, production pressures, shift schedttle, communications; etc.)� - An: error iri safety and ergonomics would be an accident or incident. · · A. Ergonomics and Accident Prevention The ergonomics goal is to design the workplace so that, even if a person makes an error, an injury (accident) will not occur. One way to accomplish that goal for strain and sprain injuries, for example, is to keep the required forces exerted or �eights handled light enough to accommodate the strengths of 75 - 90% of the female workforce. The actual acceptable weights would have to be determined by the location of the force application or lift. To meet this goal, the weights of objects 'handled in the workplace would have to be in the range of 4 pounds for frequent lifts (10 times per minute) from a floor pallet to a workbench and up to 51 pounds for a compact object handled infrequently (< 1 time per 5 minutes), with good handholds, and held next to the thighs. In most instances, acceptable weights for lifting or forces for pushing or pulling will be under 35 pounds. This may be difficult to comply with in some workplaces. For very repetitive tasks, ergonomic ways to �. / ::,. Municipal Ergonomics A Workshop for IAPA 2001, Toronto, Ontario April 3, 2001, Room 714A, 9:30 AM- 12:30 PM Workshop Leaders City of Toronto: Christine Hardy Linda Mcllwain Karen Raybould Jane Byers HR Ergonomics Consultants City of Rochester, NY: Tassie Demps, City Safety/WComp Specialist Suzanne Rodgers, Ergonomics Consultant �List of Ergonomics Projects Done in the City of Rochester, N.Y. (1987-2001) Solid Waste Operations 1. Interviews, workload estimates, weights handled in trash collection 2. Heart rate on recycling/trash collection routes Recycling box weights Physical capacity test for SWO's monitored heart 3. rate on simulation 4. Toters, Boom Trucks, etc - Review of some jobs and job elements 5. Looked at Snow Emergency Center Space analysis Police Department 1. Record Room rearrangement - Flow patterns/space analysis for better finger-printing, serving customers. 2. Property Room - Evaluation of space, heights of shelves 3. Assorted office ergonomics consults - Requested from individuals. 4.· Awareness training for employees. 911-OEC 1. Evaluation of 5t11 floor of Public Safety Building Suggestions to improve current, and for future, designs. Characterization of workload. 2. Training/consultation for employees in old center 3. Evaluation of comfort, response to DOL citation 4. Participation in the design of the new 911 Center Guidelines, simulations, data collection, team member. 5. On-going training and consulting, Medical management. Parks Department 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Trailer gates - Evaluation and recommendations Spring clean up - Leaves in school yard. Cemetery - Head stone setting Tree trimming Wellness day ergonomics training, back program �Water Distribution /Treatment/Bureau 1. Water treatment plant - Shift schedule - Workload assessment. 2. Water main repairs - Pictures only 3. Water shed maintenance - Observed tree trimming and harvesting. 4. Water Bureau Office ergonomics - Also working on accident data base with them. Library 1. Design of check-out desk 2. Office ergonomics consults 3. Shipping Dock book handling - job evaluation and recommendations. 4. Consults on job accommodations - ADA. 5. Awareness training Equipment Maintenance 1. Eidos visited garage and demonstrated creeper/scoot stooV positioner to assist in low work 2. Maintenance shop for small equipment (mowers, snow blowers, etc)- reviewed space and recommended some improvements. Fire Department 1. Office ergonomics in main offices - responding to individual requests. Central Safety 1. Ergonomics training and awareness for Supervisors, Employees, and Temporary or Seasonal Employees. 2. Improving accident/incident-reporting system 3. Analyzing accident/incident and WC data to determine city priorities in ergonomics /safety 4. Developing ergonomics process/program for the City. S. Developing Website material. 6. Publishing papers and giving presentations on City · ergonomics projects. 7. Writing up grant proposals for new program development �Suzanne ff, Rodgers, Ph,D �ONSUI,.TANT ,N. ERGONOMIC$/ HUMAN FACTORS · HIGHER PROPUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" (716) 544-3587, Fax (716) 266-8749 Email SHAODGER&@aol.com 169 HuntinQton Hills • Rochester, NY 14622 Workshop on The Impact of Extended Overtime on Acceptable Daily Workloads For the IAPA 2002 Conference in Toronto, Ontario Monday, April 22, 2002, I :45 to 4:45 PM Session Supplemental Syllabus 4-Factor fatigue Risk Profile Aerobic Capacities of Men and Women Maximum Aerobic Workload Guidelines Upper Body Aerobic Capacities Aerobic Demands and NIOSH Lifting Guidelines Heart Rate Response to Heavy Work Example Some Oxygen Demands of Heavy Work Analysis of the Suitability of a Lifting Job Workload Heart Rate Responses to Work Effect of Temperature on Time for Work at Diff Effort Levels Effect of Extended Hours of Work on Leisure Time Workload Limits as a Function of Continuous Hours Overtime Guidelines/Shift Schedule Example References - SHR Page(s) 1 2- 4 5- 6 7- 8 9 10 11 - 12 13 14-18 19- 20 21 22 23 24-25 Acknowledgements Most of the material included in this syllabus was published in Volume 2 of Ergonomic Design for People at Work (1986) by Eastman Kodak's Ergonomics Group, now available through John Wiley and Sons, and has been reproduced with their permission. The NIOSH Lifting equation material is from a handout at a talk by A. Garg and T.Waters in Denver, CO in 1991. The remaining material is by S. Rodgers. �I f _ Suzanne H. Rodgers, PhD. Consultant In Ergonomics/Human Factors 169 Huntington Hills - ROCHESTER, NEW YORK 14622 I I I I Why Ergonomics ? Benefits and Applications in Industry Talk to the IBM US Safety and Industrial Technical Conference in Poughkeepsie, NY, May 12, 1989 at 9:50 to 10:50 AM A. Ergonomics to Reduce Overexertion Injuries 1. Work Capacities and Job Design 2. Factors Contributing to Low Back and Repetitive Work Disorders 3. Ergonomic Techniques to Reduce the Risk for Overexertion Injuries B. Ergonomics to Enhance Quality Performance 1. Reducing Fatigue and Discomfort Through Ergonomic Design 2. Reducing Complexity Through Ergonomic Design C. Integrating Ergonomics Into the Corporation 1·. Where Ergonomics Fits With Quality Circles, Excellence, Continuous Improvement, Natural Work Groups, and Sociotechnical Systems 2. Ergonomics in the Manufacturing Plants 3. Ergonomics in the Initial Design of Facilities, Equipment, Environments, Jobs, and Workplaces 3/26/89 SHR (716) 544-3587 ��····· 10•ics ......... P...;luti:rity ··· "Ergo .... ,......:.......:..........: : : .. ":...... : ..B.ea.Jtl. & Safety ....JQ· -.aJit . ......�..... . . . : : : . 2-Day Ergonomics Awareness and Problem Solving Course for the Oneida Silversmiths' Plant, . Oneida, NY, May 17-18, 1990 Outline A. Overview of Ergonomics Principles and Value to Manufacturing B. Designing Jobs To Prevent Unnecessary Fatigue C. Preventing Overexertion Injuries 1. Repetitive Motions Problems 2. Low Back Pain D. Identifying Cost Effective Approaches for Improving Jobs E. Ergonomics Problem Solving Using Videotaped Oneida Jobs Syllabus Table of Contents * National Trends in Ergonomics Plant Erionomics Programs and Organization Identifymg Ergonomics Problems Work/Recovery Curves Designing Jobs to Minimize Unnecessary Effort Findmg Best Solutions to Ergonomics Problems Problem Solving Form Risk Factors for C�al Tunnel Syndrome Factors Affecting Gnp Strength .Ergonomic Job Analysis Risk Factors for Low Back Pain Height and Reach Interaction Maximum Forces in Design Kodak Lifting Guidelines Overexertion Injury Risk Factors Cost-Benefit Analyses of Ergonomic Solutions Cost Justification Problem Solving Form References - SHR Extra Problem Solving Forms 1 2 8 14 15 16 17 20 22 23 26 28 29 30 31 32 36 39 40 * Permission to reproduce original.material in this syllabus must be obtained from S.H. Rodgers, PhD., 169 Huntington Hills, Rochester, NY 14622, (716) 544-3587. �,· \' \ \ \ \ I l \ Matching Job Demands and Worker Capabilities Talk to the conference "Forging a Future", the 1992 Industrial Rehabilitation Symposium, Nashville, TN, October 16, 1992 Outline A. Work Capacity Over Time B. Relating Job Demands to Work Capacities C. Case Studies 1. Low Back Problem 2. Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Problem D. Reasonable Accommodations Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �Ergonomics: Opportunities for Health Professionals Talk to the conference "Forging a Future", the 1992 Industrial Rehabilitation Symposium, Nashville, TN, October 15, 1992 Outline A. What the Employer Is Asked To Do - ADA and Ergonomics B. How the Health Professional Can Help to Define Job Demands 1. Questions to Establish Job Demands, Worker Comfort, Possible Accommodations 2. Fatigue Model to Predict Potential Risk Factors and Success of Returning a Person to Work 3. Cumulative Trauma Disorders and Low Back Pain - Job Site Analysis Techniques 4. Evaluating the Office Workplace Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �1 Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Consultant In Ergonomics 169 Huntington Hills - Center Rochester, New York 14622 (716) 544-3587 (716) 266-8749 (FAX) A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Management of RSI A talk to the Ontario Physiotherapy Association's First International Symposium on Global Rehabilitation,Trends, January 17, 1997, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. A. Background - Why Are There So Many Occupational RSis Today ? A good and often difficult question that managers ask of most ergonomics consultants is "Why are there suddenly so many musculoskeletal problems among people who are doing substantially the same work that their parents' generation did ?" In my 28 years of chasing down these problems in manufacturing, office, and public service jobs, I have determined that four issues may explain the different incidence rates: an increased rate of reporting discomfort and injuries; substantial changes in the jobs associated with automation, pacing, volume, and variety of tasks; more awareness in the general public, medical community, and safety profession; and social changes that determine worker behavior and expectations. Table 1 includes listings of factors that have changed in jobs over the past 20 years; Some people think that RSis are not work-related because not all workers on the same "high risk" jobs develop the symptoms. If the jobs causes the problem, they say, then everyone doing it should experience injury or illness, not just 10 to 20% of the workforce. Their conclusion is that RSis are more prevalent in some people than in others, and that a good selection test will reduce the occupational cases by keeping the RSI-susceptible people out of the repetitive jobs. A not-yet-published epidemiology review of repetitive tasks and RSis (NIOSH, 1996) suggests that there are significant effects of �... 6 6 Problem Solving: Using Ergonomics and Physiology for Lifting Tasks Lifting and Low Back Pdin Seminar, Richland, WA, April 4-5, 1991 Outline A. Occasional Lifts -Two-Handed B. Frequent Lifts -Two-Handed C. One-Handed Lifts D. Carrying E. Postural Factors Contributing to Low Back Pain Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER. N.Y. 14622 Sixth Annual Medicine in the Workplace Sentinar OCCUPATl0NAl- l-JEAJ..TH N0RTHWES°T �Occupational Health Northwest's Seminar on Lifting and the Low Back, Shilo Inn, Richland, WA, April 4-5, 1991 The Science of Lifting: A Working Physiologist's Guide to the Lift Task, S.H. Rodgers, PhD, April 4, 8:30 - 9:45 AM A. Defining the Questions About Safe Lifting 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. How much can a person lift safely? How much is too much? What is the safe lifting zone? What are safe lifting weights? How many lifts per shift are safe? B. Capacities for Manual Lifting or Force Exertion 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Strengths at Different Locations Local Muscle Endurance Whole Body Endurance One- vs. Two-Handed Lifting Carrying C. The Lift Task Demands in Relation to Lifting Capacities 1 . Percent of Functional Capacity Used 2. Postural Effects 3. Behavioral Factors � &: -=�, �= -= ---= = Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �Ergonomics/Human Factors in Safety and Health Luncheon address by Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. to the conference on Making Your Workplace Safer, sponsored by the New York State AFL CIO, the Central New York Labor Council, and the Central New York · Labor Agency, June 13, 1987, SUNY College of Technology, Utica, N.Y. Outline A. Today's Jobs and Work Environment 1. 2. 3. 4. World Class Competition in Manufacturing Increased Service Jobs Changing Workforce/Market How Do We Increase Productivity Without Increased Risk for Safety and Health Problems? 5. Traditional Approaches - Safety and Health (Return to Work) 6. Disability Management B. Ergonomics/Human Factors - Designing for People 1. 2. 3. 4. More Work for Less Effort Population Work Capacities Acceptable Loads Factors That Reduce Productivity a. Static Work - Postures - Workplace and Equipment Design b. Poor Working Environments c. Heavy Effort Requirements d. Complex Tasks 5. Techniques to Improve Jobs a. Teamwork Required - Workers, Designers, Supervisors b. Examples from Cost/Benefit Analysis Handout. C. Gaining Commitment for Change - The Costs of Poor Design Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 141i22 �' S Ji, . �.•.<-.,.t.#),:,., f.,,).: � -_� ;t;<·, .· '' .-,·. ,;,, ! . ·/ •• )i/,:/ , iii( i ! . ' -1 ' �lpansion of the Therapist's Role in Industry . . . Rodgers, Ph.D., Consultant in Ergonomics, Rochester, N.Y., . . rited at the Meeting Planners' Conference, Industrial Medicine: An Introductory Course for Therapists, January 18th and October 12th, 1989 I. Characterization of Industrial and Occupational Needs A. Productivity, Quality, Safety and Health B. Practical Approaches - Prioritization of Needs C. Flexibility to Respond to Production Needs D. Ability to Respond to Changing Workforce Situations II. Physical Therapy and Ergonomics A. Focus on Job Demands as Well as Individual Capabilities 8. Functional Job Demands Evaluations C. Defining the Capacities Required for Jobs That Are Difficult to Redesign D. Body Mechanics - Training and Job Design Ill. Examples of Industrial Questions Which Physical _Therapists Should Be Able to Answer A. Capacity Required to Perform a Materials Handling Task B. Impact of Increasing Hours of Work (12-hour Schedule or Overtime) for a Heavy Job C. Expected Benefits from Making a Change in a Repetitive Task D. How to Reduce Injury Risk on Specific Problem Jobs 1/3/89 SHR ( \ �Postural Considerations in the Workplace S.H. Rodgers, Ph.D., Consultant in Ergonomics, Rochester, N.Y., presented at the Meeting Planners' Conference, Industrial Medicine: An Introductory Course for Therapists, January 18th and October 12th, 1989 I. Contributions of Work Posture to Low Back Pain A. Static Muscle Work B. Manual Handling and Postural Stress C. Recovery Time Needs in Postural Work II. Contributions of Work Posture to Repetitive Motions Disorders A. Factors Affecting Grip Strength B. Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique Ill. Workplace and Job Interventions to Reduce Postural Stress A. Workplace Design - Heights, Reaches, Orientation, Visibility B. Tools and Equipment Design C. Work Pattern and Job Design 1/3/89 SHR i. �Suzanne H. Rodgers, PhD. Consultant In Ergonomics/Human Factors 169 Huntington Hills ROCHESTER, NEW YORK 14622 Applied Ergonomics: Controlling Overexertion Injuries at Work, A Meeting Planners Course Given on March 10-14, 1993 at the Twin Towers Hotel, Orlando, FL Schedule Wednesday, March 10th 10:35 10:55 11:20 Registration and Continental Breakfast Welcome, Announcements, Introductions, Areas of Interest The Scope of Industrial Ergonomics - Rodgers Break Ergonomics in Illness/Injury Prevention - OSHA Activity OSHA General Duty Clause, Red Meat Cutting Guidelines, Proposed General Industry Guideline, OSHA Reform Act of 1991 - Stuart-Buttle ANSI Z-365 Guideline Development - Day NIOSH Manual Lifting Guidelines - Rodgers Other Guidelines - Heat, Vibration, VDT Workplaces - 11:30 Lunch 1:00 PM 1:05 Ergonomics and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) ADA Provisions and Definitions, Implications for Initial Hires and Return to Work, Job Placement Issues - Kornblau An Industrial Physician's Perspective on ADA, Return to Work, Light Duty, and Ergonomics - Parrotte Break Case Studies: ADA, Return to Work, Medical Restrictions, etc. - Kornblau, Parrotte, Golden, Other Faculty Members Adjourn Reception 7:00 AM 8:00 9:00 9:30 10:00 10:05 2:05 3:05 3:35 5:00 5:30 - 7:00 Rodgers Thursday, March 11th 8:00 AM 8:05 Qualitative and Quantitative Descriptions of Job Demands Functional Job Descriptions - Essential and Non-Essential Tasks - Kornblau (716) 544-3587 �) ) CHAIRPERSON: SUZANNE H. RODGERS, PhD TOPICS: Ergonomics and Legislation - OSHA, '.'' · :·, ·<ADA: ?,::- .· Ergonomics In Injury/Illness Prevention - OSHA Activity 'y, -c-.,- , . .·· Ergonomics and the Americans With}?:?:';\;;:, ��:�� ::�CA�aluation of Jobs: 1 �\ J Qual·1tat1·ve and Quant·1tat1·ve �!1�� ;;�/� � i b De� ands Jel,/:\_:t;\:-�trJ!f �,c,,�;f; � >-.· = . ,. .. · "" ·•· itlt\"Jt . ifj . Assessmg the Capacity of Work�rs:_{. ,) Functional Assessments of CapabilJtiesfot·: ...· Work & Normative Data V s. .- S ., -> ...·. · Testing for Susceptibility; Relating C�-p�cit'ies .. to Work Requirements; Reasonable{:>: · · · · Accommodations .·.· ...· .. .· .. . > . Building Ergonomics into the Occupational ; ·· Setting _ / >{ ·: \. _ _,,) .· .· ·? :,Di{i{iij;_ Rpplied f rgonomi�iji:fl Controlling OvereHertion Injuries at rnor� �Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Consultant In Ergonomics 169 Huntington Hills - Center Rochester, New York 14622 (716) 544-3587 (716) 266-8749 (FAX) Workshop on An Ergonomic Approach to Accident Analysis, 1Vebraska Safety, Health, and Environmental Conference, Lincoln, NE, April 27, 2000, 1 :45 to 3:45 PM A. Why Should We Look at Injury and Illnesses Accidents from an Ergonomics Perspective? 1. Multiple Factors Contribute - Rarely Domino Effect 2. Opportunities Missed to Improve Job If Only Treat Behaviors 3. Get Away From Blame and Focus on Continuous Improvement B. Gathering Data at the Site of the Accident/Injury 1. Non-Threatening Approach - Assume There is a Reason for Errors 2. 4 Areas for Investigation - Person, Task, Environment, Organizational Situation 3. Practice Questions Using Case Studies 4. Measurements Needed C. Job/Task Demands Analyses 1. Defining Tasks That Should Be Improved 2. Upper Limits versus Job Design Issues (Interactions) 3. What Is "Heavy"? D. Finding Feasible and Cost-Effective Solutions to Reduce Risk 1. Using Measurement Data and Interview Data to Establish Root Causes 2. Job Design and Workplace Design Issues 3. Defining the Seriousness of the Problem and the Probable Risk Reduction With the Proposed Change �1zanne H .. Rodgers, Ph.D. :_onsultant In Ergonomics ;9 Huntington Hills - Center .ochester, New York 14622 (716) 544-3587 (716) 266-8749 (FAX) An Ergonomic Approach to Analyzing Workplace Accidents The field of ergonomics and industrial safety complement each other in trying to find ways to reduce injury and illness risk in the workplace. While industrial safety has focused on identification of hazards, education, protective equipment, and guarding against hazards, ergonomics emphasizes job, workplace, equipment, and environmental design fo reduce overload, simplicity rather than complexity in equipment and information design, and assists to aid people at work (such as manual handling assists, special tools, automation or semi-automation, and computer-aided processes). In evaluating accident reports on-site, however, one often sees a large number of strain and sprain events that follow this pattern: Accident type: Injury type: Body part: Unsafe act: Hazardous condition: Recommended action: Lift, lower, push, pull. Strain/sprain ·· Low back Didn't lift properly Heavy weight Lift properly A similar pattern is found for repetitive tasks where upper extremity problems have been found: Accident type: Injury type: Body part: Unsafe act: Hazardous condition: Recommended action: Repetitive motions Inflammation Hand and wrist Rushed High repetition rate Rotate with less hand-intensive task Even some laceration and contusion injuries follow somewhat predictable patterns in accident reporting, such as: ' .·; Accident type: Body part: Unsafe act: · Struck against Elbow Not paying proper attention �nio�h/ergo conf/Plenary Session II/Welcome . 1/10/12 12:57 AM NOTE: This page is archived for historical purposes and is no longer being maintained or updated. ,.---� "\ C ) Plenary Session II Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ergonomic Consultant DR. RODGERS: I'd like to start the Plenary Session, Focus on Effective Programs in Small Business. I'm Sue Rodgers, and I'll be speaking first on a general basis. Carol Stuart-Buttle is a consultant in ergonomics out of Philadelphia, and she is going to be our last speaker. David Carroll from WoodPro is going to be our middle speaker. David is a small businessman who is going to be talking about his program. Carol is going to be discussing three projects that she's worked on in small businesses as well. I have a handout for my comments that is copied on two pieces of paper with eight pages of text. This means that you wouldn't be able to read it in this room, anyway, and, therefore, I set it around the sides of the room. There are 300 copies, so I'll watch the stampede at the end to get the material. It's also, of course, going to be included in the proceedings when those are available. ("-�'tle of you may look at me and say, "Well, why is she talking about small businesses?", because I mostly �-,,fk with large corporations. But what I've found in my own practice of ergonomics is that the large corporation is made up of a lot of small plants. Each of them has to deal with budgets. Each has to deal with resources. The difference, perhaps, is that the large corporation can provide corporate resources, and the small plant doesn't always have that luxury. What we decided to do is to make sure that we covered the things that are common to small plants and large corporations and to small businesses, generally. I had asked Carole Hunter if she could speak on the program because she has a unique approach, I think, to small business ergonomics. She was kind enough to say yes, and then, when we thought we had too many speakers, she was kind enough to pull out. And now she's here, but she said go ahead. So I want you to realize that she is not missing from the panel because she's not willing to speak but because she's giving us some more time for questions and answers. We want to leave about a half hour at the end of our comments so you can ask questions and share your own experiences with us, particularly the small business people. If you look at the handouts you got with the program, one of them is the Meat Packers Guideline, the original Guidelines for Ergonomics in the Meat Packing Industry. I know this isn't new to any of you. What I'd like to do is to go back to this and take a look, particularly at Parts I and II. As you know, the first one is management commitment and employee involvement with some subsets. The second one is program elements, which includes worksite analysis, hazard prevention control, medical management and training education. · Rc:>ger Stevens and the OSHA group put out their straw man (I call it) back in July of '92. It was a general bnomics guideline and Roger very intelligently put on the top "Not for Circulation, Do Not Distribute," \vnich meant that within a week every company in the country had a copy of it. I would like to go back to that ttp://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics /ergonomics/EWconf97/ec4rodge.html Page 1 of9 �rno�h/ergo c�nf/Plenary Session II/Welcome 1/10/12 12:57 AM particular document because I think it has the ingredients that all of us agree ought to be in a good ergonomics program. /.-.,, �--. )at I thought I'd do this morning is just take the two that I find the most challenging -- well, actually, one I find most challenging -- and this is, getting management commitment; and, two is: getting real employee involvement. I'll share with you some of the things I've learned over 28 years of trying to get people to buy into ergonomics in small as well as large plants. Let's·Start with management commitment. We had some good comments yesterday about how to get that. I'd like to share with you an approach that has worked very well for me. It takes no money, is done in a meeting or session where you may be able to get the management team together, such as in a morning meeting. It works very well in large groups, so I'm going to make you do it, too. If you could all stand up, please. Thank you. The best way to get commitment is to feel it, to feel what it feels like. Now, if you could take your left leg, please, and raise it 45 degrees. Quality performance is keeping this leg at 45 degrees and not holding on to anything to do it. Okay? Now, while you're doing that, I'd like to talk a little bit about management commitment and things we can do. Keep it up.Your quality is falling there. Get it up. Get it up. Right. Essentially, what I did in this particular situation was a spur of the moment idea. There was a speaker before me who was from the corporation and was telling a group of managers in a large subdivision why they should 1 ------doing ergonomics. He had all the statistics, and he was going through them. l ) The trouble was that it was 1:00 in the afternoon. We were in Europe, and they happen to have nice big lunches in Europe, and everybody was sort of, you know, looking as if they'd never quite make it through any talk, not to mention the one with statistics. He finished his talk, and turned the audience over to me, and here I am now supposed to be talking about ergonomics. Larry, get that foot up again, there. Thanks. Come on, front row. Get those legs up. I said to myself, let's get them up because they've been sitting for a half hour. So I got them up and asked them, to raise a leg like you are doing now. I had five benefits written on a transparency that I was showing, talking about "Why Ergonomics?". I spent a lot of time on the first two points on accident and illness-injury prevention, and on peoples' improved ability to perform. Then, I had three more points, which I finished up quickly about things related to reducing errors, increased flexibility, and better utilization of peoples' skills. I finished my five points. Then I said, "Okay, You can put your foot down." So you can put your foot down. And then I said, "Can you tell me the last three points I made?" Absolute silence in the room. I said, "Well, why can't you tell me? Weren't you listening?" They said, "No, we were concentrating so much on the discomfort of holding that foot up, that we weren't listening. \ '--,._lid, "Well, you're telling your people to do quality work, right? You say, do good, quality work; and you've got them sitting around with one foot up in the air all day. How can they do quality work?" :tp: //www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/ergonomics/EWconf97/ec4rodge.ht ml Page 2 of 9 �nio�h/ergo c�nf/Plenary Session II/Welcome 1/10/12 12:57 AM And all of a sudden I could see the lights go on. It's the same thing that was mentioned in yesterday's session by Eric: Quality and ergonomics are directly related. If you hurt, if you're uncomfortable, there is no way you (\put all of your attention to quality work; and that hit the chord. That was the thing that they needed to (,__,A-. From then on, we had clear sailing. You can sit now. The point is that they knew they were weaving and bobbing; it wasn't me telling them they were uncomfortable, it was them feeling it, and they understood what was going on. Another time, I was talking to a plant manager who had just been berated by the corporate safety director because he had a lot of injuries in his plant. When I say "a lot," this happened to be a good safety program, and a lot to them was three. Again, after being told that he really hadn't done a good job on safety, and he had to get busy, he was getting madder and madder. You could see him holding his anger in because his job was get the product out and to do it as safely as possible. He was not happy with being raked over the coals by the corporate safety director in front of other people. This had gone on for 15 minutes and he was really quite angry, which I could tell because his ears got very red -- he was sort of a fair complexion, and his ears just got totally deep red. The safety director turned the meeting over to me. It's sort of like having a bad warm-up act, you know. You're sitting there saying, "Gee, how am I going to get his attention?" So I changed the discussion over to quality, and I said, "You know, one thing that ergonomics really does for (-�s to make it easier to do quality work.", and I talked a little bit about examples that we had seen in the \_-lit of things that made it hard to do quality work. The ears got whiter and whiter. Not white, white, but they became less and less red, I should say, again showing me that we had hit a point. He could understand how ergonomics interacted with what he was being asked to do, which was to get a good product out the door. So, again, management commitment to a large degree comes from understanding how ergonomics can positively influence all of the goals of the company; not just the health and safety goals, but the performance goals of the company as well. I haven't met a manager yet who wants people to get hurt. It's just that they've got to understand why some people get hurt and some don't. It comes back to the word "cause", the job causing the injury. If the job causes the injury, then why doesn't everybody get it? And that's in the back of their heads when they're trying to understand why suddenly, after doing the same jobs for years, we've got a lot of people getting into trouble. They really don't understand that if the job causes injuries why there aren't more of them around. As you know, even when you have a problem, the injuries/illnesses are seen in just slightly over 10 percent of the workers. So that's my basic message on management commitment. Get them to feel it, get them to understand. I like to r .· · ,id about an hour with them the first day I get there and just ask them questions about what they have to \-domplish that year, and what are their goals. What are the things that get in the way of meeting their 1ttp://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/ergonomics/EWconf97/ec4rodge.html Page 3 of 9 �1io�h/ergo co!1f/Plenary Session II/Welcome 1/10/12 12:57 AM goals?, and how can ergonomics help them get there. It's very much a partnership when you start getting into the ergonomics program. It's not all injury and illness. A lot of it is performance related. (�the same reason, I talk about fatigue rather than causing injury. The reason I talk about fatigue is that's performance related. Everybody knows that you can be tired on some jobs, that you have to stop and break in order to get recovery on some jobs. Those are the ones that they can very often do something about through a management policy or a management process that makes sure that we don't have jobs out there that create a quick fatigue, a muscular or a mental fatigue that may lead to an injury, or error. What we see there, too, is that they can identify this themselves, particularly with the meaner, leaner things going on with downsizing and not adding staff but rather trying to find other ways of getting the job done. They feel this themselves, and they'll talk about it. Once they take ownership of the fact that those are problems that need to be addressed, they're very good about supporting the process. I'll have to say that OSHA citations have always been an effective way of getting management commitment. I guess I'd rather not get to the point where they have to get a citation because I'd like to think that they were good enough before that, but it certainly is a form of clout. One thing I noticed, and maybe you noticed, too, was that after the failure in March of '95, of the proposed standard, there were some people who said, "Let's coast for a while now." Fortunately, the ones who had been doing some ergonomics, generally realize that it has benefits that make it something that we want to continually do. But, there was a pulling back by some people who thought of this as a necessary evil. I'd rather do it because it's the right thing to do, rather than because you're going to be punished if you don't. T1 main thing I've learned also, and this is both management and employee involvement, is to be teach \__Jple to ask a lot of questions. I know somebody could probably argue that a consultant's job is to provide information. I find that my major effort is to ask the questions, to have them find their own information, to help them structure what they need to do and to help them structure the information, or find the information that will help them know how much they need to do. These are things we were talking about yesterday, how big a problem is it? what are the problems you need to address first? and things of that sort. I think it's sort of neat to be able to go in, just ask questions, and get paid for it. I was told, by the way, also, by the engineering teams that I've worked with (and it was mentioned again yesterday in some of the sessions)that the hardest thing is getting into proactive ergonomics. It's the most effective way to go, but it's very hard to do. Now, if you're a small company and you're getting some engineering done, often that's by contract. In some of the areas I've worked in we've actually had the contractors come in for the ergonomics training so they get that training, the same training that the teams are getting on the floor; they are wonderful, especially in the class, because they have ideas on how to solve some of these problems that may involve more mechanical skills or more technical skills. You definitely need to involve the contractors in the ergonomics program or else you're going to spend all of your time reviewing what they are doing and telling him not to do that. When we had trouble getting engineering commitment inside a company where we were building the ( )nomics teams in the plants, we wrote a policy that the engineer had to go talk to the inside team about )tuything that was going to appear in their area. This was whether it was a workplace rework or a line rework, 1ttp://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/ergonomics/EWconf97/ec4rodge.html Page 4 of9 �1io�h/ergo co,nf/Plenary Session II/Welcome 1/10/12 12:57 AM or a choice of major equipment they'd have to work on, and that would include the maintenance group as well as the operators. That has been very effective where it has been implemented. Again, it's still a matter of (1ng the process set up to be sure it happens. Number 2 of the Ergonomic Process Needs: Employee Involvement. ·,.,. ___,�-✓ What I am going to show you here is the importance of the employee's input. Mark Johnson used this in his presentation in the worksite analysis session yesterday, and because I didn't bring any transparencies, I'll put it up for you. The basic steps in the problem solving part of the work analysis that we do are simply to identify where the risk factors are by body part, and then the second column is what's called Causes on this form, is the "Why?" column. If I see that somebody's bending over, and I've identified that that's more than just a short duration bend, in other words, it takes maybe fifteen to twenty seconds or even more, then the question is "Why are they bending?". The first thing that I do when I have a lot of people looking at and analyzing jobs is, "What do you see?". And they say, "Well, the workbench is too short or it's not tall enough." That's not what you see, right? That's what you're inferring from what you see. What you see is somebody is bending over. It's very hard to get that process going where they describe what they see first, and therefore, define the risk factors for the body parts at risk. The risk is continuous or sustained bending. Now, Why do they do it? It's not just because the bench is too short. It may be because they can't see what they need to see, and therefore they have to bend over to get within the right distance to be able to see it. It may be because they can't reach what they need to reach or can't use a tool properly without bending over. They all may have a relationship to the higher workbench, but they aren't necessarily only related to the workbench height. �" �:..--/bu can define the posture and the risk, and then you look for all the possible reasons why they might be bending, you begin to open up a very global way of approaching these problems. In the final column are strategies or methods to reduce the stress of the risk factor. Those are our strategies for making it better. How do we make it better? In a generic sense, the risk reduction strategies for physical effort are: reduce the effort intensity; reduce the time of the effort before I get a rest break from it (i.e., a muscle rest break); reduce the frequency of doing it; or reduce the total time I do it before I move to some other activity that does not use the same muscles in the same way. So there are several generic ways of reducing the risk. This is where we begin to generate our solutions. As we are analyzing our job, we are also identifying strategies that will begin to reduce the stress. What you will find is that when you do this for the body parts, even the ones you don't think are affected, you often emerge with some generic ideas for directions to go that will fix the problem in many parts of the body, not just one place at a time. I'll walk you through the video that Don showed yesterday using those basic concepts. This is a gas stove manufacturing line. What do you see as you watch people working on this line. What strikes you as you see it? I need some of you to volunteer here. The thing you notice the most as you watch this.? \�IENCE: She has her head in the oven. 1ttp://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/ergonomics/EWconf97/ec4rodge.html Page 5 of9 �nio�h/ergo co nf/Plenary Session II/Welcome , l/10/12 12:57 AM DR. RODGERS: Yes. It's been a long day. Yes. She has her head in the oven. Fortunately, the oven's not connected. ()ow would you describe that in terms of risk factors? AUDIENCE: Bending over, bad light. DR. RODGERS: Bending, poor lighting is a potential problem. Why is there poor lighting, by the way? AUDIENCE: No light in the oven. DR. RODGERS: Y6u're right. Okay. And they're not even hooked up electrically. This is a gas stove so we don't need to have electricity, right? The point is that she is having to reach in. It's really the reach, isn't it? What she's installing is the coil on the back side of that oven. And she has to reach in because she's doing it at this point on the line, for one thing. When we first showed this, I asked, "What do you see?"; and what do you suppose they said? AUDIENCE: The conveyor is too low. DR. RODGERS: The conveyor is too low, right? Yes. Why is the conveyor too low, because she's having to bend over. Right? If she isn't bending over because the conveyor's too low, why is she bending over? Because the reach in is so far that she has to bend over to be able to reach the back side. That's one issue. The reach in. (�.)l you can say, "Well, why does she have to bend so far?" Did you notice the cardboard in the front of the Mnveyor? That projects another four inches out from the conveyor side. It's moving, as you may be able to tell. That's part of what keeps her away, too. But the other thing that keeps her away is the fact that she has to reach so far and she has to be able to see what she's doing. She can't do this blind. We use these tapes in training courses so that when we finish the training course the teams have five projects that they can proceed with. We expect to have their solutions implemented within about one to three months. In this case, it was implemented in about a day. We identified this as a bending risk, and there is repetitive motion, too. There is vibration and there are several other things, too. Give me another part of the body that you might be concerned about here. AUDIENCE: Wrist and hands. DR. RODGERS: Okay. What's the risk? AUDIENCE: Strong wrist angles. . ';. RODGERS: Okay. Awkward wrist angles. There's vibration, too. So you would like to find something \rdt would help resolve those issues. As you can see, she has a slight twist in her back as well in order to 1ttp://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/ergonomics/EWconf97 /ec4rodge.html Page 6 of9 �nio\h/ergo conf/Plenary Session II/Welcome , 1/10/12 12:57 AM reach that point with the air gun. ��t, we went through the "Whys", and we came up with the fact that the basic problem is the reach to the � ), which is what is driving a lot of the postural elements, so we said, "How can you avoid reaching so far?" Some people looked at the cardboard and said, "Let's not have the cardboard stick up; bend it up, and put clips on the edge, so that won't be a problem." What would you have to evaluate that against? Is it really better? We evaluated that against standing forward reach capability at that location, and it turned out that we really had to get the reach within 12 inches to avoid bending. So it wasn't going to work just to bring it four inches closer. We had a 28-inch reach on that job. We could look at it in terms of the time of bending. What would you do there? What strategy could you use to reduce the time of bending? It takes 17 seconds of bending out of every 30 second cycle now. There is more than what determines how long you have to stay bent over? Just think generically now. Type of fasteners, right? How long does it take to shoot a screw? Only a few seconds; but she has to be there longer. It has to do with locating and finding things. So anything you can do to take time off that would reduce the bending time and risk. A lot of people wanted to tilt the conveyor to fix this job; but there is other work going on that would be impossible to do with a tilted line. The final result of this was when the team whose job this was -- and, believe me, I didn't suggest this -- came in with their solution. They said, "There's no reason why we can't put that coil on before we assemble the oven. So they moved the operation up the line about five places, set up a fixture, put the part on the fixture, and put the coil on at a perfect working height. The oven was assembled down the line, and none of this awkward posture was required in this assembly. The fix cost them $47, if I remember correctly, the cost to the fixture. That was it. a So for small companies, without big budgets, that's not really going to wipe you out, is it? That's something you can put into your regular operating budget. It's the need to identify why there is a problem that I'd like to have you think about. If you don't really analyze why that problem is there, and you simply look at it and say you need to raise the conveyor, you are going to miss the inexpensive and very effective fixes. I use anthropometric data and reach guidelines to compare what the job requires to what I'd like to have. I use the NIOSH lifting guidelines and the version I made of those for the Kodak books that goes into the percent of people who would find a lift acceptable for my assessment of how serious a problem the job is for a lifting task. I use force guidelines, from Keyserling's studies and others that are published in the literature and again in the Kodak books. I use those to evaluate the job forces I measure and to determine the degree of risk for given muscle groups.You can identify how much of a problem it is and how much you need to change it from the comparisons. Once you've done that, it's very easy for the team to come up with very creative ways of fixing the problems. Believe me, you have no trouble with employee involvement when you are asking them to use their expertise to help in problem solving. My final point on that is, that if the employees are working together with the engineers, and with the mechanics to solve these problems, there is a wonderful interaction that can't be beat. It's much better than having a consultant come in, frankly. .,A.�a full-time consultant, let me say that your use of a consultant, to my mind, should be to help you ( 'erstand what the problems are and to help give your team some basic knowledge about ergonomics and hst factors for overexertion injuries. A consultant should facilitate your own talent or work with your 1ttp://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/ergonomics/EWconf97 /ec4rodge.htm1 Page 7 of 9 �1io�h/ ergo conf/Plenarv Session II/Welcome , 1/10/12 12:57 AM contractors to be sure that they build these things into their designs as well. JJ'- going to stop here, because I don't want to cut the others short. Just a final observation: empowerment \___ es from both having knowledge and from having support from the support part of the staff, if you're a person who works on a job like this. What I call it is control; that I feel that I have control of my ability to work safely. That's what I shoot for when I'm trying to explain to management the importance of having the teams be the primary people who do the job analyses; the support personnel are needed to help them to achieve the best solutions. It's wonderful to see the teams take ownership. I had an opportunity to teach a class where one person had an M.D. degree and a few others had third grade educations and were functionally illiterate. The functionally illiterate ones were actually better at problem solving. They didn't have all this clutter in the way of all the things they knew! So group problem solving of ergonomic issues really equalizes and builds respect for each other that is needed to solve these problems that are both production problems, business problems, and health and safety problems. Thank you very much for listening to that. My handout, by the way, includes -- I'll just tell you in case you don't get one right away -- two lists I made up. One is the components of successful programs and the other is things that retard the ergonomic programs and processes. I want to thank OSHA and NIOSH and the other sponsors for letting me get up here and explain that I have made all of the mistakes that are under the second category. C"11y, Carol pointed out to me when she looked at the handout that I had a human factors problem here. If you get one of these, this is the first page. And then what you have to do is open it up and turn it over to get the second page, okay? And then you have to tum it back this way to get the third page, and then you have to turn it this way to get the last page, and this is a test. The other material relates to securing management commitment and employee involvement; it was part of a talk that I gave at Pat Devlin's CARE conference last year in Dallas. And the final one is just a one-page thing I sometimes give to clients who are saying "It's all so confusing; just give me one page." And I put that on the last page. Thanks very much. THIS PAGE WAS LAST UPDATED ON July 21, 1997 Return to . CONFERENCE AGENDA ,:; r \ \_) ttp://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/ ergonomics/EWconf97 /ec4rodge.html Page 8 of9 �Occupational Ergonomics . ' Applied Ergonomics A 1-Day Seminar for the Orthopaedic Therapy Clinic in Toronto, April 8 j 1993 Syllabus \ Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH ANO SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �Table of Contents Topic Starting Page Capacity and Workload Detenninants . Stress Sensitizers Ergonomic Approaches to Reduce Injuries Recovery Time Needs for Repetitive Work How to Do An Ergonomics Survey · Examples of Questions to Ask About Jobs Ergonomics Problem Solving Fonn · Finding the Best Solutions Job Evaluation in Worker Fitness Determination Risk Factors for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Overexertion Injury Risk Factors Risk Factors for Low Back Pain Lifting Guidelines Problem Solving Graphs 1991 NIOSH Guidelines for Manual Lifting Maximum Force Guidelines A Functional Job Analysis Technique Job Analysis Fonns Computer Workplace Postures Checklist Work Demands Survey Fonn Postural Comfort Rating Fonn . Visual Comfort Rating Fonn Anthropometric and Workplace Measurements Chair Evaluation Fonn/Ergonomic Needs Self-Help to Increase Seated Work Comfort Examples of Workplace Assists Risk Factor Analysis Form Ergonomic Reasonable Accommodations Resources and Vendors for Applications in Ergonomics Problem Solving Fonns Cost Benefit Analyses of Ergonomic Problem Solutions Costs of Poor Design Cost Benefit - New and Old Designs Cost Benefit Problem Solving Form References - S.H.Rodgers 1 3 4 6 12 14 16 17 19 30 33 34 36 38 40 41 58 60 61 62 63 64 67 69 71 72 73 74 80 86 90 92 93 96 Acknowledgements The illustrations and tables on pages 36-37 are used with permission from Eastman Kodak's Ergonomic Design/or People at Work, Volumes 1 and2 published by Van Nostrand Reinhold in 1983 and 1986. The tables, text, and illustrations on pages 40 and 68 are from Working With Backache by S. H. Rodgers published by Perinton Press in 1985. The VDT workplace evaluation techniques on pages 60 to 71 and the stress sensitizers on page 3 have been developed in conjunction with Dr. Inger Williams. The article on pages 6 -11 was published by Thieme Pub lishers in Seminars in Occupational Medicine in March 1987. The articles on pages 19-29 and 41 - 57 hav been published by Hanley and Belfuss in 1988 and 1992 issues of Occupational Medicine: State of the Art Review . The material on the 1991 NIOSH Manual Lifting Guidelines is from a talk by A. Garg and T. Waters given in Denver, CO in June, 1992. All other unreferenced material in this syllabus is by Dr. S.H. Rodgers and permission to reproduce it must be obtained from her. �-- ' 0 0 0 Workshop : Ergonomic Job Analysis Techniques A problem solving workshop on Sunday, September 29, 1991 at the Physical Medicine lnstitute's 4th International Symposium, The Worker in the Workplace - Rehabilitating Musculoskeletal Injuries, University of Toronto by Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Table of Contents Job Evaluation for Worker Fitness Determination Page 1 Ergonomic Job Analysis Forms 12 Table 2: Examples of Muscle Effort Levels 15 16 Table 3: Heavy Effort in Manual Handling Tasks 17 Table 1: Factors Affecting Grip Strength 18 Kodak Manual Lifting Guidelines 20 Ergonomic Problem Solving Forms 26 Finding the Best Solution to an Ergonomics Problem Cost/Benefit Analysis Problem Solving Forms 27 r Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �Occupetione 1 Ergonomics Fourth Annual Conference on Reducing Work Injuries and Illness Through Ergonomics, April 23-24, 1992, Iowa City, IA G Friday, April 24th Schedule 8:15 9:00 10:00 Implementing Ergonomics: Program vs Process Ergonomic Job Analysis Techniques Break 10:15 12:00 Job Analysis (continued) Lunch (on your own) 1 :00 2:00 2:45 Generating Cost-Effective Solutions and Selling Them Case Studies - Return to Work Break 3:00 4:15 5:00 Designing With Ergonomics in Mind Questions and Discussion Adjourn Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS'. "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �0 0 0 Accident Analysis Concurrent Session F from 1:30 to 2:45 PM; at the Repetitive Motions Injuries Seminar, Thursday, October 31, 1996 at the Radisson Inn, Rochester, NY Syllabus Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT ANO. PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH ANO SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �Suzanne H. R_odgers, Ph.D. ' , , . . Consultant In Ergonomics .r � "'. }9 Huntington Hills - Center · Rochester, New York 14622 (716) 544-3587 (716) 266-8749 (FAX) An Ergonomic Approach to Analyzing Workplace Accidents The field of ergonomics and industrial safety complement each other in trying to find ways to reduce injury and illness risk in the workplace. While industrial safety has focused on identification of hazards, education, protective equipment, and guarding against hazards, ergonomics emphasizes job, workplace, equipment, and environmental design to reduce overload, simplicity rather than complexity in equipment and information design, and assists to aid people at work (such as manual handling assists, special tools, automation or semi-automation, and computer-aided processes). In evaluating accident reports on-site, however, one often sees a large number of strain and sprain events that follow this pattern: Accident type; Injury type: · · Body part: Unsafe act-: Hazardous condition: Recommended action: Lift� lower, push; pun· Strain/sprain · / Low back Didn't lift properly Heavy weight Lift properly A similar pattern is found for repetitive tasks where upper extremity problems have been found: Accident type: Injury type: Body part: Unsafe act: Hazardous condition: Recommended action: Repetitive motions Inflammation Hand and wrist Rushed High repetition rate Rotate with less hand-intensive task Even some laceration and contusion injuries follow somewhat predictable patterns in accident reporting, such as: Accident type: Body part: Unsafe act: Struck against Elbow Not paying proper attention �Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Consultant In Ergonomics 169 Huntingtrin Hills - Center Rochester, New York 14622 (716) 544-3587 (716) 266-8749 (FAX) Defining Injury/Illness Risk in Very Repetitive Jobs Talk to the Rochester Area Rehabilitation Professionals Meeting, June 17, 1998, at the Gateway Center, Rochester, NY Analysis Process 1. Observe job from far enough away to be able to see the whole body. 2. Ask questions to gather data about the job demands, production expectations, amount of control the worker has over job activities, and the provisions made for responding to increased stress because of emergency orders, absenteeism, or vacations. 3. Identify risk factors by body part. Rate effort level for each body part, based on the risk factors. 4. Determine duration and frequency of effort for each muscle group for each effort intensity observed. Determine the priority for change based on the 3 number rating. High and Very High Priorities for Change are tasks that must be - improved. 5. If the effort duration exceeds 30 seconds, use the fatigue-curves to assess the fatigue levels (Time before repeating). If the frequency exceeds 15 per minute, go to the curves describing effort at different holding times and compare the maximum recommended frequency against the frequency on the job. 6. From the Priority for Change ratings, determine how much the task needs to be changed to get it to a moderate or low rate of fatigue. Generate several options. 7. Re-analyze the chosen improvement to be sure a new problem has not been created. �-I _; ' Ergonomics in the Workplace A Seminar Sponsored by the Rochester Safety Council & OSHA November 19, 1990, Logan's Party House 8:00AM-4:30 PM Robert Szmanski, Safety Supervisor, OSHA, Buffalo Area Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D., Ergonomics Consultant Outline 8:00- 8:30AM 8:30- 9:30 9:30-10:00 10:00- 10:15 10:15-11:15 11:15- 12:00 12:00-1:00PM 1:00- 1:30 1:30- 2:00 2:00- 2:30 2:30- 2:45 2:45 - 3:15 3:15 - 4:00 4:00- 4:30 Registration/Introductions What OSHA Is Looking For in Compliance Reviews Risk Factors for Hand, Wrist, Arm, and Shoulder Overexertion Injuries Break Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique for Identifying Cost Effective Solutions to Overexertion Problems Problem Solving Example Lunch Break Review of Jobs with Overexertion Injuries- Defining the Problems- Group Discussion Risk Factors for Low Back Pain Guidelines for Reducing Overexertion Risk in Manual Handling Tasks Break Problem Solving- Manual Handling Problems Developing an Ergonomics Process in Your Company Why ? Who ? What? How? General Discussion/Questions/Summary �Table of Contents Topic Page Table of Contents Risk Factors for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Work/Recovery Graphs Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique Table 1: Examples of Muscle Effort Levels Finding the Best Solutions Ergonomics Case Study Problem Solving Form Risk Factors for Low Back Pain Force and Location Relationship - Static Pull Maximum Forces for Design Kodak Guidelines for Occasional Lifts OSHA Proposed General Industry Guidelines Thoughts on Ergonomics Programs and Processes Table 1: Ergonomics Program Elements Overexertion Injury Risk Factors Extra Problem Solving Forms References - SH R 1 2 5 6 9 · 1O 11 12 14 15 16 17 18 21 22 23 25 Acknowledgements The illustration on page16 is used with permission from Eastman Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volume 2 published by Van Nostrand Reinhold in 1986. The table and illustration on pages 14 and 15 are from Working With Backache by S. H. Rodgers. The table on page 5 was published by Thieme Publishers in Seminars in Occupational Medicine in March 1987. The analytical technique on pages 6 and 23 has been published by Hanley and Belfuss in a 1988 Occupational Medicine: State of the Art Review edition on Worker Fitness Evaluations. All other material in this syllabus is by Dr. S.H. Rodgers and permission to reproduce it must be obtained from her. }. �A Self-HelP';_Approach to Improving Office Safety Suzanne H. R:odgers, Ph.D. Consultant ii:' Ergonomics and Inger M. Wil:liams, Ph.D. Consultant in Computer Ergonomics Rochester Safety Council Ergonomics: Series 2000 November 13, 2000 / '\ ��It: Rochester Safety Council Suzanne H. Rodgers; Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/ HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" (716) 544-3587 • Fax (716) 266-8749 Email SHAODGEAS@aol.com 169 Huntington Hills • Rochester, NY 14622 ERGONOMICS SERIES 2000 Reduci11g Strai11s and Sprains by Improving Ma11ual Handling Tasks Greater Rochester Chamber of Commerce, I 0/2/2000 morning Presenter: Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D., Consultant in Ergonomics Outline I. Injuries and Illnesses Associated With Manual Handling Tasks A. Muscle Strains and Sprains B. Repetitive Motions Disorders C. Low Back Pain and Injuries D. Contusions, Abrasions, 'Lacerations, Crushes E. Dislocations, Fractures II Risk Factors For Musculoskeletal Injuries in Manual Handling Tasks A. Horizontal Factor B. Vertical Factor C. Vertical Distance Factor D. Asymmetry Factor E. Coupling Factor F. Frequency Factor G. Total Workload Issues III. The Design of Handling Tasks - Containers A. Design/Selection of Trays and Containers B. Handles and Gripping Surfaces _.J,�': '· �C. Design and Handling of Bags D. Handling Special Containers - Carboys, Drums, Sheet Materials IV. Defining Safe Lifting Guidelines A. NIOSH Lifting Guidelines -1991 B. Lifting Guidelines - Rodgers/Kodak C. One-Handed Lifting Guidelines V. Guidelines for Carrying A. Short Carrying Tasks B. Long Carrying Tasks VI. Guidelines for Pushing and Pulling Tasks A. Whole Body Push/Pull B. Upper Body Push/Pull C. Push and Pull in Different Postures VII. Problem Solving Case Studies A. Single Lifts - % Finding a Lift Acceptable B. Frequent Lifting-Total Workload C. Warehouse and Storage Shelf Designs D. Push/Pull of Hand Trucks and Carts VI. Techniques/Assist Devices for Improving Handling Tasks A. Materials Flow Analysis B. Slide Instead of Lift - Conyeyors, Slides, Air Tables C. Assist Devices to Position the Handling Tasks Optimally Levelators, Lowerators, Adjustable-Height Tables D. Assist Devices to Handle Materials - Hoists, Arms, Counter Balanced Devices E. Assist Devices to Push/Pull Materials and Hand Carts/frucks �-'-�"y .. _:J, ,· Ergonomics Series 2000, Rochester Safety Council Reducing Work-Related 1\4.usculoskeletal Disorders October 1011, Rochester Chamber of Commerce, Conf Rm D, 8AM to Noon I. A. B. C. D. E. F. Risk Factors/or MSDs A. Postural Risk Factors B. Effort Risk Factors C. Other Risk Factors II. Ill. A Functional Job Evaluation Technique A. Effort Estimations B. Holding Times for Muscle Effort C. Frequency of Muscle Efforts D. Total Time of Task E. Priority for Change IV. A. B. C. D. V. ',\ \:,� i Outline Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders (MSDs) - What Are They ? Muscle Fatigue Muscle Soreness and Inflammation Tendonitis, Tenosynovitis, Epicondylitis, Bursitis Carpal Tunnel Syndrome and Other Nerve Entrapments Muscle Strains, Tears, Joint Dislocations Back Strains and Disc Problems ��•� " -= -==== == . =-== Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/ HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" (716) 544-3587 • Fax (716) 266-87 49 Email SHRODGERS@aol.com 169 Huntington Hills • Rochester, NY 14622 Problem Solving and Solution Generation Why Are the Risk Factors Present ? How Much Does the Risk Have To Be Reduced? How Can That Be Accomplished (reduce effort, holding time, frequency, total time of effort ?) How Will the Chosen Solution Reduce Risk (re-evaluate) Prioritizing Jobs for Ergonomics Improvements A. Cost/Benefit Information B. Must Change vs Should Change vs Okay (Re.ct, Yellow, Green) C. Pro-Active vs Reactive Ergonomics �October 16, 2000 Reducing Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders Table of Contents Starting Page# Topic �; Table of Contents Acknowledgements I Work/Recovery Times for Static Muscle Work Risk Factors for Upper Extremity Discomfort/Illness/Injury Basis for Supervisory and Employee Awareness Training.... Table 1: Risk Factors for Discomfort Table 2: A Self-Help Approach to Reducing Risk.... Table 1: Factors Affecting Grip Strength Functional Job Fatigue Analysis Table 2: Examples of Muscle Effort Levels Discomfort Survey for Operators Working on Difficult Jobs ... Table 3: Definitions of Heavy Effort Ergonomic Problem SolvingAnalysis Form Hand Tool Selection and Design A Functional Job Analysis Technique Extra Forms and Lists Measuring and Setting Ergonomics Standards... la lb 3 10 I 13 20 21 22 23 25 26 27 29 46 end Acknowledgements The articles included in this syllabus are referenced on the front page of each. The remaining material has been developed by S.H Rodgers, and permission to reproduce it must be obtained from her. �SAE/ AS;SE �ALK I '1/k in Human Factors talk about the systems approach and wonder why those in the safety field aren't using the tech ni.ques we talk about. Why don't they? · Why aren't System Safety techniques used? S 1. Lack of training? Perhaps. 2. Lack of motivation? 3. Lack of usable data base? Generally not. Generally yes. Whi lack.of data base� A. What you need isn't there. A. . Form used doesn't suggest proper investigation . g Why isn't it there? S . Lack of proper theoretical con6ept� Whj n� proper ·theoretical concept? A. Never thought about it. As H. W. Heinrich stated in the 4th edition of his book, Industrial Accident Preventibn (1959), w�i£h dates back to 1931, the basic working theory of accident causation since ·the mid 1920's has been what is frequently called the "Domino Se-quence". The "Domino Sequence" or "Doinino_Theory" briefly stated, holds that� 1. Injuries are caused by accidents. 2. · Accident are causeci·by: a) unsafe acts of persons or b) 3. . . ex_posure to unsafe. mechanical conditions. Unsafe acts and conditions are _caused by faults_ of persons.· �.. : 4. Faults .of persons are· qreated by environment or acquired by inheritance. pg; 4, Inq.:ustrial Accident Prevention Heinrich, 1959} · As you �an tee, it is .person centered. . . ·. ·Heinrich goes further to state that 88%· of the causes of failures Which-cause or permit accidents are due to of "U�safe Acts .· persoriall and only 10% are due tQ "Unsafe .. . Mechaniqal ·or Physical Conditions''. The other 2%,. presumably t.he.se are acci.dents. that rekult from i'Ac '.ts of God" or other . . .. unassignable such· ca.uses other than the operator or the physical conditions. (Trilevel . Study coriclusion;· . A recent study by Indiana University of Auto Accidents, 1972) came to the same . �6% due to Human Error. -As a theory of Accident Causation, this position has .· . .. some serious deficiencies. · As Dan Petersen remarked in his . . book, Techniques· of. Safety Management,. ,iPerhaps ou.r inter. . pr�tatfon of this do·mino the.cry has been toonarrow'i. The 16g!cal consequence 6i this ·theorf'is to 6rame the· indi vidua.1 who was injured or was in charge, to the.· machine that had the accident� -· This comes from· the fac-t tha·t our attention is directed firs-t to the "Fault of the person",. . . then. to the "Unsafe Act" o:f' that person_ (88% of the time) and rareJy to the "Unsafe Condition" (10% of the time). Since Using this. approach, let.�s �xamine our 6ptions. we·are blaming people :; then we must somehow modify ·the person. Modification of people i's· a· difficult business. . can select,. t-raih,. fire or reas>sign people. . Beyond that ., We �there isn 1 t much one can do.· People forget, they revert to previously learned behavior. Workers get tired, bored and fatigued; they seek stimulation. ·risk seekers. Some people are active Accident investigations based on this theory typically find the cause of the accident to be operator error. In contrast to �his essentially unidimensional approach to accident �ausation, let us look at a multi-dimensional approach, This approach has been advocated by many people. Gordon ( 1950) first advocated. the use of Epidemiological· approach for accident analysis. It is the cornerstone of the System Safety Engineering technique. The man-machine environment and all its possible interactions is the pro venance of this theory and what is known as ergonomics or Human Factors Engineering. Basically, ttie belief is that it is more effe.ctive to fit the. task to the person rather than th� other way around. Perhaps some examples will better illustrate what is meant. In WW II it is said, .a number of student pilots trained on a particulaF trainer. They then transitioned to a fighter aircraft .. About 400 of them c�ashed. vestigated. Each crash was in In each case the pilots has retracted the flaps rather than the landing gear immedi-ately upon take off. This was attributed to pilot-error, as it most .assuredly was. The basic problem was not really the unsafe act of' the pilot so much as it was the basic design· of the controls of �the airplane. The relatiyepositionof the controls for the landing gear_arid flaPs were s�;itched in-the fighter as compared to. the. traine:ri.. This meant 'that. the previously acquired behavior of reaching over and grabbing the lever: On the left which used to retract the wheels now retract::3 the . . This<is s,ufficient to ruir:i yo.'i.ir whole d·ay:.. ·• This is . flaps. - . .. · . . .' ·, . . . . the Classic l!negativ� transfer of training;" itoI'y. · · - _ There are · many examples, one· might exaririne a,t thiS point, but. the point I want . -... -· to . .· ' . -: . make is· that no Ina.tter how ·: much: training; and selection you do' a ·poorly designed work"'."" place .or Job ig just to happen. art a_cciderit wa.iting for a. place .or. tirne ' Alan. Swain refers to the desired ·end point a.s a ' ''Safety Prone· Sit�ationll (SPS} making .situ.ations ''safety . . prone" and .. 11 . faiT;...safe11 rather thari the oth:er waY shbul¢i ·_._ always be .our' goal. · I doubt that anyone here will quarrel with what·r·have said_ thus far.· Many.of you are very possibly saying at this · point ,, "I've heard all· this before". This is true, but what have· we 'done .aboUt it? Whether we realize it or not, our th.inking has been unconsciously ·shaped lJy the• DorninO Theory rather than the · mu.I ti�dimensiona1 .. theory. . I sugge:st that there are four . . reasons w:hy we are thu� inf1uenced. 1st ..; it is just human natur,e to blame what appears to be the-active operator when something goes wrong. All of our wester_n cultur-al heritage says t.hat we are the masters or· Our destiny,. there,..; fore, if something.goes amiss, it must be our �fault. 2nd Our legal system is geared towards the deter mi�ation of r�sponsibility, fault and blame. When the police investigate an accident, they are not trying·to find out what ciused the accident so much as they are trying to determine the individual who.will be held responsible for the accident. When a lawyer starts a case, they generally want to know who is at.fault, who was negligent, etc. Workman'S compensation is geared towards compen - sating the worker and penalizing the company and only incidentally in removing the causes_of the accidents. 3rd - For manage�ent, it is easier to blame the worker than to accept the fact that the-workplace, procedure or environment might need improving. 4th-- The very forms that we use when we investigate accidents are modeled after the domino theory. The major thrust is to identify the person that did the unsafe a.et, ·rather than find the aspect of.the job that contributed to the accident-or the environment that disposed the individual to -have the accident. �Let us now examine in somewhat more detail what.the implications are.for these two approaches as they pertain.to accident and injury intervention strategies. 1) The domino theory would have us fire, retrain or otherwise modify operator behavior, 2) Most of tis are familiar with the concept of "System Safety Engin.eering 11 , the application of a· logical, step�by�step approach that systematically examines , the whole system. In this approach, the· human (as an operator, mechanic or whatever) is merely a subsystem �ithin the t6tal system that includes' the machine/tool or job subsystem as well as the environment subsystem. Classic Domino Theory can be seen then to be subsummed within system safety engi..,. rieering as the human subsystem. paper, 11 John K. Gordon'simportant The Epidemiology of Accidents 11 (American.Journal of Public Health, 39:504-514, 1949) was the first detailed analysis of the notion that accidents involved more than just a person doing an unsafe act. Accident Research (Harper Haddon in his book, & Row, 1964) expanded this concept and in subSequent writings has developed a 3xJ matrix· (morphology) which can be very useful in a systems approach. Each box has its·own appropriate intervention strategy. Haddon's approach is a very broad one that has as tts ob jective to reduce losses due to injuries rather than .merely preventing injuries. Haddon has evolved a set of 10 counter measure strategies that encompass the system safety concept rather well.. We need to think along the . se lines if we want to use . ' . . other HA1AYwAnalysis Techniques such as F.T.A., P.H.A., etc. �T·his. 3x3 morphological approach lends itself to total system analysis by subsystem and phase of the accident.· Haddon implic.itly takes Swain's concept that it is better to analyze hazards than to.investigate accidents. Hazards are accidents waiting to happen-'-cari we afford another 747 or Titanic or Turkish Airlines DC-10? This brings me to a major point -- why and how we in vestigate accidents and what do we use form 101) to do it? ·. We investigate accidents because we have to. (OSHA, OSHA requires it, various state laws require it, the insurance . . . ,carrier requires it, company regulations require it. investigate accidents to find out what happened. want to know what happened? We Why do we In order to fix blame and · •· ·responsibility--was anyone negligent? Who is going to pay for this, is the company liable for anything--is anyone due compensation, and perhaps-:...what can we learn from this so that future occurrences can be prevented. It was not by mistake that I put.that last, because all too often that is just whe:re it comes in the real world. How dOwe investigate accidents? Take a look at your �typi�al accident; report -- form. Here is ah ·improved format } qh_e that has- check-off' spaces rather than reqt{iring narrative, but is still bc1sed. OJI Domino rather< ttiah· Systems.' Wl1.at is on it? . HowmJJch SI)a�e is ·a.evote_d to J:}erson data .:.. -i. e. , who .. . . was hurt,' Whgt ·sorts bf in-juries' who was gt. fa_ult,. etc., . . •, . . hOW much ls Used to d.esc,r:lbe the Job; the j.ob aids, the . . . .. .. ' . . enviro'nment, the wodcp1ace ,.• the qualit; Of environment?- . working trie Let tis go ,back to' the, Haddon: 3x3 matrix and see vthat - _a typical part of Jt· is covered' by No. ae:cident fo'rm.- 101, Which ·is basically the AN�T �-17 mended form is :probably_the most widely country·. or· the used The _OSHA, NSC re com-. form in this What iS on it?: _There are· 19 questions Or sets of . blanks, divided into 5 sections: . · Section I ·Questions .· 1 ..,. 3 - II IlI. IV 10-13 Sections.III ··-•19 & ' . .. , Content identify the employer __ relate to the injury is the ··name of the physician , is the name of the hospital IVare the only sections where real infor_matioh might be generated---a total _of 8 items. . .. examine. each:, 10. 11. ·.. relate to·the accident ··· 14..:.17 18 . . identify the eciploy�e 4-9 V ; ·' place of accid�nt (street a�dresS) was - employee .. .· on premises . (yes or . n6) Let us . �12.· .Wh�t was employee. doing whE!n it1Jured (narrative) 13. How. did ._· acc:i..dent . occut ·{narrative). 14; · . de�cribe_ injury & indicate· part of body affected· · 15.. Name obJect o.r su,bstance that injured employe.e i6. 17. pate did employe_e ;die? (yeS or ·no) 12, 13,. 14 and: 15 are ,;eally the only questions that generate any potentia'lly useful data. '·Withou� �ny real: help. froni the :r6rrri, w� >see that' our atteriticm is• dtr.ected _. to what th� employee wa,s doing .. And most likely, wiil only h�ar we about whattookplac� during the accident •. Thia.only covers . . one of the nine areas identified by Haddon. . The. object_ or substance is idE;?n�ified but without special. attention,· we . will . . . .. . .. .. : . _nbt find b,tlt how i_t is related to anything else.. Nothing in the form directs our attention di!'eCtly to any. :fcl.cet · of· the envfronmerit or job or tbol or machine that may have"en:abled 11 the �ccident in the first place. Nothing suggests that we. should iook at the ppa�es of the sequence. - . ·. _ l'J>Othing. makes us aslc not orily • i'what was. the worker doing?!'� but a.lso !'why did the worke,r dc)what he/she did?" This is -. really the crux of the problem. The current form channels . our thinking fl.long rather narrow paths. . Let us·. look at an improved form that does look beyoricl just the worker. Pope's Dept. of: Interior Torm). (Will Let us furthe� �xamitie··the·:�eijponses that can be made to the unSare act and hazardous · condition categories, corner""" _·. stones of Domj,no · Theofy � In our recent analysis of these - �types of qu,estions' we fotfnd the following>distribution of ' responses., .· ' As you cah see, the categories of ''None.", ·"NEC", •. >arid "inherently hazard;ous" • are the . categories of choice .. This �bviously is not much help to those of us· t�ying to determine what·· can .be done to pre;ent future occurrenc.es .. It was in an eff·ort to correct this that we started our . . . . . . effort to redesign the form. . . , . . . . . . we·hoped to identi':fy aspects of the opera.tor beha�ior, •· the job/machine br accident·. agent .· and the environment that contributed to the occurrence of ' the accident; ·. · From this we·· discovered ultimately that we .. . . - ,·· : ·.. . : ' heeded to readjust. our· entire framework 6:t accid,erit causati6n � ' . conceptj_bn; : This turned out . : to . ' ' ' be much more diff: ,cu];t than i we· had anti_cipai;;ed�-: We discovered many, rq�chanical problems, for' example, that. the directions,' on tilllng · .of extrelJle importance-. out' the. form are The instructions must.be as unambiguoµ.s . and. clear as possible .. . . . In' an effort to dete'rmi:ne 'the . reliability of the. raters' ' we. co�clu,cted inter..:.rater reliability studies. The results . ' were eye ... opening� analysi,s. ' _There was noneed to do any.statistical We sent out six acc:t dent scenarios, to. 9ver 100 ' 'people who·. a.-r.e resporisib!e for' filling out accident reports. We 'found :a lack of agreement ori almo.st everything. The degree ·of disagreement was not too bad with regard to.ob-'jective thinis such as ·agent of accident, but ev�nhere., we found cause for conc.ern. .It Was clear that not eve]?yone ·. understood the, . difference hetween .agent of injury . and agent . of.accident. Our d:irectioris explicitly state that we only �.. .· wa�ted. accident agertt,'. not injury agent., y�t in some qases, : . ·. · .. we got injury. not' accident. Ac,V' -:with_ regard to i'Unsafe More sEi'.r'ious, was the pro.bl em He-re and "Hazardous Condition 11. we·. f'.ound litt:le agreement and mµ,ch use of the "none'!, "NEc i ,. and "Inherently. Hazardous" type response which.gives us very . . little to work with.· .. . . .· . . . Current: :forms :force you to think._t:ri.e w.orker is at: fault, but the investigator i.s .not anx:ious. to blame ;the worker. . Another problem .. Tn our· attempt to list· a.11 poSsJble · . . . _ . . .'.. ' agents of accident and/or lnjury, we listed. ove·r JOO.. We •. discovered that the closer an item-was th�� beginning . to . . . . . . of. . . . People ·were the list, the more lik�ly it was �o be chosen. unwilling' to .tais:e the <time to search the: .entire. list� they . . . ••,,•· . ··. . , ' . . . ,,• . . . .. w.er� simply taking the: .tirst thing· th.at remotely carrie c1o-se. So·, we had to "human-factorize" our list by g:i.Ving the major categories> in an·qrgaUizatiohchart format so_ that the . . : .. ··.· •, ••' .· . perso_n fillihg :_out . thl form would first locate the general category and .. . . .· then search for the Specific� We must cons:i.d'er/how the environment affects the operator/ · In·· much the same way, we a tteinpted to identify the human. ope;ator behavior characteristics. Here we ask,ed not-only what .did the;y do, butaTso why, in a two"'.""way matrix of what and why. ·.... :we are trying to tap the machine and environment yari. ables by asking questi.ons about the nature of the.environment as , · it might relate to the accident. We are trying to find out to what d.egree the design of .the J<?b, work�aids and. �tools,, etb. relate to the accide�t. . . .· .. ·. ···.; _ ... _ . . .·· :· . ·• This is an dn�going effort. : We feel progres,s if3 b'eing ., . . .' made. . . . . . . Our: finding.s· tO ·dat.� suggest that much attention. . . needs .. to ·be directE=d in each. of the :following areas: · L ·. Design 'of a. form that forces·· the person fill_ing .. oµt the form·to .•....t_hink•ih·. a systems.context .. 2. ... ·. Directions for filling out. the · form must pe :-crystal· clear 'and designed so that it helpS rather. than ·... ' ·. hinders _locatii1g the . correct resp-onses to ·qµestio:ns ·· · · · · on the form. · ·· · : 3. _: " · . ·.. . ·,.: . . . .·The people fil�iilg. oy.t the forrns need to be moti,.. vated, .t.rained and knowledgeaole of the wbrk ahd work area. procedures rieed to be pre�tested and de;;.;,bugged to. b,e sure you 'are getting what. you think· You are getting. . ... 4. All 5, Meani11gful clata analysis starts with �a good accid·ent report form •. The wrong form will pre,...· dispose/prejudice the data base totally. In clos·ing, let me share with you cornments frorn 2,000 Accidents, · Risk inherent · Ac:c:tderit Rate - f ( work rate) . -�:xperience . • · ' . .The Clear answer: . Don't· blame the human until the machirie and env'iro.11inent is cleaned up ,;:__.can't . . . . you cpange your theory of Accident Causation. • .. . do this until ��SEHCOM '88 Safety, Environmental & Health Communications Conference Society Hill Sheraton, Philadelphia, PA June 29 .. July 1, 1988 Agenda Wednesday, June 29, 1988 11:00 a.m.-1:30 p.m. Registration 1:45 p.m.-2:00 p.m. Welcome -John M. Evans, President ITS Corp. 2:00-3:00 Keynote Address Dr. Arthur Miller.Professor of Law, Harvard University Law School, Legal Expert for ABC News - Current Trends of Legal Exposure to Health Safety and Environmental Professionals 3:05- 5:30 Focus Groups (concurrent) Group #1 - Ted Trump, Manager of Training, ITS Corp. - How to Solve The Biggest Problems in Health and Safety Training - Effective Uses of AV in Training Group#2 New Technologies in Training (Lecture/ Demonstration) Group#3 Dialogue - A "one-on-one" opportunity to converse with our producers, directors, market researchers and top management personnel. 6:00 · 7:30 Opening Ni_ght Reception Thursday, June 30 ,1988 7:30 a.m.- 8:00 a.m. 8:00-9:30 Coffee and Danish Legal Perspective of Hazard Communication William Ament, Esquire, Organizational Resource Coun selors, Inc. 9:35-10:40 Worker Notification - Lori Ramonas, Ph.D., Associate Director of Health, Safety and Chemical Regulations, Chemical Manufacturers Association 10:40-11:00 Break 11:00 a.m. -12:30 p.m. Hazard Communication Update - . Louis S. Beliczky, M.S., M.P.H., United Rubber, Cork, Linoleum and Plastic Workers, AFL-CIO Luncheon *12:35 -2:00 �Guest Speaker- Film Recovery Inc. Trial - Jay C. Magnuson, Deputy Chief, Cook County States Attorney Office 2:05-4:05 OSHA 's Wall to Wall Inspection System (Work shop) - Raymond J. Colvin, President, Safety Training Dynamics, Inc. 4:05-4:15 Break 4:15-5:15 Health, Safety and Ergonomics- Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D., Ergonomics/Human Factors Consul tant, SHR 7:00-10:30 Dinner Cruise on the Delaware Friday, July 1, 1988 7:30 a.m. -8:00 a.m. Coffee and Danish 8:00-9:00 The One World Concept: International Aspects of Safety Health and Security - Dr. Glenn E. Hudson, CSS, CSM, CSE, President, Director General, World Safety Organization 9:05-11:05 Applications of Behavior Modification for Occu pational Safety - E. Scott Geller,Ph.D., Professor of Psychology, Virginia Tech. 11:10-12:10 Environmental Issues and Trends From An In dustrial Perspective- Thomas J. Tuffey, Ph.D., Vice PresidenVDivision Manager, econoENVIRONomics Divi sion, Roy F. WESTON, Inc. *12:15 p.m. -1:45 p.m. Luncheon Congressman Joseph M. Gaydos, U.S. House of Repre sentatives, Author of the Worker Notification Bill 1 :50 -2:50 3:00-4:30 The UA w GM Team Concept & Interactive Video Training - James Howe and Kenneth A. Hulik, UAW-GM Joint Health and Safety Subcommittee for Skilled Trades Safety Training Focus Groups Repeat or follow-up-to Wednesday's Focus Group Topics Spouses Program (Thurs.) ... Agenda items and speakers are subject to change up to the time of the Conference... �Ergonomics, Return To Work, and Injury Prevention in the Workplace A 1-Day Seminar for Professional Physical Therapy, Washington University, St. Louis, Mo, Saturday, April 29, 1989 Outline of Seminar A.- Defining Job Demands 1. Postures - Biomechanics 2. Intensity, Duration, Frequency, Energy Demands 3. Environmental Factors 4. Work Pace, Hours of Work, Accountability B. Defining Worker Capabilities 1. Size - Clearance, Reach 2. Strength/Endurance, Joint Stress Tolerance 3. Aerobic Capacities - Whole Body/Upper Body 4. Visual Capabilities 5. Tolerance of Heat Exposure 6. Shiftwork Tolerance C. Initiating and Performing a Job Review 1. Defining "Problem" Jobs 2. Surveying a Department 3. Collecting Data in the Workplace D. Using Job Data To Recommend Change 1. Relating Job Data to Individual Work Capacities 2. Determrning When to Recommend Job Changes 3. Examples of Practical Job and Workplace Changes/Accommodations (Repetitive Work, Manual Handling) E. Case Studies Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE. EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER. N.Y. 14622 �Ergonomics, Return to Work, and Injury Prevention in the Workplace Table of Contents r�\ \__j Ergonomics and Return to Work Industry's Needs/fherapists' Roles Job Evaluation in Worker Fitness Determination 1 3 5 Capacity and Workload Determinants Recovery Time Needs for Repetitive Work Ratings of Perceived Exertion Standing Arm Reach Seated Arm Reach Visibility and Quality Performance Lifting Guideline - Occasional Lifts 16 19 27 30 31 32 33 How to Do an Ergonomics Survey Equipment for Ergonomics Work Ergonomic Job Analysis 34 36 38 Finding the Best Solution to Ergonomics Problems Designing Jobs to Minimize Unnecessary Effort Cost-Benefit Analyses of Ergonomic Problem Solutions The Costs of Poor Design Industrial Ergonomics Resource Materials - SHR.odgers 41 42 43 Problem Solving Form Office Ergonomics Self-Help Low Back Pain and Repetitive Motions Injuries Risk Factors for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Risk Factors for Low Back Pain Total Work Load Problem Solving Form Carpal Tunnel Problem Solving Form 50 53 47 49 54 56 60 62 64 Acknowledgements The material on pages 30, 31, and 34 is reproduced with permission of Eastman Kodak Company from Ergonomic Design for People at Work; Volumes 1 and 2, published by Van Nostrand l_leinhold in 1983 and 1986. The articles include references and are available through their publishers. All other material belongs to Dr. Rodgers, and permission to reproduce it must be obtained from her. \,"-__; . \ �Occupational Ergonomics Institute VII: A Multidisciplinary Approach to Occupational Rehabilitation, Society of Behavioral Medicine, April 18, 1990, Chicago A. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Principles of Ergonomics Ergonomics and Occupational Health Work Capacities - Effort, Duration, Frequency, Total Time Risk Factors for Low Back Pain Risk Factors for Repetitive Motions Disorders Ergonomic Job Analysis B. Evaluation of Job Demands 1. Review of Job 2. Application of Ergonomic Job Analysis and Problem Solving Techniques C. Work Re-Entry- Ergonomics Interventions 1. . Techniques to Reduce Low Back Risk 2. Techniques to Reduce Repetitive Motions Risk 3. Job Design Approaches Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER. N.Y. 14622 �FEDERATION of NEW YORK SOLID WASTE ASSOCIATION Solid Waste/Recycling Conference & Trade Show City of Rochester Municipal Ergonomics Solid Waste Collection 1987-2001 May 9, 2001 City of Rochester Bureau of Human Resource Management Tassie R. Demps Safety Coordinator City Hall, Room 103A 30 Church Street Rochester, New York 14614 (716) 428-6916 FAX (716) 428-6902 tdemps@mcls. rochester .lib.ny .us Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/ HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" (716) 544-3587 • Fax (716) 266-8749 Email SHRODGERS@aol.com 169 Huntington Hills • Rochester, NY 14622 �The Ergonom1c Approach to Low Back Pain 1n the Workplace by Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D., Consu1tant in Ergonomics A ta1k to attendees of a conference, Strateg1es to Reduce Employee Med1ca1 Costs, presented by Eastwood Hosp1ta1, Memph1s, Tennessee, June 17, 1986 out11ne A What Is Ergonomics and How Can It Help Us Reduce Medical Costs at Work? B. Low Back Pa1n at Work l. The Kodak Exper1ence - Dr. M.L. Rowe's Studies 2. Factors That Increase the Risk of Aggravating Low Back Pain Symptoms a. Workplace Design - Postures b. Manual Mater1als Handling c. Job Destgn - Work Patterns d. Other Factors C. Ergonomic Approaches to Reduce Low Back Pain D1sab1lity 1. Postures - Heights, Reaches, Vistbll I ty, Clearances 2. Manual Materials Handling Guidelines and Aids 3. Providing Worker Control Over Work Pattern D. Case Studies l. Work Height and Reach Requirements 2. Manua 1 Mater! a Is Hand I Ing 3. Work Pace 6/16/86 SHR Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS �Ergonomics and Injury Prevention Cumulative Trauma and Repetitive Strain Injury Wisconsin Physical Therapy Association, Milwaukee, April 14-16, 1988 Ergonomics Support Materials for Sue Rodgers' Presentations Topic Pa2e# A. Work Capacities and Factors Affecting Them 2 B. Individual Susceptibility For Repetitive Motions Disorders 5 C. Factors Affecting Handgrip Strength 6 D. Evaluating Static Work Recovery Time Needs 9 E. Techniques to Reduce Job Risk Factors 14 F. Risk Factors for Low Back Pain 15 G. Height and Reach Interaction 17 H. Maximum Force Guidelines for Design 18 I. Strength vs Location of Load 19 J. Lifting Guidelines 20 K. Ergonomics Problem Solving Form 22 L. Technique for Ergonomic Analysis of Repetitive Jobs 24 M. Industrial Ergonomics Resource Materials By or Edited by S.H. Rodgers 30 3/13/88 SHR Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �Building Ergonomics Into Your Business Talk to the Wisconsin Safety Council Annual Meeting, April 10, 1991 by Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D., Consultant in Ergonomics, Rochester, NY A. Ergonomics and Safety Interactions 1. Human Error Prevention - Human Reliability 2. Reduction of Musculoskeletal Illness and Injury - Work Capacities B. Building Ergonomic Analyses into Job Safety Analyses 1. Asking the Right Questions 2. Defining the Situation, Job Demands, Environment 3. Assessing the Risk of an Injury or an Incident C. Reducing Upper Extremity Stress on the Job 1. Risk Factors for Injury/Illness 2. Defining the Job Demands and Muscle/Joint Stresses 3. Techniques to Minimize the Stresses D. Reducing Overexertion Injuries/Illnesses in Manual Handling Tasks 1 . Risk Factors for Low Back Problems 2. Design Criteria for Ergonomic Lifting and Force Exertion Tasks 3. Techniques to Reduce the Risk for Low Back Problems Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE. EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �OVERVIEW OF PHYSIOLOGICAL RESEARCH APPLICATIONS IN AN INDUSTRIAL SETTING Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Health, Safety, and Human Factors Laboratory Eastman Kodak Company Rochester, NY 14650 20 minute paper for presentation at a symposium: "Work Physiology: Industrial and Occupational Applications", American College of Sports Medicine, Chicago, Illinois, May 25-28, 1977. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Conference Workshop Materials Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Description An account of the resource Dr. Rodgers was invited to speak and give workshops at many conferences including . These are cover pages, syllabi, notes and agendas for some of her workshops. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_049 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-21 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 111 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/6590d357a8a08df6ad6e5b42f62390bc.pdf 512e955b6c16ebc8747b96b3cea1236b PDF Text Text ., ' • 6 Iridustrial Ergonomics Resource Materials Written or Edited by S.H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Eastman Kodak Company Human Factors and Ergonomics Groups, Ergonomic Design for People at Work. Volume 1 (ISBN#442-23972-6) Workplace, Equipment, Information Handling and Environment Design, 1983, $74.95; Volume 2 (ISBN#442-23939-4) Job Design, Methods to Measure Job Demands, Human Capacities, Work Patterns, Shift Work, and Manual Materials Handling, 1986, about $74.95. Available from Wiley & Sons, Phone Orders 1-800-225-5945. Rodgers, S.H. Working With Backache (ISBN#931157-01-3), 1985, published by Perinton Press. $18.95 plus handling. Review of occupational low back pain problems and techniques to manage and prevent disability from them using ergonomics approaches. Sections on what the worker can do, what workplace and equipment designers can do, and what management can do to reduce low back pain problems at work. Available through S.H. Rodgers, Ph.D., P.O. Box 23446, Rochester, N.Y. 14692. Phone= (716) 544-3587. Rodgers, S.H. (Editor). Repetitive Motions Injuries, March, 1987 issue of Seminars in Occupational Medicine. published by Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc., Suite 1501, 381 Park Avenue South, New York, N.Y. 10016. Phone= (212) 683-5088. Series was discontinued in 1988. Rodgers, S.H. "Job Evaluation in Worker Fitness Determination", a chapter in Worker Fitness and Risk Evaluations edited by Jay Himmelstein, MD and Glenn Pransky, MD, Occupational Medicine: State of the Art Reviews, March, 1988, published by Hanley and Belfus, Inc., 210 S. 13th Street, Philadelphia, PA 19107, (215) 546-4995. Rodgers, S.H. "Matching Worker and Work Site - Ergonomic Principles", a chapter in Work Injury: Management and Prevention by Susan J. Isemhagen, PT, published in 1988 by Aspen Publishers, Inc., 1606 Research Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20850, (301) 251-8500. Rodgers, S.H. "Metabolic Indices in Materials Handling Tasks", in Safety in Manual Materials Handling, edited by C.G. Drury, DHEW/NIOSH Publ.#78-185, 1976, Cincinnati, OH, pages 52-56. Rodgers, S.H. and I.M.Williams "Improving Worker Comfort and Performance in Computer Workplaces", in Modern Job Safety and Health Guidelines, September 16, 1987. NY City: Prentice Hall, 1987. Geras, D.T., C.D. Pepper, and S.H. Rodgers, "An Integrated Ergonomics Program at the Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company", in Advances in Industrial Ergonomics and Safety I edited by A. Mital, Bristol, PA: Taylor & Francis, 1989, pp. 21-28. Rodgers, S.H. and J.W. Yates, "The Physiological Basis of the Manual Lifting Guidelines", in Scientific Documentation for the Revised 1991 NIOSH Lifting Equation, NIOSH, Washington, DC: NTIS, Dept of Commerce, Document# PB91-226274, May,1991, pages 1-55. Rodgers, S.H., "A Functional Job Evaluation Technique", Chapter in Ergonomics, edited by S.J.Moore, M.D. and A. Garg, Ph.D., Occupational Medicine: State of the Art Reviews Vol 7. No. 4, October-December,1992, Philadelphia,PA: Hanley & Belfus, Inc., pages 679 - 711. �. ' . " 2. Rodgers, S.H., "Measuring and Setting Ergonomics Standards - Issues and Perspectives", in Advances in Occupational Ergonomics and Safety I (2 Vol) edited by A. Mital, Bristol, PA: Taylor & Francis, 1996, pp 884-890. Rodgers, S.H., Chapter II-10: Work Physiology - Fatigue and Recovery in Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics. 2nd Edition. edited by G. Salvendy, New York, NY: J. Wiley & Sons, 1997, p. 268-297. Rodgers, S.H., "Predicting Ergonomically-Acceptable Highly Repetitive Tasks", in Proceedings of the Silicon Valley Ergonomics Conference and Exposition. ErgoCon '98, San Jose, CA, May 3-6, 1998, pages 3�11. Williams, I.M. and S.H. Rodgers (1997), "Workstation and VDT User Mismatch and Working Discomfort ", Proceedings of ErgoCon '97 Conference, Silicon Valley Ergonomics Institute, San Jose State College, San Jose, CA, May, 1997, p. 85. Williams, I.M. and S.H. Rodgers (1997), "An Ergonomics Program at an Emergency Communications Center", Proceedings of the 1997 International Ergonomics Association Meetings, in Tampere, Finland, June/July, 1997, p. 483� 4/99 SHR � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Industrial Ergonomics Resource Materials Written or Edited by S.H. Rodgers, Ph.D Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Description An account of the resource A bibliography of industrial ergonomics books and articles that Dr. Rodgers contributed to. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_047 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-21 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 2 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/41068dc967ed3223eb59f786bba3322c.pdf ec25adbfdf5b8843c8967a1670caa12e PDF Text Text \)vv/-t�Jf, j / (7 ' 1 Vo !f9-<v' '5'� Expert Witness Testimony for the Proposed Ergonomicf Rulemaking Hearing at DOL, Washington, DC in February, 2000 My name is Suzanne Rodgers and I have been working in the field of industrial ergonomics for the past 32 years. My doctorate is in Physiology, and my area of special interest in ergonomics has been to understand what are safe and reasonable job demands for the industrial workforce. The goals of my on-site studies have been to define physical work capabilities of the potential workforce and to identify ways to design jobs, workplaces, equipment, and environments to reduce unnecessary fatigue on the job. In my 13 years at Eastman Kodak Company, I learned the applications of ergonomics by being out on the production floor or in the field and by f<• biJy,,) measu�ip.� the metabolic, muscular, and cardiovascular demands of the)obs _JY, c@� employee volunteers� I was fortunate to be inside a company where I could study people at work and also learn about production needs. In those 13 years, I was taught by the workers, their supervisors, the engineers, the medical specialists, the skilled trades people, human resources professionals, and my colleagues in the Human Factors/Ergonomics Section of the Health and Safety Laboratory that jobs have to be looked at globally to reach production goals without putting in order to find th� J M ;� people at risk of g�fietmt occupational injuries and illnesses. From our work with production employees and with engineers, we were often able to find better ways to design the workplace, production equipment, environme� an�tasks so more o� �chieved with less stress on the worke�. � �o-v��e book, "Ei-�ic �esign for People at Work" msl.ude.s_maP¥-,OLL�&ncs--f0f--the design of Jobs and workiltg �s tha� aeeemmo.date a large majority of the potential iRdustriaLworkfo1ce. Much of my work at Kodak was spent developing guidelines for safe workloads so that women and older workers would be accommodated on some of the heavier jobs and so people with disabilities or �,.. short-term work restrictions could get back to their jobs in a safe and efficient manner. It should be noted that none of the stronger men complained when we found better ways to help them get their work done. Good ergonomics benefits everyone. Since 1982, I have been a full-time, self-employed ergonomics consultant and have had the opportunity to develop ergonomics programs and processes with clients in large, middle-sized, and small companies and service or�a�o� :Jld in a municipality. I did not start a consulting firm because�� 1 ttiafthe best ergonomics programs I have been associated Idlave ol1s:ewed �s'7 � � I with are those where the production workers are the primary problem �� identifiers, analyzers, and solution generators. They must be supported by ''J..c '<t:r ,· the service providers in the company (i.e., the engineers, medical specialists, supervisors or team leaders, maintenance staff, materials handling specialists, and managers), but the ownership for ergonomics is with each person doing her or his job. In smaller businesses, where the support staff is thinner, thineed to solve ergonomics-related problems on the floor is even greater. I found that I could train production workers and the support staff to I think like ergonomists, and could facilitate them through a fairly simple fatigue analysis or lifting guideline to a problem solving process that generates several ways of addressing the root cause of the problem.. Taking a page from Kenneth Blanchard, I moved from the educational model of trying to stuff a lot of information into the heads of my course attendees to the industrial training model of asking the attendees to dump their brain contents out on the table and let me rearrange them � to incorporate the ergonomics principles. By doing this, I found I could tap into the wealth of knowledge that is present in the workforce for ways to improve jobs. By assuring that the support groups respect and assist the production teams in finding solutions for these problems, we also improve communications and �operation in projects where health and safety issues are not paramount. r ��w'-4-- .. A i l In addressin the P osed Erg start with my ition fer ononu s: like to �"Ergonomics is the science of making it easy for people to do high quality work". To do high quality work, one cannot be asked to work in a way that will generate large amounts of muscular or whole body fatigue or to do tasks that are very heavy or are less heavy and are sustained for a long time. Even if the damage does not show up right away, one cannot expect people to perform at a high quality level if they are performing difficult tasks at high repetition rates or over long work shifts without adequate time to repair microtraumas to the joints or muscles between shifts. People's desire to do quality work may put them at additional risk of injury or illness in these job situations because they neglect the signs coming from the body that indicate an over-exertion i�jury is developing. The long term costs of musculoskeletal disorders combined with the increased longevity of the population and increased health care costs add to the reasons why we should take steps now to prevent unnecessary stress on the job. It has been apparent to me over the past 2 years, especially, that most companies are trying to keep ahead of the global competition by keeping their workforce small and using overtime to cope with production variations. The "downsizing" of many companies has resulted in many employees holding more than one position and feeling unable to do quality work in any of them. The use of overtime in production has made it harder to keep ergonomic teams active on the floor because they are too tired to take on another ("unpaid") responsibility. They still have to get their work done. I think this situation is coming to a head, and we need to find better ways to get high individual productivity without putting the workers at risk of injury because of accumulated physical and mental/perceptual fatigue. I believe that the implementation of a flexible, work practices, ergonomics standard can be a positive step in the prevention of occupational injuries and in optimizing the design of problem jobs. It is not difficult to get the priorities for health and safety overwhelmed by the business's need to keep market �share in today's economy. By allowing companies to develop their own ways of incorporating ergonomics into their operations and measuring their effectiveness in decreasing the occupational injuries and illnesses, the proposed ergonomics standard can help to underline the importance of health and safety priorities in parallel with production demands. Scope of This Testimony In the remainder of this testimony, I would like to address the importance of several of the basic program elements, including management commitment, employee participation, job hazard analysis techniques, training needs, implementing changes, and program evaluation. My testimony is based, primarily, on my experience of building ergonomics programs with companies and working within a company. I have been in a position to learn about almost every mistake I have made over the past 32 years because I often work with a client for several years as we build the program and change the culture about ergonomics and teamwork on the production floor. However, I think that there are many ways to do ergonomics in a company, and each company has to find the way that best !its their re��urces, staffing, and health and safety problems. The �roposed e;.gonomic�tfodard and several OSHA and NIOSH documents provide guidance for those who want more information. The basic components of a successful intervention program that are spelled out in this document are fairly widely accepted in the field, even if specific details may be problematic to some businesses. A. Management Commitmcn.� The Proposed Ergonomici§tlindard includes a basic requirement for /\ evidence of management commitment to having an ergonomics process in • OCG�a'.U� • place m a company whereAmm;culoskeletal disorders asd oth@r oscupat1oeal �es are seen. This commitment is usually shown through the establishment of an Ergonomics Team, the provision of time for the team to� meet, and provision of a budget to implement changes to reduce the risk of injury on jobs where high risks are found. The commitment of management i /1 �.. to the ergonomics program/process is critical beQause high risk tasks must be q.,.j...(J.-j� addressed and need priority when other peopl� such as maintenanc�Ji-1: specialists and engineers, are needed to implement changes. With � the production pressures already present in many companies, it is management that can set the tone for when health and safety issues are addressed. Without their commitment to ergonomics improvements to reduce workplace risk, the best work done by the team(s) witi--eftefl fall short of the implementation stage. Budgets should be adequate to allow simple improvements to be done at the departmental level. Major improvements with larger budgets, such as the purchase of a new production machine or vehicle, should be reviewed from an ergonomics perspective and be handled through the customary channels. If the company has a union, it is critical to get union support for the ergonomics process, too. There is some concern that ergonomics improvements result in a loss of jobs, and this perception is not altogether unjustified. Removing jobs that put people at high risk of injury and cannot be easily modified may be appropriate, but the goal of ergonomics interventions to reduce the risk of musculoskeletal injuries and illnesses . should not be to remove the people, but rather to improve the tasks for people. The union leadership should support the involvement of the production workers in the risk identification, analysis, and ergonomic solution generation process since the people who do the work are the experts ,, �- Cooperation is needed to find the best, most effective, and least expensive improve�ts instead of throwing equipment at a problem11 .am1iiat is the challenge 'ff- a production-based ergonomics program. When everyone is focus;ed on how to solve the problem, there is little difficulty in finding good and practical solutions for it. B. Employee Involvement \ rd'.:s kaid ia-my in-troda� I have tried a number of formats for getting ergonomics programs started in companies. They have ranged from programs that taught p¢;1 process and industrial engineers how to fix �.· n vJ\A-o ergonomics problems, to programs that focu¥ed on following up onafis� the internal medical clinic for musculoskeletal complaints, to training hourly employees to be the ergonomics coordinators in each department, to training hourly workers to be the primary ergonomics team members with a secondary Ergonomics Steering Committee that is made up of the support group managers or supervisors and that assures that the teams get the appropriate support as risks are identified. In observing programs that have not had much staying power, the primary problem that I have identified has been that the steps between identification of a problem and implement�! solution have not involved the people who work in those jobs. Thi�hrowi.'! it over the wall" to the engineers or maintenance people to solve the problem usually results in a solution being generated that cannot be implemented w. because of som� factors tha� not known to them when they ec,mo out &e:d observ�he job-:t9Por example, a problem of getting a oro�r 2:asket assembly wiJ:.ti �,t -fL..! tf>«'�lw.s and seal on a refrigerator door in one companyAwas associated with increased reports of forearm and wrist/hand discomfort from repetitive screwdriver use. Several activities had been tried to reduce the hand stress including a partial automation of the gasket assembly with a small robot, but there were still many quality problems that the line workers had to fix. Two engineers watched the hand assembly work and decided that they could make a fixture to assist the operators in holding down the gasket on the frame so the screwing down task would be easier to perform. The fixture was fabricated and presented to the operators about a month later. Although the concept was okay, the engineers had not tried it out with the operators and did not note that they were seated at the line. The fixture could only be used if one stood up, and this was not a popular idea for people working an 8-hour shift. The operators appreciated the trouble that the engineers had taken to help them work better, but they saw the fixture as creating new problems for them, and admitted that they would probably use it as a door stop. When the operators were involved in analyzing the risk factors and defining the highest risk activities with the engineers and production supervision in a subsequent training course, they were a� identify the semi-automation as the area that needed attention so Iesu-ework of the w .lAl,L--- &, �gasket assemblies would have to be done � llaatJ.. The operators could then dedicate themselves to fixing the exceptions rather than having to fix every assembly on the line. The most effective programs I have been involved with in terms of employee involvement have been ones where each department has a Safety Team or an Ergonomics Team made up of 5 to 7 people, at least 60% of whom are hourly workers. A maintenance mechanic and a process engineer from the area are either on the tea� O!..f��11a!��)o it, and at least one team leader or superv1so�also sert�ontlle tearl'i. � d@partm@Dtal safety specialist set ves on the tearn as� Leadership of the team is jointly held by an hourly and a salaried member,_ aatl-1Iiis has been effective in helping the committee to perform job analyses together and documenting the results for further action. No recommendation for a workplace modification is made without sharing the ideas with the people who work on that job on all shifts and getting their ideas and/or buy-in. This process takes more time than many quick fi�s .w,ested by consultants or wi.lf • · _f_jJ s.stW\{'<1. � company service prov1·ders, but the�pgfitantfte™ the workers � reJect the solution are much hl/h�ban when thei ar art of the solution /;'1/"W � · I r:,..,,1.... dommant, . generation process. In one companywr:4.h 11. w ere mac 1 mg JObs W8i=€ was invited to look at some hand grinding tasks that had been associated with forearm, hand, and wrist discomfort and tendonitis. This work is very hand-intensive and involves very repetitive pinch grips with some awkward wrist angles over most of the 8-hour shifts. As a consultant responding to a call for help from the Safety Specialist, I came up with 5 ipiprovements to the workplace that would allow people to sit more comfortably, see the work better, and improve their wrist and hand postures. These were explored over the next year and some were implemented, but there was some resistance from operators who had been doing the jobs for a long time and did not like to have their workplaces "messed with". In a meeting with the Ergonomics Committee of the plant (made up of support personnel and 2 production supervisors) the next year, it was agreed that we should train teams in the areas where this type of work was done so they could do the evaluations and �ff) , • • • ?, �generate more approaches to reduce the stress on the operators' upper extremities. After training upper and middle management in short courses during the summer, the teams were chosen and trained in September. By the end of the year they had developed 14 improvements for their workplaces and jobs that cost $ 200. per workplace to implement. After implementing the improvements, they calculated a savings of$ 150,000. associated with just one of those changes. Because they had placed a mock-up of the new changes on one of the workplaces on the floor, the other people working in the area could come over and try it out and make additional_�'!:��.��ons for improvements. Only 2 or 3 people refused to try the new �and they were permitted to use a few unmodified stations as long as they did not have musculoskeletal discomfort or symptoms. It is important to point out that one of the outcomes of the improvements in the workplaces was that there was less rework needed on the parts so they could increase their productivity per person with less stress on the upper extremities. As their consultant, I was not aware of how chatter in the grinder's drive shaft{ron,i �ty . p�oblems. in (or_m the�afirould create quality problems when_g� ��Prneant th� had to be reworked fairly extensively. By reducing the chatter through better quality control on the shaft dimensions, they reduced the effort to hold the part and reduced the amount of rework .,6oth o...-r-L, • 1iag effective ways to reduce the risk of developing musculoskeletal disorders on those jobs. It is worth mentioning that this model for ergonomics integration into the plant was a joint effort of the plant EHS personnel, the consultant, and the management. It was a dynamic model that changed as changes occurred in the plant, and it survived a major downsizing and the loss of some key personnel because the ergonomics was understood and done on the production floor and management was committed to support the teams. The current program is oriented more to engineering improvements and continues to implement changes to reduce injury risk, but the lower level of involvement of the hourly members has probably contributed to the higher cost of improvements. �C. Job Hazard Analysis Job hazard analysis is a critical component of any ergonomics process or program because it allo�the company to define the problem before solving it. The approach that I use has similarities with approaches used by many other ergonomics consultants in that I do define the risk for injury in terms of the weights �andled, forces exerted, frequency of efforts, presence of sustained awkward postures, and reaches and work heights required. There are many checklists with these factors listed and others have defined why the risk factors are included on them. Where my approach differs from some of the others is in my focus on muscle fatigue as a way to predict the risk of developing a musculoskeletal disorder on a production task. I watch people work and note that they do many things in response to local muscle fatigue or to whole body fatigue if the work is heavy. I think we monitor fatigue more than we monitor force or postures, so the functional job analysis technique that I developed to teach people on plant fu-gonomics1eams to evaluate jobs is based on a 3-factor rating: effort intensity (which is determined by the forces generated to do the work and the postures they are performed in); effort duration before the muscle goes to a lower level of effort (which measures the work/recovery pattern of the muscle and estimates the amount of anaerobic work done on a task); and effort frequency for the level of effort indicated in the first factor, that is, how often the same level of effort is initiated in a minute The first three factors combine to determine the amount of fatigue that accumulates in 5 minutes of work. The higher the accumulated fatigue, the more the risk for developing musculoskeletal problems on the job. A fourth factor is total task duration, and it is used to determine the accumulation of fatigue over the whole task if it lasts more than 5 �Jiutes. I use it to help decide how much has to be done to address the fatigue. For example, if a person is doing an assembly task that requires the joining o:ftwo parts with bolts and nuts, and the task involves tightening 6 bolts per minute with a moderately heavy force for 10 minutes every 15 minutes over four hours a shift, the need to intervene is greater than if the same task is done for 5 minutes every 30 minutes with little hand-intensive work during the rest of the half-hour. �The value of the fatigue rating approach, I have found, is that it is not difficult to teach people to do (usually under 1 hour of instruction along with the discussion of risk factors), and it gets people thinking about what the problem is instead of how they are going to solve it. If the problem is defined as "The table is too low", then the natural response is to solve the problem by raising the table. If the problem is defined by noting that the person is bending down and this puts a moderate stress on the back, but the effort duration is less than 6 seconds and the frequency is 3 times a minute, the fatigue rating is low because recovery time is adequate on the·task. If one uses the problem solving approach next and asks .why the operator has to bend over, it may be that the reach or orientation of the tool is the reason, or it may be that the assembly cannot be seen without bending over because of the way it is placed on the line or bench. The fatigue rating leads the team into finding multiple ways to solve ergonomic problems.,.besausefCJme may be able to change the effort level, the effort duration, the effort frequency, or the total time on the task. Although attention to the forces required or weights handled may be the best way to address some of the problem jobs, one is not limited to these engineering solutions to reduce injury risk on many production jobs. Although the fatigue analysis referred to is based on physiological data and information from the literature, there are no specific studies that prove a linkage between fati�ue�d musculoskeletal disorders of the sort that the �roposed b-gonomics �ndard is trying to prevent. I continue to use this approach because I find that the problem jobs identified in plants through their injury and illness data and through employee surveys also tend to be those that have a high priority for change on the fatigue ratin�providing they are not simply short duration, excessive weight handling or force generation. In the process of discussing how to rate the effort, effort duration, and frequency factors, the team members have to look at the jobs and talk to the operators who do them. By the time they have gathered this information, they can define how much the factors need to be changed to j (]' �reduce fatigue, aMI1h.is usually leads to several improvements that can be implemented quickly and are of low cosf.fFor example, people packing plastic liners into boxes were experiencing hand discomfort when working on the 2 fastest machines. In analyzing the job, it was noted that they were gripping the plastic liners with a 4.5 inch wide grip and using high forces to keep them under control before they were stuffed in the box. Every 5.5 seconds, 2 new stacks of liners indexed forward at the end of a conveyoi;,ftiffl' -{hey had to be picked up before the next stacks were indexed or they would fall on the floor. It took 6 seconds to load each group of liners into its box, so there was little recovery time for the hands during the task. The operators and their supervisors recognized the problem and had dealt with it initially by rotating people through the job every 30 minutes to curtail the fatigue accumulation. The job analysis defined the problem as being a need to reduce the time of holding the stack of liners with the wide grip and high force. It was observed that 1 second of holding time was used when an insert was pick ross from the boxing station and placed on top of the 1:=� into the box. By moving the inserts next to the stack as it was boxing location, holding time was reduced to 5 seconds, and the fatigue rating dropped from very high priority for change to a high priority for change. Engineering changes in the workplace were in process to improve the stacking of the liners and make them easier to pack, so the risk was eventually reduced to a low to moderate level which could be easily accommodated by rotating people every 2 hours to less rapid machines. D. Implementing Ergonomic Changes As mentioned above, the implementation of ergonomic solutions in a company should improve operations genera).l� as well as reduce the risk for ) health and safety proble� �Erg;nomic solutions can be found at all cost levels. It has been my experience that the simpler solutions are not likely to emerge unless you have strong involvement of production and maintenance personnel. And they will not be found unless there is an analytical approach to problem solving rather than simple brainstorming. It is essential to define the risk in ){ �terms of which factors contribute the most to it and how much they need to be changed. Without this specification and a root cause analysis of other factors that determine }:Yhy the risk factors are there, one can fix the wrong thing and incur unnecessary expense. This is the hardest part of the team training because everyone has ideas on how to solve the problem and few people see the need to do an analysis of it when the problem seems so clear. "\. For example, people on a car assembly line were experiencing arm, shoulder, and back discomfort when handling doors off of an incoming conveyor and on to a carousel storage uni� from which the assemblers put them on the cars on the line. The group being asked to suggest ways to solve this problem jumped into the fray without analyzing the jobs and came up with very elegant ways of linking the line to the carousel so no manual handling of the doors would have to be done. The cost of this improvement would have been several hundred thousand dollars. What they did not hear was that the person presenting the problem stated clearly that the incoming line and the carousel line could not be linked because they had different flow rates. When we eventually asked enough questions to establish what the task demands were in terms of weights handled, heights and reaches used, lifting frequency, and carrying distances, it became clear that there were two major risk factors that could account for the arm, shoulder, and back discomfort: the force needed to remove the incoming doors from the conveyor (they stood upright and one had to break them out of the track by applying a high force above mid-chest height on most people); and the need to hold the door about 28 inches away from the body when setting it in the carousel lengthwise. This breakdown of the risk factors resulted in a suggestion to use air cylinders to push the door up out of the conveyor track where it could be handled comfortably for the transfer to the carousel. At the carousel, the door could be placed on a platform with a soft cover prior to sliding it into position in the next carousel slot. The total cost for these two workplace improvements was estimated to be less than $ 200.. Administrative interventions do not need to decrease productivity. When inadequate recovery time is provided on a difficult task, people have to find �ways to reduce the fatigue accumulation, so they tend to do more secondary work, that is, work that relates to the job but doesn't directly help move the product out of the door. This may be additional quality checks, parts inspection, or discussions with colleagues or supervisors about production issues. When adequate recovery time for fatiguing muscles is provided within the work cycle (designed into the task or made unnecessary), people can stay on the job longer and productivity usually improves. Rotating people between difficult jobs or tasks and less difficult ones is only effective if the fatigue rate is in the ni�oderate range. High and very high priority for change tasks are difficult to rotate between people because they are likely to find the people who are more susceptible to musculoskeletal disordersfven when rotation times are short. Slowing down lines is often thought to be a sure way to decrease productivity, and it is not a sure way to reduce the risk of injury or illness unless the problem is related to inadequate recovery time between exertions. I have been involved in 4 job studies where slowing down the line actually increased productivity (measured as good units out the door) because it reduced the amount of poor quality assemblies and repair work. Other administrative interventions relate to policies or ordering strategies that affect the availability of parts or tools and supplies in the production area. In onepfa;[tl¥e%�e increased complaints about hand cf-uv«t(IOf)� and wrist discomfort on a disc sanding job after a new inventory control program was introduced. Analysis of the operations showed that 2 types of sandpaper were used by the operators, one with a paper backing and one with a canvas backing. It was taking 2 times longer to do the parts sanding when the paper backing sand paper was used, and1iiis was the probable cause of the discomfort problems that had recently appeared on the job. Someone had set a reorder time of 90 days on the canvas-backed sand paper and 60 days on the paper-backed discs. Since both were specified for the operation, and since another department was also using the canvas-backed discs, there were only paper discs available for most of the sanding operations over a 3 month period. Respecifying the canvas discs and putting a 30 day reorder time on it cleared up the problem. Training operators to know when to change grinding discs or cutting tools on machining tasks �represent other approaches that are administrative and can reduce injury risk on the job. Most of these become clear when the £.gonomicsteam members keep asking "Why ?" until they get to the root cause of a problem. Administrative changes are often very low cost and easy to implement if management commitment and employee involvement are present. The ultimate goal of an ergonomics process or program is to design jobs, workplaces, environments, and equipment within the capabilities of most workers and to do this proactively instead of reactively. In the best programs I have been involved with, the designers and process engineers work with the ergonomics team to assure that improvements and new technologies incorporate ergonomics principles before they get to the workplace. This takes more time, but it reaps tremendous benefits. �,\A./-� �':""'-/ ' - /,._"Pi.. E. Training Needs ,,..._ 'i�,,T Many employers are concerned that education about ergonomics and the risk factors that may contribute to musculoskeletal disorders will open a Pandora's box and leave them with unhappy and dissatisfied employees if changes are not made quickly. In my experience this is only likely to happen if there has been no attempt to provide for a response team before the education or comfort surveys are done. The presentation of the educational material should emphasize what the employees can and should do if they experience significant discomfort or musculoskeletal symptoms on the job and who should be informed. Techniques for improving the workplace or better methods for doing the task should also be shown, and a simple method for asking for a further evaluation from the Ergonomics Team or a departmental representative should be provided. In general, I think that it is important to train the first line supervisors or team leaders first so they understand what their colleagues will be taught and so they can tell when they need to call in additional expertise. Management needs to be trained about the capabilities of the team members and the general benefits of ergonomics in helping them reach both health and safety and performance goals. Tuam tmtning has been discussed eadier ua.der employee .. LAJ ) �involvement. It is important to train the teams when they need to get additional ergonomics expertise, too. If not, there may be a tendency to take on some design projects where a much deeper understanding of human capabilities is needed. The process and design engineering staff need ergonomics training of a more technical nature so they can know where to find resources, how to ask the right questions to establish the human interface needs in the workplace, and what trade-offs are appropriate when specifying a new system. It should be their responsibility to be sure that non-ergonomic tools, equipment, or workplaces are not brought into the plant in the future. F. Program Evaluation , , ·"-' . �+ �eople find�interesting� the · ·. .. "common sense" ways they can identify better ways to do things, and�n see no need to document the befores and afters in a quantitative way. The usual comment I hear is, "Why bother with that stuff? We know it works and the paperwork is unnecessary !". That is part of the reason that many good programs have remained undocumented in the way that regulators like to see them done despite much cajoling from the consultants and managers. Most of my clients use their OSHA logs to define their ergonomic injury risk and combine that with their Workers' Compensation data to define the seriousness of the problem. Although these are important measures, they are not the whole picture, and they only indicate about one fifth of the probable costs of having ergonomically-poor designs at work. There is always a delay in measuring the impact of ergonomic improvements in the workplace because of two factors: 1. When work is done in a production area and more awareness of ergonomics issues is encouraged, people who have chosen not to report discomfort or moderate symptoms in the past usually report them. This is especially true if it appears that people are listening and acting on the information that the production workers give them. Thus, one often has increased reporting of musculoskeletal illnesses and injuries after an ergonomics evaluation is done in a �department. This is ��en for 6 months after the change and then falls to levels below the initial number. The severity of these reported illnesses and injuries is often quite low. 2. Musculoskeletal disorders that have become chronic because of repeated aggravation do not go away as soon as the ergonomics of the workplace or job is improved. They are likely to be less frequent and show less lost time, but they will not disappear overnight. On the other hand, first visits to the medical clinic for -fl--. musculoskeletal problems will probably decrease and more�f�st time �as es, will be seen. It is important to measure other medical factors, such as the number of people who have job restrictions from tasks that are considered difficult, the number of people who are not successful on those jobs or tasks, the absenteeism on those jobs, and the characteristics of the people who are successful on them. Job satisfaction ratings can also identify the acceptance or rejection of the new designs or job improvements. Since the goal of ergonomics is to design for most workers, it is important to integrate it into the day to day operations of the business rather than keeping it in a safety pigeonhole. Mature ergonomics programs are harder to document because enough people have been trained about the concepts and given the guidelines to use in their own work that it is no longer easy to isolate what is ergonomics and what is the engineer's or worker's original concept. m. Benefits of Having an Ergonomics Standard Why do we need an ergonomics standard today ? I have not been a fan of ergonomics regulation because I find that more time and money is spent in arguing why we should or shouldn't regulate this health and safety area than is spent in fixing the real problems in the workplace. Regulation has the �. ,.,,_ advantage that it provides a priority for ergonomics improvements in an industrial atmosphere that continues to try to do more with fewer people. Ergonomics should not be an adversarial area between management and labor - both benefit from good ergonomics applications. People are able to work better and with less fatigue, leaving them some reserve to take home and enjoy their families at the end of the shift. Occupational injuries and illness should be reduced, and people who are injured outside of work are able to return to the job earlier • ;; etr'because their jobs are less likely to aggravate their symptoms. In my review of many hundreds of jobs in a variety of industries, I have frequently found that ergonomics problems are also process problems in the plant. They should be fixed in order to improve the production process as well as to protect workers' health and safety. With jobs designed for the majority of workers rather than for a small fraction of the potential workforce, many of the hassles that make first level supervisors and team leaders tear their hair out are alleviated because more people are able to fill in as needed. More ability to concentrate on quality work instead of being distracted by discomfort from awkward postures or fatiguing muscles means less reliance on overtime and its impact on workers' whole body and mental fatigue in these days of global competition. In short, having an ergonomics standard to address the most serious risk factors in the workplace should give industries a priority to implement improvements that will make them better able to compete in the global economy in the future. 1/17/00 S.H. Rodgers, Ph.D. �'. �.,. ··---·◄ ·• f. Expert Witness Testimony for the Proposed Ergonomics Program Standard Rulemaking Hearing at DOL, Washington, DC in February/March, ·2000 I. My Qualifications: My name is Suzanne Rodgers and I have been working in the field of industrial ergonomi�s f�r��2 yea!.s��octorate is in Physiology, -: and my area of special m:te,est 1nferg6ii�een to understand what are safe and reasonable job demands for the industrial workforce. The goals of my on-site studies have been to define the physical work c�pabilities of the potential workforce and to identify ways to design jobs, workplaces, quipment, 8f�iron ent ��duce unl}�e"Y fatigue on the job. ffl-,ef� . :_my_13 year�¥Eastma odak tompany, !learned the applications of ergonomics by being out on the productioJ floor or in the field and by measuring the metabolic, muscular, and cardiovascular demands of the "problem" jobs using em�loy��j<>lunteers. I was fortunate�e insias a _ -�-where I c�studfpoople at work andy.so lea��out production needs. In those 13 years, I was taught by the workers, their supervisors, engineers, medical specialists, skilled trades people, human resources professionals, an�leagues in the Human Factors/ _ Ergonomics Section of th� Health and Safety Laboratory. I learned that jobs have to be looked at globally in order to find the best ways to reach production goals without putting people at risk of developing significant occupational injuries and illnesses. From our work with production employees and with engineers, we were often able to find better ways to design the workplace, production equipment, environment, and job tasks so more output was achieved with less stress on the worker. I included many of )i Ld- these guidelines in -our two-volume reference book, "Ergonomic Design for I Jt,Jt� People at Work." Much of my work at Kodak was spent developing / ,�; / J, �guidelines for safe workloads so that women and older workers would be accommodated on some of the heavier jobs and so people with disabilities or short-term work restric1T s �oul��k to their jobs in a safe and � /.} efficient manner. -It sh� a��none of the stronger men complained when we found better ways to help them get their work done. Good ergonomics benefits everyon�/'� /,I� � Since 1982, I have been a full-time, self-employed ergonomics consultant and have had the opportunity to develop ergonomics programs and processes with clients in large, middle-sized, and small comp�es, in service organizations, and in a municipality. I cfi-d-ftet start a consulting firm because I wanted my clients to take ownership of1he ergonomics rather than have me "do" it. Lihavew, discussions, the development of a propos early 1970s. I have, until recently,....'l+l�� u ndard. If you see able to sell itself to com 2� �5JI� ergonomics as a science · · design systems, jobs, and products with the worker and consumer in mind so unndessary effort and overload is avoided, it is hard to understand why everyone wouldn't embrace it. I define occupational ergonomics very simply: "Ergonomics is the science of making it easy for people to do quality work." Rather than a burden to industry, I think ergonomics can be its salvation. Making jobs better and better utilizing the skills of our human resources can only result in better products, safer work, and higher job satisfaction. Ergo (in 2 senses of the word), higher productivity and quality performance. /41� 'L.,U!� ft. II. Why do I now feel that an OSHA Ergonomics Standard is needed? You have already heard testimony about the increased numbers of �musculoskeletal injuries and illnesses seen in companies over the past several years. Some refer to it a� an epidemic. I personally think that it represents something else, the need to report discomfort and symptoms in today's work environment. In the earlier days of my ergonomics career, when I was asked to look at a job where someone had sustained an injury or developed tendonitis, I would find 5 more people in that job who hadn't reported their discomfort or symptoms because they "didn't want to bother anyone about it." The ratio of 1:6 for reporting these types of symptoms or r ....-..... .�..�.. discomfort was quite common at that, time. Today, that ratio has changed to about 1:3. There were many more options for workers to control their work patterns and get relief from musculoskeletal discomfort before the J/; "leaner/meaner" management philosophy for remaining competitive came � tJr1,� , !? into vogue. Now, the workers must report problems to get relief, and they often wait until they can no longer sustain their work, making recovery times longer. �The musculoskeletal injuries and illnesses seen in the workplace are real, and they can be managed and reduced through better design of workplaces, � tll/"ii J_,1 equipment, environments and jobs. f would not have been able to support -my�sP'lefH=f'"'3are-s..ga-,-CisH'le,Ulf==.-e�m'i'i'Kp17oreyrJS l end"i5ei'Frgmomnmo�m1fflT·c"l:!'s.,.,c.,.,ornn�sui...11�ta:rrnrt-t-f:fu"'r.,...tfl=l'iuie�pv:a�srt �18�y;;;:e;;;ar�s:-;i'ff______ � �. ,- these statements "c1e not trae ! -Then why not just let nature take its course and let the more progressive employers show the others the benefits of ergonomic design ? This was my posture for many years. But, I have noted a very disturbing trend in business that has made me think that an ergonomics standard is needed in order to put a priority on the need to address musculoskeletal injuries and illnesses in the workforce. /I f#� ...... -�f-·_: · p- f� To do high quality work, one cannot be asked to work in a way that will generate large amounts of muscular or whole body fatigue or to do tasks that are very heavy or are less heavy and are sustained for a long time. Even if the damage does not show up right away, one cannot expect people to perform at a high quality level if they are performing difficult tasks at high repetition rates or over long work shifts without adequate time to repair 3, �microtraumas to the joints or muscles between shifts. People's desire to do quality work may put them at additional risk of injury or illness in these job situations because they neglect the signs coming from the body that indicate an over-exertion injury is developing. The long term costs of musculoskeletal disorders combined with the increased longevity of the population and increased health care costs add to the reasons why we should take steps now to prevent unnecessary stress on the job. _ It has been apparent to me, especially over the past 2 years, that most companies are trying to keep ahead of the global competition by keeping their workforce small and using overtime to cope with production variations. The "downsizing" of many companies has resulted in many employees holding more than one position and feeling unable to do quality work in any of them. The use of overtime in production has made it harder to keep Ergonomic Teams active on the floor because they are too tired to take on another ("unpaid") responsibility. They still have to get their work done. I think this situation is coming to a head, and we need to find better ways to get high individual productivity without putting the workers at risk of injury because of accumulated physical and mental/perceptual fatigue. I believe that the in,iPl<tWentation of a flexible, work practices-driven, ergonomics standard e�e a positive step in the prevention of o��es and in optimizing the design of problem jobs. It is not � the -- � priorities for health and safety overwhelmed by the business's need to keep market share1n today's economy. By allowing companies to develop their own ways incorporating ergonomics into their operations and measuring their effectiveness in decreasing the occupational injuries and illnesses, the proposed ergonomics standard can help to underline the importance of health and safety priorities in parallel with production demands. J Although there may be details contested in the new Proposed Ergonomics Program Standard, I think that it bends over backwards to try to accommodate businesses' needs while still assuring that worker safety and health needs will be protected. It is more flexible than previous proposals, �does not limit the ways that ergonomics can be integrated into operations, and recognizes the importance of teamwork in resolving problems. III. Scope of This Testimony In the remainder of this testimony, I WOmtEl-1-Hre-tEe address the importance of several of the basic program elemeni , including management commitment, employee participation, job hazard analysis techniques, training needs, implementing changes, and program evaluation. My testimony is based, primarily, on my experience of building ergonomics programs with I often work with a client for several years as we build the program and change the culture about ergonomics and teamwork on the production floor. However, I think that there are many ways to do ergonomics in a company, and each company has to find the way that best fits their resources, staffing, and health and safety problems. The proposed ergonomics standard and several OSHA and NIOSH documents provide guidance for those who want more information. The basic components of a successful intervention program that are spelled out in this document are fairly widely accepted in the field, even if s� details may be proble�atic to some businesses. A. Management Commitment The P�d Ergonomics P��d�d includes a basic requirement' for evi� e,f managemen� commitment to having an ergonomics process in place 111 a contpa9¥ where occupational musculoskeletal disorders are seen. This commitm �lly show�e establishment of an e Ergonomics Team, th�9=0f tim,.,for the team to meet, and provision of a budget to implement changes to reduce the risk of injury on jobs where high risks are found. The commitment of management to the ergonomics program/process is critical because high risk tasks must be addressed, and �� peed priotily whea other people and resources, such as maintenance ��if.-�� specialists and engineers, ate ncedetl to implement changes. With all of the , ., _ production pressures already present in many companies, it is management sets the tone for when health and safety issues are addressed. Without �f commitment to ergonomics improvements t�uce workplace risk, the best work done by the team(s) can fall shortpfthe implementation stage. Budgets should be adequate to allow simple improvements to be done at the departmental level. Major improvements with larger budgets, such as the purchase of a new production machine or vehicle, should be reviewed from an ergonomics perspective and be handled through the customary channels. J� ..- V If the company has a union, it is critical to get union support for the ergonomics process, too. There is some concern that ergonomics improvements �ifl�of jobs, and this perception is not altogether unjustified. Removing jobs that put people at high risk of injury and cannot be easily modified may be appropriate, but the goal of ergonomics interventions to reduce the risk of musculoskeletal injuries and illnesses should not be to remove the people, but rather to improve the tasks for people. The union leadership should support the involvement of the production workers in the risk identification, analysis, and ergonomic /,:1-4solution generation process since the people who do the work are the � experts. Cooperation is needed to find the best, most effective, and least expensive improvements instead of throwing equipment at a problem. That is the challenge for a production-based ergonomics program. When everyone is focused on how to solve the problem, there is little difficulty in finding good and practical solutions for it7 .-<L-- -�- � , t:;r ,u.,/ A7"1 �! ? j:· � . t __ _ - B. Employee Involvement I have tried a number of formats for getting ergonomics programs started in companies. They have ranged from programs that taught process and industrial engineers how � ergonomics problems, to programs that focused on following up _9f1 all people who had visited the internal medical clinic for musculoskeletal complaints, to training hourly employees to be the ergonomics coordinators in each department, to training hourly workers to - ctYM/VJ' ± . QM�, b, �be the primary Ergonomics Team members with a secondary Ergonomics Steering Committee, made up of the support group managers or supervisors, that assured that the teams got the appropriate support as risks were identified. In observing programs that have not had much staying power, the primary pi:oblem that I have identified has been that the steps between identifi� a problem and implementing a solution have not involved the people who work in those jobs. This approach of "throwing it over the wall" to the engineers or maintenance people to solve the problem usually results in a solution beiBg genentletl that cannot be implemented be caUSe of. _ some facttm that were not known to them when they observed the Job. r For example, a problem of getting a proper gasket assembly and seal on a refrigerator door in one company (with over 1000 workers) was associated with increased reports of forearm and wrist/hand discomfort from repetitive screwdriver use. Several activities had been tried to reduce the hand stress including a partial automation of the gasket assembly with a small robot, but there were still many quality problems that the line workers had to fix. Two engineers watched the hand assembly work and decided that they could make a fixture to assist the operators in holding down the gasket on the frame so the screwing down task would be easier to perform. The fixture was fabricated and presented to the operators about a month later. Although the concept was okay, the engineers had not tried it out with the operators and did not note that they were seated at the line. The fixture could only be used if one stood up, and this was not a popular idea for people working an 8-hour shift. The operators appreciated the trouble that the engineers had taken to help them work better, but they saw the fixture as creating new problems for them, and admitted that they would probably use it as a door stop. The operators were involved in analyzing the risk factors and defining the highest risk activities with the engineers and production supervision in a subsequent training course. Together, they were able to identify the semi automation as the area that needed attention so less manual rework of the gasket assemblies would have to be done. The operators could then dedicate themselves to fixing the exceptions rather than having to fix every assembly on the line. The most effective programs I have participated in, in terms of employee involvement, have been ones where each department has a Safety Team or an Ergonomics Team made up of 5 to 7 people, at least 60% of whom are "......, /, �hourly workers. A maintenance mechanic and a process engineer from the area are either on the team or are designated as a resource to it, and at least one team leader or supervisor and the departmental safety specialist also serve on the team. Leadership of the team is jointly held by an hourly and a salaried member. This has been �tive in helping the committee to perform job analyses together anfoocumenQ the results for further action. No recommendation for a workplace modification is made without sharing the ideas with the people who work on that job on all shifts and getting their ideas and/or buy-in. This process takes more time than many quick ��s .. _"':" suggested by consultants or company service providers, but the that the workers will reject the solution �ower when they are part of the solution generation process. A � �\.,P'"� In one company with over 1000 employees where machining jobs are dominant, I was invited to look at some hand grinding tasks that had been associated with forearm, hand, and wrist discomfort and tendonitis. This work is very hand intensive and involves very repetitive pinch grips with some awkward wrist angles over most of the 8-hour shift. As a consultant responding to a call for help from the Safety Specialist, I came up with 5 improvements to the workplace that would allow people to sit more comfortably, see the work better, and improve their wrist and hand postures. These were explored over the next year and some were igiplemented, but there was some resistance from operators who had been doing the jobs for a long time and did not like to have their workplaces "messed with". In a meeting with the Ergonomics Committee of the plant (made up of support personnel and 2 production supervisors) the next year, it was agreed that we should train teams in the areas where this type of work was done. The goal was to train the team members to evaluate the jobs and to generate more approaches to reduce stress on the operators' upper extremities. After training upper and middle management in short courses during the summer, the teams were chosen and trained in a 4-day session in September. By the end of the year they had developed 14 improvements for their workplaces and jobs that cost $ 200. per workplace to implement. After implementing the improvements, they calculated a savings of$ 150,000. associated with just one of those changes. Because they had placed a mock-up of the new changes on one of the workplaces on the floor, all of the people working in the area could come over and try it out and make additional suggestions for improvements. Only 2 or 3 people refused to �try the modified workplaces, and they were permitted to use a few unmodified stations as long as they did not have musculoskeletal discomfort or symptoms. It is important to point out that one of the outcomes of the improvements in the workplaces was that there was less rework needed on the parts so they could increase their productivity per person with less stress on the upper extremities. As their consultant, I was not aware of how chatter in the grinder's drive shaft from quality problems in forming the shaft could create quality problems when grinding the parts. That meant they had to be reworked fairly extensively. By reducing the chatter through better quality control on the shaft dimensions, they reduced the effort to hold the part and reduced the amount of rework. Both are effective ways to reduce the risk of developing musculoskeletal disorders on those jobs. It is worth mentioning that this model for ergonomics integration into the plant was a joint effort of the plant EHS personnel, the consultant, and the management. It was a dynamic model that changed as changes occurred in the plant. And, it survived a major down-sizing and the loss of some key personnel because the ergonomics was understood and done on the production floor, and because management was committed to support the teams. The current program is oriented more to engineering improvements and continues to implement changes to reduce injury risk; but the lower level of involvement of the hourly members has probably contributed to the higher cost of improvements. C. Job Hazard Analysis Job hazard analysis is a critical component of any ergonomics process or program because it allows the company to define the problem before solving it. The approach that I use has similarities with approaches used by many other ergonomics consultants in that I do define the risk for injury in terms of the weights handled, forces exerted, frequency of efforts, presence of sustained awkward postures, and reaches and work heig�red. There are many checklists with these factors listed, a_nd othe� liave defined why the risk factors are i�n the12;_�)r{y appr6ach differs from some of the others i,s...m..my focu�n muscle fatigue as a way to predict the risk of �V.f,�ng a mu�c��etal disorder on a production task. I watch peopl9t workati'd note�they do mtuty things in response to local muscle fatigue or to whole body fatigu�if the work is he�·thiak we monittw- fatigue more than we monitor force or posturesJUle functiom{joh::analy�i,s <tet:lmiqtte that I developed tf) teach people on plant Ergonomics Teams to �� evaluate jobs is based on a/3-factor rating: effort intensity (which is determined by the forces generated to do the work and the postures they are performed in); effort duration before the muscle goes to a lower level of effort (which measures the work/recovery pattern of the muscle and estimates the amount of anaerobic work done on a task); and effort frequency for the level of effort indicated in the first factor that is, how often thej'ame level of effort is initiated in a minute ::i:�three factors a,,.JL combin)lto determine the amount of fatigue that accumulates in 5 minutes of developing work. The higher the accumulated fati ue t musculoskeletal problems on the joo �fourth factoys otal task duration, � is sed to determine the accumulation of fatigue,0"1'et tire w� 1t lasts e than 5 minut . I use it to help decide how much ha;-�t� edone to address the fatigue. For example, a person who is doing an assembly task that requires the joining of two parts with bolts and nuts, and is tightening 6 bolts per minute with a moderately heavy force for 10 minutes every 15 minutes over four hours of the shift, needs more recovery time than one who is doing the same task for 5 minutes every 30 minutes with little other hand intensive work. The value of the fatigue rating approach, I have found, is that it is noJ difficult t,?�h people to do. They become reasonably proficient'doing the ratings�our of training that includes a discussion of risk factors. Doing the ratings gets people thinking about what the problem is instead of how they are going to solve it. If the problem is defined as "The table is too low", then the natural response is to solve the problem by raising the table: By rating the person's posture when they are bending down, which puts a moderate stress on the back, with a� , d · on of less than 6 seconds, and a frequency of 3 times a minute,,\ t fatigue rating is low because recovery time is ade�eNe task. If the duration of bending over or -Af.. frequency of doin!J)t increases because of quality problems or increased production rates, the fatigue rating could increase to a. moderate or high priority for change. Using the problem solving approach next, one asks why the operator has to bend over. It may be that the reach or orientation of the �tool is the reason, or it may be that the assembly cannot be seen without bending over because of the way it is placed on the line or bench. The fatigue rating leads the team into finding multiple ways to solve ergonomic problems. One may be able to change the effort level, the effort duration, the effort frequency, or the total tim� on the task. Although attention to the forces required or weights handled may be the best way to address some of the problem jobs, one is not limited to these engineering solutions to reduce injury risk on many production jobs. Although the fatigue analysis referred to is based on physiological data and information from the literature, there are no specific studies that prove a linkage between fatigue and musculoskeletal disorders of the sort that the Proposed Ergonomics Program Standard is trying to prevent. I continue to use this approach because I find that the problem jobs identified in plants through their injury and illness data and through employee surveys also tend to be th"o..1 that haveNigh p�or change on the fatigue rating, 'Fhisis-proviru-� that they -&re not -simply short duration, excessive weight handling or force generation. In the process of discussing how to rate th�t,,..�f�� ;J/ _ duration, and frequency factors, the team members have to loo�at the jobsr-o and talk to the operators who do them. By the time they have gathered this information, they can define how much the factors need to be changed to reduce fatigue. This usually leads to several improvements that can be implemented quickly and are of low cost. For example, people packing plastic liners into boxes (in a plant with less than 200 people) were experiencing hand discomfort when working on the 2 fastest machines. In analyzing the job, it was noted that they were gripping the plastic liners with a 4.5 inch wide grip and using high forces to keep them under control · before they were stuffed in the box. Every 5.5 seconds, 2 new stacks of liners indexed forward at the end of a conveyor. They had to be picked up before the next stacks were indexed or they would fall on the floor. It took 6 seconds to stuff each group of liners into its box, leaving little recovery time for the hands during the task. The operators and their supervisors recognized the problem and had dealt with it initially by rotating people through the job every 30 minutes to curtail fatigue accumulation. The job anal_ysis defined the problem as being a need to ! I{ I �reduce the time of holding the stack of liners with the wide grip and high force. It was observed that 1 second of holding time was used when an insert was picked up across from the boxing station and placed on top of the stack as it was stuffed into the box. By moving the inserts next to the boxing location, holding time was reduced to 5 seconds and the fatigue rating dropped from very high priority for change to a high priority for change. Engineering changes in the workplace were in process to improve the stacking of the liners and make them easier to pack, so the risk was eventually reduced to a low to moderate level which could be easily accommodated by rotating people every 2 hours to less rapid machines. D. Implementing Ergonomic Changes As mentioned above, the implementation of ergonomic solutions in a company should improve operationo/generally, as well as reduce the risk for health and safety problems. Ergonomic solutions can be found at all cost levels. It has b - y experience that the simpler solutions are not likely to . . : ¥ } volvement of production and maintenance �emerge unless � .9P.� n personnel. And� wilfofte�ot be found unless there is an analytical approach to problem solving rather than simple brainstorming. It is essential to define the risk in terms of which factors contribute the most to it and how much they need to be changed. Without this specification and a root cause analysis of other factors that determine why the risk factors are there, one can fix the wrong thing and incur unnecessary expense. This is the hardest part of the team training because everyone has ideas on how to solve the problem, and few people see the need to ds-ttH-anal�/4 it when the problem seems so clear. For example, people on a car assembly line (in a plant with over 1000 people) were experiencing arm, shoulder, and back discomfort when handling doors off of an incoming conveyor and on to a carousel storage unit, from which the assemblers put them on the cars on the line. The group being asked to suggest ways to solve this problem jumped into the fray without analyzing the jobs and came up with very elegant ways of linking the line to the carousel so no manual handling of the doors would have to be done. The cost of this improvement would have been several hundred thousand dollars. What they did not hear was that the person presenting the problem stated clearly that the incoming line and the carousel line could not be linked because they had different flow rates. We / 2-, �eventually asked enough questions to establish what the task demands were in terms of weights handled, heights and reaches used, lifting frequency, and carrying distances. With that information, it became clear that there were two major risk factors that could account for the arm, shoulder, and b�ck discomfort. The first was the force needed to remove the incoming doors from the conveyor. They stood upright, and one had to break them out of the track by applying a high force that was above mid-chest height on most people. The second risk factor was the need to hold the door about 28 inches away from the body when setting it in the carousel lengthwise. This breakdown of the risk factors resulted in a suggestion to use air cylinders to push the door up out of the conveyor track where it could be handled comfortably for the transfer to the carousel. At the carousel, the door could be placed on a platform with a soft cover prior to sliding it into position in the next carousel slot. The total cost for these two workplace improvements was estimated to be less than $ 200. Administrative interventions do not need to decrease productivity. When inadequate recovery time is provided on a difficult task, people have to find ways to reduce the fatigue accumulation, so they tend to do more secondary work, that is;,::work that relates to the job but doesn't directly help move the product out of the door. This may be additional quality checks, parts inspection, or discussions with colleagues or supervisors about production issues. When adequate recovery time for fatiguing muscles is provided within the work cycle (designed into the task or made unnecessary), people can stay on the job longer and productivity usually improves. Rotating people between difficult jobs or tasks and less difficult ones is only effective if the fatigue rate is in the moderate range. High and very high priority� change tasks are difficult to rotate between people because they are likely to find the people who are more susceptible to musculoskeletal disorders even when rotation times are short. Slowing down lines is often thought to be a sure way to decrease productivity, and it is not a sure way to reduce the risk of injury or illness unless the problem is related to inadequate recovery time between exertions. I have been involved in$studies where slowing down the line actually increased productivity (measured as good units out the door) because it reduced the amount of poor quality assemblies and repair work. Other administrative interventions relate to policies or ordering �. strategies that affect the availability of parts or tools and supplies in the production area. In one machining/assembly plant (with more than 1000 employees), there were increased complaints about hand and wrist discomfort on a disc sanding job after a new inventory control program was introduced. Analysis of the operations r- showed that 2 types of sandpaper w�re used by the operators, one with a paper backing and one with a canvas backing. It was taking 2 times longer to do the parts sanding when the paper backing sandpaper was used. This was the probable cause of the discomfort problems that had recently appeared on the job. Someone had set a reorder time of 90 days on the canvas-backed sandpaper and 60 days on the paper-backed discs. Since both were specified for the operation, and since another department was also using the canvas-backed discs, there were only paper discs available for most of the sanding operations over a 3 month period. Re specifying the canvas discs and putting a 30 day reorder time on it cleared up the problem. Training operators to know when to change grinding discs or cutting tools on machining tasks represent other approaches that are administrative and can reduce injury risk on the job. Most of these become clear when the Ergonomics Team members keep asking "Why ?" until they get to the root cause of a problem. Administrative changes are often very low cost and easy to implement if management commitment and employee involvement are present in an ergonomics program. The ultimate goal of an ergonomics process or program is to design jobs, workplaces, environments, and equipment within the capabilities of most workers and to do this proactively instead of reactively. In the best programs I have been involved with, the designers and process engineers work with the Ergonomics Team to assure that improvements and new technologies incorporate ergonomics principles before they get to the workplace. This takes more time, but it reaps tremendous benefits. E. Training Needs As has been mentioned earlier, the best ergonomics programs I have been associated with are those where the production workers are the primary problem identifiers, analyzers, and solution generators. They must be supported by the service providers in the company (i.e., the engineers, Ji �medical specialists, supervisors or team leaders, maintenance staff, materials handling specialists, and managers), 'mt the ownership for ergonomics is with each person doing her or his job. In smaller businesses, where the support staffis thinner, this need to solve ergonomics-related problems on the floor is even greater. I found that I could train production workers and the support staff to think like ergonomists, and could facilitate them through a fairly simple fatigu�lnalysis or lifting guideline to a problem solving process that generate� ·several ways of addressing the root cause of the problem. . Taking a page from Kenneth Blanchard, I moved from the educational model of trying to stuff a lot of information into the heads of my course attendees to the industrial training model of asking the attendees to dump their brain contents out on the table and let me rearrange them to incorporate the ergonomics principles. By doing this, I found I could tap into the wealth of knowledge that is present in the workforce for ways to improve jobs. By assuring that the support groups respect and assist the production teams in finding solutions for these problems, we also improve communications and cooperation in projects where health and safety issues are not paramount. Many employers are concerned that education about ergonomics and the risk facto�s that may contribute to musculoskeletal disorders will open a Pandora's box and leave them with unhappy and dissatisfied employees if changes are not made quickly. In my experience, this is only likely to happen if there has been no attempt to provide for a response team before the education or comfort surveys are done. The presentation of the educational material should emphasize what the employees can and should do if they experience significant discomfort or musculoskeletal symptoms on the job, and who should be informed. Techniques for improving the workplace or better methods for doing the task should also be shown, and a simple method for asking for a furtht;r evaluation from the Ergonomics Team or a departmental representative should be provided. In general, I think that it is important to train the first line supervisors or team leaders first. Then they understand what their fellow employees will be taught, and I IS: �they can tell when they need to call in additional expertise. Management needs to be trained about the capabilities of the team members and the general benefits of ergonomics in helping them reach both health and safety and performance goals. Team training has been discussed earlier under employee involvement. It is important to train the teams to know when they need to get additional ergonomics expertise, too. If not, there may be a tendency to take on some design projects where a much deeper understanding of human capabilities is needed. The process and design engineering staff need ergonomics training of a more technical nature so they can know where to find resources, how to ask the right questions to establish the human interface needs in the workplace, and what trade-offs are appropriate when specifying a new system. It should be their responsibility to be sure that non-ergonomic tools, equipment, or workplaces are not brought into the plant in the future. F. Program Evaluation The-��-ic--js-4hat)eople find · very interesting, they like the "common sense" ways they can identify better ways to do things, and, often, they see no need to document the befores and afters in a quantitative way. The usual comment I hear is, "Why bother with that stuff? We know it works and the paperwork is unnecessary !". That is part of the reason that many good programs have remained undocumented in a way that regulators expect them to be done, despite much cajoling from consultants and managers. Most of my clients use their OSHA logs to define their ergonomic injury risk and combine that with their Workers' Compensation· data to define the seriousness of the problem. Although these are important measures, they are not the whole picture, and they only indicate about one fifth of the probable costs of having ergonomically-poor designs at work. There is always a delay in being able to see the impact of ergonomic improvements in the workplace because of two factors: /�, �1. When work is done in a production area and more awareness of ergonomics issues is encouraged, , people who have chosen not to report discomfort or moderate symptoms in the past usually report them. This is especially true if it appears that people are listening and acting on the information that the production workers give them. Thus, one often has increased reporting of musculoskeletal illnesses and injuries after an ergonomics evaluation is done in a department. This is may be seen for 6 months after the change and then usually falls to levels below the initial number. The severity of these reported illnesses and injuries is often quite low. 2. Musculoskeletal disorders that have become chronic because of repeated aggravation do not go away as soon as the ergonomics of the workplace or job is improved. They are likely to be less frequent and show less lost time, but they will not disappear overnight. On the other hand, first visits to the medical clinic for musculoskeletal problems will probably decrease and more cases �ith no lost time will be seen. It is important to measure other medical factors, such as the number of people who have job restrictions from heavier tasks, the number of people who are not successful on those jobs or tasks, absenteeism on those jobs, and the characteristics of the people who are successful on them. Job satisfaction ratings can also identify the acceptance or rejection of the new designs or job improvements. Since the goal of ergonomics is to ��-8-�_gn�!,or most workers, it is important to integrate it into the day to day operations of the business rather than keeping it in a safety pigeonhole. Mature ergonomics programs are harder to document. People have been trained,about the concepts and given the guidelines to use in their own work, so it is no longer easy to isolate what is ergonomics and what is the engineer's or worker's original concept. 4 7, �·--•- · IV. The Benefits of Having an Ergonomics Program Standard I will conclude by returning to the ori�inal questiqn:�y1 �� ..:)jY-e need an ergonomics program standard today ?' I have no�been a ergonomics regulation because I find that more time and money is spent in arguing why we should or shouldn't regulate this heal� _anq��<?tl 1rea than is spent in fixing the real problems in the workpla�.JR-ef{Jft� has the advantage that it provides a priority for ergonomics improvements in an industrial atmosphere that continues to try to do more with fewer people. Ergonomics should not be an adversarial area between management and labor - both benefit from good ergonomics applications. People are able to work better and with less fatigue, leaving them some reserve to take home and share with their families at the end of the shift. Occupational injuries and illness�·· should be reduced, and people who are injured outside of work are able to return to the job earlier because their jobs are less likely to aggravate their symptoms. In my review of hundreds of jobs in a variety of industries, I have frequently found that many ergonomics problems are also process problems. They should be fixed in order to improve the production process as well as to protect workers' health and safety. When jobs are designed for the majority of workers rather than for a small fraction of the potential workforce, many of the hassles are alleviated that otherwise make first level supervisors and team leaders tear their hair out, because more people are able to fill in as needed. More ability to concentrate on quality work instead of being distracted by discomfort from awkward postures or fatiguing muscles means less reliance on overtime and its impact on workers' whole body and mental fatigue in these days of global competition. In short, having an ergonomics standard to address the most serious risk factors in the workplace should give industries a priority to implement improvements that will make them better able to compete in the global economy of the future. :funof Respectfully submitted, �.• 1.-·· r. Hearing testimony of Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. on OSHA's Proposed Ergonomics Program Standard Washington, DC March 2, 2000 Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Consultant in Ergonomics 169 Huntington Hills Rochester, NY 14622 I. My Qualifications My name is Suzanne Rodgers and I have been working in the field of industrial ergonomics for the past 32 years. My doctorate is in Physiology from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry.The goals of my on-site studies have been to identify ways to design jobs, �/'--\ \) workplaces, equipment, and environments to reduce the risk of developing musculoskeletal injuries and illnesses on the job. For 13 years I was employed by the Eastman Kodak Company where I learned the applications of ergonomics by being out _on the production floor or in the field. I measured the metabolic, muscular, and cardiovascular demands of the "problem" jobs using employee volunteers and also learned about production needs. In those 13 years, I was taught by the workers, their supervisors, engineers, medical specialists, skilled trades people, human resources professionals, and my colleagues in the Human Factors/ Ergonomics Section of the Kodak Health and Safety Laboratory. I learned that it is possible to reach production goals without putting people at risk of developing significant occupational injuries and illnesses. From our work with production employees and with engineers, we were able to find better ways to design the workplace, production equipment, environment, and job tasks so more output was achieved with less injury risk for the worker. I included many of these guidelines in our two-volume reference book, "Ergonomic Design, for People at Work" {Eastman Kodak. 1983, 1986 (26-1283)}, a work that is considered one of the classical references in applied ergonomics. () -.. . .,- Since 1982, I have been a full-time, self-employed ergonomics consultant and have had the opportunity to develop ergonomics programs and processes with clients in 267 large, middle-sized, and small plants, in 12 hospitals and service organizations, and in a municipality. My consulting work is done in conjunction with training in many of the programs mentioned above. I have written 3 books, 8 papers in journals, monographs, and conference proceedings, and 5 chapters for ergonomics and medical books. In addition, I have spoken at 85 professional conferences throughout North America, primarily on factors related to the control of injury and illness risk through the application of ergonomics principles to the design of jobs, workplaces, equipment, and working environments. You have already heard testimony about the large numbers of musculoskeletal injuries and illnesses seen in companies over the past 2 �several years. From 32 years of experience watching and measuring people at work, I finnly believe that the musculoskeletal injuries and illnesses seen in the workplace are real, and that they can be managed and reduced through better design of workplaces, equipment, environments, and jobs. Until recently, I believed that ergonomics should be able to sell itself to companies without an OSHA standard. My posture for many years was to let the more progressive employers show the others the benefits of ergonomic design. But, now I think that an ergonomics standard is needed in order to put a priority on the need to address musculoskeletal injuries and illnesses in the workforce. The long term costs of musculoskeletal disorders, combined with increased health care costs, add to the reasons why we should take steps now to prevent these types of job-related injuries and illnesses (Exs: 26-54, 26-33, BLS; 64 Federal�gister 65768, 65975-79). The proposed ergonomics program standard is flexible and does not limit the ways that ergonomics can be integrated into operations. It recognizes that many problems can be addressed through _a "quick fix," and stresses the importance of teamwork in resolving problems. The proposed rule's " grandfather clause" acknowledges that many companies have already implemented ergonomics programs in their plants, and these programs will satisfy the rule providing that the injury and illness rates are being addressed effectively. Most of the companies that I have worked with over the past 18 years have ergonomics processes or pro grams that would more than satisfyt,Cthe basic requirements of the proposed ergonomics program standard. II. Scope of This Testimony In my testimony I will address the importance of several of the basic program elements of the proposed rule, including management leadership, employee participation and involvement, job hazard analysis, hazard controls, and training. I will also comment on the proposed OSHA triggers 3 �for job identification in the standard. My testimony is based on my 32-year experience of building ergonomics programs in more than 250 plants, which includes evaluating more than 4,000 jobs and finding improvements to reduce injury risk on them. In working with my clients to build successful ergonomics intervention programs that result in injury and illness reduction, we have included the same basic components that are spelled out in the proposed OSHA ergonomic program standard, ones that are widely accepted in the field (cf, Exs: 26-1370) . . J. Management Leadership �- In my work with more than 50 different companies and businesses, in over 280 plants, I have found that management commitment and leadership are essential to the success of an ergonomics program. Management commitment to the ergonomics program/process is critical because high risk tasks must be addressed, and people and resources (such as maintenance specialists and engineers in larger plants) must be made available to implement changes. Management sets the tone for how health and safety issues are prioritized in the operations. It is common to see ergonomic programs that specify content and structure, stating what is expected, who is responsible and what resources are available. My clients know the importance of communicating this information to assure the success of the program so that ergonomic improvements are implemented to reduce workplace risk factors. /l,,.Employee Participation and Involvement �Strong participation of hourly employees in every aspect of the ergonomics program is essential because they know the most about the jobs. Facilitating their participation in job analysis, problem solving, and in the generation of solution strategies will help the plant to find cost-effective interventions in both engineering and administrative categories. In observing programs that have not had much staying power, the primary 4 �problem that I have identified has been that the steps between identifying a problem and implementing a solution have not involved the people who work in those jobs. This approach of"throwing it over the wall" to the ergonomics expert, engineers or maintenance people to solve the problem often results in a solution that cannot be implemented for reasons that were not lmown to them when they observed the job. Case Study 1: A problem of getting a proper gasket assembly and seal on a refrigerator door in one company (with over 1000 workers) was associated with increased reports of forearm and wrist/hand discomfort from repetitive screwdriver use. Several activities had been tried to reduce the hand stress including a partial automation of the gasket assembly with a small robot, but there were still many quality problems that the line workers had to fix. Two engineers watched the hand assembly work and decided that they could make a fixture to assist the operators in holding down the gasket on the frame so the screwing down task would be easier to perform. The fixture was fabricated and presented to the operators about a month later. Although the concept was okay, the engineers had not tried it out with the operators and did not note that they were seated at the line. The fixture could only be used if one stood up, and this was not a popular idea for people working an 8-hour shift. The operators appreciated the trouble that the engineers had taken to help them work better, but they saw the fixture as creating new problems for them, and admitted that they would probably use it as a door stop. The operators were involved in analyzing the risk factors and defining the highest risk activities with the engineers and production supervision in a subsequent training course. _ Together, they were able to identify the semi-automation as the area that needed attention so less manual rework of the gasket assemblies would have to be done. The operators could then dedicate themselves to fixing the exceptions rather than having to fix every assembly on the line. The most effective programs I have participated in developing, in terms of employee involvement, have been ones where no recommendation for a workplace modification is made without sharing the ideas with the people who work on that job on all shifts and getting their ideas and/or buy-in. fl.Identifying Jobs OSHA uses an OSHA 200 log recordable as a trigger for employers to use '\ 5 �(j in identifying problem jobs. In manufacturing and materials handling jobs, symptoms trigger the problem where the employer has knowledge from an outside source that a risk for muculoskeletal injuries and illnesses exists and the symptoms have persisted for at least 7 consecutive days after they have been reported. In many of the programs that I have helped to initiate, my clients have been interested in catching ergonomics problems before they result in recordable injuries or illnesses. These programs focus on reducing the risk factors before an injury is reported and use discomfort and early symptoms to prioritize jobs for ergonomic improvements. High hazard jobs get the first priority, but jobs without injuries that have known risk factors are also addressed. Thus, my clients exceed the OSHA requirements for triggering action in the proposed rule. �Job Hazard Analysis �Job hazard analysis is the method for defining the MSD risk in terms of which factors contribute the most to it and determining why the risk factors are there. It is a critical component of any ergonomics process or program because it allows the company to define the problem before solving it. The proposed rule requires that a job hazard analysis be done when a musculoskeletal disorder has been recorded and a "quick fix" has not abated the problem sufficiently to prevent additional injuries. The.importance of using a job hazard analysis is to find the right and simplest solutions for the probtemjobs. These solutions will be more likely to be found where there is an analytical approach to the problem. The proposed rule's list of physical work activities to look for when an injury/illness is detected on a job are observable and practical. Employers/employees without extensive ergonomics training should be able to find the factors on the list that are most important to change in order to reduce musculoskeletal injuries and illnesses. Job hazard analysis must include the input of the workers on the jobs. Without this input and analysis one can fix the wrong thing and incur unnecessary expense. / \ \___�) 6 �Case Study 2: People on a car assembly line (in a plant with over 1,000 employees) were experiencing arm, shoulder, and back discomfort when handling doors off of an incoming conveyor and on to a carousel storage unit, from which the assemblers put them on the cars on the line. The group being asked to suggest ways to solve this problem jumped into the fray without analyzing the jobs and came up with very elegant ways of linking the line to the carousel so no manual handling of the doors would have to be done. The cost of this improvement would have been several hundred thousand dollars. What they did not hear was that the person presenting the problem stated clearly that the incoming line and the carousel line could not be linked because they had different flow rates. We eventually asked enough questions to establish what the task demands were in terms of weights handled, heights and reaches used, lifting frequency, and carrying distances. With that information, it became clear that there were two major risk factors that could account for the arm, shoulder, and back discomfort. The first was the force needed to remove the incoming doors from the conveyor. They stood upright, and one had to break them out of the track by applying a high force that was above mid-chest height on most people. The second risk factor was the need to hold the door about 28 inches away :from the body when setting it in the carousel lengthwise. This breakdown of the risk factors resulted in a suggestion to use air cylinders to push the door up out of the conveyor track where it could be handled comfortably for the transfer to the carousel. At the carousel, the door could be placed on a platform with a soft cover prior to sliding it into position in the next carousel slot. The total cost for these two workplace improvements was estimated to be less than $200. tHazard Controls I have had the opportunity to help companies identify ergonomics problems and to work with them to control the risk factors that contribute to musculoskeletal disorders in more than 4,000 jobs. I have found that effective ergonomic interventions are identifiable and often simple-and that employee participation in job analysis yields the best results. Solutions are often a combination of engineering and administrative controls. Case Study 3: The operator of a die toggle press (to make a frame out of several metal parts) was experiencing hand and wrist pain symptomatic of early tendonitis on the job. She picked up 7 parts to place them in the die nest and made about 500 frames a shift 7 �on the press. She was rushing to keep the line supplied and had help from the next operator to reduce some of the pace stress. In observing her work, we noticed that one of the pieces she used was always set on the side of the press and pushed on to realign it. She explained that the part did not fit in the die nest, so she re-bent it by hand. This forceful push was identified as being very heavy and quite frequent and contributed to the hand fatigue and pain mentioned by the operator. Up to 5 seconds was spent re-bending the part, and this was the main factor in getting her behind time on the line. The operator'§ supervisor had checked with the Purchasing Department and was told that the part met their specifications and could not be returned to the vendor as an out-of-specification order. They agreed to tighten up the specification the next time the part was ordered, but there was a 6-month supply of the "bad" parts in stock, so the problem was not going to go away soon. The hazard analysis indicated that most people would be at risk of upper extremity illness and injury from doing 500 maximum effort hand exertions on this job each shift. The decision was made to re-bend the "bad" parts off-line using a fixture and tooling instead ofby hand in order to reduce the toggle press operator's injury risk until the new part specifications were applied 5 to 6 months later. Reworking the die nest to accommodate the parts was not really an option since re-engineering that die would have taken several safety and client approvals and many months of testing to implement. Case Study 4: Workers in a hospital Food Service department were experiencing low back pain - �d upper extremity discomfort and symptoms that were associated with the preparation of food trays for the patients. 12 people were lined up along 2 sides of a 20-foot long conveyor belt with food items forming semicircles around them. As each tray went by, the worker would read the menu and select the appropriate items to put on it. Some people had been restricted from the tray line in order to reduce their risk of getting more serious injuries or illnesses. I was asked to come into the area in order to recommend an ergonomic chair for the lirte workers. From the job analysis, we found that the workers were leaning and twisting throughout the tray assembly process. Although they had thought their back pain was associated with standing, it was more likely to be related to the leaning and twisting. Chairs were only going to make the back discomfort worse because they would have more twisting and pivoting and more extended reaches loading items on trays from a chair. Using a problem solving approach, we identified 2 interventions that would reduce the leaning and twisting: 8 �I .Increasing the size of the type on the menus so they could be read from 3 feet away (giving an additional 1 second for obtaining the items at each station). The menu was redesigned by the department staff. and 2.Reducing the conveyor line speed a little bit each day until the workers were aware of it. This would be the optimum speed that would balance the time needed to get the items and put them on the tray when it was still in station and the need to move the trays between stations in an efficient manner. Both of these solutions were administrative. The combination of a 22% reduction in tray line rate (from the vendor rate, not the actual rate being used on the job) and a more readable menu resulted in a 7% decrease in the time to complete the job. There was also a reduction in the error rate on the line from 15% to 1 %, and a reduction in errors detected on the patient floors from 3% to 0.1 %. We saw a reduction to almost nil of the medical restrictions and complaints of low back pain and upper extremity discomfort formerly attributed to this job. Case Study 5: In one machining/assembly plant (with more than 1,000 employees), there were increased complaints about hand and wrist discomfort on a disc sanding job after a new inventory control program was introduced. Analysis of the operations showed that the operators used 2 types of sandpaper, one with a paper backing and one with a canvas backing. It was taking 2 times longer to do the parts sanding when the paper-backing sandpaper was used. This was the probable cause of the discomfort and symptoms that had recently appeared on the job. Someone had set a reorder time of 90 days on the canvas-backed sandpaper and 60 days on the paper-backed discs. Since both were specified for the operation, and since another department was also using the canvas-backed discs, there were only paper discs available for most of the sanding operations over a 3-month period. Re-specifying the canvas discs and putting a 30-day reorder time on the item cleared up the problem. Training operators to know when to change grinding discs or cutting tools on machining tasks represent other approaches that are administrative and can reduce injury risk on the job. Most of these become clear when the workers or others doing the job analysis keep asking "Why?" until they get to the root cause of a problem. Administrative changes are often very low cost and easy to implement if management commitment and employee involvement are present in an ergonomics program. 9 �F. Training The proposed rule has a requirement for providing both training on musculoskeletal disorders and ergonomics to employees and their supervisors who are working on jobs where MSDs have been seen and for training people who are responsible for the ergonomics program development. Most of the programs I have been involved in have had ergonomics awareness training for all managers and supervisors and for all employees. The best ergonomics programs I have been associated with are those where the production workers are the primary problem identifiers, analyzers, and solution generators. In smaller businesses, where the support staff is thinner, this need to solve ergonomics-related problems on the floor is even greater. Thus, training is critical to assuring that the plant management and employees can move the program forward. In addition to my training and consulting for companies, I have participated in ergonomics training and awareness programs for small businesses sponsored by the Occupational Safety Section of my local Chamber of Commerce. Similar programs that I have been part of have been sponsored by professional organizations and by the State of New York. (,) In addition to the general awareness training mentioned abov�, my client's ergonomic programs include special training for the persons involved in setting-up and managing the program. In the plants I have worked with, this job is often done by the members of an Ergonomics Team. I have trained ergonomics teams in about 250 plants and businesses. More than 5,000 people have participated in these team training courses over the past 18 years. I have found that I can train production workers and the support staff to think like ergonomists, and can facilitate them through a fairly simple job analysis or lifting guideline to a problem solving process that generates several ways of addressing the root cause of the problem. The best programs, I find, are those where the plant takes ownership of the ergonomics program. One does not need an ergonomics expert to run them CJ 10 �once they are trained. III. The Benefits of Having an Ergonomics Program Standard I will conclude by returning to the original question: Why do we need an ergonomics program standard today? I have not in the past been a fan of ergonomics regulation because I find that more time and money is spent in arguing why we should or shouldn't regulate this health and safety area than is spent in fixing the real problems in the workplace. This proposed Ergonomics Program Standard has the advantage that it provides a priority for ergonomics improvements in an industrial atmosphere that continues to try to do more with fewer people. I believe that the implementation of a flexible, performance-based, ergonomics standard will be a positive step in the prevention of occupational injuries and in optimizing the design of problem jobs. By allowing companies to develop their own ways of incorporating ergonomics into their operations and measuring their effectiveness in decreasing the occupational injuries and illnesses, the proposed ergonomics standard can help to underline the importance of health and safety priorities in parallel with production demands. In short, having an ergonomics standard to address the most serious risk factors in the workplace should give industries and businesses a priority to implement improvements that will reduce injuries and illnesses and make them better able to compete in the global economy of the future. 11 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Expert Witness Testimony for Proposed Ergonomic Program Standard Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Description An account of the resource Draft with comments of expert witness testimony for the Proposed Ergonomics Rulemaking Hearing at DOL, Washington, DC in February, 2000 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2000-01-17 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_046 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-21 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 46 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/8d4424acdea78a02ea71b787c30746e8.pdf 8917fd4664d2278de956a4792486e02d PDF Text Text r l QUESTIONS ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF A PROPOSED ERGONOMICS PROGRAM STANDARD FOR STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS September 24 and 25, 1998 I. PUBLIC PROCESS OSHA is meeting with stakeholders to draw upon their individual expertise as the agency develops a draft proposed standard to protect workers from work-related musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs). OSHA's ongoing efforts to foster public dialogue on this subject involve many stakeholders, including workers, employers, trade associations, unions, State and local governments, professional organizations, other Federal agencies, and our advisory committees. In accordance with a prohibition included in OSHA's appropriation, the Agency will not publish any proposed standard during fiscal year 1998. The prohibition prevents OSHA from promulgating or issuing "any proposed or final standard regarding ergonomic protection before September 30, 1998." The prohibition expressly allows OSHA to "develop a proposed standard regarding ergonomic protection" in the meantime. Because of the many tasks associated with drafting a proposed standard, OSHA does not anticipate publishing any proposed rule in the Federal Register until, at the earliest, the summer of 1999. In the meantime, OSHA is obligated to engage in a long list of pre-proposal actions: (1) continue dialogue with stakeholders and the Agency's advisory committees; (2) conduct economic and risk analyses; (3) continue to review the extensive research on work-related MSDs; (4) develop the regulatory text; (5) develop the preamble and other supplementary analyses; (6) assess the impact of a draft proposed rule on small businesses and, depending on that impa_ct, convene a small business panel under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA); (7) submit the draft proposed rule for Departmental review and clearance; and (8) submit the draft proposed rule to the Office of Management and Budget for Executive Order 12866 review. Each of these activities takes time. OSHA will not begin the SBREF A process until it has formulated its ideas for the regulatory text and evaluated potential impacts. The SBREFA process takes a minimum of two months, after which OSHA must respond to the comments of the SBREF A panel. After this is done, OSHA must submit the draft proposed rule to 0MB for an additional review that lasts a minimum of three months. Only after each of these steps has 1 �been completed is a proposed rule ready for publication in the Federal Register. Once a proposal has been published, OSHA will undertake another extensive effort to obtain public input through public comment and the agency's informal hearing process. Informal public hearings allow for extensive comment and questioning on relevant subjects by the scientists, economists, safety and health professionals, representatives of potentially affected industries, workers and other interested parties who participate. After the hearing ends, participants are given additional time to submit comments and briefs. OSHA is meeting with various stakeholders at this time to seek their input on key questions that must be addressed in whatever proposed ergonomics standard OSHA publishes. These discussions are occurring early in the standard development process, to give OSHA the benefit of stakeholder experience as the agency drafts its proposal. II. WHY A STANDARD IS NEEDED The most recent Bureau of Labor Statistics data show that 34% of all lost-workday injuries and illnesses are musculoskeletal disorders. Workers' compensation costs for these disorders account for more than $20 billion annually. BLS data show that MSDs like carpal tunnel syndrome cause, on average, more days away from work than is the case even for amputations, fractures, or falls from heights. Thousands of employers across the nation have addressed their MSD problems by implementing ergonomics programs that prevent these disorders, save workers' compensation costs, and improve worker morale and productivity. However, many employers remain unfamiliar with the protective and financial benefit of implementing such programs. OSHA wishes to hear from stakeholders on how a protective standard should be structured to reflect the effective practices used by industry in such programs. III. PRINCIPLES GUIDING OSHA'S EFFORT OSHA believes that the development of a proposed standard should be guided by nine principles. The proposed standard should: • • • • • • be based on sound scientific principles; focus on areas where the risk of MSDs is great and solutions are well understood; maximize worker protection and minimize burden; reflect practices shown to be effective; call for efforts that are commensurate with the size of the MSD problem at that establishment; recognize the unique needs of small businesses; 2 �• • • focus on performance and permit flexibility; recognize employers who already have effective ergonomics programs; and be written in plain language. IV. ELEMENTS OF AN ERGONOMICS PROGRAM There is widespread agreement that the following elements form the basis for successful safety and health programs, as reflected in the voluntary Safety and Health Program Manag€ment Guidelines issued by OSHA in 1989. These elements are the foundation of the ergonomics program OSHA outlined in its Meat Packing Guidelines and of countless successful ergonomics programs implemented·by employers across the country. • • • • • • • Management leadership and employee participation Hazard awareness and identification Training Medical management Job hazard analysis Hazard prevention and control Program evaluation An ergonomics program standard would include these elements in some form. At this meeting, OSHA is seeking input on how the elements of real-world programs can be embodied in a proposed standard. V. DISCUSSION OF KEY ISSUES OSHA has held several meetings with stakeholders to discuss the Agency's ideas for a proposed ergonomics standard. At those meetings, stakeholders expressed views ranging from opposition to a standard to support for an OSHA ergonomics rule. Many stakeholders strongly favored a program standard, i.e., a standard that includes the elements of safety and health programs that have been shown to be effective in many different applications, as well as for a standard with a narrow scope. A program standard with a narrow scope would differ in important ways from OSHA's 1994-1995 efforts to develop an ergonomics standard. At the meetings with stakeholders held earlier this year, OSHA discussed a standard that would cover manufacturing operations, manual handling operations, and keyboarding operations. OSHA also discussed the difficulty of obtaining data to identify those computer users at significant risk ofMSDs in order to tailor the scope of the standard to these users. Various stakeholders urged the Agency to work further on this problem, and OSHA has continued to do so. At the stakeholder meetings in September, OSHA hopes to continue this discussion with stakeholders, and the following material raises a question about this issue. 3 �OSHA has identified four key issues that the Agency would like to discuss with stakeholders: A. What should all employers covered by the scope of the standard do to protect their employees from MSDs? B. What action levels should be used to trigger further employer action? C. How does an employer with an effective program determine when controls are adequate for a problem job? D. Should OSHA limit the scope of a proposed ergonomics program standard? 4 �KEY ISSUE A: What should all employers covered by the scope of the standard do to protect their employees from MSDs? OSHA is working on a draft proposed ergonomics standard that would establish the basic obligation of all employers covered by the standard but would then incorporate action levels that would trigger action such as analyzing jobs for risk factors, developing solutions and implementing controls; providing additional training; or applying medical manageme,nt procedures. OSHA believes that hazard identification is an essential part of any effective ergonomics program, and seeks input from stakeholders on how best to ensure that employees are aware ofMSD hazards and that MSDs are reported promptly. QUESTIONS: 1. What minimum elements of an ergonomics program should all covered employers be required to have in place? How do those elements protect employees from MSDs? 2. How do employers with ergonomics programs determine when it is necessary to do more than monitor workplace conditions? 3. Thinking beyond the minimum requirements for covered employers, how should further requirements of the standard be tailored to correspond to the magnitude of the MSD problem in a given workplace? 4. What are some of the ways an employer with an effective ergonomics program can demonstrate management leadership of that program? 5. What steps should an employer take to encourage employee awareness of MSD hazards? 6. What steps should employers take to encourage early reporting of MSD hazards? 7. What steps should an employer take to increase employee participation in an ergonomics program? 8. How can an employer be sure that the hazard identification phase of an ergonomics program is working effectively? 5 �KEY ISSUE B: What action levels should be used to trigger further employer action? OSHA would like to discuss whether the recording of a job-related MSD is a useful "trigger" or "action level" for requiring further action in an ergonomics program. Further actions might include job analysis, implementation of controls, additional employee training, and medical management. The purpose of an incident-based trigger of this type is to ensure that employers act when real problems occur and to limit the number of jobs an employer is required to address at one time. Stakeholders at the July meetings suggested that the standard should incorporate a variety of "triggers" which employers might use in their programs. For example, the triggering event for "medical management" might be different from the trigger for implementing controls. Some practitioners pointed out that they use different triggers for different workplaces, depending on the conditions in or size of the workplace. For example, a single incident may be an appropriate trigger in a small workplace or where only a few employees perform certain jobs or tasks; in large workplaces, or where many employees perform nearly identical jobs and tasks, an incident rate change may be a better trigger. Others analyze jobs when changes in work methods, materials or processes are planned. Some stakeholders also suggested that a prioritization system based on seriousness of hazards could be incorporated into an ergonomics standard to "phase in" the abatement of hazards identified through the program. Under such an approach, employers might be required to analyze and fix some percentage of all covered jobs by a certain date, followed by phase-in dates for fixing the remaining jobs. QUESTIONS: 1. What are the trigger events (e.g., observation, occurrence of an MSD, results of a symptoms survey) that employers with effective programs rely on to indicate that job analysis, job controls, medical management, and/or job specific training are needed? 2. Should the signs and symptoms of work-related MSDs, in addition to recordable occurrences, trigger further action? If so, which signs and symptoms should trigger such action? For example, should all signs or symptoms trigger further action, or only those that persist for some period of time? 6 �3. Would it be appropriate and useful for OSHA to develop a list of alternative triggers and to offer employers flexibility to choose among a combination of those action level events or conditions? 4. Do certain high-risk jobs warrant further action even before an MSD occurs? If so, how can such jobs be identified? 5. What criteria would employers use to prioritize jobs for implementation of controls? 7 �KEY ISSUE C: How do employers with effective programs determine when controls are adequate for a problem job? In earlier meetings, stakeholders said that a proposed ergonomics standard needs to tell employers when they will be considered to have installed adequate controls (including training, work practices, administrative controls, and engineering controls) on a problem job. OSHA is seeking feedback on how best to translate effective industry practice into regulatory t�rms. Some stakeholders suggested than an ergonomics program is an on-going effort, and therefore, that OSHA should evaluate the process and not the intermediate results of the ergonomics program. They felt that the occurrence of incidents of MSD by themselves is not a good measure of the effectiveness of a program. Several employers suggested that an alternative means of evaluation of the workplace program would be to measure the activity and progress of the ergonomics process. Such measures could include steps taken to implement elements of the program, actions taken in response to reports of MSD, jobs analyzed, controls evaluated, tested and implemented, or changes of patterns of MSD incidence. These and similar measures could become indicators of good faith efforts to implement a control process. QUESTIONS: 1. OSHA intends the proposed standard to recognize that employers who have implemented a control process in good faith and are taking reasonable steps to address their MSD problems should not be at risk of a citation. How can OSHA best do this in a standard? 2. How should OSHA determine compliance with an ergonomics program standard? What measures clearly indicate that a program has been properly implemented? How can employers, employees and OSHA decide whether a program is effectively identifying problems,·generating solutions and following through on implementation and evaluation of results? 3. What processes do employers with effective programs use to set priorities for controls for problem jobs? 4. What processes do employers with effective programs use to select controls for a job determined to be a problem?. 5. How do employers with effective ergonomics programs determine that a particular control is functioning adequately or inadequately? 8 �6. How do effective programs incorporate training, employee participation, and/or administrative controls into the control process? 9 �KEY ISSUE D: Should OSHA limit the scope of a proposed ergonomics program standard? At earlier meetings with stakeholders, OSHA discussed taking a phased regulatory approach to the problem of work-related musculoskeietal disorders (MSDs). Since those meetings, OSHA has focused on limiting the scope of the first phase to two operations: production work in manufacturing and manual handling in general industry. These operations are of interest because their reported rates of musculoskeletal disorders are 2.6 times the rate for all of private industry and account for over 65% of all reported MSDs, but involve only 25% of all private industry employees. OSHA is aware that this narrow scope excludes many operations that pose significant risk and cause substantial disability among workers. For example, a standard that addresses production work and manual handling might not address the problems that lead to carpal tunnel syndrome in computer users or retail cashiers. OSHA is seeking input on effective ways of addressing these and similar significant risks. QUESTIONS: 1. Should OSHA limit the scope of the first phase of this rulemaking to certain jobs, risks, or operations? 2. How should OSHA identify other high risk jobs, risks or operations for which solutions are well understood? 3. What data are available that would permit OSHA to identify those computer users, cashiers and other workers whose jobs might not be included in "manufacturing operations" and "material handling" but who are at significant risk of incurring work-related MSDs? 10 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Questions on the Development of a Proposed Ergonomics Program Standard for Stakeholder Meetings September 24 and 25, 1998 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1998-09-24 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_045 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-21 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 10 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/881f865de0f43e0e7f5f6c8afecc0d32.pdf 4b8b94c536db7d02de0913cafacea998 PDF Text Text 1 Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Consultant In Ergonomics 169 Huntington Hills - Center Rochester, New York 14622 (716) 544-3587 (716) 266-8749 (FAX) ' Comments on the Development of !l Proposed Ergonomics Standard by OSHA/DOL, in connection with the Stakeholders Meetings, September 24th and 25th, 1998 Key Issue A: What should all employers covered by the scope of the standard do to protect their employees from MSDs ? . 1. What minimum elements of an ergonomics program should all covered employers be required to have in place ? At a minimum, an employer should have a program that educates employees about MSDs and risk factors, encourages them to report discomfort early, and has a process to assure that job analyses and problem solving by the employees will lead to interventions to reduce the risk of MSDs. A process for returning people to work after an MSD has occurred should also be in place. Management commitment is best measured by the number of job improvements made in response to employee reports of discomfort or injury and by the amount of time employees are permitted to work on ergonomic projects and receive training. 2. How do employers. with ergonomics programs determine when it is necessary to do more than monitor workplace conditions ? If the employer has a medical department or uses a nearby clinic, records of visits for musculoskeletal discomfort give a late indication that ergonomics issues may need to be addressed. A structured program of reviewing all jobs in the plant over a 1 to 3 year period (depending on plant size and frequency of changes of jobs), in addition to responding to injuries and illnesses, can assure that problems are picked up earlier. The usual problem is that people do not want to "bother" their supervision about muscle soreness, .so they wait too late to report it. The most successful companies make it acceptable to mention soreness by treating suggestions for job improvements as positive contributions from the employees, not as complaints. Another time when it is necessary to do more than monitor the workplace. is when a significant change is being made in the job, workplace, �2 environment, or tooling. The ergonomics team can review the plans before implementation and identify any added risk for MSDs instead of waiting for them to appear after the changes are made. 3. Thinking beyond the minimum requirements for covered employers, how should further requirements of the standard be tailored to corres pond to the magnitude of the MSD problem in a given workplace ? More matQre ergonomics programs have sometimes been penalized because they have reached the stage of integrating ergonomics into all phases of a plant's operations. Consequently, they may no longer have the structure that they once had because more people have been trained and there is less need for a separate team to deal with ergonomics issues. If an outbreak of MSDs occurs, these plants would be more likely to set up a corrective action team (CAT) or to designate the health and safety team to set up an ad hoc team to investigate the problem and recommend action. This qpproach should not be considered inappropriate because it puts ergonomics where it should be, on the floor and within the responsibilities of every work center. As in all health and safety issues, the way the goal is reached should not be restricted so as to set up yet another structure that generates more paperwork than action. Good safety and medical surveillance, carefully done "comfort" (as opposed to symptom") surveys, and an open attitude by the employer to respond to suggestions for ways to improve the jobs will usually assure that major ergonomics issues are not missed. Prescriptive solutions that do not emerge from a problem solving process involving hourly workers, support staff, and supervision are less likely to be effective and are more likely to run into funding limits. More attention should be paid to the role of job design in resolving some of the ergonomics issues. Administrative improvements are currently limited primarily to job rotation, slowing down the speed of a line, and giving additional rest breaks, all of which may affect productivity and quality goals. Good job design can build the needed recovery time for active muscles into the tasks and can cut the time needed for recovery by focussing on the elements of tasks that require the heaviest efforts and longest effort times (e.g., those that are most fatiguing). Without prescribing how this is done, one can indicate that improving the job design to minimize fatigue is an effective way to reduce overexertion injuries. I have found that the hourly workers know exactly what needs to be improved even though they may throw a common solution at it rather than �3 looking at all of the ways the task/job can be improved. For example, not every heavy lift needs a hoist; sometimes an adjustable-height cart is all that is needed to move the item into position by sliding it. 4. What are some of the ways an employer with an effective ergonomics program can demonstrate management leadership of that program ? I have not yet met a manager who wants employees to be hurt on the job. Most of them do not understand why the job is a problem if only 1 out of 6 or 3 out of 20 people have reported MSD problems. They do not understand the reporting issues or the individual susceptibility that helps to explain those figures. It is a similar problem to the one that results in many back injury reports being attributed to "improper lifting", with the recommended action being to either teach the person to lift better or tell them to be tnore careful. There is still an underlying belief in many plants that you find the people who can do the work safely (train them how and enforce the training rules), and anyone who can't do it, can't have the job. The notion that the job can be designed to accommodate most people is still a new one to many managers. I can often sell them on the desirability of improving the job by pointing out that jobs that can only be done by 20% of the potential workforce create a hassle for supervision when the usual people doing them go on vacation. The usual problems I see with management leadership relate to the problems of today's production world. There are too few people to do the work, so making time available for an hourly worker to be part of an ergonomics team, or to get ergonomics risk factor or problem solving training, becomes an issue. Many of the hourly people involved on the teams have found themselves doing some of the work outside of their normal working hours and without pay. Even with their dedication to the process, this is not an appropriate �xpectation. Although the numbers will be hard to retrieve, it is useful to document how many hours are spent in a plant on meetings, investigations, and implementation of ergonomics solutions. The dollar amounts spent each year are useful, but can be misleading. Good problem solving often results in low cost solutions that are very effective. Throwing hoists and lift tables at problems is very expensive and may not be effective. A count of the numbers of projects addressed each year and the average time to resolution (i.e., completed action), as well as the cost and time spent, will also give a reading of management commitment. �4 A measure of management commitment that has not been used very much, but does appear to correlate With the more effective programs, is how many times a year ergonomics is on the management's agenda in their regular meetings. In general, if the topic is on the agenda on a regular basis, the program/process is active and management is keeping informed. If it never shows up on an agenda, ergonomics work may be active at a lower level, but management is not actively involved. I usually suggest that ergonomics be included on the agendae of quarterly or annual management meetings across plants or within a company, often in association with the EHS (Environmental Health and Safety) presentations. Another management role is to be sure a budget is available for addressing ergonomics issues that are not major cost items. Some plants have set up a "checkbook" for items under $ 500. that can be used at the team's discretion for tools, assist devices (e.g., adjustable keyboard supports), small carts, etc.). Other plants have indicated when approvals are needed from a higher level, usually based on cost. In some plants, the teams report through their plant's operations committee and make presentations for all but the least expensive items at regularly-scheduled production meetings. Management must also resolve conflicts that can occur in the Maintenance Department if there are many projects in the hopper and the ergonomics ones keep getting shoved down the list. We have solved this problem in many plants by assuring that at least one maintenance person is on the Ergonomics Team and by getting approval from management ap.d the union for bringing in an outside vendor/contractor if there is little hope of Maintenance being able to get to the projects in the next few weeks. 5. What steps should an employer take to encourage employee awareness of MSD hazards ? For smaller businesses, every employee should have a minimum of a 1hour introduction to ergonomics and risk factors for MSDs as part of their initial training and on an annual basis. Someone who can answer questions should be present at each of these sessions, either a health and safety specialist in the plant or a qualified professional from outside the plant. There are good videotapes available on a number of ergonomics topics, and these can be used for the annual refresher sessions. The employees should be given an opportunity to indicate if they have musculoskeletal discomfort and would like to have their job evaluated both at the training session and within their department. �5 If the plant has an Ergonomics Team, I usually suggest that the team members do this training so they are known to the other employees as people they can ask for help in looking at their jobs. The team members have proven to be very good at answering questions, too, and know when to refer the person to a medical specialist or to their supervision. 6. What steps should employers take to encourage early reporting of MSD hazards? The success rate of getting people to report their symptoms early depends very much on the over-all psychosocial working environment and the consequences of reporting soreness versus some disability from an MSD. The best plants encourage early reporting of symptoms by responding to short term problems positively and by looking for ways to improve the jobs on a continuous basis. If a person has done something outside of work that has set them up for an MSD, there is little emphasis on the Workers' Compensation issue because the goal is to keep the employee on the job and injury-free. Very short (2 to 3 days) job alterations or restrictions can be used to let the short term overexertion injuries heal and to reduce aggravation of the problem by the job. Unfortunately, short term restrictions like this go on the OSHA log and are considered a negative situation for the plant. There needs to be a better way to recognize the need for occasional short periods of respite on a job with some risk factors that could further aggravate an outside of work injury. I am attaching a "think piece" that I put together in 1996 to help describe the patterns of MSDs seen in the workplace to further address this issue. 7. What steps should an employer take to increase employee participation in an ergonomics program ? a. Acknowledge that the employee is the expert on his/her job and is essential to good problem identification, analysis, and solution finding. b. Provide time away from the production or office job for ergonomics training and for meetings and problem analysis and solving. c. Provide a process for implementing agreed-upon changes and provide a budget and project priority system to assure that small changes are not delayed unnecessarily. d. Publish the activities in the company newsletter and praise good work ! �6 8. How can an employer be sure that the hazard identification phase of an ergonomics program is working effectively ? Since thete are usually only 2 reasons why the reporting is not good, the employee's decision not to report or management's desire not to have them report, this problem can usually be resolved through education of the employees and managers and through management commitment to solving problem� rather than hiding them. We have found that some hazards are missed because the tasks occur very irregularly or rarely, such as a seasonal cleaning task or a rare combination of circumstances that leads to a work overload for a few days. As usual, the best source of information about these types of tasks are the people who do the work. They come to the surface when looking at jobs together and asking respectful questions about how things are done (in other words, being their student on the job). An on-going process of providing a way someone can call attention to these issues when doing the job or afterwards will move the plant forward in hazard identification. Some people comment that because these things are not done regularly, they cannot justify spending alot of money on them. That may be true, but there is no reason to think that alot of money will be required. Using a problem solving process will usually come up with a policy or an assist device or a job process change that will reduce the risk substantially. Hazard identification is needed before a process or piece of equipment goes into the plant, too. So the ergonomics team or people trained in ergonomics should be part of or consult with each new project team that is designing or purchasing equipment or processes that people will be working with. The people who install the equipment should also be knowledgable about ergonomics or should be subjected to oversight by the team so new problems are not created at this point in the project. Key Issue B: What action levels should be used to trigger further employer action ? 1. What are the trigger events (e.g., observation, occurrence of an MSD, results of a symptoms survey) that employers with effective programs rely on to indicate that job analysis, job controls, medical management, and/or job specific training are needed? �7 Everyone would like to know what the incidence of MSDs is in the general population throughout the USA. Without a reliable number for general incidence, it is difficult to decide what the trigger point should be on a strictly epidemiological basis. The recent literature review from NIOSH showed val�es all over the place, and I have learned from a local DOL group that they use a trigger value of 10% of people self-reporting any musculoskeletal discomfort for office jobs, based apparently on a Boston based DOL guideline. For an ergonomics standard to reduce MSDs, I believe there should be at least 2 levels of job "trigger": those risk factors that we all agree are excessive for most people (handling very heavy weights, lifting more than 24 inches in front of the body, sustained work in very cramped or awkward postures for a majority of the shift, and doing highly repetitive hand work at muscle use frequencies exceeding 30/minute for a large majority of the shift); and those risk factors where the risk is more related to the combinations of effort intensity, effort duration, effort frequency . and total time of the task per shift. A paper I wrote on this concept for a meeting in Zurich in 1996 is attached. The decision that has to be made is how many people can be protected in a standard without creating an unreasonable burden on plant production needs ? We have already lost too many manufacturing jobs to the rest of the world, and too strict a standard would assure the flight of many of the rest of them. The quandry comes from knowing that the best jobs are those where there is very little risk, but, without a massive retooling of many plants, there are many job� that can be done by a smaller percent of the workforce without risk but would not meet the design standard. I have addressed this issue in my paper and will only add that we need to keep clear when setting a standard for ergonomics to reduce MSDs that we are defining hazard in terms of part, not all, of the population in many repetitive motions tasks. I'd like to protect everyone, but I'd also like to keep good jobs in the USA ! I think we need to give employers some room to address the lower risk issues differently than those that are a problem for most people. 2. Should the signs and symptoms of work-related MSDs, in addition to recordable occurrences, trigger further action? If so, which signs and symptoms should trigger such action ? For example, should all signs and symptoms trigger further action, or only those that persist for some period of time ? My major problem with symptom surveys is that they are rarely done well in the plant, and, often, they are not followed up on, so the employee who �8 has identified a problem gets the feeling that no-one really cares. My own suggestion is that plant areas should be selected based on health and safety data and that discomfort surveys (10 point scale by body part) are administered as part of a specific project to reduce MSDs in those areas. All parts of the plant should be surveyed, but not all at once if one is to see action in response to the survey. Like any good ergonomics process, the surveys should be planned and progress in reducing risk through job analysis and problem solving should be monitored on it. By targetting the problems initially through the injury/illness data, it is not difficult to explain why some areas get preferential treatment by the ergonomics team. The use of a discomfort survey will let you know how accurate your reporting system is and whether there is a need for further employee education about early reporting or a need to educate a team leader or supervisor about the importance of responding to employee discomfort. The combined data will usually point to a few tasks where there are significant opportunities for improvement, and the problem solving process will usually lead to solutions that can be handled withing the department's budget. If one waits for a symptom or sign of an MSD to persist for a certain period of time, one is not reinforcing the value of early detection in the workplace. For a standard, I would suggest that symptom persistence is significant if they last 3 days or more, basing this on the typical pattern of short term overuse problems (see ""think piece" attachment on MSDs). 3. Would it be appropriate and useful for OSHA to develop a list of alternative triggers and to offer employers flexibility to chose among a combination of those action level events or conditions ? Yes. Good luck! 4. Do certain high risk jobs warrant further action even before an MSD occurs ? If so, how can such jobs be identified ? I don't believe that having an injury is the best way to find high risk jobs, although it is the most consistent way across plants because of the OSHA reporting system. The tasks or jobs with the highest risks may not occur very often, so, again, the best source for this information is the people who do the job. They can be given a list of risk factors (see the Zurich paper for details) and asked to identify tasks that may require those activities. �9 Then, the next level of analysis can be done by the ergonomics team with employee involvement. 5. What criteria would employers use to prioritize jobs for implementation of controls ? Where possible, the best priority schemes are those tied to the degree of risk present or the percent of the potential workforce (men and women) who would find the task acceptable (based on Liberty Mutual's lifting studies). I use the accumulation of fatigue in 5 minutes of work as another way of prioritizing the need to improve a job or task, adding caveats according to the over-all work pattern during the shift. Another factor comes into the picture in the field, however. Some solutions developed in the problem solving process are easy to implement, and others are more difficult or are affected by other projects in the plant. Thus, I think that the prioritization approach should be tied to the high risk jobs and that the less serious risks (where 50 to 75 % of the potential workforce may not be at risk) should be handled in a work practices mode, where progress against goals is tracked, but firm deadlines aren't set. Key Issue C: How do employers with effective programs determine when controls are adequate for a problem job ? 1. OSHA intends the proposed standard to recognize that employers who have implemented a control process in good faith and are taking reasonable steps to address their MSD problems should not be at risk of a citation. How can OSHA best do this in a standard ? Avoid being too strict on the interpretation of what makes a good program since there are many different effective models and mature programs or processes look very different from start-up programs. My experience has been that it is not difficult to tell who is doing a good faith effort and who is not. In plants with a commitment to the ergonomics process or to health and safety, there are people with the training and responsibility to respond to ergonomics issues, and they can usually run through a number of projects out on the floor where changes have been made in response to employee discomfort or injury. The employees on those jobs, unless they started working there after the improvements were made, will also �10 comment on how much better the task/job is than it was before the ergonomic improvement was made. What should be avoided is heavy paperwork documentation of every phase of the projects. I have struggled for years to find a way to make this easier for the ergonomics teams, and it still doesn't get done, even by the best plants. The usual comment is, "We know it is effective. Why do we have to write it up ?". Because there is always plenty to do, active teams often do not get to the paperwork and "just do it", so documentation can be a problem. I try to get them to keep project lists and progress notes at their regularly scheduled meetings and to do before and after videotapes to illustrate their work. I also encourage them to make presentations to their managers and to professional meetings so more documentation and follow up gets done, In some plants, I have seen so much emphasis on documentation that very few job analyses and problem solving solutions get done in the time allowed for ergonomics. So, some follow-up and documentation is needed, but pay more attention to the over-all attitude towards ergonomics on the floor and the numbers of completed projects. 2. How should OSHA determine compliance with an ergonomics program standard ? What measures clearly indicate that a program has been properly implemented ? How can employers,. employees, and OSHA decide whether a program is effectively identifying problems. generating solutions, and fallowing through on implementation and evaluation of results ? Set some process goals, such as having ergonomics knowledge in the plant, a process for requesting job analyses, doing problem solving to generate solutions, and implementing changes; there should be employee awareness of risk factors and a medical management process for injured employees and people returning to work. Set some outcome goals, such as reduction of injuries/illnesses on jobs where high risk factors are present, numbers of meetings per year, percent of employees trained in ergonomics awareness, numbers of projects completed, etc .. 3. What processes do employers with effective programs use to set priorities for controls for problem jobs ? The priorities are often set by the perceived risk, which is often determined by injury and illness data, specifically OSHA recordables. With a good problem solving process for generating solutions, the cost of �1 1 the solution is usually not too high, so priorities may often be given to those projects with easy-to-implement solutions. Where there are serious safety or ergonomic risks evident in an operation, priority is given without regard to cost in many plants. For solutions that are costly but not associated with a high risk for MSDs, I usually recommend that the costs be planned over several years and that priorities be assigned according to job demands. For example, if new chairs are needed in the production areas, I recommend that the people who sit for 4 hours or more per shift be given the first priority and that the others be phased in over a reasonable time period. The same may be true for phasing in improved power tools or new work benches. 4. What processes do employers with effective programs use to select controls for a job determined to be a problem ? Many processes are used, some more effective than others. Many plants equate a type of injury with the lack of a piece of equipment or furniture and spend a great deal of money "solving" the wrong problem, although they have the best intentions. For example, not every backache in a standing job is going to be improved with a fatigue mat on the floor. By using a problem solving process that not only identifies the risk factors but asks "Why are they present ? " , the ergonomics team can usually find multiple ways to improve the job or task. For example, if a person is bending over a floor pallet to inspect a part, the problem solving process does not necessarily result in the common fix of placing the pallet on a lift table. By asking why the person is bending over, one may learn that the item being inspected has an identification mark placed on a label that is very difficult to read or hard to see from the usual inspection location. Although the pallet lift would be a nice piece of equipment to have, addressing the location and.legibility of the label would reduce the time the inspector has to be in an awkward posture and reduce the risk for back and leg discomfort substantially. The cost of the lift would be likely to be considerably higher than the cost of improving the labelling, and the side benefit might be to reduce errors in transcribing the label information. This would be more of an administrative solution than an engineering solution, and those are less onerous financially for small plants to implement. 5. How do employers with effective ergonomics. programs determine that a particular control is functioning adequately or inadequately ? �I2 If the plant is tracking injuries and illness by job or work center, is encouraging employees to report discomfort early, has a medical management process that assures that people with discomfort are followed up in their return to work, has a team or people able to do ergonomic analyses and to recommend and implement improvements to reduce risk factors for MSDs, and has a process for making changes once they have been approved, they will know if the program/process is effective. A common outcome of a good ergonomics program is improved morale and cooperation in finding and improving jobs or tasks that are production problems as well. They also ask their people to keep them informed about areas for improvement on a regular basis, and they respect and act on their suggestions or, better yet, give them the authority to resolve the problems. 6. How do effective programs incorporate training, employee participation, and/or administrative controls· into the control process ? The problem solving process requires that the hourly workers and support staff and supervision sit· down together to find solutions for ergonomics issues. The support staff will never know enough about thejob to solve the problem in a way that is cost effective and will be accepted by the hourly workers. The outside consultant will not be around to assure that the ideas come to fruition in a job or workplace modification, and will never know as much about the job or working atmosphere as the people who work in the plant. The engineers will usually come up with an over-designed solution, and they need to work with mechanics and the hourly people to find the simpler solutions. Supervision has to fund the solutions and explain them to the cost accountants, so they need to be involved in the · process as well. When all of these people work together to determine how to reduce the risk for.injuries (and.fatigue) on a job, there is a form of training going on, especially if there are some analytical tools used (fatigue analysis, lifting guidelines, postural analyses) and a videotape of the task. Very often, administrative controls emerge from the problem solving process where "Why ?" is asked until one runs into a dead end. These include decisions to reduce the size of a load (chemical bag size when small numbers are used) or change the way it is delivered (hoppers of chemicals or Super Sacks instead of paper bags), production planning improvements (when materials are delivered or decisions on when preventive maintenance is scheduled), or staffing policy changes (adding labor temporarily when �13 failures occur in automated equipment). I don't know how one reaches the same point if the hourly workers are only asked to identify problems, the engineers are charged with analyzing and fixing them, the maintenance people have to implement those changes, and the supervision has to fork out the money for it, all independent of each other. This "throwing it over the wall" approach is fairly common when plants use an outside consultant and do not develop ergonomics talent inside. It is subject to the power structure in the plant (whether they think the consultant really knew enough about the plant), to the degree of commitment of the hourly workers to the solutions suggested, and to human relations issues that are best resolved by sitting down to develop consensus. Key Issue D: Should OSHA limit the scope of a proposed ergonomics program standard ? 1. Should OSHA limit the scope of the first phase of this rulemaking to certain jobs, risks, or operations ? As discussed above and in the attached paper from the 1996 Zurich meeting, I think that the standard should be set for high risk factors that we can all agree on, because there are still many of those in plants. The risk factors that begin to limit the numbers of people who can perform them safely, but where at least 50% of a mixed (M/F) population would not be at risk, would be better addressed through a work practices approach and not be prescriptive in their approach. 2. How should OSHA identify other high risk jobs, risks, or operations for which solutions are well understood ? I worry about the phrase " ... for which solutions are well understood." here because I find over and over that people throw equipment at problems rather than doing root cause analysis to determine the real drivers of risk. Two jobs that appear very similar on the surface may yield very different solutions because of the circumstances prevailing in each situation. I think that a panel of ergonomics experts could sit down and make a preliminary list of high risk job requirements that could be used by plant ergonomics teams to survey all jobs and set priorities for ergonomics improvements. This would avoid the situation of waiting for a person to have an injury to identify a problem job. �14 3. What data are available that would permit OSHA to identify those computer users, cashiers, and other workers whose jobs might not be included in "manufacturing operations" and "materials handling" but who are at significant risk of incurring work-related MSDs ? They need to be treated under the second level of risk factors that I address in my paper and above, because the risk is not inherent in the task itself, but rather is in the way the task is done in time . In other words, it is a multifactorial problem that cannot be treated by looking at one risk factor at a time. I find that job design is the ultimate way to address the issues once the person has been put in a reasonable workplace (one that meets basic ergonomics guidelines for postural and visual comfort). Legislating furniture, etc. is totally inappropriate, in my view, because it assumes the problems are all related to equipment rather than recognizing that the way the job is done (the employees control over the work) often determines individual comfort and risk for MSDs. We lump these factors together under "psychosocial stress factors" now, but some are really work design issues that should be addressed through better job set-ups. Respectfully submitted, 9/24/98 SHR � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Comments on the Development of a Proposed Ergonomics Standard by OSHA/DOL Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Description An account of the resource Comments on the Development of a Proposed Ergonomics Standard by OSHA/DOL, in connection with the Stakeholders Meetings, September 24th and 25th, 1998 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1998-09-24 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_044 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-21 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 14 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/6ea573666c4d30bb98b2123cba185520.pdf 80e73782ba3757ed703100c4d6ce1d2a PDF Text Text .· Suzanne H.\Rodgers, Ph;D. Consultant In Ergonomics · · �1-69 Huntington Hills - Center · · Rochester, New York 14622 Comments on the Draft Document 29 CFR Part 191 O Ergonomic Safety and Health Management Program (716) 544-3587 (716) 266-8749 (FAX) A. General Comments Putting myself in the role of an industrial respondent to the questions you are asking, I have the following reactions: 1. To answer all of the questions thoughtfully, I would need to spend at least a month on the response. I don't have a month to spare. 2. I could cut out some of the time by not answering questions that I don't have an immediate answer to (would require research or calculations) and not answering questions the lawyers are going to cut out anyways (what jobs are the injuries seen on?, how many cases do I have?, etc). 3. What they should be asking is whether my company has tried ergonomics and how successful have we been in reducing our injuries. I'd save a lot of time if I could ignore most of these questions and just send them a copy of our program - use the end of year summary report we did last December. 4. It looks to me as if they have already decided that this standard will be like the red meat guidelines; they are asking me to bless it with my data. I would like to know how effective the standard has been in reducing the incidence rates in the meat cutting industry. (In one corporation with a worldwide ergonomics program, we saw a 25% reduction in overexertion injuries in the first 2 years of the program. Has a similar drop been seen across meat cutting industries in the past 2 years?) 5. There are too many places where it is assumed that I know what an unacceptable level of illness or injury is - where it can be identified as job-related. The major diagnoses we are looking at (low back pain, tendonitis, CTS, shoulder and arm strain and sprain, etc) can have risk factors in recreational and home activities as well as in work activities. Also, we know that some people are more susceptible than �2. others to some of these problems. I'd like to see more questions that address the state of knowledge about job versus non-occupational risk factors. 6. I don't feel comfortable about solutions being included in any legislation since each problem may have a different solution depending on the circumstances. I don't mind a performance standard, but I don't want to be forced to do something that may not be effective or may cost much more than needed to fix the problem. 7. This is a very reactive program - one responds to injuries with an ergonomic redesign process. Many of the problems relate to equipment and tooling that is not ergonomically designed in the first place. Why isn't there some activity in the area of requiring ergonomic involvement in the design process or a performance standard that requires a machine or tool to meet some basic ergonomic guidelines (usability, reaches, clearances, maintainability, visibility, etc) ? B. More Specific Suggestions 1. Use a much simpler form for gathering initial information from industry about their experience with or concerns about ergonomics programs. Put more emphasis on learning what has worked for them and less on evaluating their thoughts about the meat cutters' guidelines format. I have attached a suggested format that you are welcome to play with. Anything much more than 1O pages long will discourage many plants from responding, even if they have good programs - just because everyone is carrying several responsibilities now, and no-one has the time to write a treatise on their program. 2. Expand the section on how they are or are not using existing ergonomics guidelines, including the meat cutters guidelines (or the infamous draft document of the general guidelines from July, 1990 of which most companies have "pirated" copies), the Guidelines for Manual Lifting, the Vibration Exposure guidleines, the Guidelines for Exposure to Hot Environments, and the monograph by Verne Putz-Anderson of NIOSH on Cumulative Trauma Disorders. 3. Ask more specific questions about how their programs are organized and what record keeping (outside of OSHA logs) they require. Find out their follow-up mechanisms and what data they track to identify the effectiveness of their programs. �3. 4. Find out more about how they developed ergonomic expertise in the plant/workplace and whether they were satisfied with the quality of that service if it was obtained outside of the company. Identify the "expert's" qualifications and the specific projects or work they did. You may be surprised by the outcome of this set of questions. Ergonomics is a multidisciplinary field and a wide variety of people can do parts of it very well, in many cases better than a single "qualified" ergonomist can do them. 5. Most plants do not keep very good records of Before/After data on ergonomics projects. I push this very heavily in my training and still rarely get it except from a few industrial engineering coordinators. The OSHA log will reflect some of the benefits, but this is the only sure data you can count on. Attached is an example of a case study report form I used to try to get some consistency in the reporting of the first year's results of 3 pilot projects in a large corporation. Despite the request for cost data, it was rarely given, even though they all agreed that there were significant savings. It is just too difficult to dig out the figures; and it does not seem necessary to do so because people agree that the solution was effective and they want to go on to the next one. Also, so many things change in a plant over 6 to 12 months, you cannot always identify how much the ergonomics contributed to the response. In over 23 years of doing ergonomics, I think I can count about 8 times when a really careful analysis of cost/benefit on an ergonomic project has been done. In most cases, the client felt that the time spent doing the documentation was not worthwhile because the benefits were obvious. Therefore, make the section of questions on the additional benefits of ergonomics programs more qualitative - give categories of improvement rather requesting specific amounts. See the simplified format for an example. 6. Under management commitment and employee involvement there are too many questions and most of them are getting at the same thing. My guess is that the people who respond will have good management commitment but will not necessarily have good employee involvement. The usual model has the employees identify the "bad" jobs and turn over the rest of the task to the engineers or to maintenance to fix them. It is less common to see these groups work together throughout the process to solve the problems and analyze the job. Because the line workers are often not involved in the design of the fix, the solution is often an engineering change that may not be accepted by the workers because it may not work in practice (takes too long, shifts the stress to another muscle group, makes it harder �4. to do a quality job, etc.). These are failures that discourage people and make some managers think that ergonomics is an expensive way to go. The failures may set up an adversarial situation between the engineers and line workers instead of an appreciative relationship, especially if someone tries to force the workers to use a tool that really does not work for them. I think that what you need to know is whether the line workers have really bought into the ergonomics program and feel ownership for it or whether they are on the sidelines and acting primarily as problem identifiers. This can be identified by asking a few questions about the way a project is handled. See the suggested form for an example. 7. Job site analysis can be very intensive or very casual, depending on who is involved in it. For example, with a good problem solver, one can do one-on-one training in a few hours on the floor. By providing a fairly simple format for identifying problems and analyzing their root causes (by using the question "Why ?" until you hit a dead end, then going back and asking it again), one can often identify effective strategies for resolving problems that contribute to poor postures, excessive loads, or poor visual conditions. Although videotaping is probably the best way to capture the mechanics of a job, it only shows you what one or a few people are doing and should not be relied upon totally. The best information will come from sitting down with a number of people who know or have designed the job, workplace, or equipment and using the videotape to ask questions and discuss the factors that contribute to discomfort. Rather than lead the question by suggesting specific job analysis techniques (such as biomechanical models, the NIOSH Manual Lifting Guideline formula, etc), the questions should be directed towards what they are currently using and whether they are using such guidelines to direct their designs or policies. I would personally deplore any legislation for how one should analyze jobs. There are many ways to look at them and no one way is adequate for all. Although I have learned to use biomechanical models and understand their value for comparing different lifting conditions, I have rarely used them to either justify the need for a change or to design a better lift. I have found it much more appropriate to use the NIOSH Lifting Guidelines information (based largely on Dr. Snook's studies with an overlay of the biomechanical model for single lifts) to predict the percent of the population that might find a specific lift difficult. I am constantly looking for better ways to do job site analysis and think that we are very far from having a perfect system at this time. So, I do not think one technique, or even a series of methods should be pushed, although there should be a repository where interested people can go to learn �about what is available. There probably should also be some attempt to evaluate the results of some of these analyses and to see if they can be validated based on epidemiological data. In the meantime, however, I think that industry's experience with different methods should be evaluated and fed back to the people who are developing analytical techniques so further improvements can be made. 8. On the medical management issues, you should ask less about the qualifications of plant medical people and more about the policies and interaction with the local medical community. There are a new set of considerations coming in with ADA legislation, and even the meat cutters' standard will have to revisit the issue of work restrictions in 1992. Therefore, I think there should be more questions included about the impacts of work restrictions and how they handle them, what concerns they have about exposing people to additional risk, what mechanisms are established for early detection of overexertion or cumulative trauma problems, etc. I am personally very negative about the symptom surveys suggested in the meat cutters' guideline. I find that they create more problems than they solve because at the time they are done there is often no mechanism set up to respond to them. As a result, either people are afraid to report because they think they may be taken off their job, or they report their discomfort and nothing happens for a long time. Both situations are a long way away from the desired outcome of an ergonomics program - a close teamwork between employees and supervision. Some questions about symptom surveys should be included because it is a topic of great concern to management. They do not wish to educate the workforce about risk factors and health hazards before they are prepared to respond to their employees' concerns. 9. Under education and training, I think the questions should relate to content and timing of training as well as what level of training is needed for different people. Providing checklists of risk factors is some people's idea of training, but such an approach may leave people without control over their exposures. In some cases they may use the list to issue grievances or to bargain for additional work privileges, whereas the outcome of the training should be to provide them with the ability to identify and solve some of the non-ergonomic aspects of their jobs. Training of the people who design the equipment, select the tools or furniture, and build the jobs is just as important as training the line workers, yet it has not been focused on in these questions. Some commitment to 5. �6. incorporating ergonomics principles into the design and purchasing processes should be included in the guidelines. Questions about available training materials seem a bit out of place here, but perhaps the question could be asked more generally about what materials they have found most useful in their programs. Questions about how the training was accomplished (who did it, what topics were covered, what groups were involved, how much time was spent, etc) could also help to identify how much is effective versus how much is too much or too little. 10. Computer workplace legislation seems to be in vogue lately, and there is justification for considering it as part of a general standard. As before, however, I think it is entirely inappropriate to legislate furniture or specific rest break strategies for office workers in a standard. I have seen people throw money at these problems and buy all new furniture and lighting for areas only to find that the effect on the office workers' comfort has been marginal. Although good furniture is desirable and should be provided in any workplace, there are still driving factors for discomfort that will make more difference if they are resolved than simply providing a new chair or changing the height of the keyboard. The questions in this section should be directed to the companies' concerns about computer workplace issues. Are they seeing "ergonomic problems" such as carpal tunnel syndrome, tendonitis, headaches, visual symptoms, or low back pain ? What have they done to relieve them ? What is their usual turnover of furniture ? What policies have they initiated to build ergonomics considerations into their choice of office furniture, lighting, and layout ? It is always difficult to set a standard that will cover employers who are already involved in ergonomics (because they are concerned about their employees and wish to reduce their injury/illness rates) and, yet, will still have teeth to assure that less enlightened employers will be held accountable for non-ergonomic jobs that contribute to overexertion injuries and illnesses. The fear of most companies who are already actively involved in ergonomics is that the new standard will make them abandon a proven model for one that may be less effective. This can be avoided if the legislation is not too specific in determining how things are analyzed and solved but rather focuses on the desired outcome. 8/11/91 Respectfully submitted, �Suggested Questions for Review of ANPR of �9 CFR Part 1910, Ergonomic Safety and Health Management Program (Start with an introductory statement but please avoid the use of terms like "ergonomic hazards" or "ergonomic risk factors". If anything they should be "non-ergonomic hazards" and "injury/illness risk factors". Suggest that if a company has more than one program and they are substantially different, they should submit information on each separately.) A. General Information 1. What level of ergonomics activity is present in your company today ? _ _ _ _ _ None, see no need for it None, some in past, let drop Some activity, not formal Pilot projects in process now Company-wide activity _ _ _ _ None, but planning to start some None, some in past, not effective Activity in localized areas in company Some activity related to citations Other __________ 2. IT you have had an unsuccessful experience with ergonomics, why do you think it failed ? _ _ _ _ _ Management commitment low _ Lack of employee participation/support No depth - "one-man show" _ Lack of expertise in-house Budget and personnel cuts _ High costs relative to benefits seen p Im ractical solutions recommended by outside consultant Inability to give ergonomics a priority Other ________________________ 3. Hyou do have some ergonomics activity or are about to start some, what stimulated your interest in it ? _ Low back problems _ Repetitive work problems _ Union grievances _ Employee discomfort Cost control measures _ Union negotiations _ Increased knowledge of field _ Discussions with other companies/plants _ Anticipation of legislation OSHA citation _ Team approach philosophy _ Continuous improvement philosophy _ Design improvement process _ Competitivity issue _ Corporate policy _ Media attention to topic _ Concern about long term health of employees Other _______________________ 4. What department/person is charged with the responsibility of overseeing the ergonomic activity in your company/plant �· ____________ 5. Please describe briefly the organization of vour ergonomics program/process and attach any examples of documentation on the program that you can. Problem Identification Approaches: ______________ Problem Analysis and Resolution Approaches: __________ �2. Project Prioritization Techniques: _______________ Approval Requirements: ___________________ Funding Sources: _____________________ Implementation Processes: __________________ Follow-Up Procedures: ___________________ Program Evaluation Techniques: ________________ Communications Techniques:-----'-------------Education and Training Strategies: _______________ Use of Outside Consultants and Trainers: ------------6. Do you have an ergonomics process in place for your office workers ? _ Yes _ No Describe any concerns you have about a general ergonomics standard that includes office workers' jobs ? _______________ 7. What have been some of the impacts of ergonomics approaches to reduce overexertion injuries and discomfort in the workplace m your company? Please mark the extent of the impact in the columns to the right for those measurement8 you have observed. Impact # of Injuries Cost of injuries Absenteeism Level Job Turnover Level # of Job Restrictions Job Reputation Training Time Quality Performance Level None Little Some Sil,!nificant Very Laree �Impact None L.iU.!e Some 3. Si�nificant Very Lari:e Productivity Amount of Rework Scrap or Waste Levels Employee Morale Supervisory Stress Levels Lost Time Days Ability to Meet EEO Goals Other _______ Other _______ B. W orksite Analysis 1. Which of the following guidelines/information have you used to develop ergonomic policies or for analysis of problem jobs?: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ OSHA Red Meat Cutters' Ergonomic Program Standard, 1990 NIOSH Guidelines for Manual Lifting (1981, 1991 ?) NIOSH Guidelines on Vibration Exposure (198�n NIOSH Guidelines on Exposure to Hot Environments (1972, 1978, 1986 ?) NIOSH Monograph on Cumulative Trauma Problems - V. Putz-Anderson Biomechanical Models (U of Michigan, etc) Metabolic Models (Garg, U of Mich, etc) Fatigue Models (Work/Recovery Needs) Liberty-Mutual (Snook) Tables Checklists Methods Provided by Outside Consultants Methods Developed Internally Methods Learned at Conferences/Courses Methods Taken from the Literature Methods/Guidelines Developed by Other Plants/Companies Other __________________________ Which 3 sources of information have you found to be most effective and useful in your program? ________________________ 2. Who performs the worksite analyses and develops the solutions? _____ Who is involved in looking at ergonomics issues in the design of new workplaces, jobs, and layouts or in the reworking of an existing workplace or machine? -------------------------3. How is a proposed solution introduced to the floor? _________ �4. What control do the people affected by the change have during the implementation penod? ___________________ I 4. Videotaping can be an important tool for analyzing jobs, particularly jobs that are highly repetitive and ones that are done intermittently. Do you have any concerns about suggesting videotaping as a recommended part of the worksite evaluation process? _ Yes _ No Explain your concerns, if there are any. 5. What qualifications have/will you look for wh�n having a worksite evaluation performed by either an inside or outside "expert"? __________ How will/did you find an expert in ergonomics? __________ C. Hazard Prevention and Control 1. Which of the following hazard prevention and control strategies have you used to improve jobs/workplaces/equipment/environments from an ergonomic standpoint ? Automation Assist devices (hoists, lifts) Outsourcing Reduce speed of line/machine Change specs on parts Job rotation _ Splints, belts, restraints _ Employee education/awareness _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Semi-automation Height adjustability Add labor to job Modify production goals Redesign product for better assembly Job reassignment Job redesign (changed content) FitPess/wellness program Team approach - self-directed workforce for problem solving Environmental improvements (lighting, noise, vibration controls) Workplace redesign (heights, reaches, clearances) Improved processes to reduce more difficult tasks Selection of employees for more difficult tasks (or Swot teams) Set Purchasing guidelines to value ergonomic qualities of furniture/equipment Build safety/ergonomics performance into personnel rating system O ther _______________________ 2. Which of the above strategies used have appeared to be the most cost-effective? 1. ---------------------2. ---------------- 3. ---------------------- What are the average times for implementation of the above most effective ergonomics intervention strategies? 1. ---------------2. ---------- 3. ---------------- �5. 3. Have you documented before/after measurements of productivity, quality, personnel issues, health, and safety statistics to determine the impact of your ergonomics program? _ Yes _ No If not, why not ? ______ 4. What size of budget do you think is needed to :initiate and to sustain an ergonomics process/program in a plant/company ? __________ What level of expenditure requires a high level of approval in your company ? How much can be commited by a department head without having to go to higher levels (except in the initial budget process) ? _______ D. Medical Management 1. What processes have you used to detect early signs of potential ergonomics problems in the workplace ? _ OSHA 200 logs _ Employee suggestions Grievances _ Productivity problems _ Symptom surveys Absenteeism data Job turnover rates _ High repair or rework _ Long training times Other ________ _ Medical or first aid logs _ Safety meetings Job restrictions _ Qut'lity performance problems _ Us� of outside expert to survey jobs _ Use of internal audits to survey jobs _ Difficulty staffing jobs _ High scrap rate _ Diniculty meeting EEO goals (women, older workers) Which three of th�se 1?rocesses have you found most effective for identifying areas for ergonoffilcs nnprovements ? 1. -------------2. -------------3. ______________ 2. What processes have you set up to encourage employees to report early signs of sustained musculoskeletal discomfort ? --------------- 3. What approaches have you used to decrease discomfort after an employee has reported symptoms ? _ Sent to dispensary Sent to clinic _ Referred to own physician _ Sent to specialist _ Observed employee at work and recommended approaches to reduce the stress on the affected muscle/joint _ Initiated an ergonomics review of the job _ Identified a job accommodation and implemented it _ Provided assistance to employee for the tasks most difficult to perform �_ Provided employee with a brace/splint/assist device _ Educated empoyee about risk factors at job and at home 6. _ Removed employee from her/his job for: _ a few hours the shift less than a week a month the forseeable future _ until the symptoms abated _ until the job was modified Other _______________________ 4. What are the most effective parts of your company's job restriction and return to work policies? ________________________ What areas for improvement do you see ? ______________ 5. Symptom surveys have been used in many meat cutting plants to identify the magnitude of ergonomic problems. What are the positive and negative aspects of doing employee symptom surveys in your company ? Positive Impacts 1. Negative Impacts 1. 2. 2. 3. 3. How else can the magnitude of the symptoms in the workforce be determined? 6. Have you been successful in returning people to their original jobs (unmodified) after an absence of more than 3 weeks for a musculoskeletal problem without incurring a repeat problem? _ Yes _ No What approaches were used? _ Employee awareness/education _ Work hardening _ Reduced job demands or help given _ SpEnts/protective equipment _ Fitress/wellness program _ Changed tools/workplace intuitively (not aware it was ergonomics) 7. Do you have a process for evaluating jobs when a person has been out for more than 3 weeks with a musculoskeletal injury/illness that may be work-related? _ Yes _ No If so, please describe the process and how the job information is communicated to the medical people making the return-to-work determination for the employee. �7. 8. If a person enters a new job, is there a pol;icy of phasing her/him into that job gradually so the skills and strengths can be developed without excessive stress during the break-in period? _ Yes _ No ' What concerns would your company have if a policy of work "acclimatization" is suggested to reduce the risk for injuries in the initial stages of learning a new job? _______________________ E. Training and Education 1. For the following people or groups in your company, please indicate the type of ergonomic training or awareness you think is needed to provide the basis of an effective program/process. N= None, A= Awareness, B = Basic training, I= Intensive Training _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Top management Line supervisors/Dept heads Key operators Medical specialists Industrial engineers Job Placement specialists Process engineers Skilled trades specialists Facilities engineers Trainers Office workers _ Purchasing specialists _ Industrial hygienists _ Product engineers Other ________ _ Middle management Foremen Union stewards _ Safety specialists _ Labor Relations specialists _ Production planners _ Design engineers _ Tool and Die specialists _ Maintenance specialists _ Materials Handling specialists Production workers Service workers _ Wellness/Fitness specialists _ Union leadership Other _______ 2. In what order were people made aware of ergonomics in your plant? First: Second: Third: Fourth: --=-------------------------------------------------------------------- No Would you change this order if you were starting again? _ Yes What changes would you make and why? ____________ 3. Who has done the employee awareness training in your company? _ _ _ _ _ _ Outside consultant/trainer Ergonomics team members Internal company ergonomist Industrial hygienist Industrial engineer Production supervisor Other: ------- _ _ _ _ _ _ Internal company trainer Ergonomics Coordinating Committee Safety specialist Medical or Fitness/Wellness specialist Personnel specialist Co-op student or summer employee �4. Where have you obtained the materials for your awareness courses? _ _ _ _ 8. Developed by the corporation _ Developed in-house Purchased commercially _ Obtained from seminars, courses Taken from publications _ Adapted from published programs Purchased or taken from other companies with programs 5. What approaches have you used to obtain more intensive training for your staff and employees? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Outside consultant on site _ Outside training firm on site Sent people to outside courses _ Sent people to outside seminars _ Hired ergonomist Purchased training packages Hired student with ergonomics training Developed an ergonomics library Brought in experts from other plants Sent people to professional meetings Visited other plants and studied their programs and approaches Other ______________________ Which of the approaches has appeared to be the most cost effective? ___ 5. How often do you provide ergonomics awareness or training programs or schedule a discussion of ergonomics topics in a typical year (once the initial phases of the program have been completed) ? __________ Is ergonomics included in employee orientation or new job training programs? No Yes 6. What means have you used to communicate ergonomics program successes inand outside of your company ? _ Grapevine _ Safi:!ty meetings _ Production meetings Conferences _ Joint meetings of teams _ Quarterly meetings _ Company newsletter Bulletin boards Union newsletter Plant newsletter _ Suggestion System tie-in _ Recognition ceremonies _ Videotape on internal TV _ Health and safety reports _ Audit results reports _ Ergonomics reports _ Local community media _ Presentations at professional meetings _ Health fairs/Open houses _ Management reports _ Professional publications _ Lobby displays Other: __________ F. Other 1. Do you think there is a need for an OSHA regulation for the establishment of an Ergonomic Safety and Health Management Program to reduce No musculoskeletal Injuries and illnesses in the workplace? _ Yes Please explain why or why not. _________________ �9. 2. If you already have an ergonomics program, which three of its elements do you think have contributed the most to its effectiveness ? 1. ----------------------2. ----------------------- 3. -----------------'---------Thank you for your assistance in responding to this request for comments. Please mail your responses to: Hershal W. Hensley, Director etc. (8/12/91 S.H. Rodgers, Ph.D.) (716) 544-3587 Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS ROCHESTER, NEW YORK 14622 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Comments on the Draft Document 29 CFR Part 191 O - Ergonomic Safety and Health Management Program Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1991-08-11 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_043 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-21 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 15 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/829d30766f40e9b9c007332cc4c28559.pdf f0195430a7e1e0e4305877680f4c3eaa PDF Text Text Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Consultant In Ergonomics 169 Huntin¥ton Hills - Center Rochester, New York 14622 (716) 544-3587 (716) 266-8749 (FAX) Comments Regarding the Issuance of a General Industry OSHA Standard on Ergonomic Safety and Health Management 1. Thanks to the good fortune of being invited to work in the Human Factors Section at Eastman Kodak Company in 1968, I am now in my 25th year of practiving ergonomics, 13+ years at Kodak and 11+ years as a consultant to companies and municiJ?alities. At the time I joined the Kodak group, they had already been studying Jobs and making improvements for 11 years. The advantage of having many years of practical experience in this very challenging and fascmating field is that one learns to look at each potential or real problem as a set of unique circumstances. It is possible to develop cost-effective solutions to almost all of these problems if the available talent in the business or plant is tapped. Because we had to live with our mistakes as members of the same company, we learned what worked and what didn't work in implementing solutions in the workplace. We did extensive measurement of the physiological responses of people during work, measured many work capacities to establish a baseline for good job design, and did research on measurement techniques. From this we learned that people doing the jobs could often tell us where the problems or discomfort were before we could objectively measure them, and that job design could contribute as much to problems as workplace or equipment designs. 2. What has concerned me in watching the increased attention to ergonomics over the past 5 years is that a very limited, mostly biomechanical, model is featured that leads one to defming risk as a posture or a piece of equipment rather than to how that posture or equipment is used in time. Many of the solutions that come from the risk factor checklist type of evaluation of jobs or tasks involve elimination of the person via automation of the process. This certainly reduces the risk of injury to people (unless it is self-inflicted because of the lack of a job), but it is often a very expensive and not very productive way to go. Such solutions leave the management with the unpleasant task of having to choose between an expensive solution to a safety problem or a loss in their competitive edge in a global marketplace. In most instances, this is not the only ch01ce available because very cost-effective solutions can be found to reduce the risk for the workers if the problem is defined beyond the listing of risk factors. I am concerned that a standard that perpetuates this model will result in companies fighting ergonomics because of the apparent fiscal penalties to their businesses when the field really can help to provide them with that very competitive edge for which they are striving. To find the cost-effective solutions, what is needed is a good facilitator and access to the people who design, work, supervise, and service the workplaces and jobs of concern. An ergonomist who does not tap into these talents short changes the client and employees because little happens if they do not take ownership of the problem and solutions. 3. As a consultant, I have found it difficult to work with companies who want me to give them the "ergonomic rules" so they can enforce them. Although there an �some good design principles, I cannot think of many "rules" that wouldn't resul1 in an inappropriate solution at some point.. In manual materials handling tasks, I can generate a few "rules", such as handling objects weighing more than 35 pounds or any object handled more than 6 times a minute below waist level for more than 1 hour continuously by some other method than manual lifting (sliding, for instance). However, other than "good ideas", like keeping the wris in the neutral position, there are not too many other guidelines that are "rule-like." One outcome of suggesting that there are such rules is that people throw furniture and equipment at "ergonomic problems" and get mad at the workers if they still complain of discomfort or symptoms. 4. The approach that I have found to be most successful in getting people to work together to improve working comfort uses a problem solving technique (see article attached to Section A comments later m this package). It complements other improvement programs currently being used m companies, such as Total Quality Management and Continuous Improvement. Ownership is given to the people working on the jobs of concern, their supervisors, and service providers (such as health and safety specialists, engineers, materials handling specialists, and maintenance specialists), and things do happen. By teaching the team to define the risk factors, why they are present (root cause analysis), and by using a fatigue model to predict how much change is needed to improve the job and reduce the risk, one can define several interventions and choose the one that gets the most benefit for the least cost. 5. Despite active ergonomics programs to improve existing workplaces and jobs, we still bring in new lines, jobs, equipment, etc., that does not meet good ergonomic design criteria. There should be much more emphasis in any ergonomics standard on the incorporation of ergonomics design guidelines into the processess for purchasing or designing new plants, offices, equipment, tools, and for setting up new jobs and defining new work schedules. There are good design and evaluation guidelines for all of these (see, for example, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volumes 1 and 2, from Eastman Kodak Company), yet few companies have set up the processes to be sure the ergonomics considerations are included. 6. There is value in setting an ergonomics standard if it is work practices and results-oriented and does not specify how one has to get there. The general sections on Management Commitment and Employee Involvement, Worksite Evaluations and Analysis, Hazard Prevention and Control, and Medical Management are fme {Jroviding they do not exclude effective ways of achieving each goal. The inclusion of checklists and symptom survey forms is not appropriate if it suggests that there is only one way to gather job and employee discomfort information. 7. In the past 4 ye�s I have seen some very successful ergonomics programs hurt badly by OSHNCompany citation resolution agreements that forced one procesE on all plants. In 4 GM plants that were doing ground-breaking ergonomics work (since the mid-1980's), the requirement to go to another process has all but destroyed these programs that were far ahead of their times. People who previously were empowered to make changes, call in vendors, requisition tools, etc., have been told they cannot do that any more and must depend on engineers to solve the problems. As a result, where there were several hundred changes made in a year in the previous program to improve people's comfo� and ability to work well, there have been only a handful of changes suggested m the past year. They have more clout to enforce the changes, but far less is being �accomI?lished. This should not be the result of the implementation of any upcommg standard. 8. I suggest the following philosophy for an ergonomics standard, if there is to be one: a. If strains, sprains, overexertion, or cumulative injuries and illnesses are present in the job, these will be investigated to determine how the jobs can be rmproved and cost-effective changes will be implemented. b. New plants, workplaces, jobs, equipment, and tools will be designed or selected to meet ergonomic design guidelines. c. Management will support the development of ergonomics problem solving expertise in plant or business personnel, preferably at the work center or departmental level. Every employee who may be exposed to non-ergonomic job risk factors will be provided with awareness training and will be encouraged to report their discomfort early to their supervision and the ergonomics team so interventions can be initiated. d. As part of the general process imJ?rovement goals of businesses, members of the ergonomics teams should participate on production project teams doing HazOp reviews and problem solving to be sure that the ergonomic concerns are included in these evaluations. Respectfully submitted, �--. , 1/30/93 � �.,-.A- tl RI) iJf, ·� £ '--l Attachments: Comments on specific parts of the Proposed Ergonomics Safety and Health Management Rule "A Functional Job Analysis Technique" reprint �Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Consultant In Ergonomics 169 Huntington Hills - Center Rochester, New York 14622 (716) 544-3587 (716) 266-8749 (FAX) Comments on A. General - #1 a and b, p34196 of Federal Register Vol 57 (149), Monday August 3, 1992 -#29 CFR Part 1910, Ergonomic Safety and Health Managment; Proposed Rule A. Working definitions for "ergonomics", "ergonomic hazards", and "ergonomics disorders". 1. As described in the comments on AJ?pendix A, I find the expressions "ergonomic hazards" and "ergonomics disorders" oxymorons. If it is ergonomic, it is not hazardous and does not result in a disorder. 2. In doing my own consulting, training, and lecturing, I stress the multifactoria\ nature of repetitive motions disorders and low back pain and discuss what the person can do to reduce personal risk factors (mostly related to body water balance effects), what the engineers can do to reduce workplace, equipment, and environmental risk factors, and what the "job designers" can do to reduce job pattern, l?acing, and total hours of work risk factors. In my experience, many repetitive motions disorders symptoms can be significantly reduced by assuring that the shoulders are relaxed while working (or only tense for short r,eriods during a work cycle). Thus, I do not talk about "hazards" but about 'contributors to discomfort", or "stressors". Few of the risk factors are hazards in themselves. They appear to contribute to the problems through synergism with other risk factors and through work patterns that do not build in recovery periods after intense efforts (best done by varying the muscle activity rather than stopping it). 3. To get away from the oxymorons, I use the terms "ergonomic problems" with jobs or "non-ergonomic stressors" and refer to jobs with these problems as ones that will "benefit from ergonomics interventions". The use of the terms "ergonomic disorders" and "ergonomic hazards" has created a negative attitude towards ergonomics in some companies whose businesses would benefit significantly from good applications of the design principles. 1/28/93 SHRodgers �Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Consultant In Ergonomics 169 Huntington Hills - Center Rochester, New York 14622 (716) 544-3587 (716) 266-8749 (FAX) Comments on A. General - #2-4, p. 34196 Fed Reg. 57 (149), Monday, August 3, 1992 - #29 CFR, Part 1910, Ergonomic Safety and Health Management; Proposed Rule. A. Program Components for an Ergonomics Standard 1. In my 24+ years of applying ergonomics principles in the field and developing guidelines for use in industry, I have found that ergonomics principles are most effective when they are integrated into every part of the business. In my work with Goodyear and General Electric, we found that teaching a process for evaluating jobs where employees were experiencing discomfort and for anticipating the effectiveness of suggested improvements would lead to very cost-effective interventions. The process of doing the ergonomics problem solving builds teamwork, provides ownership to the team for carrying through the changes, and most often results in production improvements as well. The problem solving approach with teams made up oj hourly employees, supervisors, maintenance specialists, materials handling specialists, health and safety specialists and engineering specialists results in strong employee involvement m not just the identification of problems but in their effective resolution. The process is exciting to participate in and fits in very nicely with Total Quality Management and Continuous Improvement philosophies that are being implemented today in businesses of every kind. 2. In my work with some 25 companies, hospitals, and municipalities, I have found that the weakest link in establishing an ergonomics process has been to be able to determine where they are having overexertion or cumulative injuries and illnesses, since many of them are not traumatic in nature. The OSHA 200 logs are the most useful data, but jobs are not indicated specifically and one has to do a great deal of digging to identify which factors may be contributing to problems that might be resolved by ergonomic interventions. When I worked at Kodak, I had access to a data base with 39 variables per report that I could cross tab with the personnel data file to get a person's job stamped on each accident. Then, I could cluster accidents by building, job family (handler, packer, assembler, etc.) across all buildings, agency of injury, contributing agencies, length of service, time of day, etc. This very powerful data base gave me the ability to prioritize the ergonomic needs of a plant of 27,000 people and over 3,500 jobs. Most companies do not have data bases anywhere near as sophisticated, but they could improve the OSHA 200 log's usefulness by including a more specific Job title on each report and indicating the work center where the job is done. Similar information should be included in first aid logs so early signs of potential ergonomics problems can be identified. 3. The work site analysis is essential in defining ergonomic problems, but it is my impression that far too much time is spent in analyzing every motion and task systematically while the overall problems are lost in the detail. There are �many different ways to analyze job demands, and I have found that characterization of a job requires one to use several methods. However, if people are experiencing discomfort or injuries/illness on a job, my first mterest is to define how much we need to alter that job to make them comfortable and able to work without the injuries and illnesses that may be exacerbated by job demands. Identifying the risk factors has to be done in conjunction with understanding how they come together in time to increase the potential for overexertion or serious fatigue. In my experience, the fatigm model best predicts problems because it looks at the effort, duration of effort, frequency of that level of effort and total task time in one analysis. Many of the risk factors included in the red meat cutting guidelines are components of the effort part of the fatigue model. They describe postures and forces that determine whether an effort is light, moderate, or heavy based on what percent of capacity it takes for the involved muscle groups to exert that force. What is usually missing from the industrial engineering and systems safety analyses is an evaluation of what degree of control the mdividual employee has over the pattern and methods of work. This determines what ability an individual has to work within his or her comfortable range. When a person i5 constrained to work in a particular way that could overload a joint or muscle, the opportunities for injury are greater than if he or she can modify the task to make it fall on stronger muscles or can alternate the task with other tasks to permit full recovery between exertions. In sum, then, a systematic evaluation of the job in questions involves more than administering a risk factor checklist. One must look at the demands of the work on the body and the degree of control the employee has to alter them. With a risk factor evaluatior only, one can overweight a very transient posture that is contributing very little to joint or muscle stress while missing the more sustained but less intense efforts to maintain posture. 4. The prevention and control measures usually focus on engineering changes since these can eliminate the problems by automating the process. In today's manufacturing climate, the investment of many millions of dollars in existing plants to automate jobs currently performed by people is just not in the cards. To maintain competitivity in the world market, most companies have to be very cost effective, and most automation has not proved to be that. The good news is that making it easier for people to work well through ergonomic improvements is cost-effective and also reduces the opportunity for injuries and illnesses. The "small engineering" approaches, that include relocation of materials, improved flow of materials, some adjustability in working heights (not just through workbench height adjustments), and improvements in equipment design and tooling, are more likely to be inplemented effectively than large capital projects. If they are evaluated appropriately beforehand, these types of interventions have been shown to have very positive influences on safety and health statistics, too. 5. Because I have had the opportunity to follow some ergonomics consultants into plants where the risk factor a proach has been used and equipment has been thrown at the problem, I fee fvery strongly that specific solutions should not be included in an ergonomics standard. By using a problem solving approach, one can always find a root cause for a repetitive motions or back problem that can be addressed to reduce the risk for injury and illness. For example, I have personally helped people improve their back comfort substantially by removing a plastic mat under an office chair, increasing the size of the type on a menu in a tray assembly line, and removing a section of, machine panel that prevented a person from getting close to a pick-up point. �Each of the solutions emerged from a careful look at back pain risk factors, asking why? they were present, and defining the driving factor or root cause for the risk factor's presence. All were implemented within a month, and all resulted in effective reductions of discomfort for many workers. So, I think it is very important to avoid an approach to the standard that suggests that certain types of equipment or furniture will solve "ergonomic disorders"; the root cause of the problem may still be there. In office ergonomics, for instance, I have seen people surrounded by well-designed furniture who still experience significant discomfort because proper supports for their feet or arms are not available or their visual needs are not accommodated. In a study of 21 people at one facility we found that improved workspace was a major consideration, and this was far more important to address than the chair, desk, or screen characteristics. The longer I work in this fascinating field, thf more I learn that each situation has its own set of variables and a problem solving approach is far more effective than buying all new ergonomic chairs, desks, or changing the lighting. On the other hand, there is no doubt in my mind that all people who work in seated workplaces should have ergonomically-designed chairs and that adjustability is desirable. The commitment to making the workers comfortable should come through a phased-in program of updating equipment and furniture, however, not via a case by case request based on low back pain or upper extremity disorders. 6. Under health management, I have found that early detection is the best way to avoid the more serious repetitive motion and low back disorders. The best form of early detection I have seen has been an active search for how people'� comfort can be improved through the training of an ergonomics team in each work center. The team is on site and can be called over to look at any job, so they can look for cost-effective interventions before injuries and illnesses are reported. They can also work with the medical practitioners to help define potential risk factors for a person returning to work after an injury or illness, whether this is work-related or not. Another role the team can play is in assessing the job requirements for ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) compliance. The worksite evaluation techniques that I teach these teams permit them to look at several parts of the body and assess the potential for fatigue for each of them in the tasks performed. By knowing the location of the musculoskeletal problem that an employee has experienced, the team can identify whether that joint or muscle will be under particular strain and how much it would take to reduce the strain to an acceptable level. 7. Training and education is essential to control overexertion risk factors, but it should not be purely didactic. The model I have been developing over the past 6 years has the following training needs: a. Awareness and process discussions with top management and supervisors. Subset of this group may make up the Steering Committee for Ergonomics. b. Content training and problem solving analyses with work center teams 3.5 to 4 days including 0.5 days of _projects that the teams use as their firs· implementation example after trainmg. Teams are made up of hourly workers, supervisors, maintenance, materials handling, engineering, and health and safety specialists. They do most of the work, going to the Steering Committee for funding approvals and assistance m implementing changes. An example of a typicaf course outline is attached. �c. The work center teams are expected to do the awareness training for the rest of the plant using videotapes and in-plant examples from their own training session and experiences. Before and after examples are used to illustrate the successful resolution of problems. d. The engineers who design or select equipment and environments, do layouts, and select tooling should receive content training from a skilled ergonomist. Actual design problems should be used to illustrate how to incorporate ergonomics into their designs. They should be linked to the plantErgonomics teams when they are working on a design that will be used in that plant so the work center team can contribute to the design, in the early stages, especially. This can be done via a corporate policx, "All designs will incorporate ergonomics guidelines", or "No project will be approved until it has been reviewed by the work center Ergonomics Team", or "Each Engineering project will include the coordinator of its work center Ergonomics team on the design team", etc. B. Program Additions and Qualifications to Perform Ergonomics Services 1. One place where I think a skilled and experienced ergonomist is needed is in the training of engineers and related specialists to design with ergonomics principles m mind. This is a complex business, and an inexperienced person can make significant errors if he or she al?.proaches it too simplistically. It is essential that engineers be given these skills early in their careers. There is a recent heartening effort by ASME to define what is needed for their professionals. As part of any ergonomics standard, I would hope to see a statement that all new desf1s are expected to be ergonomically sound by a certain date (1995 for ADlegislation, for instance). That is the best way to improve the health and safety picture in the future. 2. There are two types of ergonomists currently working in industry and the public sector: those who have studied ergonomics or a related field (physiology, psychology, industrial engmeering, occupational medicine) and have done research or developed ruidelines for the field; and those who have learned ergonomics principles in seminars or training courses and are a lying the principles in their jobs. The former fall into a category I called "silled ergonomist" earlier in this commentary but so do some of the latter group who have extensive experience in applying the principles and also have often attended a large number of training courses. I have followed people with PhD's (who would be called "skilled ergonomists") into plants and found that they made serious errors in suggesting solutions to ergonomics problems, mostly impractical solutions that would not have reduced the over-all risk for the injuries or illnesses of concern or would have shifted the problem to another joint (e.g., wrist was straight but shoulder was put under a heavy strain by the solution). I have also been absolutely delighted by the effectiveness of hourly workers (with no degrees beyond high school), using problem solving techniques to defme the risk, in finding ele�ant but simple solutions to problems tliat had stumped me. So, I do not think that it is necessary to have a person with an ergonomics degree do the job evaluations or develop the solutmns. One does need an experienced ergonomist available to train the work cernter teams, however, and to be available for additional help, as needed, as the teams develop their skills and proceed with the process. The point is to have the work center teams take ownership of the process and integrate it into their other activities rather than seeing 1t as an 18 �outsider's province. 3. I do not think that it is appropriate to require that people who develop and implement the various elements of an ergonomics program have some "nationally-reorganized qualifications or training". I encourage people actively involved in ergonomics problem solving to attend as many conferences and training courses as they can. The effectiveness of the best programs I have been involved with has come not from how much ergonomics the team members learned but from how well they learned to evaluate the driving factors for the problems and how successfully they developed solutions and sold them to management. We need the researchers and people with degrees in ergonomics/human factors and related fields to develop the best information on human capabilities and on the stresses on the body from different types of work. They are not necessarily the best people to implement the processes, however, because they often do not understand the manufacturing environment and factors that may make their theory impractical to implement. The most effective ergonomists to initiate and help a com_pany develop an ergonomics process will be people who have expenence in plants or other occupational settings and who also have kept up their skills in ergonomics and related fields through attendance at conferences courses, or trainin� programs. They will also be good facilitators of the team members and willing to subject th.err egos to the process of making the teams independent of them. 4. Attached is a recent article describing a job analysis technique that forms the basis for my current approach to teaching teams to identify, analyze and develop solutions for discomfort and injuries/illnesses in the workplace. My approach is continuously evolving, so this is representative of my current work with companies like General Electric, Srruth.Kline Beecham, Amoco Chemical and Goodyear. I have also used part of it with a VA Hospital, several small companies (plastics, food service) and municipalities (911, Police, and Environmental Services) and its acceptance has been good. Where we have good data, we have found significant improvements on health and safety statistics. 1/28/93 SHRodgers �Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Consultant In Ergonomics 169 Huntington Hills - Center Rochester, New York 14622 (716) 544-3587 (716) 266-8749 (FAX) Comments on B. Systematic Analysis: W orksite Analysis and Surveillance, 1-3, P. 34197 of Fed Reg 57 (149), Monday August 3, 1992 - #29 CFR Part 1910, Ergonomic Safety and Health Management; Proposed Rule 1. See "A Functional Job Analysis Technique" attached to the comments on Section A. 2. An er�onomic analysis of a job or task should be triggered whenever a person expenences discomfort over more than the first few days of starting the job and if that discomfort persists into the non-working part of the day. Early reporting is important, so encouraging a person to suggest improvements to reduce their discomfort is another way to home in on possible ergonomic opportunities. 3. \Vhen first inititiating a rocess, the OSHA, medical, and quality control logs all give good indications ofwhere to start. However, in many instances the ergonomic concerns have been addressed by staffing the jobs with people who have well above average capacities, so a general screen to review all jobs is an eventual goal for a work center team. To become proactive, not simply reactive, one has to link the ergonomics approach to a Contmuous Improvement philosophy. Then it becomes part of each process analysis, materials flow analysis, accident investigation, root cause analysis, etc. that goes on in the work center. 4. As mentioned earlier in the comments on Section A, one wants to be assured that all new designs, layouts, equipment, tools, and environmental changes incorporate ergonomic principles. By setting a policy that a member of the Ergonomics Team for the affected work center will be part of the project team, one can go a long way towards assuring that the workers' needs will be addressed. In addition, one could suggest that the project team receive some ergonomics training early in the project to enhance their skills. 5. Please avoid checklists except as a reminder to people of things they should look for in the workplace. I have found over and over again that people who use checklists tum off their thinking and do not see things that are not on the list. Such lists of risk factors also lead them into solutions that may be limited and not get to root causes. For example, a person is observed to be bending over to work so the recommendation is to raise the height of the conveyor so they won't bend over. In studying the job more carefully and asking why they are bending over, one might identify the fact that what they are lookin� for (a defect, label, etc.) is not visible from their upright posture, so they bena over to see it. Or it might be a reach problem, inability to reach the far side of the part without bending. Raising the conveyor height might be a very expensive solution, but improvmg the lighting to better see the defect, diverting the part closer to the worker so the reaches are reduced, or using a mirror to see a label on the back side of the part are quite inexpensive to do and could have an equally positive effect on back comfort. Ergonomics solutions are as cost effective as its �practitioners are creative, and I find that checklists do not do a thing for the creative process ! A form that shows how to go from risk factor identification to driving factors for the risk would be far better than a simple checklist. 6. It would be inappropriate for OSHA to tell people how to do an ergonomic analysis of a job and to suggest how the problems should be resolved. There are many ways to improve jobs and reduce the risk for injuries and any system included m a standard could become obsolete as we learn more about the causes of these problems. To understand the factors that appear to increase the risk of developing repetitive motions and low back problems, there needs to be more research to define the levels at which the problems are more likely to appear. By suggesting that there is one best method for evaluating jobs, we suggest that we know more than we do about the synergism between the risk factors and job design. To my mind the best approach 1s to make several options available in an Appendix to the standard, but to indicate that other apJ?roaches are acceptable if they permit identification of the tasks where overexert10n or cumulative injuries and illnesses are seen, and if they lead to effective reduction in the OSHA 200 log injury/illness rates. 7. If the readers of this material have not read Maurice Oxenburgh's book, Increasing Productivity and Profit Through Health and Safety. I strongly recommend it. It takes case studies from companies in four countries and shows effective strategies to reduce injury and illness using many different analytical approaches. A brochure is attached. 1/28/93 SHRodgers �Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Consultant In Ergonomics 169 Huntington Hills - Center Rochester, New York 14622 (716) 544-3587 (716) 266-8749 (FAX) Comments on C. Hazard Prevention and Control, pp. 34197 and 34198, Fed Reg 57 (149), Monday August 3, 1992 - #29 CFR, Part 1910, Ergonomic Safety and Health Management; Proposed Rule C. Hazard Prevention and Control 1. I have basic problems with the treatment of ergonomics "hazards" like chemical hazards and safety concerns (like confined spaces, etc.) because in most instances they are not "hazards" but combinations of factors that may contribute to injury in susceptible people. A few things fit this approach, such as handling very heavy loads, exerting very high forces, and working with inadequate clearance so twisting is required and sustained. Most factors that contribute to ergonomics problems, however, are not hazardous in themselves, but they combine to increase the potential for injury. For example, exerting a forty pound grip force is not inherently hazardous, but doing it with a strongly flexed wrist increases the risk for wrist and elbow discomfort. Repeating it 2,000 times a day may bring out repetitive motion problems in susceptible people. If it is a true hazard, one would expect most people to experience repetitive motions problems. Because they do not, in most instances, it suggests that different methods of performing the task may affect outcome, but that has not always proved to be the case. Some people doing the task properly have symptoms and some people doing it "improperly" (not the recommended technique) do not have symptoms. As was mentioned earlier, repetitive motions and cumulative problems have multifactorial contributors, and our job is to reduce the ones we have some control over in order to make jobs better. 2. Many people without much experience in ergonomics are telling employers to rotate employees between jobs in order to reduce their exposure to tasks that appear to be contributing to repetitive or cumulative musculoskeletal disorders. I have had the opportunity to follow up on what has happened in several of these situations and have found that job rotation is of limited value. If the task is inherently very fatiguing (evaluated using my job analysis approach in the article attached to Section A comments), it does little good to rotate people after 2 or 4 hours; the recovery time was needed much earlier to reduce the potential for injury. By rotating people on a 2 to 4 hour schedule in that type of job, one only exposes more people to the risk factors. The incidence of repetitive mot10ns problems may go up because more susceptible people are doing the job. Where job rotation does help is when the task is mtense but not inherently very fatiguing (e.g., moderate fatigue) and where the total exposure time will be reduced by rotating to a less intensive job (for that muscle or joint). The other job condition where rotation is effective is when the task requires a moderately heavy to heavy energy expenditure. By rotating to a lighter activity, it is possible for a person to work an extended hour shift, for mstance. Or, more people will be able to do the job if the total �energy requirements are reduced over the eight hour shift by rotating between the heavy and lighter tasks. 3. Prescribing rest breaks after a certain period of work is not appropriate for an ergonomics standard since it assumes there is only one way of dealing with potential overexertion or cumulative problems. I have found it much more effective to educate supervisors about why they need to permit their workers to get up from their desks or assembly lines now and then to get a visual and postural break from the seated work. Most employers give their employees a 15 to 20 minute break after 2 and 6 hours of work and give a 30 minute lunch break, so the suggestion that you need to add extra rest breaks becomes less defensible. The better approach is to build jobs with more variable tasks so the recovery time for one activity is built into the next one. 4. I have personally been involved in suggesting that 3 production lines be slowed down in order to reduce the risk for repetitive motions or back problems, but I was careful to collect data to show that the current line speed was not optimal for meeting productivity or quality goals as well. As a general rule, I do not consider the slowing down of a line as a feasible solution to a problem unless there is no other way to control the risk. My own approach is to say, "How can we run the line even faster and have less stress on the people working on it?". Using that as a design or solution goal pushes us to define the true risk and how we can work around it. If an ergonomics standard includes a strong push for slowing down operations, it will probably be fought by most manufacturing industries. They see machine and line speed as measures of their productivity and slowing them means they may lose their competitive edge. 5. For evaluating the risk of manual materials tasks, I use the Kodak guidelines that I developed from Dr. Snook's original studies of acceptable lifting weights based on 38 men and 18 women. I used the data to create a problem solving form for occasional lifts that will allow the user to estimate what percent of a mixed male and female workforce will find a given lift acceptable An overlay of the graphs was made to be sure that the acceptable lifts would not violate the NIOSH criteria for compressive forces on the lumbar discs. A copy of this set of graphs is included in the article attached to the comments on Section A. The graphs allow one to plot the horizontal and vertical axes oj each of the lifts being made at the object weight and to determine approximately what percent of a 50/50 mixed male/female population would fmd the single lift acceptable. If more than 50% of the population would fmd the lift acceptable, the frequency factor is included as a correction to the design zone acceptable weight (75% of the mixed population would find this lift acceptable). If, however, less than 50% of the potential workforce would find the lift acceptable, no matter how frequently the lift is made, we try to improve the lift by seeing what it would take to get it where more people would find the weight acceptable. This might be a change in its horizontal or vertical location; the % who would fmd it acceptable can be estimated again sc the cost-effectiveness of the improvement can be assessed. With the problem solving graphs one can also evaluate the effectiveness of reducing the item's weight, 1f that is an option. Only when the lift is improved is the frequency factor added to the evaluation. Lifts that exceed the acceptable weights for 95% of the population are considered hazardous and other methods of transferring the item are required, such as sliding, bulk loads, and the use of assist devices. The graphs can also be used in design to identify the priorities for making materials handling equipment available. �6. An IBM plant in Rochester, :MN implemented a lifting policy that said that an) time theu product or parts/supplies weighed more than 35 pounds, it would be moved by some other method than by manual lifting. This was done in an existing plant and was very successful in reducing low back problems in a large plant. By pushing the process to find other ways to transfer the product and parts, they also improved the quality, reduced product damage, and gained more flexibility in assigning people to jobs. 7. fu my work with several companies, I have worked with design, facility, and process engineers to try to get them to think like ergonomists when they do their designs and layouts. I have also worked with production planners and placement people who build jobs to help them understand that what they do has a strong impact on peol'le's ability to work safely and comfortably. It ha� been difficult to get the designers to acknowledge their responsibility to design with the operators in mind because they consider that to be production's problem, something that can be resolved by finding the right person for the job. After trying a number of approaches at Goodyear, we found that the following traming and policy approaches were most effective: a. Consultant visits the engineers' newest or most modernized plant and reports back on ergonomics opportunities missed. b. Consultant listens as engineers present their plans on a new plant design (or a new machine) in an early stage of the project. Questions are asked to determine what will happen if the automation fails, what the operators will be doing, etc. c. A training course for engineers in which some production people from one of the plants participate. The first part of the course involves teaching the engineers how to ask questions to determine how the current equipment is working; the production people respond to their questions exactly as they are asked (volunteering nothing). The rest of the course involves content training on using information about body size and strengths for design, layout issues, controls and displays, etc. and problem solving on project designs to apply the ergonomics information. d. fuclude the name of any machine associated with an accident or overexertion injury in the workplace and make that data available by machine type (across all plants) to the engineering design groups. e. Improve the flow of information from the plants to the design engineers and be sure the plant engineers are trained to be able to evaluate the ergonomic concerns in equipment and plant design. With those skills, they can assure that any designs coming into their plants will be ergonomically sound. As the customer of central or contract engineers, they can insist on appropriate designs for their workforce. 1/28/93 S.H. Rodgers �Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Consultant In Ergonomics 169 Huntington Hills - Center Rochester, New York 14622 (716) 544-3587 (716) 266-8749 (FAX) Comments on Factors Associated With the Increased Incidence of Musculoskeletal Disorders in Industry - 29 CFR Part 1910 Ergonomic Safety and Health Management; Proposed Rule, page 34196 In conducting training courses on ergonomics at about 50 locations over the past few years, I have developed the following list of factors that contribute to the increased reporting of repetitive motions disorders in the past 5 to 10 years: A. Factors Related to Increased Awareness 1. Public awareness - through the media's attention to red meat cutting concerns. 2. Medical awareness - better understanding of risk factors and more specific diagnostic testing (used to be called "sore hand", "sore arm", etc.) May also be over-reporting of carpel tunnel syndrome since many of control studies of peripheral nerve conduction delays have not been adequately done (e.g., Mayo Clinic data based on older population; they do not do Worker's Compensation work so may have fewer actively employed people in their data base). 3. Employee awareness - through safety and health programs at work; also through the media's attention to risk factors; union education programs. B. Social Factors 1. Older workforce - cumulative problems more apparent. 2. More women in the workforce - risk for women is about 2.5 times the risk for men in the same jobs (based on an unpublished Kodak study, 1978). 3. Less acceptance of musculoskeletal discomfort by younger workers (as part of the job). 4. Increased stress in workplace and outside of work that synergizes with musculoskeletal risk factors to increase discomfort. 5. Pay systems and personel motivation to earn more income - incentive systems, overtime work, extended hours schedules (12 hour days). C. Changing Work Requirements 1. More output with fewer people in order to improve productivity. �2. Automation for simpler tasks - humans for more complex motions (orienting, etc.). 3. Multiskilling requirements expose more people to the less ergonomic jobs. 4. Shorter production runs associated with some just-in-time inventory reduction programs result in increased numbers of changeovers on production equipment. Puts more time pressure on the whole production process. 5. Lack of spare parts in inventory may result in a decision to "make parts work" through working harder. For example, if one part is on the small side of the acceptable size range and the other is on the large side, the two parts may not fit together without the assembler exerting excessive forces. If no other parts are available, the assemblers may go ahead with the task instead of leaving work 4 hours early and not making their goal for the day. 6. More 12-hour work days (more exposure/less recovery per day) especially schedules with 4 continuous 12-hour shifts and where employees can volunteer (with no limits) on rest days. 7. Increased interaction of employees with hard and soft automation which is o1 fixed pace and highly repeatable (people are variable). Some loss of control over work pattern by employees. 8. Increased machine speeds without concomitant ergonomics designs. D. Transient and Other Factors 1. In recessions, lay-off periods, and other periods of uncertainty, employees often do not report discomfort until it interferes with their ability to work or do outside activities. Thus, the diagnoses tend toward the more significant problems (carpel tunnel syndrome versus tendonitis). 2. Many people who like their current job do not report discomfort as the report might lead to their being assigned to another, less favored, job; they may only report problems when their ability to work is affected. 3. Occasionally, repetitive motions disorders may be reported when a person is asked to learn several other jobs and this is perceived as stressful by him or her . The presence of a medical problem might exempt the employee from the multiskilling process. 1/28/93 SHRodgers �Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Consultant In Ergonomics 169 Huntington Hills - Center Rochester, New York 14622 (716) 544-3587 (716) 266-8749 (FAX) Comments on OSHA Appendix A: Glossary of Terms; Ergonomic Safety and Health Management; Proposed Rule - 29CFR Part 1910. 1. The definition of "Ergonomics" is appropriate. Using that definition, how can one have an "ergonomic hazard"? Ifit is ergonomic, it should not be hazardous. Please eliminate this expression ("ergonomic hazards") since it is incorrect and tends to suggest that ergonomics causes 1?,roblems rather than solves them. Suggested substitutes: just "hazards" or 'non-ergonomic hazards". 2. " ... combination of stressors or workplace conditions that may cause harm to the worker." (from the definition of "Ergonomic Hazards" p. 34199). I have been working in the field of ergonomics for 24+ years and still do not feel that I know what causes repetitive motions disorders or low back pain. As a person with diagnosed carpal tunnel syndrome in both wrists/hands, I have to admit that I cannot clearly define why it is exacerbated at some times and not at others. Therefore, I think we have to be very careful to state what we know, i.e.,that some activities, postures, environmental exposures, patterns of work, etc. make it more likely for repetitive motions problems to appear in a susceptible person. "Causation" implies more than we know at this time. "Correlation" is there and the problem is multifactorial. 3. "Ergonomic Disorders" and "Ergonomic Stressors" -- For the same reason that I think "Ergonomic Hazards" is inappropriate, I feel these terms are inaccurate and should be eliminated from any document. Possible substitutes: "Health disorders associated with non-ergonormc jobs and equipment" (a mouthful, but much more accurate), or "Overexertion Disorders"; just plain "Stressors" or "Excessive Stress" to replace "Ergonomic Stressors". 4. Under "Systematic Analysis" (p. 34200) -- "The objective of this step-by-step analysis is to determine if and where the limits of human capability have been exceeded". This suggests that only peak loads are of concern in ergonomic evaluations (e.g., forces that exceed a person's strength). In reality, many of the risk factors may not exceed a human capability but, in conjunction with long durations or high frequencies of effort, they contribute to overexertion or cumulative disorders. Toe breaking up of the job into small parts may overemphasize the relatively small contribution of an occasional biomechanical risk factor and miss the large contribution of a lesser effort that is sustained for a large part of the job cycle. Thus, the standard industrial engineering and safety , systematic analyses, while valuable, should not be required if other approaches have been used to integrate the factors more holistically. 1/27/93 SHRodgers � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Comments Regarding the Issuance of a General Industry OSHA Standard on Ergonomic Safety and Health Management Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1993-01-20 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_042 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-21 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 17 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/8cbb6fdca60e4065ed14ba4974765dd8.pdf 39bf33f176c28aaad09293abb46e018b PDF Text Text NIOSH Work Practices Guide to Manual L1fting - Future Evaluations Revisions, and Extensions - Proposed Contr1but1ons - SHR I. Summary of April 18, 1986 Meeting Major Po1nts A. Current Guide 1 ines 1. They have been received well by industry although they may not be being used as intended or being applied as widely as they have been disseminated. 2. The original publicat1on ts a source document summarizing the state of the art through 1979/ 1980. To assure that the guideltnes are used by more Industries, a user's guide to the guidelines (with some revisions) is needed, one that shows a less sophisticated health and safety officer how to apply the guide I Ines to reduce the risk for manual handllng Injuries. 3. There are some problems with the existing guidelines, most notably the underestimation of load for frequent hand! Ing tasks (>6 lifts/minute) and some overestimation of MPLs for less frequent handling tasks. These problems need to be rectified In the next revision of the guide11nes. B. Revising the Guide11nes 1. Because of some problems with the equation for calculating the AL and MPL values., It w111 probably be necessary to do a fairly complete revision of the current Gulde. 2. The revtslon of the Gulde should Include an Introductory chapter on why the revision has been made, drawing on the experience of people who have used the 11fting gulde11nes both for new design and for evaluating existing designs. This Information should be gathered In a controlled manner so that priorities can be set for revisions of those parts of the Gulde that w111 have the most 1mpact on accidents and 1nJurles. I. �.. 3. Relevant injuries and industrial/occupational studies, where they extst and can be made ava1Jable, should be tncorporated tnto the Gutde In the next revision. Parttcular attention should be patd to getting more eptdemlologtcal studies tn order to evaluate rtsk factors for tnjurtes and related 1Jlnesses associated with manual materials handling tasks. 4. Current literature and data from relevant studtes that may not yet be published should be reviewed for Inclusion of gutdeJtnes for carrytng, pushtng, puJltng, one-handed ltfttng, dynamtc ltfttng, and awkward postures (bending, extended reach) or uneven loads. Preferably thts Information should be presented In a way that permits a person to "correct" an AL calculated tn the manner stmttar to the current gutde. 5. The revtston should strtve for stmpJtctty so that tt ts · not necessary to have a computer to evaluate a Jtfttng task but an analysts can be performed quickly by a person only aware of the fteld of ergonomics. Software atds for use by engineers, professional safety, medtcal, tndustrtal hygtene, or unton health and safety practtttoners should be "user friendly" and requtre only short and stmple tnstructtons. 6. The revised gutde should form the basts for the User's Gu Ide as the new source book and 1nc I ude the derivation of the new calculations of AL and MPL as wen as examples of how to apply the tnformatton In the fteld. C. Testing The New GuldeJlnes l. In para11el with the lntttal phase of evaluating the experience of practitioners In using the current guldeJlnes for manual lifting, the revised guldeJtnes should be tested before being flnaJtzed. This Involves both testing the predictions against experimental data from laboratory and occupational studies and evaluating the relattonshlp between the presence of Inappropriate design and Increased risk of MMH .Injuries on the job. . ::?. i .. �2. Any new factors that are developed to descrtbe the tmpacts of postures, force exertion, muscle groups used, etc. on AL and MPL values should also be tested before betng adopted. The testing procedure must be lterattve and be subject to rev1s1ons unt111t accurately reflects workforce handltng capacities or acceptable loads. 3. Better definitions of the assumptions made In predicting AL and MPL should be framed. Vartattons for calculating them should be simulated In order to determine the conftdence ltmtts of these values In evaluating handling tasks In the workplace. D. Developing a User's Gulde to the NIOSH Handling Guidelines 1. In a parallel process to the Gu1de revisions, a User's Gulde should be prepared that focuses on how to Interpret the AL and MPL values, pttfalls, and Inappropriate use of the AL and MPL values, how to handle task evaluations that do not meet all of the handling assumptions, and how to use this tnformatlon to justify changing existing workplaces or to demonstrate the Importance of good Initial ergonom Ic dest gn. 2. The user's guide should be simple, short, easy to understand, and be dlfftcult to apply Incorrectly. It should be In the nature of a "mint Alert" bulletin, preferably with little explanation of how the guldeltnes have been developed C which will be In the sourcebook) but good visual atds to make 'It easy to use for people who are not trained In ergonomics. 3. The User's Gutde should Include some case studies to Illustrate not only how to calculate the AL and MPL, but also how to go about ldentlfytng the most effecttve ways to reduce the risk for Injuries. Examples of multiple approaches to reducing rtsk, tnstead of a stngle approach, should be tncluded as well as a clear explanatton of how the handling task evaluation can be used to define the problem. �4. Information that shows the Impact on the workforce of a given job design {percent of people excluded by the design, for �xample) Is favored over too specific a load weight, which might be used 1nappropr1ately as a TLV. Work practices to counteract the problem should be enumerated so the user Is not left without a way to remedy a situation that represents a restrictive design or high risk for many people. 5. The User's Gulde should Include a form for soltcltlng feedback about the usefulness or difficulties In using the handling guidelines. E. Additional Aids for Users of the Revised Handling Guidelines I. Videotape aids should be developed that illustrate the major points In the User's Gulde and show examples of how to use the handling guidelines to reduce the risk of Injuries or overexertion Illness on jobs. These should be targeted to specific audiences. The management tape should focus less on how to use the guldellnes than on explaining why proper design Is good business. The engineers/health and safety professionals tape should focus more on proper use and cautions on using the guidelines and train them In learning to Identify the problem before solving It. The first-line supervisors and foremen's tape should address the value of using the guidelines to Identify why and In what direction an Intervention may be useful to reduce Injuries and Illnesses. More attention should be given to the Impacts of trying to match the worker to the lifting tasks Instead designing the task for more workers, especially In terms of personnel hassles, flexibility 1n adapting to change and quality performance on the job. A worker's videotape should emphasize their role In Identifying difficult handling tasks and In finding ways to reduce the risk for Injuries through methods, administrative, and engineering changes. �' ' 2. The vtdeotapes shou1d present the baste concepts of ustng the gutde1tnes but then 1eave room for tndtvtdual p1ant vtdeotape examples so the information can be tat1ored to the specific types of hand11ng situations of Interest. 3. An instructor's manual should be written for the videotape programs so that the person destgnated to carry forward the hand11ng acctdent reduction program knows the baste concepts to be emphasized w1th each tape. 4. The videotape and instructor's manuals might be deve1oped with the help of funds from the Nat1ona1 Safety Council. The assistance of a professional communicator to help "market" the Gutde to the user community should be considered. F. General Comments 1. The importance of management committment to implementing the NIOSH Hand11ng Guidelines and the relative effectiveness of treating this revision as a potent1a1 criteria document Instead of design guidelines were discussed. Although a criteria document might improve the lmp1ementation of the gulde11nes tn tndustry, deve1oping one wou1d tnvolve a major new developement effort. If done, It shou1d emphastze work practices that gtve emp1oyers f1extb1e, not overly expensive techntques to comply wtth the regu1attons. Performance ranges rather than dtscrete va1ues mtght be more appropriate. 2. BNA O� Reporter or National Safety News and other pub11cations that reach the intended users of the hand11ng gulde11nes might be used to so11cit tnput from current users of the NIOSH Lifting Gulde. Examples of ways that have been developed to make them easter to use could also be so11c1ted. ....- �. . 11. Areas of Poss1ble Contr1but1ons to These Programs by SH Rodgers A User's Gu1de to the NIOSH Hand11ng Gu1del1nes Th1s ts the area 1n wh1ch I can contribute the most unique material and expertise to the handling gu1de11nes rev1s1on and expansion. Hav1ng worked tn industry and currently hav1ng a large part of my work assoc1ated w1th try1ng to commun1cate the baste pr1nc1ples of ergonomics to untra1ned employees and managers, I have some 1deas of how to reach these groups. I would also have the opportun1ty of test1ng out the mater1al wh11e 1t 1s be1ng developed, as I have tested several of my 1deas about work/rest patterns, t1me pressure, and repet1t1ve mot1ons problems. Th1s iterative approach helps 1dent1fy unclear or confusing concepts and potential for misusing data as well as providing opportun1ties to develop case stud1es that demonstrate proper use of the gu1de11nes. I could see my contr1but1on as being in four areas: 1) Work with the source document revision group to f1nd simpler ways of integrat1ng the biomechanical, psychophysical, physiolog1cal and epidemiological data into an easy-to-use and work-pract1ces-oriented gu1de11ne for var1ous manual handling tasks. 2) Prepare a draft of a User's Gu1de for health, safety, personnel, and engineering staff members use. 3) Prepare drafts of v1deotape scripts and Instructors manuals for the target groups: managers, engineers, f1rst-11ne superv1sors, and 11ne employees. 4) Develop 1O case stud1es from a variety of occupat1onal tasks to show how to apply the gu1de11nes and to just1fy change to reduce the risk of handl1ng accidents. lo. �B. Revise the Current NIOSH Manual Lifting Guidelines This major project has three components: 1) Evaluating the experiences of users of the current guide11nes and prtoritiztng areas of improvement; 2) Rev1ew1ng the literature and other data available since 1979 to update the gutde. Developing gutde I tnes from extsting data on pushing and pulling tasks, one-handed carries and lifts, carrying, dynamic ltfting, asymmetric ltfts, etc. 3) Testing the guideltnes developed against the data already collected and wtth actual problems from Industry or the service sector. I will complete the proposed frequency factor revtston In a few months, so we can work wtth that new material In the next revision. I will also test that factor against the literature data and against industrial and service sector experience. I will complete a summary paper on the earlter evaluation I did for NIOSH on how well the current guidelines predict the risk for Injury on handling tasks in small parts manufacturing. This will be a follow-up on the 2-part report prepared tn 1983 for NIOSH. The emphasis wtll be on how to and how not to use the current gulde1 Ines. I would be able to help in testing the new guidelines by providing a series of case studies from industry and the service sector. These same cases could be used for the User's Gulde examples and to 11lustrate the videotape instructor's manuals. �; J 111. Funding to Cover Work by S.H. Rodgers As Noted Above A User's Gulde See proposal relative to this from March, 1986 ($ 6.9 K). Videotape scripts and support materials (except case studies); travel associated with taping ($ 4.5 K). B. Revising and Expanding Guidelines Evaluate existing use and areas for Improvement (Covered). Improve frequency factor (Covered) Simplify Guidelines for End-User - Review, development, and travel to work on final draft ($ 3.5 K). C. Case Stud l es Develop t O case studies to test guidelines (March proposal). D. Budget Summary User· s Gu I de Videotape Materials Guidelines Revision Total 4/18/86 SHR $ 6.9K $ 4.SK $ 2.SK $ 13.9 K (Includes provision for 6 trips) �IV. Timelines June 1, 1986 . � August 15 Working draft of frequency factor revision out ifor review and critique frequency factor revisions completed and tested September 30 Paper completed on application of current guide Jines to industrial tasks ( 1983 work) October 31 Develop 10 case studies to test new guidelines. November 30 Draft of User's Guide for style critique. December 31 Draft of videotape scripts and Instructor's manuals for style critique. March 31, '87 First draft of simplified guidelines for the User's Gulde. June 30 Complete the test Ing of the revised guide I ines. September 1 Complete User's Guide with case studies. December 3 t Complete videotapes and Instructor's manuals. S.H. Rodgers 4/18/86 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource NIOSH Work Practices Guide to Manual Lifting - Future Evaluations Revisions, and Extensions - Proposed Contributions - SHR Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Description An account of the resource Summary of April 18, 1986 Meeting Major Points, Areas of Possible Contributions to These Programs by SH Rodgers, Funding to Cover Work by S.H. Rodgers As Noted Above and Timelines Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1986-04-18 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_041 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-21 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 9 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/c99dad427d4a9637ee540500dc77b3c7.pdf 6ae354b471dec2fb26814e83bf5afdba PDF Text Text Suzanne H. Rodge�. PhD. Consultant in Ergonomics/H¥man Factors 169 Huntington Hills ROCHESTER. NEW YORK 14622 Proposal for Revisions to the Frequency Factor in the NIOSH Guide for Manual Lifting �- The Need for Frequency Factor Revisions: When the NIOSH Guide for Manual Lifting was published in July of 1981, it offered industry and scientists a way of analyzing lifting tasks and defining their difficulty in terms of people's strengths, pressures on their lumbar discs, and acceptable lifting loads determined using psychophysical tech niques. For occasional lifts the Guide has been very useful to define appropriate weights for lifting tasks. For lifting at frequencies greater than 1 per minute, however, there have been inconsistencies in relating the calculations of Action Limits (AL) and Maximum Permissible Limits (MPL) to observed acceptable workloads in industry. Specifically, the maximum frequency (Fmax) factor of 12 for lifting below 30 inches and more than 1 hour per shift results in the finding that anyone lifting 12 times per minute for more than 1 hour at common pallet heights can lift 0 weight per lift. Since 12 lifts per minute is not an unusual frequency for loading and unloading pallets of product in a shipping or warehousing operation, this suggestion that it cannot be done without high risk of injury lacks credibility. In analyzing the frequency factor developed for the NIOSH Guide for Manual Lifting, it is apparent that the physiological data collected by Petrofsky, Lind, and Webster of St. Louis University Medical School was not fully utilized, perhaps because they did not participate in the final guideline development stage. Figure 5.8 on page 88 of the Guide suggests an approach to improving the frequency factor calculation that should be further explored. A major difficulty in using the current frequency factor is in defining the time base for calculating the lifting frequency. If a person lifts 480 boxes a shift (about 480 minutes), that could be called a lifting frequency of 1 per minute. If those 480 boxes are lifted in the first half of the shift only, the frequency would be 480/240 or 2/minute. If the real work task requires one to lift all 480 boxes in one hour, then the fre quency would be 480/60 or 8/minute. But if you watch the workers you may find that they lift for 10 minutes, do something else for 5 minutes and alternate the work that way through the lifting task period. So the actual frequency may be 480/40 or 12/minute. From an industrial engineering standpoint, frequency is often calculated by determining how many units have to be handled per shift. From the physiological viewpoint, the stress of lifting is defined by the pattern of lifting and the time of sustained lifting, so peak frequencies would have to be considered as well as average ones. (716) 544-3587 �Proposal for Revisions to the Frequency Factor in the NIOSH Guide for Manual Lifting A. The Need for Frequency Factor Revisions: When the NIOSH Guide for Manual Lifting was published in July of 1981, it offered industry and scientists a way of analyzing lifting tasks and defining their difficulty in terms of people's strengths, pressures on their lumbar discs, and acceptable lifting loads determined using psychophysical tech niques. For occasional lifts the Guide has been very useful to define appropriate weights for lifting tasks. For lifting at frequencies greater than 1 per minute, however, there have been inconsistencies in relating the calculations of Action Limits (AL) and Maximum Permissible Limits (MPL) to observed acceptable workloads in industry. Specifically, the maximum frequency (Fmax) factor of 12 for lifting below 30 inches and more than 1 hour per shift results in the finding that anyone lifting 12 times per minute for more than 1 hour at common pallet heights can lift 0 weight per lift. Since 12 lifts per minute is not an unusual frequency for loading and unloading pallets of product in a shipping or warehousing operation, this suggestion that it cannot be done without high risk of injury lacks credibility. In analyzing the frequency factor developed for the NIOSH Guide for Manual Lifting, it is apparent that the physiological data collected by Petrofsky, Lind, and Webster of St. Louis University Medical School was not fully utilized, perhaps because they did not participate in the final guideline development stage. Figure 5.8 on page 88 of the Guide suggests an approach to improving the frequency factor calculation that should be further explored. A major difficulty in using the current frequency factor is in defining the time base for calculating the lifting frequency. If a person lifts 480 boxes a shift (about 480 minutes), that could be called a lifting frequency of 1 per minute. If those 480 boxes are lifted in the first half of the shift only, the frequency would be 480/240 or 2 /minute. If the real work task requires one to lift all 480 boxes in one hour, then the fre quency would be 480/60 or 8/minute. But if you watch the workers you may find that they lift for 10 minutes, do something else for 5 minutes and alternate the work that way through the lifting task period. So the actual frequency may be 480/40 or 12/minute. From an industrial engineering standpoint, frequency is often calculated by determining how many units have to be handled per shift. From the physiological viewpoint, the stress of lifting is defined by the pattern of lifting and the time of sustained lifting, so peak frequencies would have to be considered as well as average ones. �Another difficulty in using the current frequency factor is in defining the one hour vs 8-hour duration categories in a way that makes sense physiologically. If a person lifts at 2 lifts per minute for five 15 minute periods throughout the shift, the Fmax is the same as if he or she lifts 2 times per minute con tinuously for 8 hours. It appears that there needs to be consi deration of some other duration category that more accurately reflects the way people perform lifting tasks. It has been my observation that high frequency (greater than 6 per minute) lifting is seldom sustained for more than 15 to 20 minutes con tinuously except when a person is at the end of a conveyor line and is being paced by the machine speed. Even there, I have observed that breaks from the line are often taken every 15 to 20 minutes either by rotating someone else in, by allowing a storage conveyor to fill up, or by shutting down the line. During the 8-hour shift there may be many 15-20 minute segments of lifting, but that physiological load is different from the load of doing one to two hours of continuous lifting at the same rate. Loading and unloading a pallet in shipping operations, for example, often takes less than 3 minutes if 2 people are working together, and then there is a "break" of 2 minutes or more when a new pallet is procured. The frequency during the lifting task can often be 1012 boxes per minute, but the work pattern permits some recovery between the lifting activities and effectively reduces the work load. The pattern has to be evaluated throughout the shift in order to assess the whole body and local muscle fatigue potential of the job. B. Suggested Approach for Frequency Factor Revision Two studies were recently reported at the Brouha Work Physiology Symposium in Rochester, N.Y. where frequency of lifting was varied and psychophysical (Ciriello) and physi ological (Yates) data weer collected to establish acceptable loads. Other frequency studies, notably by Mital, have also been reported in the past few years. The Ciriello and Yates studies concluded that lifting frequencies greater than 6 per minute were associated with whole body energy expenditure demands limitations on the acceptable weights for lifting tasks. If one takes the Lind and Snook data from Figure 5.8 on page 88 of the Guide and alters it to reflect more of the female population's capabilities (instead of the average male as is shown), a frequency of 6 lifts per minute also emerges as the point at which total workload must be factored into the calculation of acceptable load. Building on those laboratory studies, it would be wise to collect more data on typical lifting frequencies in occupational tasks, paying particular attention to work patterns. Tasks that are self-paced, as well as ones that are situation- or machine- �paced, should be studied. The focus should be on jobs where ting takes place for a majority of the shift, such as postal package delivery services, warehousing, stockroom attending, construction jobs, chemical workers, some agricultural jobs, shipping dock workers, or handlers on production lines. The to be collected would be: lif or some data 1) Work pattern - this would be established by timing the activities and tracking the continuous lifting times as well as the time between them when other tasks are done. It could also be gathered by monitoring ECG continuously if the industry is willing to ask for volunteers for a work physiology study. 2) Weights Handled - the workload would be characterized in terms of the weights of the items handled and their distribution in time. In many shipping operations it may be difficult to get the exact weights for every item handled, but ranges of weights could be identified and classified into light, moderately heavy, and heavy cat egories. 3) Load Configuration - the sizes of the units handled and how they are gripped would be noted. The same diffi culty of defining this per unit in shipping operations could be addressed by defining 3 load size categories and classifying the ease of gripping them as well. 4) Lift Location - the locations of the lifts would be des cribed in terms of the NIOSH guidelines for manual lifting, using H, V, and D. Pallet patterns and shelf heights would be measured for multiple tier lifting tasks. 5) Lifting Frequency - this would be measured in conjunction with the work pattern data collection. The number of lifts per minute and continuous minutes of lifting would be recorded so that frequencies can be calculated across multiple time bases. 6) Subjective Comfort or Fatigue - this would be quantified using a psychophysical method such as a discomfort in dex and a rating of perceived exertion. It would be used to identify local muscle fatigue limits to the lifting tasks and to help define the potential whole body fatigue limits. c. Use of This Data to Develop an Improved Frequency Factor There are several ways in which the data on occupational lifting patterns can be used to develop an improved frequency factor. The energy requirements and heart rate responses of people doing laboratory lifting studies can be used to identify total workload demands for the patterns that emerge as most representative of repetitive lifting tasks. Further laboratory studies may also be needed to confirm these estimates, however. �In addition, the discomfort and perceived exertion data can be related to the workload, weights and locations of lifting at given frequencies, and to the load configurations. This will help to define the lifting limits in terms of ways that the tasks could be modified to accomodate larger weight objects. It would provide the Guide user with some options for workplace or packaging design, for instance, that could reduce the stress in repetitive handling tasks. The goal in developing the new frequency factor would be to make it as simple to use as it is now (or simpler), but to make it more reflective of the real world situations where highly repetitive lifting tasks are done. Ambiguity in the definition of the time base for calculating frequency would also be reduced. D. Time to Accomplish the Study Study 4 people each in 6 occupations = 250 hours Analyze data = 120 hours Develop frequency factor = 100 hours Prepare Report = 50 hours 520 hours Suggested Time Lines: Complete Complete Complete Complete data collection data analysis frequency factor report Respectfully Submitted, 10/18/84 June 30, 1985 August 31, 1985 October 31, 1985 December 1, 1985 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Proposal for Revisions to the Frequency Factor in the NIOSH Guide for Manual Lifting Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1984-10-18 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_040 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-21 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 5 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/f6b7c89be38f437e04f4374b61bde06b.pdf 9046e1423e22c1071c1b6779321baec6 PDF Text Text ] A Practical Guide To Adjusting Your Computer Workstation . . . . r=l'-f'>, ... . . .. -..·;,.:;.Y·✓- . .. , /' :::; ' ·. - . . .... :···.-.:.. ••• . . . ... . . ·=·:-:.._:.....,.·......: ... .......... ..... . .. __ o, . .. . . "'· . .... ·: .,,;•,• ....... .· ' ·,• �{f�< ·1-◄ : t�C..,( _;;- . . . . :-. : ·\ .. . ,· · . ' ; ..··.. .- . - .'- . �. . : .. -· ....... . ·-. .. .···'•·�-... :: . �_,:. -:.....:- . ,..- -;-· ._.,;,•.-· ...:.· ... _.,._ � ; . ,. -�----- .• :._· ...·. . { � ·'··· · :· �-- .::... ' .·: ... ., ................--- - :;· . ;, Inger M. Williams, Ph.D. Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. © Febru�ry 1999 .• �fl �Welcome to your workstation. It is designed to fit all sizes of employees. To assure the workstation meets your individual needs, go through this self-help guide and make the necessary adjustments. Be proactive, set up your workstation to fit you and your tasks before you develop any discomfort. E rgonomics is a multidisciplinary science that studies how to best design work environments and tools to fit all peo le. The computer workstation is designed to fit all employees. �erefore, to make your workstation ergonomically designed especially for you, you must make the final adjushnents to ensure your postural and visual needs are properly accommodated when you perform your specific tasks. R G 0 ead this manual carefully. We want you to refer back to this material in the future if you have any questions about further adjustments of your workspace or if you start to experience any discomfort. o through all sections in the manual before you start working. It should not take you more than 10 minutes to read and you will find many important and practical ideas on how to make adjushnents yourself. If you have any concerns or questions after you have finished, talk to your supervisor who will refer your concerns to the "Ergonomics Help Desk" 238 4652. nee in a while you will find an article in the weekly newsletter the "Bulletin" under the "Wellness" section. It will remind you how to adjust your workspace so you are working comfortably. �Your Chair and Desk C hairs made by Haworth come with a manual on how to use all of the adjustable features. You can find it under the armrest. Take time to try them all. Before you continue reading here, make sure you know where and how to adjust seat height, seat and backrest positions, and armrest height as well as position. H eight of your seat should allow you to rest your feet flat on the floor and keep your upper legs level and parallel to the floor when your lower back, also called the lumbar region, is properly supported by the back rest. Make sure, as you first sit down and use the back support that the edge of the seat pan does not cut into your lower legs or push them out. If that is the case, you must move the seat pan back to shorten its depth. A nnrest height should allow you to keep your forearms level and parallel to the table top without pushing your shoulders upwards when you type. On the Haworth chair, you can turn the armrests to the side and behind you if you do not want to use them or if they are preventing you from getting close enough to the keyboard and desk top. I f you cannot keep your anns and hands level with the keyboard and the desk top you can try one of two things to assure you can use a comfortable arm and hand posture: raise the seat height and add a footrest if needed to keep your feet supported or, add a keyboard holder that lowers the keyboard. Make sure the surface of the keyboard holder is large enough to accommodate your mouse and mouse pad. If you are short, you might need both a keyboard holder and a footrest. Talk to your supervisor if you are having difficulties getting into a comfortable typing posture. R emember, no matter how comfortable you are in your chair, you should not sit still for too long. Stand up and stretch now and then and do tasks that take you away from your workstation occasionally. �Your Keyboard and Mouse K eyboard location depends on three things: your task, what section of the keyboard you use, and your dependence on the mouse. Your goal is to have your forearms level with the desktop and straight ahead of you. Try to maintain your wrists straight and the keyboard centered. If you are only using the alphabetic section and the numbers on top, center the keyboard with yourself on the § key. If you are using the whole keyboard with the number pad as well, center the keyboard with yourself on the I or i key. If you are only using the number pad keys for an extended time, center those to assure that your right hand is comfortable straight ahead of you. If you are only using the mouse, move the keyboard to the side and place the mouse straight ahead of you. When you are using the whole keyboard as well as the mouse, make sure you do not use a long reach for the mouse. E ven if you have a wrist rest, it is not always necessary to rest your wrist on it while you are typing. Sometimes, when you place your wrists on the rest, your hands will be held in an awkward angle. Make sure, that if you are resting your forearms on a hard surface that you are not resting them on a sharp edge. Talk to your supervisor if you need to add a wristrest. Y ou might need to raise your chair and add a footrest in order to hold your hands, wrists and feet in comfortable positions. This might be an easier solution than lowering your keyboard with the help of a keyboard-holder. If your keyboard is lowered with the help of a keyboard holder, make sure you do not have to reach over the keyboard to read and/ or write on your paper documents. In addition, you must adjust your computer display height to assure you are not looking upwards and tilting your head backwards. Talk to your supervisor to help you find the best typing posture that will fit you and your task. �Your Display and Glasses D istance to your display is very important for the comfort of your eyes as well as of your neck and shoulders. If you cannot see the text on the display clearly you are more likely to squint, stick your neck out and lean your upper body forward to see better rather than move the display itself to a closer viewing distance. I S P L f you are using bifocals and if you are using the lower area of your glasses to read, place the display as low as you can on the desk top. To achieve that viewing angle, you can also raise your chair to sit higher than you usually would. In that case, raise the keyboard to maintain a comfortable arm position and maybe add a footrest. eparate one inch-high platforms are available to raise the display if you need to. Make sure you do not look upwards. When your eye muscles get tired from elevating the eyes, you might start to bend your head backwards which might result in neck and shoulder discomfort over time. rimary viewing area on the display is the area that you are looking at most of the time. This area should be at or slightly below eye level. If you cannot lower the display enough, move the window you are working in down on the screen itself. This might be especially important if you are using bifocals. eave your paper documents as close to straight ahead as possible if you need to look at both while you are typing. If you are only looking at the documents and just glancing over at the display occasionally, move your display to the side and place the documents straight head. A y sk your supervisor to help you move your computer display. They can be very heavy and it is difficult to move the platforms under the display by yourself. ou should try to get an eye exam every two years. Your medical insurance usually covers such exams. It is important to do when you are over 40 years old and your eyes naturally start to change due to aging. �Your Books and Telephone B 0 0 ooks, manuals, and reference material that you need for your work,. should be placed as close to you as you can. This will ensure that you can reach them comfortably without having to lean over far to the side. Heavy manuals should be stored at the desk height if they are used frequently. K verhead reaches that are long and to the side can be very uncomfortable for your shoulders and back. H your material is heavy, it is important that you stand up to get it rather than use a long awkward reach from a seated position. n the panel behind your computer is the telephone jack. The telephone cord is long enough to allow you to locate your phone where you prefer to have it on your desk. eep the phone within an easy reach. Try not to cradle the receiver between your head and shoulder. This could give you neck and shoulder discomfort! There are head sets available for employees who frequently use the phone. Talk to your supervisor if you need one. �Maintaining Good Postures at Your Computer Workstation Once your workstation is properly adjusted to meet your postural and visual needs it is important to maintain comfortable and good postures. However, remember, no matter how comfortable you are, you should not sit still for too long. Stand up and stretch now and then and do a task away from your worksta tion occasionally. Eyes level with text most worked with on display Viewing distance that is preferred Hands and wrists straight, fingers slightly curved Head straight or slightly turned to the side I Neck straight or bent forward I houlders lowered and relaxed . Upper back relaxed Lower to middle back supported Thighs parallel to the floor Feet resting flat on the floor or other foot support No pressure on thighs and back of lower legs Lower legs stretched out unhindered I �.. ' �.,, TM © 1999 Inger M. Williams, Ph.D. and Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. All rights reserved For more information e mail cergos@rochester.rr.com � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource A Practical Guide To Adjusting Your Computer Workstation Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Williams, Inger M. Description An account of the resource A guide about office workstation ergonomics by Dr. Inger Williams and Dr. Suzanne Rodgers. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1999-02 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_039 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-21 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 10 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/9dc6e01639249a4569bda8c8a1b59a49.pdf 6d07727953a06057278e9877ba1f249d PDF Text Text .f·' ;,',7'_· -.. _ ,...... l a.. /!u Fo·· -- -- ~ ,-;. oCO-ov ',~VV\ w"---hv --~ v.J VD ;,.,v~ -· f{;JJA;Xt :e-n 0 .~- ~~ --tv- 7.-0 :/J--e ·- 60 r n A! A tV 7:>' I') 17--V ·o •},/) --t.,..., 21J -0.! .\ \~) 7-0 '-' td /'v-A--- - ./1 - ' 11 () \ "J;~·~1 \ ___, 3\ol.. -- -_., -~ <.£,, \ ...-u &·LF"'O '-' ,, I {) - II . -1.\ I I .J o- v q" r \1' .... ' .-/ I• I ,\'\lA n ~ ,.J-· \ v r 't(D Vt1- 'V I \ \ .. ~~Lifvv ~\ \ill - fLJ .\ "J II\ ~~ ' '""'-' '· \~ \) \7· I ~") rV ~- ,.; v a" {/V . > VI-\- " . I \. - \ 2A) 1\ L~ I M rotc- , tJ {fi.jQ I ( '-i- I tJ\ '1- r tl\ ---{lV __l4 :t 1-t /trO Vi\ Nt'-- \ ~ 'fl' {L-- I v ---·- / ~ I 11'j {<- I ~ ~ \ ~'I . ' w ~ . I , '-"V 7..""! I-- "' I 9-78 (846-5167-900) "" ~ l I l l \ KP fii R7o_r: ��Mean Skin Temperature - oF ... <D 0 <D "' "' 0 c;, -j 3" CD 3 ::;· "' 0 c fD (/) "'"' "' 0 "'"' ... 0 "' 0) Mean Skin Temperature - o C �.:.: ..... ..... .. . .:_. ·•.: ;~::~' . . .•· ' _ ' .. . .('. FiGu.re 32 : Hest Pulse Toleranc.e$ -- Duration· of E>:J=tosure <Referenc:e 4) .·- , ·. · ·.. :. . . ,....... . . C<t~'~ r\. f~·f 7-t tt- ~" 11~7 t- I ~ ILl ~\. '~ I' I •u• II ..0 ~~ ~. j! ~ ~~~ . ::c.; '"" « ~ c « ILl .... ~ ~· . ! . -' ~- .... ...tz ILl ~C«c~ I! --..... li 38 ~-. II 1 .,it ~ 36 w s- t,/ -~~- - ......... . :· . ~ .. :.. . . --- ··- -·--·-···· .·. ......· ·.:"··· ·. .. ·.• -..~ · . ~ . .... : ··.. ,· ·- -:·- .. __........-.. -~.·-~--. -~---.~--·-.- ... "':"· •' "":: ... ···... .. . :""' .. -:..:.-·~::. _._·. :. ... ·. ·Th~ abilitY 'of a Person to tolerate the heat Pulses shown atove will dePend on whether other fa~tors exist which make the exPosure less tolerable. If the radiant heat load is ver~ siGnificant~ Pain and burninG pf the skin can Prevent a Perscn fro~ wcrkinG in hest that he or she theoreticallw could tolerate based on the heat balcm.ce eouatior,. Radiant enerm~ burns c:an result fron. exPosure to temPeratures which raise skin temPerature.to.115 deGrees F (16 dE~ Grees C> <referer.ce 4). ·. '.·· ,,··. ' ~. . . . ... . ·DrYinG of the mu6ous membranes of the thioat and re~Piratorw sYstem·can Prod~ce serious discomfort• and·~ay be associatEd with other Pulmonarw PrDblems after .the exPosure. Provision ~f humidified alr throuGh a resPirator can be~useo to over~ome this drYinG effect, but maY limit the ~erson's activities and extenc the time needed tti do the task. In some eme~aenc~ situations there maw be inadeouate time to Put on sPecial resPiratorw eouiP~ent. so peoPle should, GenerallY• not be exPected to enter environ~ents ho~ter thsn ~00 deGrees F (204 deGrees C.) even f'or a brief period <reference 7·>. . :··--r~;;--·:.' i -·:Y''···:·f;:· :.j·::;:~~-,~~~·~~~~"!f.:~:::; ·:<.:,_-~-,~ -.. · ·-· ·· . f • • 0 • • • • • ; :• ·'-:~ • .. : · • • • .. :· ·. �, I I I I II ', I' I .:--::I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I II Ill I : i I I II ,., I 1 ,, II ,I I, ::- IH I III I I' II iI :··> j-·- I' I I I I II I I I I ' I ,, 1 II II ,, I I 'I I I I I I I, I I I' 'I I II I Ill ~: I I I ,, II II I I I :I II I 'i' II I, I I I I II I I :: I I := ~~ I I III I I I I I II I I '' I I II I : I :--' I I II I II I :I II I i··>l I I I j : I I I : I II I I I : I II I II I I I, I II I I II II II I I I, I I I I I i I II II II I I I II ! :- :-:- I I I II I I I I I ! ':. ~ . I I I I I II I I I I I 'I 'I II ''I i I I: :-1-' I I I I' I I I I II I I II I I I I I' II II I I I , ;;Ja I II I ~ I I I I il III I' II I I I' II I-' I I I : , I I 1 l1 I I I ' I :-::. 'I I I' ', II I I I I I II I I II II 'I I I: I I I I I II I I 1--'- I I' II I I ' I :-•' I I I I ,' II ==~= !=': I I, ' I I I, ' I I ' II I I I I, I .. I ' I I I I I I I :'' I' II I ::: i I II I I I I I I I, I I I I I I 'I : I I' I II I I ': ' I ' II I ' I II I Ii I I, t I 'II I 'I I I I I :-:-' I II I I I I ' ''I' ::· 'I I I I Ii II I I: I h·' t I j-r i I I I ,, II I I I t :' I' II II I I I II ': I t I I I II I I I II I I I I I I I I I I ' II I I I :--- I H·' It I I II I I ' I I I I +·H: I I I I I I I I i: I I I II I ,I I I' I ' I, I I I ,I I I I I' I I I ' II I' I: It ''II I I I ''I I iI ::: I ,I I I I I' I I' -!-'· I I I I I ' I ' I I' I I I I I 'I I :: I !=F I !-:-II 'I I I I II : i :--'·· Ill-: I I I I ,,II I I I II : I ' II I I I I I I I ' I I I ' I I I I t I I II I' 'I II I I' I II I I' ' :II I I I I I II ]' I I I ,I II +1· 1 ' I+ I j', ' I' I: i I I:-]~ II I I '' ::-: :! ;: :_:_]: 'I I i I I, I 'I II I I: I I :.-: ,I I I' I ' I II I I 'I I I I I II I I I I' II I I I I I I ,, :! :- :- I' I II II I I I I I I I 'I t I 11 I I :' II I : I: I, I I II I III ' 11 I I I I I I' I I It.:. I II I' I+ ! I I =PIT![:.:t:~':jl: ~~ I ,, I II I' I I l I : I' I, I I' ' I H+-'1 I I I ' I' I ' II I I I 'I I II I II i I I I 'I II I II I:!= II I' ,,j I : 1-!-:- H' I I !: I I I blii! I I! II II I jl· i : : : i-=~~ I I II I I j, I I I I I I I I I ,,1 I',I I_' I I I,I I I'' I i I I: I, ,II I I I I II I I II: I I I :,,i I :--:-1 I II I I I I I' I I I I I I, I I I, I I I ,, I,I II II I I I I i I I I I 1,' I I 'I II I ,I I I II I I ,' I II I II I I I II I II II II 1: I I I I· I I I II II I II I I 'I I: II : --;.1 I II 1 I I II I: I I ,I II II II H- I I I I' III' I i II I I I I I ji ,I I II II I I I :I I II I I I I i I I I I I I I I , ' Ia II I II I I I II ii : i I I I I j II I I II II II I II I I I I I II :: I I I I II II I I II 'I I ,, ,, II I I' ' I I I ,,',, I I I :: ''It I I II I I I I !+I I I II II II I i I, I I I I I II I I I I I I ' I II I It I I II I I I I II I ',I I II I I ' ' I I I I I: I I I I! I : I t II I I I I I 'r I I I I' I II ' I, I I I II II I I: ,, :I II II I I II I I I II I II I I I I ' I' I I II I I II I I I I I I I I I' I I I II I I I - II II I 1 I I I II c : ' I 'I I ' I I '1 I I I I I II I I I I I' I ' II I I I i I I ' j I I 'I I i :---::: I I I: I Ill I I ,I I I I ', I I I I I I' [, ,, I I I II I !--'· I I I I '' I I t I I I I II I I: I :--1 I I I I II II I II : I I I Ir I I I I II II 'II :I I ll I II II II I I ,I, II II II II I II I I I 'I I I, II II II II I 1 'I I II II II I 6o'1 II I '', I II ' I I II !-=!-II II 'I I II I II I II I I I I I I :II II II I I II I II I ,·· ... :IIi~l: II II i II II I I 1-' I I' I I ' I :-: ''+--: I I ' I I II I I I I I '' II I I I I I I I I H:i=i··--: :=:= :Ti j-' I, I I -1-' t•. U ItI ,7 _,_I ' I I ,I 'I I t II ' II I I I I t I, ,_ I I I' I I I .:1__ 1 ' II I I I � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Notes on Heat Tolerance Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Description An account of the resource Handwritten notes, graphs and typed draft about heat tolerance. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_038 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-21 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 5 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/fb706f30649a2e8833e472d388892bad.pdf 70351761fa74f662fff0df4ecf2ac0f8 PDF Text Text �� Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Handwritten Notes on Blood Pressure, Hypertension, Muscle Fatigue, Muscle Endurance and Energy Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Description An account of the resource Handwritten notes about blood pressure, hypertension, muscle fatigue, muscle endurance, and energy. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1978-01-19 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_037 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-21 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 10 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/e139c8edbf931f297724beece36c62b5.pdf 7a1970847d376513ca051d3197ce34e6 PDF Text Text �� Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Handwritten Notes on skin conductivity and fatigue Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Description An account of the resource Handwritten notes about skin conductivity, muscle fatigue (static and dynamic), previous studies and additional thoughts. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1979-06-29 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_036 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-21 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 5 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/25b615a26ba2234c070ab1c4b76fb34c.pdf 175290cd696b00fb07d97e2b648c0758 PDF Text Text �� Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Handwritten Notes - Lifting Tasks Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Description An account of the resource Handwritten notes on lifting tasks and job analysis flowcharts Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1978-10-12 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_035 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-21 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 6 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/4cb245155a63140ecdfe909440472916.pdf 747970c6f3747ed933ad20ec57c32aea PDF Text Text %£ 436/536 The Physiological Basis of Human Factors Monday Evenings, 6:30-9:30 PM; Fall Semester Course Summary 0 The course will be run as a seminar/lecture with reading assignments for 9 of the 15 sessions. There will be four laboratory sessions and a midterm exam. The 15th session will be used to work on a project to study a job from an ergonomics standpoint, focusing on the physiological demands of the job. Lab reports will be required for the four laboratory sessions and a final report on the project is to be done in place of the final exam. Several quizzes and problem sets will also be included in the course. Topics include muscle, cardiopulmonary, and nervous system physiology, work capacities, fatigue, stress responses, circadian rhythms, and tolerance of heat exposure. These topics will be discussed in the context of the design of jobs and work places to accommodate most workers. Instructor: Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. 169 Huntington Hills Rochester, New York 14622 (716) 544-3587 Textbooks: Textbook of Work Physiology by P.-O. Astrand and K. R6dahl, McGraw-Hill, 1977. (Required) Working With Backache by S.H. Rodgers, Perinton Press, 1985. (Optional) l) �.... ' IE 436/536 ' 0 0 The Physiological Basis of Human Factors Schedule Date Topic Type _August 26 Overview of Course, General Review of Physiology, Industrial Applications Lecture Sept. 9 Muscle Structure and Chemistry, Metabolism Semi.nar Sept. 16 Muscle Function, Strength, Endurance Sept. 23 The Cardiopulmonary System: Blood Flow, Breathing, and Blood Pressure Seminar Sept. 30 Temperature Regulation Seminar Oct. 7 Lab Heart Rate, Blood Pressure and Metabolism (due 10/21") in Occupational Tasks Oct. 14 The Nervous System - Coordination, Alert ness, Reactivity Seminar Oct. 21 Stress Response - Hormonal, Nervous System, Factors Influencing the Response Seminar Oct. 28 Midterm Exam - All Material To Date Exam Nov. 4 Biomechanics Seminar Nov. 11 Biomechanics and Work Capacity Nov. 18 Projects - Observe Som�one at work (Collect Data) No Class Nov. 25 Paced Work, Total Workload, Circadian Rhythms and Shift Work Seminar Dec. 2 Paced work and Workplace Design Dec. 9 Low Back Pain and Repetitive Motions Disorders Dec. 16 Projects Due 7/22/85 S.H. Rodgers (Dr. David Kiser) Lab (due 9/30) Lab (due 11/25) Lab (due 12/9) Seminar �., II IE 436/536 Physiological Basis of Human Factors General Information A. Office Hours: Mondays 4:30 to 6:30 PM Room 411 (knock on door at top of stairs) Phone (Rochester): B. Grading: 4 labs and reports 1 midterm exam 1 project 2 problem sets Class work Pop quizzes 0 1-544-3587 40% of grade =. 15% of grade 20% of grade = = = = = (10% each) 10% of grade (5% each) 10% of grade 5% of grade More will be expected of you as the term progresses, so I will be a little more lenient in my grading at the beginning than I will be at the end. My primary interest is in how well you think and solve problems, so I am less interested in the answers than how you get them. If your lab experiments give confusing results, for example, I expect you to analyze why they are not the expected ones and also to indicate how you would expect to remedy the situation if you were to . repeat . the lab. C. Attendance: Your attendance at each session is important since you will be assigned specific reading to report on to the rest of the class. If you are not there, that part of the material will not be available to your colle�gues, but you will still be responsible for it on any tests. If you miss a lab it is very difficult to write the report's discussion section and to ana lyze the data. You are responsible for writing your own dis cussion section for each lab, and each lab represents 10% of your grade. So, don't miss them. D. Plagiarism: C, Most of my material is new each year, so it is not very helpful to look to previous years' reports or exams to com plete your own. Thinking is faster and more effective! I have a very good memory for things I've read before, whether they're books or old reports. If such material appears without ·an appropriate reference, I will automatically deduct·l0 points. t. �E. Refer•nce Materials: There will be articles �nd reference materials on reserve in the Science and Engineering Library. Readintj assigned for the · seminar sessions will be passed out in class the week before the topic is discussed. Any extra class handouts will be placed in a folder to· the right of the faculty mail boxes in Nancy Pilon's office - marked 436/536. · The Health Sciences Library should also be searched for additional material for lab and project write-ups. It has a better supply of physiological reference.materials than the Science and Engineering Library does. F. Laboratories: The labs are extensions of the seminar materials and give you an opportunity to test some of the theory. We will often collect some standard data on ourselves in order to see where we fall in relation to the sizes or strengths of an industrial popula-. tion. You will work in groups of four in the lab. At least one part of each lab will require you to design your own experimen� to illustrate an ergonomic principle with a physiological basis. Y6u will get instructions for each lab a week ahead of time so that you will have time to •think about the principle you want to test.. I .will review your ideas at the beginning of the lab in order to identify any potential overexertion problem or to help define a "do-able" task, if needed. You will need the full 3 hours for each lab in order to collect the data and understand how to analyze it. A sample lab report will be given to you before the first lab to show what is expected in the lab write-up. G. Project: The project is meant to be an opportunity for you to bring together all of the material presented in the course by watch ing people working. You are expected to describe what they are doing qu�litatively and quantitatively and to identify environmental influences as well. A sheet describing the types of observations and measurements that can be made will be given to you lat�r in the course. The project report replaces a final exam and accounts for 20% of your grade. Each person does his or her own project. �"' tli C • H. Problem Sets: You will be given 2 sets·of 3 problems each to solve as homework assii;Jrunents during the ·term. They will ask you to analyze an industrial or occupational task or workplace and to explain why a certain set of problems (e.g., low back pain, sore shoulders, etc.) may be occuring on the job. You will have to use body size 2'nd strength data or other information from the course to solve the problems. You will have 2 weeks to complete each set, and I will use them to work with you individually on your job analysis skills. These are 10% of your grade. I. Pop Quizzes: Short quizzes will be given occasionally (3 to 4 total) in order.to identify how well the class is grasping the material being presented in the seminars. All together they will make up 5% of the grade for the course. J. c Class Work: Since the majority of the course will be run as a seminar class work will be important and will account for 10% of the grade. Class preparation ( familiarity with the topic) , presen tation of assigned material, and attendance at class will be used to determine the score for class participation. 8/24/85 S.H. Rodgers . 3 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Course Syllabus Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Description An account of the resource Syllabus for IE 436/546 The Physiological Basis of Human Factors 1985 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1985 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_034 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-20 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 5 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/ade370cf686663dda4a18f32c5dafe6c.pdf 50ba1ec3024082f5cb5628c966c8159b PDF Text Text summary of Grip Strength Laboratory - October, 1983 '··,·,,) IE 436/536 - S.H. Rodgers, Ph.D., Instructor Despite the lack of equipment and.the confusion surrounding the first set of lab reports, you have done quite well on this lab. A few points of confusion are summarized below, and a synopsis of the projects is also given. Some of last year's data is included to increase the 'n' and help identify where data used in the class handouts may be questioned. A. Presentation, Spelling, etc. 1 •. The problem words - this time are : Breadth not breath (that comes in the next part of the course) Clearance not clearence not dynometer (which must be an Dynamometer ancient scale for_measuring rep tiles) Affect/Effect - confused over and over. The easiest way to get these straight is to agree· never to use affect as a noun unless you are - going into psychiatry. When you are using _ them as verbs, test to see if you are trying to say that something caused a thing to occur (effected) or if it only influenced it (af fected). 2. Several of you had alot to say about tne experiments and in answering the questions, but you put some of it in the introduction, some in the discussion, and some in the conclusions. Please try to.place the answers to the questions in the Discussion section, and note that you are doing so with a heading (like "Answers to Quest ions"). Save true conclusions from your experiments for that section: any afterthoughts can be tacked on to the discussion session with an.llinsert" signal. _ The best waytq keep from rambling on too much and repeating material bewteen sections is to make a good outline before you start to write. This is critical in the exam situation, so doing it for the lab reports is good practice for you • . 3. Some of you noted that I had given you some incorrect instructions on how to handle the hand-length and �. . breadth measurements from the class data. I had said that you had to subtract 49 mm from the values in the class data for these two measurements. That was be cause the anthropometer scale read 49 before the start of the hand measurements. However, after you pointed out the inconsistency of the corrected readings with · the population data from·the Kodak book, I realized that the 49 mm represented the distance between the arms of the anthropometer and should be included in the readings •. Those of you who made the correction were not penalized, those who caught the mistake were given extra credit, and those who didn't seem to notice the whole business were given the benefit of the doubt that you saw the problem but were not given extra credit. I lost 15 points. •. 4. The handout you got in lab did have Kroemer's method for static strength measurements on th.e top, but the anthropometric data in it was from the Kodak book. 5. Because we measured them in kilograms of force, I.have not marked anyone off for grip strength values in these units. However, the standard unit (SI) is Newtons, which can be· found by multiplying the kg values by 9.8. B. Analysis of Lab II Data 1. Those who measured grip strength changes with wrist angle changes and found less reduction in strength · than was suggested in the class handout. shou1d not get overly zealous about finding the errors in their experiments. It is always possible that your data is closer to the Ultimate Ergonomic T�uth than mine is. If you get consistent results and,do not know of any reason why they should be disregarded, do not be afraid to use them in answering questions. The search for sources of error is always important, but it should not be done solely to discredit a value that does not agree with someone else's pub lished data. Published data can be, and often are, wrong! See the discussion of radial and ulnar dev..;.. · · iations of the wrist and grip strength later in this summary of Lab II. · �2. Several people confused percentiles and percent of the population in discussing who was accommodated by a given design. A percentile defines a value where 1 x 1 percent of the population has the same or less than that reach, height, breadth, etc. You cannot find what percent of the people with a 5th percentile measurement are accommodated. Either the design accommodates people with that level of the measure of interest or it does not. The percent of the population accommodated would be determined by looking at the design in terms of both large and small values of the measurements of in terest. If the value of interest is a strength, then the percent of the population accommodated would be (1 - the percentile at value x 1 of the design). If it is a reach and the design is not optimal for either very short- or very long-armed people, then the percent of the population accommodated would be the difference between the percentiles marking the design limits. 1 3. In the discussion of grip span vs grip strength, several people brought in the data on p •. · 310 of Konz' s work De sign. This is attributed to Greenburg and Chaffin, where it does appear, but is actually a thesis project by Fitzhugh from U • · of Mich. • It represents 50 men and 50 women whose grip strengths were measured using a leaf spring dynamometer developed by Jim Foulkes of u .. of Mich •• It is interesting to compare the class data to Fitzhugh 1 s data, but be careful that you note the dif ferences in the way the span is measured. In ·the hand dynamometer the entire grip-has a span of 2-inches (or whatever value is chosen), whereas in Fitzhugh's leaf spring dynamometer the span decreases near the top of the hand. The value recorded is at the base of the ·spring. Dr. Lind of St. Louis University Medical School would go one further and suggest that the hand dynamo meter we used is too compressible and should be replaced with a stiffer set of bars (made by Petrofsky). So, the discrepancies between· the Fitzhugh data and the data from last year's class that was handed out in class are rela.ted to differences in measurement techniques. I purposely gave you the class data instead of the Fitz hugh data because I think it more accurately reflects manual handling grip design needs. The Fitzhugh data is most applicable .for tool design where the handl.es resemble the leaf spring type of grip • .3. A few of you also noted the discrepancy between some recommendations for cylindrical handle design and the grip span data from class. It is important that one. look carefully at the item being gripped in determining �the most appropriate grip span or circumference. If the item can be handled with a power grip or cylindri cal grip, then the cylindrical handle should be con sidered, and the diameter should reflect the cone cir cumference measurements of the population, or 1.25 to 1.5 inches in diameter. If the gripping surface is a block that cannot be encircled, then the grip span of 1.75 to 2.5 should be used. If the handle is able to be grasped with a power grasp but it is not cir ular, like a carving knife handle, the thickness of the handle as well as its span must .be evaluated and the best combination determined. The thicker the han dle, the less wide the grip span can be. 4. Only one person, so far, explored the biomechanics of the hand and wrist when trying to explain why grip span and grip strength are related in an inverted U 1 -shaped curve. The main thing I was looking for was the realization that the force measured on the dynamo meter is the resultant of the forces generated by forearm and hand muscles. These forces are greatest when the fingers and wrist line up so the pull on the tendons from the forearm muscles is direct, and does not have to go around bends (as with wrist deviations} where resistance to movement is increased. The levers of the system are most effective when all of the joints can be stabilized to form one long lever. This is not possible when too-small an object is gripped and the fingers wrap around it. It is also not the case when too wide an object is grapsed and the force is applied at an angle instead of perpendicularly on the dynamo meter. See Figure I for an illustration of grip force vectors with an appropriately sized object and in a similar task on a too-wide object. 1 -,� 5. The discussion of anthropometric measures and grip strength identified that hand length was quite well (r = .8) correlated with strength. In a study last year, one group looked at grip strength with 0.125 inch incren1ents in grip span from 1.12 to 2. 38 inches. They found a fairly consistent relationship between the span at which people reached their maximum grip strength and their hand length, or: Span at max grip strength, inches Hand Length in Inches = 0.27 From this data one can estimate what span would be best for any percentage of the population based on hand len gth. It is not terribly precise, but it does seem to predict a person's best grip span for some tasks. �. . · 2. In discussing the implications and applications of the lab results to industrial tasks, many of you focussed on the design of hand tools. Although these are very · important, you seldom get a chance to design them. So, be sure you consider other grip interfaces that you can do something about, such as tray handles,-handles on machine components, etc •• Many product sizes are chosen without attention to grip requirements as well. Not only is the orientation of the handle important because of its implications for wrist angles, but the handle size :is very important. From your data in class, and from last year's group data, you can.feel quite secure in recommending gripping block tray handles that are from 1.75 to 2.50 inches in width. 3. Do not get confused about.minimum handle sizes and re commended handle sizes when it comes to designs that minimize pressure on the fingers (Rigby in Konz's . book). The recommended diameters for handles on ob jects of different weights are minimum levels; they are determined by calculating the force per unit area that the handle exerts on the fingers.· Larger handles, such as those developed from grip span considerations, are more satisfactory than these minimal dimensions •. D. Group Projects Stapling activities led the list in the types of tasks evaluated for the group projects. Radial and ulnar deviation of the wrist during stapling was analyzed by two groups. Another group looked at flexion and extension of the wrist during procurement of library books, but did not get a dyn amometer to collect data with. One group did collect data. on strength changes with flexion and extension and �l.so looked at strength loss with time during a fatiguing hand. grip exertion. The results are sµ.mmarized in Tables 1 and 2 for radial and ulnar deviations and flexion/extension of the wrist, respectively. �6. Some people stated that people would get carpal tunnel syndrome or a related problem if they don't have the right grip span or wrist angle, ·etc. • In the interest.· of accuracy, you should be aware that there is no evi dence yet that the awkward grip spans, high forces in respect to maximum voluntary contraction capabilities, or extreme wrist deviations actually cause overuse · syndrome problems. What we do know is that they aggra vate pre-existing problems, and if they are reduced, fewer people have difficulties with these tasks. 7. Some of you confused a fatigue curve for muscle work that is sustained over time (holding a grip and watching · the maximum force decrease with time) with Rohmert's curve (actually first described by Scherrer and Monod) which relates intensity of muscle effort and duration. Rohmert's curve suggests that one can hold a 20% MVC for over 10 minutes. This is not the same as saying that if one does a maximum grip for 10 minutes, it will be down to 20% of the original value at the .end of that time. There is no way you would be able to continue the maximum grip for 10 minutes unless you needed it to keep from falling into a pit of alli gators with big appetites. We will get into muscle fatigue next week, but suffice it to say that the shape of the fatigue curve and of Rohmert's curve are not the same, and they should not be used interchangeably. c. Implications for Industry 1. Several people· suggested that workers should be in structed to keep their wrists in the neutral position during work and to select their tools to fit their hand size. These are not terribly practical solutions to the handgrip problem, as you can see if you try to keep your wrist in the neutral position as you write your midterm exam. Tool selection is not always an option for the worker, although it can be controlled somewhat by the purchasing agent. More recently, there have been · attempts to design tools for the smaller hand and to angle them to reduce the amount of ulnar and radial deviation required in some tasks. The latter approach has resulted in some ergonomically fine tools that are seldom used in the workplace. The reasons for their abandonment relate to the lack of versatility an angled·· tool often has, usually only being good for a specific operation in a given orientation (vertical work witn the angled Western Electric pliers, for instance). The less ergonomically optimal tools are more versatile, .· and are preferred by workers in tasks where multiple tasks are performed in different orientations. �' "' ,,.,i a) .... .. F (tendon l ," - - , ,, _, Fy ed . ·:·. For a requir nap the lid.· s to kg 5 • F y 5 . cosl5 · F • F : cosa • _y F • 5.2 kg_. to the llelgram solution Figure l' , ·. A para squeezing the hand in : a) forces exerted by b) the ortably closed and; with the hand comf ly wide op en . hand uncomfortab --·. ·•-····--:---------;_____- .. -��- .... - -... -- ----- -- -·· Fx {tendon) For a required the lid, F • 5 kg to snap y . cos75 F • F � cosa s 5 y F • 19 kg_; ·- �Grip Strength and Wrist Deviation - Strength Changes Expressed as a Percent of the Neutral Position Values 1982 and 1983 IE 436/536 Data Table l : Radial 25 Deg. --------Maximum Mean +/- 1 SD Range 50 Median N Radial and Ulnar Deviation 80 75 57 6 l 8 13 - 67 79 - 70 38 85 - 71 60 8 3 3 8 Table 2 : Flexion and Extension 65 Deg. Flexion 45 Deg. 25 Deg. +/- 1 SD 10 13 29 - 80 60 N 81 61 47 Median 40 Deg. 59 Mean Range Ulnar Maximum --------- --------- --------- --------Neutral - 67 43 - 85 J Neutral 70 Extension 45 Deg. 25 Deg. --------- ------ .-- 82 · 88 76 8 9 9 73 - 93 78 - 100 64 - 86 48 60 81 86 72 9 9 4 4 9 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Summary of Grip Strength Laboratory Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Description An account of the resource Feedback from Dr. Rodgers to her class at University at Buffalo (IE 436/536) on Grip Strength Laboratory Exercise Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1983-10 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_033 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-20 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 8 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/a793f5e51105e65b035d8b02ac3fb7d5.pdf 2d4671b10c7beecf113c2e34f9279403 PDF Text Text e1 ~~~ ~L"~~ ':) U.r...Y.,\Cr,<J i \. / '~~\, .. \ict. .• Exam,- October 19, 1983 IE 436/536 - Mi\:lte:im . \ . 20 points I. Definitions - Write short definitions of five of the following words or phrases. Explain what {s meant and how it is important in human factors/ergonomics. GD 1' Ulnar deviatio.n.-Uf/- ·Hft- y S~h perc7ntile ilfl-fttt- till <!if) . P~ncJ; gr~P--1/-(f~· \ @ Flex~on ilq q Length-tensi .· relationshipfttr±fH- , 40 points II. Ill E) Clearances -~~Iff Gi) Static work ~fftt-ifft.·fflt@:. Grip span fl// @ .· Acromial height{fft~ Adjustable back support ·+ftt-f\1/ (f) (§) Short Problems - Answer ~of the following problems.; Follow the instructions for each carefully. For each of the following situations you have been asked to determine who should be considered in the design. Indicate what population data you would use for your design. Be sure to include the specific anthropometric measurements that determine the design. a. b. c. d. e. Drinking fountain height in a pediatrics office Seat height in a movie theatre Door height in the New York Knickerbocker's (a basketball team) locker room The force required to trigger a power drill The weight of a portable T.v. set The strength to lift a tray at full arms• extension above 75 inches (above the floor) is only about 15% of the strength available to lift an item close to the body and 30 inches above the floor. Explain why. 1·-H-l+ 3. ill l 4. Mrs. Jones is 50 years old and suffers from arthritis. She is having difficulty opening screw-top soda pop bottles and the peanut butter jar when her grandchildren come for lunch. Why do you think she has trouble with these items, but has no trouble opening the jelly jar? Be quantitative, where possible. In the move from English units {pounds) to SI units �£:· . • ...... (kilograms) some bulk packaging standard sizes will . be changed. At present, chemical and food comp-· anies in the u.s. use a 50-lb bag. With metrification, a decision has to be made whether togo to a 20 or a 25 kg standard bag size. What would. your recommendation be, and why? Use information from the lifting guidelines ahd be quantitative where you can be. 40 points III. - Longer Problems - Answer one of the following problems• You have been asked to desi~rn a lunch counter for a local hot dog stand. The owner wants to use stools and to make them just slightly uncomfortable so people will not hang around too long after their meal. a. b. c. d. 11 r1 2 •. What anthropometric measures should you consider in designing the counter and stools? What population will you consider in your design? · What approach will you use to produce just a little discomfort, and why will this be uncomfortable? Sketch the recommended lunch counter and include the relevant dimensions: A construction worker handles 200 rectangular concrete building blocks with one hand over a 4hour period while building the foundation for a skating rink. The blocks are 16 x 10 x 4 inches (1 x w x h, solid) and weigh 12 lbm each. At the end of the day, he notices that his arm and hand a,re quite sore. a. If he has a 96 lbf grip strength (m'easured with a 2-inch grip span and with the wrist in its neutral position), can you explain his arm and wrist soreness? Be as quantitative as possible. b. Would you anticipate that he would have any d.ifficul ty carrying a block in one hand for one minute continuously? Explain your answer. �IE 436/536 - Midterm Exam - October 19, 1983 20.points I. Definitions- Write short definitions of five of the following words or phrases. Explain what is meant and how it is important in human factors/ergonomics. Ulnar deviation ~ 5th percentile ;l.. •Pinch grip $' · Flexion 10 · Length-tension relationship 3 40 points II. Clearances if Static work I Grip span Cj Acromial height . ' Adjustable back support f. Short Problems - Answer ~of the following Follow the instructions for each carefully. 1. / problems~ For each of the following· si tuatioris you have been asked to determine who should be considered in the design. Indicate what population data you would. use for your design. Be sure to include the specific_anthropometric measurements that determine the design. a. Drinking fountain height in a pediatrics office b .. Seat height in a movie theatre , c. Door height in the New York Knickerbocker's (a ·basketball team} locker room . d. The force required to trigger a power drill e. The weight of a portable T.V. set 2. The strength to lift a tray at full arms• extension above 75 inches {above the floor) is only about 15% of the strength available to lift an item close to the body and 30 inches above the floor. Explain why. 3. Mrs. Jones is 50 years old and suffers from arthritis. She is having difficulty opening screw-top soda pop bottles and the peanut butter jar when her grand~ children come for lunch. Why do you think she has trouble with these·items, but has no trouble opening the jelly jar? Be quantitative, where possible. 4. In the move from English units (pounds).to SI units (f) �. "'-· ····••i!_lol -.. (kilograms) some bulk packaging standard sizes will be changed. .At present, chemical and food companies in the u.s. use a 50-lb bag. With metrification, a decision has to be made whether to go to a 20 or a 25 kg standard bag size. What would your recommendation be, and why? Use information from the lifting guidelines and be quantitative where you can be. 40 points III. - Longer Problems - Answer one of the following problems. 1. You have been asked to design a lunch counter for a local hot dog stand. The owner wants to use stools and to make them just slightly uncomfortable so people will not hang around too long after their meal. a. b. c. d. 2. What anthropometric measures should you consider in designing the counter and stools? What population will you consider in your design? What approach will you use to produce just a little discomfort, and why will this be uncomfortable? Sketch the recommended lunch counter and include the relevant dimensions. A construction worker handles 200 rectangular concrete building blocks with one hand over a 4hour period while building the foundation for a skating rink. The blocks are 16 x 10 x 4 inches (1 x w x h, solid) and weigh 12 lbm each. At the end of the day, he notices that his arm and hand are quite sore. a. If he has a 96 lbf grip strength (measured with a 2-inch grip span and with the wrist in its neutral position), can you explain his arm and wrist soreness? Be as quantitative as possible. b. \'lould you anticipate that he would have any difficulty carrying a block in one hand for one minute continuously? Explain your ans\.,rer. �IE 436/536 Physiological Basis of Human Factors Midterm Examination - 75 minutes (25 points) I. Definitions. iD/Jo/fs~ Choose~..,.. Define ,2. of the following terms. In each definition say what the term means and why it is of importance in ergonomics. Action Limit - NIOSH Lifting Guidelines Anaerobic Metabolism Grip Strength Percentiles - Muscle Strength Radial Deviation of the Wrist Motor Unit Muscle Fatigue L-5 Disc Intensity-Duration Relationship for Muscle Work Optimum Grip Span Static Muscle work Sarcomere (40 points) II. Short Problems. Choose .:::;::::. 2. 1. You have been called in to act as a consultant at a local warehouse where electronic equipment, such as TV sets, video players, radios, and computers, is stored. The architect and engineer are convinced that the shelves should be at 5, 40, and 75 inches above the floor, while the warehouse foreman is pushing to put them at 15, 35, and 65 inches above the floor. The usual inventory could be accommodated in either design. Which shelf height combination would you choose (of these two) and why? Be quantitative where you can be, and state your assumptions clearly. 2. Dennis is a body repair auto mechanic and has a hand-grip strength, as measured on a dynamometer with a 2-inch span, of 100 pounds. He is using a grinder with a 1.5-inch diameter cylindrical handle to prepare the surface of a car's door. The grinding is done in a vertical surface, so Dennis's wrists are extended at 45 degrees from the neutral position during the task. What is probably the longest period of continuous grinding he can perform before his grip muscles will start to fatigue if the task requires a grip strength of 50 pounds? 3. Metal ingots are delivered via a 30-inch high con- �veyor to a work station where they are removed and placed on a flat table that is 45 inches above the floor. The ingots are only one layer high on the table and are 12x6x4 inches in length, width, and height. They arrive on the conveyor so that there is very little extended reach to procure them and there is only room for 2 rows (not stacked) on the table that they are lifted to. The ingots weigh 50 pounds each. Estimate the percentages of the male and female workforce that may find this lifting task too difficult if an ingot arrives once every two minutes and the job is done throughout the shift. 4. Claudine is a ticket and baggage checker at the Buffalo Airport for Air Chance. The airline is a low budget organization and only flies by night. They have made a deal with Agony Airlines to use Agony's luggage conveyor after 9 PM, so Claudine has to carry each piece of luggage about 80 feet after it has been checked in. It takes her about 20 seconds to reach the conveyor. Air Chance is considering setting a luggage (per bag) weight limit in order to reduce the chances of Claudine getting too fatigued or injuring herself on the job (Claudine is Air Chance's President's daughter). If the main fatigue problem is for the grip muscles and Claudine has average grip strength for women (2-inch span), what would you recommend as a weight limit for the luggage? State your assumptions clearly. (35 points) 1. III. Long Problem. Choose one. -= Several people in a job where steam irons are packed into boxes have complained of back, shoulder, and wrist pains. The workplace has the following dimensions: Incoming iron line (conveyor) = 50 inches above the floor (packing table in front of it) Packing table = 30 X 30 X 30 inches (1 x w x h) Iron box dimensions = 12x8x6 inches Distance from front of table to middle of conveyor line = 30 inches Outgoing conveyor is behind worker as he or she stanqs at the packing table and is 50 inches above the floor. rEmpty boxes are stored there, too. Irons when boxed weigh 10 pounds. The irons are picked up by the handle which is 2.5 inches in circumference. The irons arrive at each work station at a rate of 3 per minute for boxing. The line runs all morning (about 4 hours). There is a 20 minute break after the first 2 hours of work. a) Using the above information, identify potential �workplace and job factors that may be associated with the workers• complaints of sore backs, wrists, and shoulders. Use diagrams, graphs, and anthropometric data to clarify your answer. b) 2. What might be done to improve the workplace, assuming that you have to keep the production rate at 3/minute in order to meet the Christmas rush demands? Workers in a ~oy factory are manufacturing several sizes of Rubik 1 s cube for the mass market. The cubes range from a key chain version that is 0.5 inches on a side to a 6-inch coffee table model in 0.5 inches per side increments. They are delivered to the packing station through a conveyor system that presents them to the worker at 45 inches above the floor and 20 inches in from the front side of the workplace at a rate of 10/minute. They are placed in preformed boxes and put back on another conveyor that is set 90 degrees to the supply conveyor and has the same dimensions. Some of the workers are having symptoms of hand soreness with some of the Rubik 1 s cubes they pack. The results are as follows: Cube Side, Inches 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 Difficulty? Yes Yes No No ,.~No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes The largest cube weighs 2 pounds and the smallest one weights an ounce. 10/5/84 a) Indicate why some people are having hand soreness using anthropometric data and the information given above. b) What might you do at the workplace to reduce the hand soreness without reducing the necessary production rate? Explain why this approach should improve the work situation. SHR 3 t �~~ tf3w(j5~ f~_SL-~~ ~~ '~ ~~ ~ ~""'- ~---- ~ . . . . - .. t-r . 2.) ~_,r· ~- _, ~ ~....... - l,-~ v ~Ji-f~ ~~ ~.1 w~~y~~~.~~~-~ J.,;chc ~c.J ~ s~ Q ~.t.0 ~ ~ / 1/--rQJ ~ tv~--z__r?--..r t.c~ £~..-rt'cL. ·- )Lwt-t~'-'1 t-v~ flr-r:t '-'ll~ 6-~r ~~ ,? Le-<-) -L-r ~ ~ 1 ~~~ _~L<-. o) ~r ~ - -ft-._ --..-.( ~-4' ~~~ (Jy <>+ ~ ~ ~ -fL._ k.L r~ ~ (Art§:_J, W~ -r~ ~ ~ -~ r ~~ r~ ~~ c~ ()~ ~ ~) ~ (.UYLfr -S ~ -'\.~,._,__~ ~J +~~~ ~-~~J ~-t~ s~~ ~~- :L. ~cLc_, i -ft- ~ y~ z___ ~ ~ ~~ ~( .L;t4 ~ ' �~-~~~--~-tv . ~ -r~~a_-~ S/,~~r- ~·~ ~ -fl--.-- ~~- ~- -jvt< · 1c , ·:;__~ ·~·-~·. ~. ~;;:. ~ ,~1:: . s~" ~ ~-~--r -fL.-..-.... ~-~--r'L ..... :~] ~tV"t.cl.t...A . .. . ~(.!. .. c w..................... --7 -~ .. . . l.-J-'..._ -~ ~ ~~.s~~ ........ \)f~ ~.~ ~·+--w~-- ·~~·'vYT ~ ~ -f~ ·s~ ~--~ ~s&f , -. :I=D ~~~ ~~ c:. ~ t-:tr .~.~. ~-·yt (o). /{;:G-_, ~ ·-~~- - .. · ;--, ~-C-._. ·u-~ ~ ~~ ~.1-t~ ~~ ~-l~~~-~~~~~ 1r-J ~~- -~ ~~ > 7-.~J ~ ~ . ~sf:'t~~/ ~~&"' ~~~ ~ck, o-J ~~ -~ ---dw~, ~~ ~olt~ ~1-~~~/ 1) ~d..~~ ~~ · ko4 1 41 p w -~c-tJ. c_c~~ . ~ ~ ~ ~-{. -ta-t) k:f~ c.~ ~ ~-c_ ?yf-r-r· --£_ O-<J~ ~- '=:J ~~ s~ ~c.L ~~ ~ -~~ ~ v~ ~l ~(c_,· w'"- ~ 1t- le-,~ [~c:L,C.. "'~ ·s ~'<k.~) ~~ ~ ~~- s;~ ~~ ~ -fkS~ L.-1) !).,(. - r~'-t- -~ ~ -~.l~~s .. \)~_ -t ~~l ~~ ~.A~A ~ ~- r-u-cr{~~~~ �~··· �~~ J?.-) -f.~ .~~ ~ ~. ~ - '~·~ ev~~~. -{;~~.~ . . ~. . ~yL ~. ~-fk ··'1 c:__t-f -J. Jt-zr, . .. . --~ ~ -fL.J _;;( -L~~.. ~~ ____) ~d-n~ rc- . ·~ ~ ·~. v~ -f~ ~!b~~ ~. Sl~~~· 9 ::;-· I ~0 76u ~L(' ) vs.. 1:> t ?,.;"J ~5~'"' kh/)~ • --r ~~~ ~··~ <-{b- i:: 2- ~~~~~ ()~~ I · l .~ -~:.-~=-·· ~ ~ \,) c) · 1'> bJ:I:;:, T . ~.~~ --tL... S " k~ "b .R_.,._J_ .,_ Cs;- c4. "- '"- J.-(f w4; J ;,~<fo'' 1~ uk. -~ ~ -(-54~-si-r~~ b~ ~ ~ ~.~ ~~ ~~ · ~. ~ -~ ~k<f-f~ ) ~ c ;.s-~~~·~c~_) ~·~ <too so/7s-~ 7sZ ~C?7 r-n ~. . Is~ .'Zi:. JO~~. �J<t ~ tb lc lf.) 1;.<S-: ~ ~ { '2 9--·-to-<> ~ ~7 ··~ ()-? ~ ·~~ 17,~ ~. 7s cr] !fis-c, .~ J ~ '-13 2es..t.u~ -6~~ . r s-r ~'f ~· 7.5"2 Y'--L~~ f.~. ·~· '-{~ ~ ~ ~'-<-- ~·~ ~ .. ~ ""1 L{s-t&. ' ~~~~ f. o-.'1---(~·.,.:: c2. 1oe .,..~ 'foo <t""Z.,i :~ -traLc ~ . ·<:_ ~1 <L_--<; ~ 1 ~ (~~] / df 2--s"Z Jry ~ ;;t;;:r ~ .-t;:::tL\.. 7~t 1-t~~ 3i "'='} �~ ~ 7: f ~¥ 1:-6-'f 3 ·b \ __ o1 ]s:;,bJ;t-s~ ~) lo-~~ ~ ~~ c{-_ ( -r fM-W.-+ ~- 1 £_<) -. ~-rL--~. - ~.~.:f- ~ ~~.- 3" ~cJ___"" ~ ~ ~ ~x - ~~ ~ ,_ _i.J_[._ "->-'~ !?) s~ ~...._ o..v~~ ~- ""'~ -c,'Z- l- _,_ c-\ ·7 )s-e-t - ~ L.c( La~~ M-t;__~ -,:; ~ .~ ·. ;;t.;::;r~ - ~- DelL ~ "" ~ ~/-(; ~~"-1K ~~~J;;t:;;, "": ~~a4 r)- .~ I-~ M~~ / �I Data Sheet for Comprehensive Exam Question I. Anthropometric Data I Women Inches, Means +/- ISD Men 50/50 Mix ± Forward Functional Reach (from Abdominal Extension) 23.8 ]:.. 2.6 24 4 3 5 24.1 + 2.6 Waist Height, Standing 40.0 + 2.0 41. 9 + 2 1 40 9 + 1 9 Elbow Height, Standing 40 4 + 1. 4 43 5 ± 1. 8 42.0 ± Eye Height, Standing 59.6 ± 2.2 64.7 j: 2.4 62.1 ±. 2.8 Shoulder Height, Standing 51.9 ;±. 2.7 56.6 ± 2.4 54.4 + 2.6 9.1 + 1.2 9.5 .± 1.3 9.3 + 1.0 Elbow Rest Height (height above seat height) ~) * 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.0 Upper Leg Length, Seated 22.6 ± 1.0 23.4 ± 1.1 23 0 ± 1. 0 Eye Height, Seated (height above seat height) 29 0 + 1. 2 31.0 :±: 1.4 29.9 ± 1.5 Popliteal Height, Seated (back of knee) 16.2 + 0.7 17.2 ± 1.0 16.6 ± 21.9 Overhead Functional Reach, Standing 78.4 3.4 82 5 t 3 3 80 5 Hand Length (wrist crease to middle finger tip) 7.2 + 0.4 7.5 + 0.4 7.4 Grip Breadth, Inside Diameter 1.7:!:0.1 1.9 ± 0.2 1. 8 ± 0.15 Hand Spread - Digit One (Thumb) to Two2nd Joint 3.2 ,..... +- 0.7 4.1 * 0 j: 0 0 :t 0.7 From Kodak Human Factors, 1983 tables. 0 0 ;:1:. 3 4 0 ±. 0.4 3.6 ±. 0.7 �II. Strength Data A. Grip Strength - maximum isometric force, at optimal hand span, no wrist deviations; mean values+ l S.D.: \vomen: 60 ..±. 14 pounds Men: 101 ±. 24 pounds 50/53 Mix: 80 t 20 pounds Span at Max Grip Strength, ln./Hand Length, In. = 0.27 Pinch = 25% of Power Grip Wrist Deviations and Power Grip (PG) Strength: B. Flexion: 25 degrees= 80% PG.; 45 degrees= 60% PG.; 65 degrees = 45% PG Extension: 25 degrees = 90% PG; 45 degrees = 75% PG Ulnar Deviation: 40 degrees = 75% PG; max = 55% PG Radial Deviation: 25 degrees = 80% PG; max = 60% PG c. 2-Handed Lifts - NIOSH Guidelines - Occasional Lifts Pounds, Mean values Women Men Floor to Knuckle Height ------.± ----- lS.D. 50/50 Mix ----------45 t. 7 5 54 ±. 8 Knuckle to Shoulder Height 34 ± 5 53 ± 10 43 ± 8 Shoulder Height to Arm Reach (above head) 29 + 3 49 + 10 - 39 + 7 III. 37 +I- - Work Capacity Data A. Aerobic Work Capacity Kilocalories/min - Treadmill Women Men 50/50 Mix ( 9.5 .± 1.5 15.3 ± 2.5 12.0 + 3.0 Upper body aerobic capacity is about 70% of whole body capacity (treadmill) �B. Endurance Intensity vs Time - Aerobic Work and Strength Exertion Average % of Aerobic work Capacity Time of Continuous Effort Aerobic Work 100 85 70 50 40 33 -----------6 minutes 12 25 1 2 minutes minutes hour hours 8 hours Strength -------- seconds seconds seconds minute minutes 2 minutes 6 12 25 1 1.5 SHR 10/25/93 ( \ \____) 3 ( �( ' , ___ (lb.) / ('\ (K~.) -,\ "-..__) /' "J 200 '! 80 150 0 w t- LL. ..J t- {o"' Hazardous Liflinq Conditions 100 :z: (.!) Functional Reach limit ~ 1 w ~ 1 Maximum 1 Perr:nissob.le Limit -----J...-~ Act1on ~~~~~~~~~~Limit 0o 20 40 60 60 .I ;' • . ----~~·--~--~·~--~--~·~~--~-·--~ 0 10 20 ' 30 (em) (in.) HORIZONTAL LOCATION OF LOAD ~~~:<imum tve1ght versus Horizontal Locat1on for Infre- quent Lifts from Floor to Knuckle Height Nt asH ) }<1 ~I wf:'--( ''- r,c:..c...4 i ~ k-~ ~ L ,·C-t. "-A. r-L'Y �( "------ (lb.) / (J (Ko.l 200 / 0 80 150 0 w .... Hazardous Lifting Conditions LL. -.J .... 100 :I: C) Functional Reach limit ~ 1 1 Maximum 1 Permissob.le Limit w ~ 50 ---........._l_~ Ac t1o n ~~~~~~~~-'-!...Limit 0o r. 0 20 40 60 80 ----~-·~~----~·~--~--~·~~--~-·--~ 10 '20 . 30 - I I I f ' (em) (in.) HORIZONTAL LOCATION OF LOAD ~~u:<imurn tve1ght versus Horizontal Locatlon for quent Lifts from Floor to Knuckle Height Infre- -,\ � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Exams Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Description An account of the resource Exams and drafts of exams written during Dr. Rodgers' work at University at Buffalo. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1983-1984 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_032 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-20 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 18 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/fc3b449aed99bb7aa25a9bc6ef3dc38c.pdf 3913869cb8aa7ab7d495637661720ff5 PDF Text Text �� Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1999 Travel Schedule Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1999-01-29 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_031 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-20 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 2 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/59a90be54089464fc88c1919f0846100.pdf d8783f0bddd5da3fc299a2d163e30de4 PDF Text Text 1 Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Consultant In Ergonomics 169 Huntington Hills - Center Rochester, New York 14622 • (716) 544-3587 (716) 266-8749 (FAX) Chris Gjessing, Public Health Advisor Division of Physical Sciences and Engineering NIOSH/DHH/PHS - Mail Stop R-2 4676 Columbia Parkway Cincinnati, OH 45226-1998 July 24, 1996 Dear Chris; Thank you for asking me to comment on the NIOSH document "Elements of Ergonomics Programs - A Primer Based on Workplace Evaluations of Musculoskeletal Disorders". I have just returned from a nice vacation in Europe and attacked the task with gusto, perhaps more gusto than was intended when you sent the manuscript to me. As I warmed up to the task, I got more prolific in my manuscript comments, so much of what I can offer, in the way of specific suggestions for improvement, will be found there. In this letter I will put some more general comments, some of which address the questions you asked in your letter. First, let me emphasize that I make a living as a consultant in ergonomics helping plants set up ergonomic processes to control occupational injury and illness and to integrate ergonomic principles into their plant operations for better productivity and quality performance. I have been doing this on my own for 14+ years after 13 years of doing similar work at Kodak, and I have made probably every mistake there is to make in the process. Fortunately, I have been able to learn from those mistakes (mostly created by a lack of political astuteness or by trying to apply ergonomics theory too rigidly in the field), and have thrown out quite a bit of the material I learned from books in favor of what I have learned from being out on the floor. I am also fortunate in having clients with plant sizes ranging from 44 to 27,000 people, and I have found that the only real difference between a large and a small plant is in the number of resources they can tap into to solve problems. The types of solutions they find to problems, providing they really analyze the problem, range from simple rearrangements or assists to full automation, the latter being less feasible unless it has a �2 productivity improvement associated with it as well. Money has not really been the issue when we've properly analyzed the risk and developed ways to reduce it, because the solutions have not been expensive to implement. Because of my opportunity to follow progress in the ergonomics programs I have helped to start (over 6 years in many instances), I have learned what "works" versus what should work based on ergonomics theory. Consequently, I have rejected many of the "standard" ergonomics guidelines and solutions that have only limited application in the field (bent handle tools, tilt- or adjustable-height tables, etc.) and focussed on a broader problem solving approach based on an analysis of the risk for fatigue or overload on specific muscles groups. I have found the checklist approach to ergonomic risk factor identification problematic because it only defines the potential for problems if the job pattern is non-optit»J.al. The risk factor checklist tends to describe postures or give force levels or repetition rates independent of each other, and therefore, overestimates the risk in some situations and badly underestimates it in others. I am attaching a copy of a paper I gave in Zurich earlier this month that tries to address the problem in terms of the need to evaluate the interactions of effort intensity, frequency, and effort duration to assess the risk for musculoskeletal injury and illness. That should give you a sense of where I am coming from in evaluating the toolbox methods, for example. I will address some general issues in the rest of this letter: 1. Intentions of the Document There seem to be two intentions of the document: a. To share what NIOSH has learned from doing workplace evaluations and helping companies establish ergonomics programs; and b. To provide small and middle-sized companies with direction for what they should do to start an ergonomics program or improve an existing one. My observation is that you have accomplished the first goal and have not really addressed the second goal in a way that a company could develop an effective program. I like the vignettes where specific problems are discussed using the job studies you have done, and I like the tables summarizing the studies except for missing an "Impact" statement based on follow-up in the last column in many of them (see comments in that section). But there is no "How To" section that relates �3 to the essential elements in a program (c.f., 1992 General Ergonomics Guideline outline or the Red Meat Cutter's Guideline that spells out the essential elements for an injury/illness control program). The plant with little in-house expertise and not much money for consultants wants some direction in this way and, although most of the material is present in the document, there is no place where it comes together. Perhaps that is intended for an "Executive Summary" of the whole document. 2. Level of Document for Intended Audience As you have said in the document, to be useful to small companies and people without a lot of ergonomics training, the document has to be presented in laymen's language and the content should be practical. I find that the language and content range between academic and practical and, thus, do not meet the needs for a "primer". As a discussion of what NIOSH has learned, it is an appropriate style; but for a company to use in starting up a program there is too much information in some places and not enough in others. I have learned the following "truisms" from working with a wide diversity of businesses in the past 28 years: a) Do not provide them with guidelines that have to be interpreted. For instance, don't give 2 sets of design guidelines for working heights or reach distances unless it is for different tasks (see manuscript for specific comments). Especially, do not give them male and female guidelines since those will encourage them to design for one or the other sex and perpetuate a design problem we've had for generations. Design for the largest majority of both sexes. b) In providing general guidelines for postures or forces, etc., use words like "minimize" instead of "avoid" when talking about working with a bent wrist or bending over to reach something. Working with a bent wrist or bending over is not a problem unless a high force is exerted or a long time passes before the wrist goes back to the neutral position or the person stands upright. I do not like to see risk factors described in only one dimension, anyways, because it mis-states the injury/illness risk and results in people making many changes instead of targeting the most effective interventions. Large companies may be able to afford the new tooling, furniture, materials handling devices, lift tables, etc., but smaller companies often need to home in on less expensive ways to reduce risk. These �4 are often simple changes in job pattern or production planning, but they will not emerge as solutions from a checklist approach to ergonomics. c) A good checklist should lead the user to the next phase of problem analysis, finding out why? the risk factor is present. I find very few job analysis methods that include this step, they rather go straight into the solutions from the risk factor identification. Therefore, in a VDT workplace, for example, every low back problem gets a chair, every wrist discomfort gets an articulating keyboard, an adjustable height work surface, or a wristrest, every leg discomfort gets a footrest, and every neck discomfort gets a monitor stand. These improvements are not bad, just often they are not necessary; and in a smaller plant they may not happen because of lack of a budget for equipment like this. In typical problem solving approaches where the "why?" is identified, we have often found that vision drives the posture, and the backache and neck problem disappear when we improve the screen text contrast or color combinations or rearrange the locations of hard copy and screen to meet the visual needs of each task. Improving the office workplace and furniture can then be done over time, instead of on an emergency basis, and Purchasing can be assisted in assuring that only ergonomic equipment, furniture, workplaces, and tools are brought into the plant. d) Don't bother the inexperienced ergonomics practitioner (for whom this "primer" is intended) with technical information that he or she cannot evaluate and that will just confuse them. Leave that discussion for an Appendix or refer them to original papers about it. Give them your best understanding of how to do things, and qualify it accordingly as your opinion. e) Continually emphasize that the people who do the jobs in the plant are the experts on them, and they must be an integral part of the job analysis and solution-generating process. The role of an ergonomics consultant should be to help bring out all of their knowledge and to help bridge the communications gaps between the workers and their supervisors/managers and with the plant engineers or maintenance specialists who will have to implement any changes. f) Analytical tools should be easy to use, not much more than one �5 page in length, and should lead to root cause analysis and solution-generation. It should not be possible for people who have not done the jobs to fill out the forms without talking to the people who do them, even if they have a videotaped sequence to study. One cannot understand all of the elements of a job and understand why it is done as it is done unless one talks to and listens to the worker. Most failures in solutions come from not getting enough information about the job from its practitioner. I have attached a few additional articles and documents from my own consulting practice to illustrate some of these issues. Since this is primarily a document on what NIOSH has learned in doing its job analysis, I do not expect that you will want to change anything, but I include them to show what I am alluding to in my above comments. 3. Proactive Ergonomics I am glad this has been included because it is the way to do ergonomics in companies. However, I find the section very weak, on the whole. The biggest problem is the ability to get ergonomics input into the design or selection process. I have included one of my "outlines" on this in the attached material. Some of the processes I've used to get the designers to see their responsibilities to include ergonomics principles in their work include: a) Sitting on a design project committee and working as a team member to identify and help resolve potential ergonomics problems as they arise. b) Providing a set of design guidelines for designers of equipment, workplaces, etc. or for purchasers of tools, furniture, etc. that define when they need to come to the ergonomics team for additional help. This is like a "design space" within which they are okay or outside of which they are creating a significant risk for workers, with a gray area between these areas where risk is defined by the interactions of risk factors and job pattern. c) Reviewing an existing design before it is near finalization and asking questions about how people will operate equipment, move, be supplied, etc. It is the process of asking questions to understand more about the new jobs that brings about an increased awareness by the designers of their responsibility in making the workplace, equipment, or tools safe and easy to �6 use. d) Training designers in ergonomics principles around potential future projects. In this way one does not appear to be criticizing a designer's work but can show the application of ergonomics information to the solution of design problems. The training has to be technical initially so they understand the data bases on capabilities and understand their limitations. Then, the training should leave at least one day for applications to real problems or evaluation of existing designs (although this approach is difficult for some designers to handle if it is their design). Most designers will think that ergonomics is not one of their responsibilities (except in product design), but rather is the responsibility of production people who operate the machines ("just have to find the right person to do it"). They see their responsibility as getting the machine or tool to do the required job or the layout to fit the space available, and they rarely think of maintenance or what will happen when the system fails. They get quite interested in people's capabilities and in applications of the data, however, and the goal of training should be to raise that awareness. Since you can rarely get more than 2 days of their time to train them (even on site), one has to target the best use of that time and make it as relevant to their needs as possible. Assuring that they spend time on the production floor talking with operators of similar equipment will be almost as effective as trying to teach them a lot of ergonomics ! The Toolbox Proactive Ergonomics section uses the checklist approach, and, although, the design guidelines may be helpful in some cases, in too many instances there is not enough guidance and too much is left to the designer to figure out. See the paper on Ergo Standards attached with these notes to see another way of helping the designers identify potential ergonomics problems. I have written all over the checklist to illustrate where I have difficulty with it. There are more helpful tools available. The Kodak books are focussed totally on Proactive Ergonomics, for example. 4. Other Issues a) "Ergonomic hazards" You mention in the introductory material that, although it is not really appropriate, the term "ergonomic hazard" has become an �7 acceptable way of describing risk factors. I have been trying to kill the use of this term since the Red Meat Cutter's Guidelines first inappropriately used it almost 10 years ago. Bad use of language has effects on people's thinking, and I anticipated and have seen that this oxymoronic term has cast the whole field of ergonomics in a negative light for many industries. Note the National Association of Manufacturer's comment when they protested the OSHA Ergonomics Guidelines in 1995, saying that they didn't want anything to do with ergonomics and that they did not believe there were hazards to control. I have accepted that some term is needed, and have used "ergonomic problems" as a weak accession to the need to define ergonomic risk factors. The use of "hazard" is fraught with many difficulties because it assumes serious injury can result when it may be a discomfort issue. I beg you to eliminate it from this document so you do not perpetuate the damage and inaccuracies that the field is having to overcome with industry. Sloppy language and sloppy thinking go together, and we need much clearer thinking in how to reduce the risk of non-ergonomic designs ! b) Guidelines for Men and Women - see comments in the text I realize that this material came from Grandjean's book and the male/female values are separated there. However, the Affirmative Action Legislation of 1974 does not allow companies to build workplaces for women and men alone - all workplaces have to fit all people, in so far as that is possible. By putting in 2 sets of values for work height, etc., one leaves it up to a designer to choose who to design for, and most designers will not do it properly. The values that should stand should be ones that accommodate the majority of both the male and female populations, no matter who currently works there. If one designs for the existing population, one only perpetuates the situation that makes it difficult for men to work in traditionally-female jobs or vice versa. In practical applications of anthropometric data, I have found that the general guidelines for heights and reaches are only slightly useful because each job is different. The first thing that is needed is to find out where the hands have to be in relation to the work surface (the size of parts or product or packaging materials and the tools used and how they are oriented are some needed data). The reach data is not meaningful unless you identify the working height as well, �I • 8 since a 15-inch reach in front of the body at a height of 30 inches above the floor requires everyone to bend over. Thus, some of the simpler statements we like to use like "let the tall person fit and the short person reach" are simply wrong if applied to standing reaches below 40 inches ! Good design looks at male and female capabilities together to develop a design value,or a small range of values that does not inordinately affect either extreme of the population for that measurement. If you keep the two sets of data for workplace design, people will choose the values based on who they think is most likely to do the job. That is against the law, and we shouldn't push them in that direction whether they understand the law or not. The Kodak books give design guidelines based on accommodating the majority of both populations. Sometimes the value is taken from the female data (maximum forces) and sometimes from the male data (clearances), but the ultimate outcome is to accommodate the largest majority of both populations. c) Transferability of Solutions to Similar Jobs In the 28 years of job evaluations I have done in a wide variety of industries, businesses, and service sector/municipality jobs, I have rarely found two jobs that were identical, even when they carried the same title. The Dictionary of Occupational Titles categorizes job demands and responsibilities by title across industries which can help define equivalent pay and assist in the rehabilitation-towork process; but actual measurement ot a job with the same title often does not meet those estimates of job demands. More emphasis should be put in the document to inform the less experienced ergonomics practitioner that one really has to understand the job before developing solutions to the ergonomics issues. Not every frequent lifting task needs a lift table, for instance; often a fixed-height platform will do the job if the pallet load height is under 40 inches and the primary problem is handling from the lower 2 tiers on the pallet. The best way to understand the necessary improvements is to do a root cause analysis on why" the problem exists (why the risk factors are there) and then work with the workers and service groups to find several ways to address the problem. Anytime someone says that there is only one way to solve a problem, I know they haven't really analyzed the job or talked to the worker. �9 I think that is plenty of feedback for you to chew over, Chris, so I will stop here. I think there is a need for this type of document, and my efforts to show you where I think it needs improvement are offered in that light. If it is to be a "primer", then I think it needs a fair amount of work. If it is primarily a document showing what NIOSH has learned in studying jobs and helping set up ergonomics programs, it needs less revision, but that goal should be clearly stated up front. Despite a great deal of experience in this field, I still find that each plant has its own set of needs. A good part of my first contact with them is spent in trying to determine the most effective approach for getting ergonomics built into their processes, so they will see the positive results and reinforce them quickly. 'Lots of traps out there, mostly political or managerial, and working through them takes more time than does developing their enthusiasm for ergonomics applications in the workplace ! I am currently developing a "Dilbert Meets Godzilla the Ergonomist" approach to break down industry's negative barriers set up by the proposed OSHA Ergonomics Guidelines of '95 ! I hate to see a good thing killed for the wrong reasons. Thanks again for letting me review this document, Chris. Sincerely yours, 7/24/96 SHR/mes � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Comments on Elements of Ergonomics Programs - A Primer Based on Workplace Evaluations of Musculoskeletal Disorders. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Description An account of the resource Letter from Dr. Rodgers with comments on the NIOSH document "Elements of Ergonomics Programs - A Primer Based on Workplace Evaluations of Musculoskeletal Disorders" Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1996-07-24 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_030 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-20 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 9 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/53a4eb668720f6a557cbbd34bd3c9794.pdf 903b58e979f4e79e3137a4e8739cbe68 PDF Text Text The Visual Access Simulator for Standing and Seated Work Constructed by S.H. Rodgers, Ph.D., Consultant in Ergonomics A. Description of the Visual Simulator The purpose of this simulator is to provide a way to predict the impact of recommended workplace or equipment designs on the ability of a person to see what he or she needs to see to do the job. It is made up of three parts. A gri.Q_showing height above the floor versus distance in front of the eyes makes up the bottom layer. Three eye height ranges are shown on this grid: the first is for standing operations and the second and third are for seated operations, the second for sitting on a 27-inch high stool and the third for sitting on a 17-inch high office chair. The range of eye heights accommodates 90% of the potential workforce (men and women) but does not make allowances for bifocal or trifocal wearers. That adjustment should be made after the other impacts have been evaluated because it will affect the choice of height uniformly across most viewing conditions. The second part of the simulator is a set of dotted lines that represent visual angles and the line of sight from a worker's given position. This should be positioned on the eye height range lines (at top and bottom to evaluate the extremes of eye height) for the working posture of interest. It is important to note that even if a person is scheduled to be standing while monitoring a process or machine, he or she will probably sit down whenever the machine or process is running properly, So, it is usually wise to test the visual access in both standing and sitting postures. 1. �The third part of the simulator is a set of vertical bars that represent different height barriers (walls, supports, equipment, etc.) to vision. They project down and rise from the floor or standing surface. This transparency can be moved horizontally across the grid after the visual angle overlay has been located at the appropriate point on the eye height range. The bars will intersect the visual angle lines at different distances from the eye. B. How to Use the Simulator to Determine the Visual Impact of a Given Design There are at least 2 ways in which the simulator can be used in designing or retrofitting a given workplace or piece of equipment. One can use it to determine how easy it will be to � a given part of the equipment from a specific distance, using a given window location or a structural barrier. Ease of seeing the part is equated with a comfortable working posture, that is, not having to crane one's neck, lean forward for extended periods, or crouch down to be able to visually access the location of interest. The simulator can also be used to recommend the location of a window or access port to allow a comfortable posture at the location where the job is being done. For the situation where the design has been done and one wants to measure the impact of that design on the operators' ability to see the location of interest, the simulator is used as follows: 1) Determine which ranges of eye height are most appropriate to use in the evaluation. 2. �2) Move the visual angles overlay to the top or bottom of the eye height range. Place the intersection point on the line representing eye height. 3) Determine the distance from the eyes to the barrier or window, for the design problem. This value may be the width or depth of a control console or of a table, for example. 4) Place the vertical bar barrier overlay at the point determined by 3) above and move the different length bars across this point until the one closest to the existing design is simulated. 5) Note the visual angles that are intersected by the bar at this point. Items placed in areas where the visual angle lines are !J.Ilinterrupted should be easy for the worker to see in the posture shown. 6) Note the impact of the upper barrier (window frame, for example) on visibility of higher items using the appropriate upper bar to represent the existing design. 7) Repeat 4) to 6) for the other extreme of the eye height range or for the next posture in which the operator may be found. 8) Summarize the analysis by identifying the area in which visual access is good for the job. 3. �For the workplace or equipment design situation where one is trying to determine the best location for a window or access port, one should follow steps 1) to 3) as above, initially. Then, the following approach can be used: 1) Determine the visual distance from the operator's job site to the most commonly viewed parts of the production system. Measure the height of these items, too. 2) Determine which visual angle lines should be @interrupted in order to see the desired areas at their height and distance locations. 3) Move the vertical bars (barriers) over the g.d.d and visual angle lines to the point where the desired visual angle lines are left uninterrupted. Note the vertical heights that are compatible with visibility using both the top and bottom vertical bars. 4) Use this information to help determine the best designs for control rooms, etc.. Define the design by the working posture (sit, stand) and always consider both extremes of the population. C. Assumptions: The following assumptions have been used to develop this simulator: 1. A cross-section of the working population will be involved in these tasks. Therefore, the design should consider men and women and tall and short people. A 50/50 male and female 4. �mix is assumed (see Kodak, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volume 1, Appendix A. Anthropometrics). 2. The vertical lines illustrating eye height include values where 95% of the workforce is taller (5th percentile, at lower end of the distribution) to where only 5% is taller (95th percentile, at the upper end of the distribution.) The shorter workers will have more difficulty seeing low objects and the tall workers will have more difficulty seeing high objects. 3. It is assumed that the operator can easily turn to face the area of interest, so the visual access lines are always straight in front of the body, not to one side. 4. Chair heights of 27 inches (stool) and 17 inches (office chair) above the floor have been used for the seated eye height range calculations. If the seating differs from these values, just adjust the visual lines up or down by the amount the chair height deviates from the given value. The range of eye heights will remain constant, so this chair height adjustment should be made at both ends of the distribution of eye heights. 5. All heights are measured above the walking surface. If a false floor is used, it is important to add the floor height to get the actual window height above the slab floor. 5. �D. Example: Where should a control room window be located (height above the floor) so that an operator standing 30 inches back from the window can see a liquid level display that is 1 O inches above the floor and 12 feet away? Analysis: Operator = 30 inches from window Object to be seen = 144 inches away, 1O inches high Using the grid for object distance and height and for the window location, one can use the visual angles overlay to determine the needed visual angle for short and tall people. For both the tall and the short persons, the needed visual angle is between 20 and 30 degrees below the line of sight. For the short operator, the view to the display is clear as long as the lower part of the window does not exceed 45 inches. The tall operator would still be able to see the display until the barrier height exceeded 50 inches. Assuming that the operator may sit on a stool in the control room, one might decided to test the 45- and 50- inch high barriers against that posture, too. On the 27-inch high stool, the seated eye height of short and tall people ranges from 54 to 60 inches above the floor or walking surface. The visual angle of concern is now about 20 degrees below the horizontal, and barriers in excess of 42 inches will block the view of the shorter operator. The tall operator can still see the display if the barrier is less than 45 inches high. 7/21/87 S.H. Rodgers, Ph.D. 6. �inches aboue floor 120 108 96 84 m .!:l!J! 72 fil 60 1/1 Si27 � 48 [· ill.._ 36 24 12 0 0 12 24 36 48 60 72 Distance from eyes, inches 84 g6 158 1 2 108 l 2 0 3 l 44 �.. .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .. ... ... --.. · "' .. -- .. .. .. - ------ ------- ...... .. ,. .. ; ,. ; .. .. �2' 8' 3' 4' 6' 5' 5' 4' 3' 2' � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The Visual Access Simulator for Standing and Seated Work Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1987-07-21 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_029 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-20 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 9 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/7da631a31f6918e381573822bda815b4.pdf 806ab627471f18c67a87e7dac292cb9c PDF Text Text \, Matching Worker and Work Site - Ergonomic Principles Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D., Consultant in Ergonomics The major goal of ergonomics is to design jobs, equipment, environments, and products within the capabilities of most \_,, \'.people. If this is done, it is not very difficult to return people to work after an illness or injury. However, we are far from realizing this goal, and there are many jobs that are too difficult physically for many eligible workers to perform for a full shift. In most of these jobs we use either worker self-selection or "natural selection" to find the people who can do the work. Those who can perform the tasks safely often tend to be young, male, and physically fit. Although one can find people to perform difficult jobs by this trial and error method, a side effect is that there is often high turnover in the job and strain and sprain injuries are common. The ergonomist can approach such jobs from two directions. One approach is by defining the job requirements and the cababilities needed to perform them so that a person can be selected for the job based on a measureable strength or endurance capacity. requirements, Another approach is by defining the job identifying the limiting activities, and determining how to lessen those demands so that more people can do the job. Selection testing does not solve the job problem and requires continuous screening of applicants for the job. Job redesign eliminates the problem and is probably the �less expensive alternative over time, although it may require a significant up-front expenditure. For this reason, it is the second approach that will be discussed in detail in this section. 1. Characterizing the Job Demands To determine the suitability of a job for a person who is coming back to work after an illness or musculoskeletal injury, there are three major requirements to characterize: 1. the intensity of effort required 2. the amount of time the effort has to be sustained continuously (duration) 3. the pattern of effort exertion over the total working period, or shift Other factors such as environmental conditions, social interactions, and psychological stresses are also important but will not be discussed here. A model of upper extremity disorders, especially those of the hand and wrist, will be used to illustrate an ergonomic approach to matching the job and worker and to suggest ways of improving jobs that are outside the capabilities of many people. a. Effort Intensity The strength required to exert force or lift something will depend upon the muscles used and their posture during the task. �For work with hand tools, one should identify the amount of force exerted on the tool and characterize the type of grip the person can use for the task. The force on the tool can be measured directly using a torque meter. If this is not available, reasonably good estimates can be made by asking the worker to recreate the force while pressing on a platform (e.g., bathroom) scale or pulling on a spring (e.g., fish) scale using the same posture as is used in the task. The type of grip used can be definXed as either a power grip or a pinch grip. Figure 1 illustrates these types of grip. The primary difference between them is that pinch grip strength is only about 20 to 25% of power grip strength. Consequently, a required force of 15 pounds (or 150 Newtons) could be perfectly acceptable for most people if they are using a power grip (requiring about 25% of their strength or less) but would be a maximum exertion if they have to use a pinch grip. Other factors limit the amount of power grip strength available, especially grip span and wrist postures. Too large or too small a grip span make it difficult to curl the fingers and bring them together in a power grip. The grip muscles in the forearm have to exert high forces in order to get the required force at the hand in these biomechanically inefficient postures. Wrist posture also affects the biomechanics of grip exertion by making the tendons from the muscles in the forearm pull around corners instead of directly on the fingers and thumb. This �means that larger forces have to be developed in the forearm muscles to get the same strength output one gets when the wrist is in the neutral position (no flexion, extension, or radial or ulnar deviation). Table 1 shows how grip span and wrist angles influence power grip strength. Another factor that influences the amount of power grip strength available on a job is whether gloves are worn. Thin gloves without seams between the fingers have the least interference with grip force development. Thick gloves with seams can reduce grip strength by up to 40%. Table 1 also summarizes the effects of wearing gloves on grip strength. Having estimated the force exertion requirements of the job and determined the type of grip, wrist postures, hand span, and the characteristics of any gloves being worn, one can express the job force requirements in terms of a percentage of available strength for most people. %MVC, This is referred to as or percentage of maximum voluntary contraction strength, for the muscles most involved. For example, about 75% of the potential workforce can be expected to have a maximum power grip strength of at least 60 pounds (or 27 kilograms) if the grip span is from 2 to 2.5 inches (5 to 6.2 cm), the wrist is in the neutral position, and no gloves are worn. So a force of 20 pounds exerted in a task would use 33% of the capacity of a person with a 60 pound grip strength. If the task is designed so the worker has to flex his or her wrists �45 degrees, the available strength would be 75% of the original value, or 45 lbs (about 20.5 kg), so the same 20 pound force would now be 44% of capacity. If the tool being used has a 1-inch (2.5 cm.) grip span instead of a 2 to 2.5 (5 to 6.2 cm.) span, power grip strength would be 40% of the initial value or 24 pounds (11 kg). With a neutral wrist and no gloves; the 20-pound force is now 83% of capacity. When awkward wrist postures, gloves, and suboptimal grip spans are all present, only those people with high grip MVC's will be able to perform the tasks on a repetitive basis. b. Duration of Continuous Effort. A most important concept for ergonomic design is the relationship between continuous work. effort intensity and duration for It is not only how intense an effort is needed to perform a task, but how long that effort must be sustained before there is a break to allow the muscles to recover. As the effort intensity increases, blood flow into the working muscle is compromised. At about 40% MVC blood flow reduction is measurable, and at 70% MVC there is a very significant reduction. Since the blood carries oxygen which is vital for supplying energy for muscle contraction, the higher the %MVC used, the shorter the time it can be sustained continuously. Figure 2 illustrates this relationship. Without enough oxygen to supply the energy for muscle contraction, anaerobic metabolism is used and lactic acid is �formed. This by-product of inadequate oxygenation has to be sent to the liver to be reconverted into glucose or glycogen, so it takes longer to recover from a period of oxygen debt in the muscles than it does to develop the debt in the first place. is the availability of recovery time between It intensive exertions that determines the acceptability of some highly repetitive tasks. As the frequency of repetition increases, there is less recovery time between exertions. Even if the effort is quite short (3 to 5 seconds), there may not be enough time to recover if the intensity of the effort is high. Figure 3 shows the needed recovery time for efforts of several different intensities as a function of holding time. By summing the holding and recovery time for a given effort intensity and dividing it into 60 seconds, one can determine the best frequency for performing the task. The duration information can be used to identify whether the work will be suitable for most people to perform in a repetitive manner. periods If the effort has to be sustained for long (a minute or two), the duration information will determine whether most people can perform the task even on a lowly repetitive basis (see Figure 2). Ways to improve the tasks to make them suitable for more people are discussed later. c. Work Pattern If the effort intensity and duration requirements of the �job are appropriate, one still has to consider the overall job demands for the shift. It is possible that a person will be able to sustain a task for 30 to 60 minutes but may reach limits when trying to sustain it for 120 minutes before having a work break. It is important to observe the degree of control that the worker has over his or her work pattern. The more control, the easier it is to get them back to the job, because they can arrange the work to fit their need for recovery time. Intermittent work, where short (1 to 2- minute) breaks are alternated with intense efforts, is known to be more efficient as a work pattern than is sustained intense work with a 15 to 20 minutes rest break afterwards. If a machine or other outside influence is determining the work pattern and requiring the worker to match its pace, the worker with a lower capacity will be disadvantaged. Work patterns are best categorized by describing the distribution of tasks in time and over the shift, then timing within the major tasks to see if periods of lighter effort are interspersed with the heavier ones. In addition, it is useful to observe specific muscle groups and to identify their work and recovery cycles. Videotaping the jobs permits these analyses to be done more carefully. the job so appreciated. individual Several people should be taped on differences in technique can be �2. Characterizing the Individual's Capabilities for the Work In the discussion of job characterization above, it was mentioned that we can express physical job demands as percents of capacity for given muscle groups. There is data available on the strengths of specific muscle groups in men and women and on the strength available for pulling up or pushing and pulling horizontally where several muscle groups are used. Some of the relevant strength measurements are given in Table 2, which includes average values and values representing weaker people (5th and 25th percentiles) and stronger people (75th and 95th percentiles). To determine whether an individual has adequate strength to do a task, one should identify the active muscle groups and test the patient's strength in the posture used on the job. In the job analysis discussed earlier, the job strength requirements were measured, so one can then compare the job requirements to the strength available, expressing the job demands as a percent of the patient's capacity. For example, if an upward pull of 35 pounds (16 kg) is needed and the patient has a pull capacity of 70 pounds (32 kg) at that location, the job requires 50% of his or her capacity. If the task is a repetitive one, the demands have to be related to the work/recovery cycle guidelines presented earlier in Figures 2 and 3. If one wants to test the patient's endurance capability, it is possible to have the strength �exertions repeated as they are in the job for a period of three to five minutes in order to observe the patient's tolerance of repetitive work. If several different types of work are done, it may be necessary to test the strength of several muscle groups in order to assess the patient's suitability for the work. For most of the strength measures, a strain gauge or dynamometer is adequate to assess the strengths of interest. Use of a tray with calibrated weights added to it may be appropriate to evaluate a person's capacity for repetitive lifting tasks. The primary concern is to make the test similar to the job requirements by assuring that the same muscles and similar postures are used. If the job requires frequent lifting throug,hout the shift, total workload limits may be of concern, so an aerobic capacity determination may be needed. Then the estimated or measured energy requirements and the job pattern information can be used to assess what percent of aerobic capacity is required in the job. Figure 4 illustrates the aerobic workload time limits for different percentages of capacity. 3. Examples of Techniques to Reduce the Demands of Heavy Jobs If it is determined that the patient does not have adequate capacity for the job, one should not simply set a restriction against doing that work without looking for ways to modify the �job effort requirements. Ergonomists will look for ways to reduce the strength requirements or to shift them to stronger muscle groups, to reduce the overall effort levels, and to give the worker control, in so far as it is possible, of the work pattern. Ergonomics interventions in the workplace will be illustrated using low back pain and carpal tunnel syndrome as examples of common musculoskeletal problems for which a person may need work modifications. a. Low Back Pain People with low back pain may have difficulty with jobs that require frequent awkward postures and with repetitive or awkward manual handling tasks. The postural characteristics of jobs that may produce problems include: working over shoulder height bending over crouching down constant standing constant sitting, especially if the seating is poor twisting of the trunk extended forward reaches These can be modified by adjusting working heights to reduce bending over or crouching down. One can often use platforms to bring the person up so the work is not done above shoulder height. less likely to occur. By orienting the workplace trunk twisting is So there are 90-degree angles between �work locations instead of 180-degrees (for supplying parts, for example), Activities in the job that allow the worker to get up and walk a bit in a sitting job or to sit down for short periods in a standing job will also provide relief for the person with low back pain. Handling aids such as reach extenders, back supports for chairs, and foot supports are also useful aids. Manual handling tasks may make it difficult for a person with low back pain to return to work, but the ergonomist can look for ways to reduce these problems using the following techniques: 1) eliminating barriers that prevent the person from getting close to the load, such as inadequate foot and leg clearances around items to be lifted. 2) raising items to be lifted to 20 inches above the floor or more by using platforms or lift tables so less energy is needed to lift repetitively and there is less strain on the back. 3) looking for ways to handle some items in bulk in order to reduce the amount of manual handling required. 4) providing less heavy tasks as part of the job in order to assure adequate recovery time between lifting tasks. An example of a theoretical return-to-work situation will serve to illustrate how ergonomics techniques can incorportated into the medical evaluation of the patient's be �ability to return to the job after an attack of low back pain. The Job: Packing boxes of product, labeling and sealing them, and then placing them on pallets for shipping. Boxes are 12x12x12 inches (30x30x30 cm) and weigh 30 pounds (14 kg) each. The packing line is 30 inches (75 cm) high; the labeling and sealing line is 25 inches (62 cm) high, and the pallets are 5.5 inches (11 cm) high as they sit on the floor. The lifting rate is 9 per minute and is sustained for 2 to 3 minutes at a time. In a full shift there are 540 boxes handled per shift on the job. The pallet is loaded 5 tiers high with 12 boxes on each tier. The Patient's Status: 5th attack of low back pain in 8 years; some chronic pain, radicular - R leg; found to have pain when lifting 30 pounds (14 kg) at 15 inches (38 cm) above the floor and 10 inches (25 cm) in front of the ankles in a laboratory simulation of the job. No pain on handling up to 55 pounds (25 kg) between 30 and 40 inches (76 and 102 cm) above the floor and close to the body. Additional pain generated with lifts of 25 pounds (11 .5 kg) at 50 inches (127 cm) above the floor or higher. Initial Evaluation: At first look it would seem that the patient could not go back to this job because it involves frequent handling below 15 inches (38 cm), some sustained bending �for the labellng and sealing activity, and some lifting above 50 inches (127 cm) to stack the 4th and 5th tiers of the pallet. Ergonomics Interventions: Among the approaches that could be considered to reduce the load on the patient's back and to make the job better for most people would be: 1. Raise the labeling and sealing conveyor so the labels are applied between 35 and 45 inches (88 and 114 cm) above the floor. 2. Place the pallets on levelators so the low lifts are avoided; and provide a platform for the workers to use when loading the top tiers. 3. 4. Consider eliminating the 5th tier of the pallet pattern. Evaluate the feasibility of sending the boxes to a central area where an automatic palletizer may be cost-justified so that hand palletizing is eliminated altogether (long term solution). �b. Carpal Tunnel Syndrome and Tendonitis People with cumulative trauma disorders of their hand, wrist, and forearm may find it difficult to return to a job on which the symptoms first appeared. Several of the risk factors for these problems have been discussed earlier under the heading of characterizng the job. These include: high grip forces awkward wrist angles too large or too small a pinch grip span use of gloves In addition, cumulative trauma symptoms are more prevalent in jobs where the following conditions apply: time pressure work with arms elevated, tension in shoulders constant holding tasks forceful rotations cold temperatures vibrating tools used high frequency tasks (7 strong exertions per minute or more) To reduce the risk of aggravating the symptoms in people with a susceptibilty to carpal tunnel syndrome or to tendonitis, the ergonomist looks for ways to improve the wrist and hand postures through workplace and tool design, to relieve neck and �shoulder tension by adjusting workplace heights, to improve the grip type and span, to chose appropriate gloves, to reduce the forces required, to provide short recovery periods in constant holding tasks or to provide aids to hold or support parts or tools, to control cold and vibration exposures, and to design the job to provide periods of less forceful exertions so the arm and hands can recover and so the patient can regulate his or her work pattern as needed to minimize the symptoms. An example of how this information can be used to help return a person to work after an episode of carpal tunnel syndrome or tendonitis follows. The Job: Using a pistol grip power tool to attach nuts to bolts on a product on an assembly line. The nut driver's handle is 3 inches (8 cm) wide and the trigger is another 0.5 inches (1.2 cm) from the front of the handle (span = 3.5 inches (9 cm) ). There are eight nuts to tighten on each part and there are 480 parts done per shift in this job. The part is bulky and must be held in place with one hand while the other hand operates the tool. The nut driver is air-driven with the hose connected to an air outlet 30 inches (76 cm) from the front of the work bench. When each nut is tight, there is a "kick", which must be resisted to control the tool. The assembly is done at a seated workplace with a 30 �inch (76 cm) high work surface and a stool that adjusts from 20 to 30 inches (51 to 76 cm) above the floor. Incentive pay creates some time -pressure. The Patient's Status: Bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome diagnosed using a nerve conduction velocity test. Night pain and aggravation with flexed wrist posture and with pinching tasks or high repetition rate. Grip strength with 2.5-inch (6.2 cm) span is 55 pounds (25 kg). Symptoms also aggravated when shoulders are elevated. Initial Evaluation: The risk factors are high forces (the "kick"), high repetition (about 8/minute throughout the shift), shoulder tension (it is necessary to work with the elbows elevated because of the work surface height and lack of leg clearance), vibration from the tool, two wide a grip span for triggering the tool and for holding the part down with the other hand, and some pacing associated with the pay plan. would not appear to be a good job for this patient. Ergonomics Interventions: The following approaches would reduce the risk factors for repetitive motions problems on this job: 1 . Reduce continuous holding of the tool and the part by supporting the tool from overhead and providing a It �fixture to hold the part in place. 2. Consider using an in-line (straight) tool to press vertically down on the nuts from above so awkward wrist angles can be avoided and so that less "kick" is translated to the hand at the end of each nut tightening cycle. 3. Consider using a nut driver with multiple heads to speed up the task and provide more recovery time between parts. 4. Use vibration damping material on the tool. 5. Improve the workplace seating so the shoulder tension is reduced. Each of these changes would benefit all workers, not only the patient. Some will take longer to implement than others, but often they can be phased in slowly as workplace and job changes evolve. 4. Summary At present, we usually deal with patients who have chronic musculoskeletal problems by looking for a job that they can do given their reduced functional capacities. Trying to find the right job creates new problems such as having to "bump" people with less seniority from their jobs to accommodate the injured �worker, having to train them to do the new job and train the "bumped" worker on a new job as well, having to deal with other psychosocial aspects of creating jobs for injured workers, etc.. To avoid these disruptions and to improve problem jobs for all workers, it is important to address the risk factors that make it difficult for people with chronic musculoskeletal problems to return to their job. The probable result of ergonomic redesign will be to reduce the amount of time lost and restricted from the job, keep trained people working productively, and reduce the number of poeple who develop cumulative trauma or low back symptoms that interfere with their ability to do their job. 8/3/86 S.H.Rodgers � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Matching Worker and Work Site - Ergonomic Principles Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1986-08-03 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_028 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-20 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 18 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/b5728f85e531e7cdf291f94d8163aac8.pdf 7a3ff303d2a6941fff775e3842ab8c75 PDF Text Text Notes on the 7/14/87 Meeting at NIOSH Regarding the Manual Materials Handling Guidelines - S.H. Rodgers Revision of the Work Practices Guide for Manual Lifting and development of a User's Guide were the subject of this meeting. Dr. Ayoub has been designated as the person to pull together the update/revision of the Work Practices Guide with assistance from Ors. Drury, Garg and Rodgers. Ors. Rodgers and Drury, with assistance ' from Christine Chi, are responsible for completing a User's Guide which will be supplemented with a videotape to show users how to use the manual lifting guide. Dr. Badger opened the meeting with several questions relating to the Work Practices Guide (WPG) .. 1) What should be done with the Guide? Should it remain the same with the emplaasis on updating the formula using on more recent research ? Does it need a total rethinking with a new approach to presenting the information ? 2) What needs to be changed ? 3) What should be added ? The User's Guide was to be discussed in the afternoon once the content and form of the WPG was established. 1. �A. What Should be Done With the WPG ? Because of the incorporation of the 1981 Manual Lifting Guide formula for determining AL and MPL into many industrial and seNice sector safety programs, and because an update rather than a "start from scratch" approach is preferred by this committee, it was agreed that the WPG revision should concentrate on the formula to improve the AL and MPL values where they appear to be incorrect. Although the MPL values often appear to be to conservative, the direction of the deviations of the AL and MPL from empirical and experiential data is not always consistent. There was much discussion about the need to improve the presentation of the guidelines so they will be easier to use and will not require a computer at the workplace. I shared my experiences with trying to teach the formula to a wide variety of industrial , employees, ranging from production workers to safety and design • engineers. There has been resistance to using the formula from all except industrial engineers, with the most common complaint being that the formula is "too complicated". Dr. Drury indicated that he has not had those problems, and that the people with whom he has worked (using a simple portable computer program) love to play with the formula in the computer. Dr. Garg indicated his concerns that many of the people who are using the formula are using it inappropriately, especially in calculating the horizontal distance factor (H). 2. �It was agreed that many of these factors relating to how people use the Guide should be addressed in the User's Guide instead of in the WPG itself. The basic Guide revision should be done without regard to how people are misusing the formula and should give the best guidelines for design. The User's Guide will be built around the formula from the revised WPG and will look for presentation modes that will make it difficult for a user to misuse the information. B. What Needs to Be Changed? If one hypothesizes that maximum acceptable loads determined by psychophysical studies reflect work conditions where the biomechanical conditions (compressive forces on the spine) are also within safe limits, then a stronger reliance on the empirical psychophysical data to calculate AL and MPL would appear warranted. Unfortunately, the relationship between acceptable load and musculoskeletal morbidity has not been investigated using a standard , epidemiological protocol. Some of Ayoub's military studies may help 'in evaluating this relationship even though a case control protocol was not used in them. In other studies for Western Electric, he found that a JSI of 1.5 was associated with increased risk of injury; the Job Stress Index (JSI) is a measure of the load lifted divided by the person's maximum aceptable lift capability (MAL) determined in a psychophysical maximum voluntary lift protocol. 3. �The sympathy of the group tended towards more reliance on the available psychophysical data to establish the AL and MPL values rather than using biomechanical stress as the primary determinant. The reasoning for backing off on the disc compressive force model is based on the following concerns: 1. We really do not know what levels of compressive force are "safe" (and for whom) and the degree of risk for injury/illness at the levels usually chosen for the AL (350 kg) and MPL (650 kg). 2. Our modelling is still based on static forces, not dynamic ones, and peak forces are often not considered. It was agreed that a careful examination of the literature should be made on the relationship between lifting and spine compressive and shear forces in order to predict "safe" levels. Chris Chi has been asked to do this as part of her literature review file for the User's Guide project. Dr. Garg reviewed a recent study where he used the horizontal distance (H) calculation recommended in the 1981 Guide (6 inches plus one half of the box width) and actually measured the way people handled it in a designated lifting task. There was a very substantial difference between the measured and predicted H values (hands to spine distance), suggesting that the actual H is less than the predicted value. He believes that the H correction factor should be modified to reflect these observations. 4. �I suggested that there needs to be substantial revision of the frequency factor (F) and the table of maximum frequencies for different heights of lifting and durations (Fmax). The reason for revision is that the frequency of lifting contributes to b..Q1h local muscles fatigue and whole body fatigue. Thus, there needs to be attention to the pattern of liftng, the degree of loading of the affected muscle groups (% maximum strength required) and to the holding time and available recovery time between exertions. This can be predicted using work/recovery time data from work physiology studies. The metabolic or total workload factor has to be addressed through work intensity and duration relationships These can be compared to the aerobic capcities of workers for the types of tasks involved to determine the workload suitability. I have not found metabolic considerations limiting unless the frequency exceeds 6 per minute, the weights of objects handled exceed 40 pounds, or the task duration is 2 or more hours. Usually the strength limit or local muscle fatigue limit comes in before the metabolic load is of concern. It was requested, and agreed to by the committee, that we develop a formula to calculate the AL and MPL for occasional lifts and leave the frequency corrections to another part of the analysis, after other situational factors have been accounted for in the occasional lift calculation. For example, the work/recovery information could be used to interpret the impact of increased holding time in a carrying or holding task even if the repetition frequency is not too high. Also, there will be other factors that 5. �modify occasional lifting AL and MPL values and will be applied sequentially as correction factors only if they are relevant, e.g. assymetric lifting, gripping conditions, load stability, etc. The constant in the AL calculation formula is based on biomechanical considerations and Ors. Ayoub and Garg think it is probably too conservative. In my experience, it is sometimes too high and sometimes too low, depending on the lifting conditions. The vertical height correction factor is one of the calculations that stymies my classes because of the absolute difference markings. New Math seems to have killed that part of people's math education. There is a need to better define how to analyze handling tasks where Vi is changing (pallet or truck unloading, etc.). I also have a significant problem with the concept that a lower and a lift are not different in the AL and MPL values. Most handlers would very seriously dispute the assumption that these are the same, much preferring lowering to lifting. I suspect that some of the difference between them is in holding time (shorter for lowering unless the load has to be carefully positioned). The Snook data shows quite a substantial difference for women between lifting and lowering in infrequent lifting tasks but less difference in the 1/minute to 4.3/minute tasks. Since lowering instead of lifting is a very common and effective work practice to reduce handling problems, it would be wise to review the Vi and absolute difference concept for the revision. 6. �C. What Should Be Added to the Work Practices Guide ? (The ideas below are my thoughts supplemented by some comments in the discussion.) Most people would like to have guidance on a range of handling tasks, including holding, carrying, pushing, pulling and lowering, as well as lifting. They need to know how much effect a difference in the task assumptions, compared to the Guide' s, will make. For example, if the task involves assymmetric lifts, how much should the AL be reduced ? If the item's dimensions exceed the compact load limit, how much effect will they have on the AL? Other correction factors that would be helpful would be for handleability, including stability of the load and grip requirements, for unbalanced loads where the center of mass is not equally distributed between the hands, and for handling across the body instead of up and down in the sagittal plane. One-handed lifting guidelines should be included in the revised WPG as a separate item. It is my opinion that they can be best derived by evaluating grip requirements first, determining the limiting factors affecting available grip strength and then using work/recovery time data to assess the potential for local muscle fatigue. In assessing the total workload of handling tasks there should be a method for relating the handling workload to the energy 7. �requirements of the other job requirements. Similarly, I think it is important to evaluate the postural requirements of the tasks done before and after the handling activities, because the risk for injury should be greater if the supporting muscles are also loaded (as in bending or leaning to one side) during the other job tasks. A "How to use the formula" section that is set out in terms of a flow chart or list rather than as text would be a great advantage for the person who wants to work with the formula rather than the simplified User's Guide presentation. Generally, I find that industrial engineers and safety managers (not safety representatives) like to work with the formula, so the explanation of how to use it can be written with them in mind. 8. �D. Philosophical Points As part of the discussion on what was needed for the revision of the MMH Work Practices Guide , the group formed a consensus that the design guideline should remain at the level where 75% of the females and99% of the males are capable of doing the job. I suggested that the User's Guide should include information on the% of the potential · workforce (50/50 , males and females) that would be accommodated, so the implications of design changes could be evaluated. In that case, I would use 4 zones, where90%, 75%, 50%, and 25% of the workforce is accommodated. The90% value is essentially where 75% of the females and99% of the males find the lift acceptable (based on psychophysical data). Discussions in connection with both the User's Guide and WPG emphasized the importance of showing how to go from the AUMPL calculation to an analysis of what can be done to make the job better and "reduce the risks for injury." In the User's Guide, the approach favored by Ors. Drury and Rodgers includes a flow chart that leads one to a series of approaches rather than only to enginering changes or aids or workplace design modifications. I feel that one can do a great deal of ergonomics education through a carefully structured problem analysis (using the magnitude of correction factors and the impact of changed design on those factors) that will lead to administrative, engineering, and worker methods and "behavioral" (e.g., fitness level) approaches to reduce risk. 9. �E. The User's Guide In a discussion about the users of the MMH WPG, it was agreed that they should be identified and their needs defined in order to get the best criteria for the User's Guide format and content. A first cut on that is attached as Table 1 to this set of notes. It is difficult to complete a User's Guide until the formula revisions have been agreed upon. Much of the work over the next month will be to try out different methods of displaying the AL formula graphically so problem solving can be done on the plant floor without requiring a slide rule, calculator, or computer. The goal will be to structure the information so the impact of a given alteration in the handling task can be evaluated in terms of the percent of the workforce accommodated. The display should be set up so one can look at weight and location interactions in the handling task and can • identify what factors limit the load or force. These limiting factors should then be used to access the menu of possible approaches for reducing the overexertion risk. In connection with the Guide, a videotape will be developed to demonstrate how to evaluate lifting tasks using the graphics of the User's Guide and the formula of the WPG. The audience for the videotape should be production supeNisors and health and safety representatives from the staff and unions. The section on how to use the formula for calculating AL and MPL can be geared to the engineers who should be using that approach in new designs or major renovations. 10. �I would make the explanation of how to use the Guide as problem oriented and non-technical as possible. I would also keep the tape , within a 20- to 25-minute duration if it is to be useful to the key people mentioned above. Eventually, one might want to do a supplementary 20 minutes of examples of specific jobs where the applications are more involved, but the basic tape should be able to cover the most common types of lifts, etc. and show how to apply the User Guide information. As we discussed in connection with the WPG, the most common request Dr. Drury and I receive when showing people the curent guidelines is "Don't tell me how you get the answer, just give me the answer and tell me what things can be done to make it better." So the theoretical material should be in the WPG and the "How To" and examples will make up the User's Guide after the simplified graphic and/or table or flow chart display has been presented. F. Action Items - S.H. Rodgers 1. Week of August 3rd - send Dr. Ayoub and Dr. Badger my suggested approach for revision of the frequency factor for the WPG as well as other thoughts on the formula. Complete draft of report on frequency factor for publication. 2. Week of August 3rd - meet with Dr. Badger and Mr. Sinclair in St. Mary's Ohio (or nearby) to develop plan for videotape content and approach and to draft script outline. 11. �3. With Dr. Drury and Christine Chi - develop format and display ideas for User's Guide that convert the formula into a graphic that will permit rapid problem solving on the production floor. Review recent literature and continue to add to the literature data base so the graphic can be tested against the empirical data. 4. As Soon As Possible - write up 1982 project analyzing lifting tasks from industry using the 1981 lifting formula and comparing the results to physological measurements and accident experience, where available. 5. Identify an opportunity for Ray Sinclair to attend part or all of one of my training courses, preferably one where production people make up a majority of the attendees. Respectfully Submitted, Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. 7/16/87 12. �Table 1: Manual Lifting Guide Users and Their Needs User Agglications Implications for Guide Safety Personnel Identification of risk for handling (LLPP and Overexertion) Injuries. Quantification of risk using deviation from recommended guideline. Establishing priorities for need to change jobs where injuries are seen. Need relative ratings of degree of problem. Make recommendations for improving jobs where risk of injury is fairly high. Define limiting factors for handling tasks. Medical Personnel Job placement/matching individual capacities and job demands. Return-to-work decisions after injury/ illness. Clear relationship between handling requirements analysis and capacity measurements. Quantification essential. Identification of reasonable accommodations on the job. Supervisory Personnel Identification of job problems and more appropriate designs. Cost-effective approaches to reduce the risk for overexertion injuries. Need to identify what % of workforce may be at risk. Enable the user to find limiting factors in handling task design and get idea of relative effectiveness of different interventions. �Engineering Personnel ' Workers Management Priority on need to redesign tasks. Guidelines for new design. Determining most cost effective ways to improve existing jobs. Quantification - relative risk. Identification of best zones/weights/work patterns for handling tasks. Understanding of good handling conditions and patterns. Identification of techniques to reduce risk of injury - fitness, style of lifting, work methods, etc. Information for distinguishing degree of deviation of job requirements from a design that would be suitable for most people. Support for requests for job changes in situation where injuries have been found (objective criteria). Recommended lifts in best conditions. Amount of risk seriousness of problem (People or job?). ldentifcation of ways to improve job. Work practices section. Quantification in terms of% of deviation from the recommended design. Objective data on% of population affected; ability to show impact of specific solutions in terms of% of people capable of tasks. Quantification - degree of deviation from a recommended value and ease of improving the job. Work practices and engineering approaches to improve handling tasks � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Notes on the 7/14/87 Meeting at NIOSH Regarding the Manual Materials Handling Guidelines Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1987-07-14 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_027 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-20 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 14 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/c5c4b4f64d25952b6e71c5365158fc24.pdf 2e0b5001421dcbd900f6cd467a0e3e26 PDF Text Text Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. r"nsultant In Ergonomics Huntington Hills - Center Rochester, New York 14622 A. (716) 544-3587 (716) 266-8749 (FAX) General Guidelines for Chair Selection The choice of a chair for a job where a person wiJl be sitting for a majority of the shift depends very much on what tasks are being done. Ergonomically-designed chairs may be very comfortable when a person can sit back to work and very uncomfortable if the work requires one to sit forward to write or reach controls. One can use the ANSI-I 00 guidelines for the ergonomic design of office furniture for many office applications, but they assume that the chair user is sitting upright, not having to lean forward. Most of the guidelines for chair selection that are found in ergonomics text books and training manuals are ultimately derived from ANSI-100 and its European and American predecessors. They are based on anthropometric data that measures the distance between bony prominences on the body, but they do not consider the functions performed by the person who is seated. Based on our experience with 911 in Rochester, Dr. Inger Williams and I have learned that consideration of population measurements of leg length, elbow height, and forearm length are only the first step in specifying chairs for office or production workplaces. I addressed this in 1985 in my book, Working With Backache by including both a set of measurements and a flow chart to determine what are the most important chair characteristics for different types of tasks (see Figure and Table Bl attached). In reviewing those recommendations today, I would update some of the tabled values and add or expand a few of the flow chart breakouts, but the basic idea has held up. The process for deciding on the best chair for a job should probably run as fallows: 1. Define the tasks performed and % of work time on each one. 2. Determine the most important chair characteristics for the primary tasks (e.g., need to reach forward, working at more than one surface height, etc.) �3. Define the hands' working height for the primary tasks and the type of activity (e.g., typing, assembly, operating tools, etc.) 4. Choose the chair height adjustability range needed based on the working height of the hands so people can work at or below elbow height. 5. If the job requires sustained activity in the same hand location (e.g., using a calculator or mouse), arm rests should be considered, preferably ones that adjust in a 4-inch range and can be moved horizontally and laterally as well. 6. Footrings are not an appropriate footrest for continuous sitting because they tend to increase thigh and lower leg discomfort through reduction of leg circulation. They are a good alternate foot support for short seated periods, however. 7. The choice of back rest characteristics depends on the tasks done. If a person is leaning forward to work or see, a back rest that adjusts in and out about 6 inches is recommended. Adjustability in back rest height of 4 inches is also recommended if people are sharing workplaces or sitting for extended periods. 8. Seated comfort also depends on the hardness or softness of the seat, arm rests, and back rests and on the type of material used. Unless there are FDA or other regulation to follow, a "breathable" fabric is most comfortable for extended sitting. A little more detail on these characteritics follows: 1. If the workplace does not allow height adjustability of the working surface (or a keyboard holder), determine the range of seat heights needed to accommodate the population's hand working height minus 7 to 11 inches. For office work, this should be in the 15 to 22 inches range. For laboratory or bench work it will be higher, and foot support will be needed (a footring is not satisfactory for continuous sitting, though). 2. Arm rests are usually used for support of the arms between task elements. They occasionally can be used to support the arm during sustained work in the same location, as in mouse, trackball, or keypad use or in operating controls on a �microscope. In order to accommodate the shorter and taller operator, one needs at least 4 inches of adjustability in the arm rest, and it should be within the range of 7 to 11 inches below where the hands are located in the workplace. Arm rest length should be kept under IO inches to clear the work surface while seated. 3. Back rest adjustability is very important when people have to work forward to write or reach or see for sustained periods. Many of the new "ergonomic" chairs do not have a back rest that adjusts horizontally (in and out); they use a tilt mechanism on the chair back instead. This is often uncomfortable, for people with short legs especially, because the forward tilt of the back rest changes the lumbar support point and also tends to push them out of the chair. Tall people find the back rest tilt shortens their thlgh support too much and complain of discomfort in the buttocks. The better design for people who have to work forward on their work surface is to have in and out adjustability of the back rest as well as movement up and down to locate the lumbar support appropriately. A horizontal range of 6 inches and a vertical range of 4 inches should be satisfactory for most workers. Chairs that have a horizontally sliding seat and a fixed back rest can be a good alternative, too, providing there is at least 17 inches of thigh support available for tall people. 4. The material used on the seat, back, and arm rests of a chair can make a significant difference in comfort. Sometimes the range of materials available is limited by FDA or other regulations, so those requirements have to be honored. For places where machine oils or other environmental situations make it difficult to keep a fabric clean, one may have to go to an easily cleanable material. For most offices, fabric that breathes is an important design feature, and this is particularly needed in areas where there is no air conditioning. Rounded surfaces on arm rests and a waterfall front at the front edge of the seat are also important design features for comfort. C. Suggested Approach for Chair Selection To make sure that chairs coming into the plant or office have ergonomics characteristics, one can specify a few features and then trigger the need for additional characteristics through a job checklist. �This would be a MUST and a WANT prioritization of features so , Purchasing has some leeway in finding vendors. The "MUSTs" I usually suggest are: • 5-leg base • seat length about 17 inches • hydraulic cylinder height adjustability (16 to 21 inches or higher for higher work surfaces) • Breathable fabric (unless FDA or other rules apply). • Waterfall front on seat pan • No sharp edges • At least 17 inches between arms • Back rest adjustability in and out 6 inches and up and down 4 inches • Arm rests at least 2 inches wide and 6 inches long, but no more than 10 inches long. The "WANTs" include: • Tilt capability on seat pan (0-10 ° ) • Seat length adjustability • Arm rest adjustability laterally and horizontally as well as vertically • Foot ring for chairs that adjust above 21 inches vertically (but foot rest still needed) • Lumbar support - inflatable • Compressible seat - foam or fabric • Easily adjusted back rest As a general rule, I have learned that one can have all the right sizes but still have large numbers of people uncomfortable in an "ergonomic" chair. That usually relates to how they have to use the chair to get their work done. It also puts a real burden on purchasing to get too specific on some of the measurements. The most successful approach is probably to identify which chairs are in the desired price range, check to be sure they have the "MUST" features, and then have the vendor send a chair or two over for trial before they are ordered. That way any potential problems can be identified and remedied before the purchase is finalized. 6/13/96 SHR/mes .,,,-:r. "'- .,. •;- � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource General Guidelines for Chair Selection Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1996-06-13 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_026 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-20 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 4 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/be2231cc1f21cb791e24bdac45069692.pdf 21315ada06b244991cfde0736e2fe500 PDF Text Text ---� '!" l:<:...._ ...�� An Integrated Ergonomics Program At The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company The Forcing Strategy D T Geras, CD Pepper, SH Rodgers Spiraling workers' health care cost necessitated a systems approach to employee safety managemen� at The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company. Our mission w2.s charted, "To eli.IT!i'!.1ate loss and maxJ.mJ.ze our resources through the application of ergonomic principles, in support of tqe perfection strategy." The following reviews Goodyear's approach to establish a global ergonomics awareness program by utilizing a forcing strategy to create change. INTRODUCTION The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company has traditionally taken the approach of providing the needed safety and health res.:iitrces to maintain or exceed the reauired Corporate, Federal, State and local safety pe;formance standards. During 1986, the safety department analyzed the corporations' injury and illness data. It was determined that approximately 62! of our total workers' compensation payout was a result of strains and sprains due to lifting. pushing and bending. The 42! frequency of cumulative trauma type cases resulted in expenditures of millions of workers' health care dollars for ergonomic type problems. These accidents were classified into situations resulting from the poor application of equipment design, plant layout, operator/equipment systems a�d the general work environment. During 1986, (Mihelick, 1986) developed the concept of "PERFECTION STRATEGY." This vision of a manufacturing perfection environment, dealt with both present and future concepts of the ideal work place. Mr Mihelick then developed nineteen points of critical inter�st for manufacturing management to monitor, in terms of plant performance. The first item listed in terms of importance dealt with employee safety. The perfection performance is "ALL Injuries strategy regarding satety 1 Ar2. Prevenr::able." In order to achieve this goal, we needed a oraac:ive ergonomics approach. ... �-2- This approach would have two phases. The first phase dealt with establishing ergonomics awareness in all manufacturing facilities worldwide. Then, we would incorporate ergonomics principles into the initial design of equipment, plants, and people/machine systems. METHOD During 1986, a request from our Logan, Ohio, General Products plant, revealed the benefits of ergonomic intervention in solving carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). The CTS was a result of unusual stresses on the operators hands and wrist while fabricating automobile dashboards. ·The plant study consisted of work station evaluations and suggestions to correct and prevent future ergonomi� problems. Also, plant engineering discussions allowed for initial orientation to the benefits of applying ergonomic principles in the plant. Due in part to the success at our Logan plant, we determined that all facilities would benefit by establishing a structured ergonomics program within the plant . . At this time, Goodyear was evaluating each manufacturing facility's c ory .c .:,-v nst l...c]•_.1,.1.,. .c-e -i-1 -c:a ..L.--� �-m-o .:::a .:...__ ..J ._u .. ._._, � n°n--- a_,:: . L'o--l. ao-1.· prcgr;:,m pr-or;:,·n 0:=1. .1. The plant's audit score is then reported to executive management and carries the same importance as other manufacturing pe4formance indicators. The decision was made to incorpo�ate an ergonomics section into our existing safety program audit manual. This section emphasized establishing an ergonomics committee, general awareness training for all personnel, employee involvement, repetitive trauma evaluation and requirements to conduct routine ergonomics audits to ide�tify proble�s in the plant. Thus, we created a need for the ergonomic program before it actually existed. Soon afterwards, our plants were calling for assistance to meet the audit requirements. We actually forced the plants into accepting ownership for the program. 0 J Phase One - Reactive Ergonomics As the heading notes, the reactive ergonomics phase dealt with the plants and their existing problems. As in most situations, we needed to correct design and plant layout errors. Unfortunately, we corrected these errors after they were exhibited as injuries and illnesses. But, we were on the right track and moving forward with a program to prevent these problems. Pilot Programs A pilot training program was conducted at our St Marys plant, St Marys, Ohio. The plant safety manager was requested to videotape several problem jobs within the plant. Those jobs involved accidents resulting i� strains and sprains, CTS, absenteeism, quality and productivity problems. The videotapes would then be used as part of the problem solving workshop. A five d�y training program was scheduled. .. �-j- The following table breaks do"711 the weekly activities. Table 1. Ergonomics Pilot Training Program Day 1 - Couduct Plant Ergonomics Survey Present Plant Management Orientation Review Videotape of Problem Jobs Days 2-4 - Conduct Ergonomics Committee Training/ Problem Solving Workshop Day 5 - Conduct General Awareness Training (4 hours)/Key Plant Personnel Training Pro�rarn The pilot training program proved a success and this precipitated additional requests from other division plants for training assistance. The forcing strategy worked. Due to the competitive nature of our plants, no facility wanted to be outperformed on the safety audit. In order to facilitate plant trai�ing requests and establish the ergonomics program as rapidly as possible, we devised the following agenda. A training schedule was established for each manufacturing division. Each plant in the division was requested to send three representatives to participate in a four day ergonomics training and problem solving workshop. The training participants would then create the nucleus for an ergonomics committee within the plant. The training participants were the movers and shakers within the plant. They all had reputations ·for their problem solving capabilities, teamwork, and communication skills. Table 2. - Suggested Training Program Participants Plant Nurse Safety Manager Training Specialist Industrial Hygienist Industrial Relations - Industrial Engineers Workers Compensation Production Specialist Union Safety Personnel Engineering Maintenance Each plant was also asked to provide a videotape of several problem jobs to be used as topic material in the problem solving portion of the program. The training participants had four goals {Rodgers, 1988): 1. Become familiar with the field of ergonomics and resource books. 2. Be able to identify and analyze ergonomics problems in the plant. 3. Be able to generate multiple approaches to solving • the problems. 4. Understand how to go about incorporating ergonomic principles into daily plant activites. �-q- An ergonomics awareness manual was created to assist the participants during the course and after their return to the plan.t. This manual had to be user friendly. It was designed·· to provide all the necessary information to accomplish the audit requirements and implement the program with the least amount of difficulty. The awareness manual contained a provided ergonomics training syllabus; a section on committee makeup; goals and roles; an outline of the required plant activities report; a guide to achieve lOOZ of the audit requirements; an example of an implementation plan; a training section which provided the plant with four one-half hour training modules; and a section for ergonomic articles and reference materials. Each participant also received a set of resource text books for their personal use (Eastman, Kodak, 1983, 1986). The training syllabus (Rodgers, 1988) covered the necessary topics in ergonomics which could be applied to solve problems in an industrial setting. General awareness training involving all manufacturing pe=sonnel is a mandatory safety audit item. To assist the plants, fou.:- one-half hou:?:" training modules were created. These training modules were in the sta�dardized company performance based training format. A trainers script was provided as well as videotapes concerning the particular ergonomics topic. Also, copies of suggested overheads for each training module were supplied to the plant on a personal computer disc. The canned training program enhanced the acceptance of the training requirement of the audit program. The training modules covered the following topics: Module 1 - Ergonomics Overview Module 2 - Repetitive Motion Injury Module 3 - Work Postures & Manual Material Handling Module 4 - Identifying Ergonomic Problems/Problem Solving Additional training modules will be provided in the future. This will maintain the program awareness after the general awareness training is completed. Program Implementation Training participants were given the charge to implement the program soon after their return to the plant. The following implementation process was then developed as a guide: 1. Develop an action plan. 2. Introduce the topic to gain the support of management, union leaders, and the safety committee. 3. Establish an Ergonomics Committee structure, assign roles, designate coordinators, and committee members. 4. Train the trainers (committee members) and all plant personnel in general ergonomics awareness. ; 5. Identify problem areas, utilize computer safety and compensation information systems, and employee inte::-views. �-J- 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Conduct audits: Identify problems, videotape jobs, and conduct committee reviews. All plant Ergonomics Committees conduct problem job reviews for solutions and input from all. Communicate success by plant public relations work, keep the program fresh by using newsletters, pamphlets, etc. Ergonomics Committees report monthly activities to the plant coordinator. Plant coordinator reports to plant management and corporate office. Develop outside resources: consultants, texts� and future training. To assure program participation, each plant was required to submit an activities re?ort on a monthly basis. This would continue for the first six months following the training program. Then, this report would be filed at quarterly intervals. Updates of division progress were submitted to the respective production director on a quarterly cycle. Plants with little or no progres�·were highlighted for follow up by the production director. Liker (1987) found thut the most effectiv� activity process in correcting ergonomic-type problems was to: - Start small and simple - Implement ea�ly projects fast - Learn by doing - training - doing - Develop and maintain operational groups Incorporate review process - new and changed equipment - Communicate, communicate, communicate - Look at problems as opportunities The training program was completed on schedule with all 87 manufacturing plants worldwide represented. This c.•.; ,,r., ,..._...,.: _,; ,,...,.,... __ ,...rr..,....R'"" e f=f=--r si...--,,...ened ou'-'-06"""'"'-"""..,•""'5.Lf..A.U p-o•--!lm implementation time by approximately one and a half years. ...,, ... rT- 0 c:• '-L.U.-i....t.&..J...J..t.E, !;-'.._VE:,J... LU -.LVL.'- 4.&.V.1.'- J.. L. Phase Two - Proactive Ergonomics The most effective time to incorporate ergonomic principles is in the initial design phase. Unfortunately, senior engineering personnel with ergonomics training are not widely available in the Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company. We decided to initiate general ergonomics awareness training programs for all of our engineering staff personnel. We began this training with an awareness presentation for corporate engineering management. The presentation was followed by additional training for corporate engineering staff and engineering consultants. This involved approximately 250 personnel in the engineering disciplines. Concurrently, we conducted awareness training for executive management in order to gain their support and to assure that we had a driving force behind the program. As a part of the ergonomics development training for our engineering staff, a video library was established (Rodgers, 1988). This video library contains analyses cf the plan: problem jobs that were submitted as part of �-6- the plant training programs. These analyses would then be categorized and used as training aids for new and existing staff personnel. Also, a training needs analysis will be completed in the future. The purpose is to determine what additional and specialized training is essential for the engineering staff. Ergonomics reviews were recently mandated as part of dn equipment safety approval system. This standard practice requires an ergonomics, safety, industrial hygiene, and environmental assessment of the equipment before final approval fo� fabrication is given. A safety engineer was assigned the responsibility of coordinating new equipment safety/ergonomics review activities between the receiving plane and vendor/design consultants. The ergonomics safety review led to the establishment of the X-Plant concept. The program involves the review of existing plant modernizations in order to evaluate those activities for ergonomic equipment design and plant layout. We will take this information and correct design errors as part of the initial design of future plants. The entire ergonomics program is reviewed on a yearly tasi� ia order to raonitar progress. adjust the ?ra;ra� as needed and to chart future activities. RESULTS The Ergonomics plant program has been iu existence for less than a year. Due to the varying size of the plants, they are reporting different levels of progress in meeting the audit requirements. But, all plants are actively pursuing the 100% goal. I would like to reflect on the two facilities that received initial ergonomics intervention and the pilot training program. Both facilities are in the Industrial Produces Division wich a broad range of job activities that may subject the employees to ergonomically related injuries and illnesses. A key safety performance indicator is the lost time incident rate that the plant reports. This rate deals only with cases involving actual days away from work for a work related injury or illness. Table 3. Lost Time Incident Rate Comparison Logan and St Marys Plants (Year End Statistics) Plant 1984 1985 Logan 4.9 4.4 4.5* Sc Marys 9.7 5.6 8.9 1986 1987 o·. s (7.4/0.8)+ 1988 o. 9 2.6 * Initial Ergonomics Intervention, 10-86 + Pilot Training Program - 9-87, YTD 8-87 (7:4) Beth plants reduced their lost time incident rates dramatically after the intervention and training programs. The St Marys plant improved from last to first place in their division for this performance indicator. The Sc '---•� ��P�c rate inc�eased at yea�s end due to �-7- a slowdown in program activities. This was a result of key committee personnel being involved in contract negotiations. The plant is improving their activities since the negotiations ended. We cannot say what amount of this improvement can be attributed to the ergonomics program. But, the plant management has informed us that the overall plant communications have benefited from the training program. The plant manager has also stated that team work in problem solving is evident throughout the plant, and that all levels of employees are contributing to the development of improved work stations. The following is a compilation of some of the success ,stories submitted by the plants. The Greensburg plant has improved a large air spring fabrication station by eliminating unnecessary operator floor movement and extended hand reaches. This modification resulted in less opera�or fatigue and improvement in productivity of over 60Z. The change was submitted by an hourly employee and no Crtpital improvement budget was required. The success of this change resulted in operator -::-eq-:.iests to change the additional three similar work s tatic,r,s. The St Ma�ys plant modified a tank track shoe production line to eliminate unnecessary handling of two and one half tons of m2 terial over t·..;o shifts. This change wRs department funded and did not require a capital budget. The Madisonville plant needed an operator sit/stand inspection seat that resembled a saddle to reduce operator back and leg fatigue as a result of long duration standing. An appropriate pod seat was found but replaced with an employe� E=gonomics Committee suggestion. The employee cc..:::r- ----fn11nd nn fic::hi"nao boat!'-� - Th1"s... --t>b _____ - T'\rnn-t-vno r--r -..1r- -----idea was evaluated and ac�epted for triai use resulting in a considerable savings while producing the same results. Operators have not complained of back and leg fatigue since the installation of this equipment. These are some of the changes being incorporated in our plants as a result of the ergonomics program. Improvements in operator safety productivity and quality are noted. The initial results are in and they point to a win-win situation for all the parties involved. C,11(TOOC,!-O� ::, SUMMARY In evaluating the key factors in this program, we have concluded that the general awareness trai�ing for all employees, auditing the program implementation and program participation at all levels are integral to the success of an ergonomics program. For maximum impact, ergonomic programs should be implemented into the design phase of equipment, plant layout, operator/machine systems and the gener�l · work environment. Emplo�ees when given a basic understanding of ergonomics and then allowed to interact with fellow ecployees, will d�rive a common sens.e approach to eliminate stressors at thei= wcrk s�ations. In manv situations, corrections to ·-- ---.�1 a�c �� be �a�2 with mini�al capital �-u- expenditure. An additional benefit of the program will be improvements in communications and team work at all levels of plant employees. The acceptance of chis program by union personnel probably would not have been possible ten years ago. The economic realities of global competition have changed chis attitude, however, the need for company productivity improvements are vital. With their participation in the ergonomics program, employees will have a say in the development of their work environment, and job requirements and together more efficient and effective designs can be developed. The proper application of Ergonomics will result in improvements in employee safety, productivity, and quality. REFERENCES Eastman, Kodak Company, Human Factors Section, Ergonomic Design for People At Work, Volume 1 (1983) and Volume 2 (1986), New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. . · Liker, J.K., 1987, Org2nizational Aspects of Ergonomics ?rogramG. !rr: Procecdi�2s cf the EneinceriD£ Su��r Conference on Occuoational Ergonomics, the University of Michigan. Mihelick, S.J., 1936, PerfE:c:tion Environment3. In: Proceeding of the Organizational Development Training �rogram, Niagara Falls, edited by D. T. Geras. Rodgers, S.H., 1988, "Four Day Ergonomics Training PrograI!l for The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company", training syllabus for ergonomics problem solving course; S. H. Rodgers, Ph.D., 169 Huntington Hills, Rochester, No,.1 Y/"lrk' ---·· · ---· ---·--, -1 !.,F,.?? � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The Forcing Strategy: An Integrated Ergonomics Program At The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Garas, D.T. Pepper, C.D. Description An account of the resource Spiraling workers' health care cost necessitated a systems approach to employee safety management at The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company. Our mission was charted, "To eliminate loss and maximize our resources through the application of ergonomic principles, in support of the perfection strategy." The following reviews Goodyear's approach to establish a global ergonomics awareness program by utilizing a forcing strategy to create change. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_025 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-20 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 8 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/4d8f139562640b19132e2a03f115e107.pdf 2e048dd69b69a14490d1539cf39819c3 PDF Text Text � A Proposed Revision of the Frequency Factor for the i NIOSH Work Practices Guide for Manual Lifting by Suzanne H. Rodgers, Donald E. Badger, Vincent Ciriello, Arun Garg, Hollis Hohensee, Gary Lovested, Anil Mital, Stover H. Snook, and J. W. Yates. In 1981 the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health published the Work Practices Guide for Manual Lifting (NIOSH, 1981 ). The purpose of the Guide is to provide state-of-the-art information about manual lifting tasks and how to design them to reduce the risk of strain, sprain and overexertion injuries at work, The committee of experts that developed the Guide used biomechanical, psychophysical, epidemiological, and physiological information to establish two levels of object weight where either most people were accommodated by the task design (the Action Limit, or AL) or where most people were at risk of overexertion (the Maximum Permissible Limit, or MPL). Although these guidelines are intended for use in designing lifting tasks, there has been interest in using them to set standards for safe workplaces and jobs in order to prevent overexertion injuries. In one pilot program (OSHA, 1986), compliance officers are looking for excessive incidence of low back problems and strains and sprains and will then evaluate the jobs using the NIOSH Manual Lifting Guide formula. Presumably, if the Guide values are being exceeded, the employer may be cited against the OSHA general duty clause for not providing a safe workplace. 1. �There are several reasons why this use of the NIOSH Manual Lifting Guide information must be reviewed. They include the following observations: 1. The Guide is for the design of lifting tasks in order to reduce the risk of injury. If the guidelines are not met, it does nQ1 follow that people will be injured. Other factors such as self selection or "natural selection" on the job may be reducing that risk without the use of administrative or engineering controls. 2. Low back pain incidents are more likely to be reported on lifting jobs because of the effort required. This does not mean that the lifting caused the low back problems but rather that repetitive lifting cannot be performed when a person is experiencing low back pain. About 67% of the low back pain in industry is probably associated with degenerative disc disease (Rowe, 1983), and episodes of low back pain may occur to people who are doing even well-designed lifting tasks. Because there is not a direct relationship between low back pain incidence and the lifting task requirements, one cannot assume that following the NIOSH Lifting Guide guidelines will prevent low back pain at work. 3. Although the NIOSH Work Practices Guide for Manual Lifting represented the state-of-the-art in 1981 when it was published, more recent research and experience in trying to apply the formulae to industrial tasks have identified some areas for improvement: 2. �a. The frequency correction factor does not correspond to the laboratory data or reflect the industrial experience, especially at lifting frequencies above 6 per minute for more than 1 hour per shift (Garg and Saxena, 1983; Rodgers, 1982; Snook, 1982). For example, the current frequency factor correction suggests that the AL is O pounds if compact boxes are handled from a floor pallet to a conveyor at 12 times per minute for more than 1 hour per shift; or, in other words, the task cannot be done safely, even with no weight. Since there are many such jobs performed in industry without a significant history of musculoskeletal injuries (Rodgers, 1982; Rodgers and Pilarski, 1986), the validity of the use of the guidelines to cite a job as unsafe can be challenged. b. Most industrial lifting tasks are done assymmetrically, not in the sagittal plane with compact loads using handholds and sharing the weight with both hands (Rodgers, 1982). Deviation from those assumptions reduces the AL and MPL values further, so even small errors in their calculation can have a significant impact on the assignment of risk to a given lifting task if the guidelines are used in compliance reviews. c. The lifting tasks need to be looked at in the context of the work pattern and the other physical job demands, such as postural demands and total energy requirements 3. �(Garg, 1985). The lifting pattern will influence local muscle fatigue development and the metabolic demands of that part of the job. A 1-hour vs. 8-hour duration distinction gives equal weight to 72 minutes of 1 O per minute lifting and 6 hours of 2 per minute lifting, workloads that are very different physiologically, especially from the standpoint of local muscle fatigue. d. The linearity of the relationship between AL and MPL (3AL = MPL) in the Guide is debatable, if convenient. The MPL values thus calculated often do not agree with psychophysical data collected empirically (Garg, 1985; Snook and Ciriello, 1983). In the summer of 1985, NIOSH formed an ad hoc committee to evaluate the frequency factor of the Lifting Guide and to suggest ways to improve it. Representatives from industry and researchers from universities who have studied frequent lifting tasks discussed applications of the frequency factor and where it could be improved. This paper summarizes those thoughts and presents a revised frequency factor that more accurately predicts the observed AL and MPL values for industrial men and women. 4. �I. Review of the Current Frequency Factor (NIOSH, 1981) The 1 981 NIOSH Work Practices Guide for Manual Lifting presents a formula for calculating the Action Limit (AL), in terms of the acceptable weight of a load that 75% of the women and 99% of the men should be able to lift at the locations, lifting frequency, and duration indicated. That formula is: AL(kg) = 40(15/H) (1-0.004 IV-75I) (0.7+7.5/ D) (1-F/ Fmax), where H is the horizontal distance, in cm, from the ankles (the distance from the weight-bearing hands to the ankles in a sagittal plane lift) V is the initial vertical location, in cm, of the hands in the lift, D is the vertical distance of the lift, in cm, or the difference between the destination height and the starting height in most cases, Fis the average frequency of lifting, in lifts per minute, and Fmax is the predicted maximum lifting frequency for that location and duration of lifting. 5. �The Fmax table gives the maximum lifts per minute that can be sustained for one or up to 8 hours (more than one hour) when lifting in either an upright (standing) or stooped posture. Standing Stooped (V > 75cm) (V < 75cm) 1 hour 18 15 8 hours 15 12 Thus, if a job requires a person to lift from a floor pallet to a bench at a rate of 6 per minute for 15 minutes out of every hour on an 8-hour shift, the "stooped" and "8 hours" Fmax of 12 will be used. The frequency factor for correcting the occasional lifting (less than 1 per 5 minutes) AL would be (1- F/ Fmax) or 1- (6/12) = 0.5. Two hours a day of lifting at 6 per minute would, therefore, reduce the load weight by 50% to be acceptable for 75% of the women and 99% of the men. The basis for the Fmax table is the metabolic demands of frequent lifting, especially when that lifting is done below knuckle level. In low lifting, the object being handled is only part of the weight being moved. The upper body is also moved, and this increases the metabolic work load by about 20% for lifting at the same frequency as 6. �when standing upright (Garg, 1978; Hamilton and Chase, 1968). In the Fmax table, the 8-hour workload would use a Fmax of 12 for stooped lifting. This is 80% of the value of 15 for lifting while standing upright. For one hour of lifting or less, the total metabolic load is less critical. About 50% of maximum aerobic capacity can be used for one hour of continuous work (Astrand and Rodahl, 1970). The stooped workload is still 20% greater than the standing load, so the Fmax again has to be reduced by approximately 20%, or from 18 to 15 lifts per minute. The percent of aerobic capacity that can be used in lifting for 1 hour versus 8 hours changes from 50% to 33%. The reduction in Fmax is also approximately 17%, moving from 18 to 15 lifts per minute. Studies by Lind, Petrofsky and Webster (1976, 1978) on box lifting showed that the aerobic capacities for lifting tasks varied with box weight and frequency. They found that the metabolic component of the lifting task became most important at frequencies above 6 per minute for low lifting. These data do not appear to have been integrated into the existing frequency factor correction except in recognizing that metabolic, as well as biomechanical and psychophysical factors are to be considered as lifting frequency increases. Other data that were used in establishing the AL values and against which the frequency factor could be tested are the psychophysical data of Snook and Ciriello (1983) and Ayoub et al (1978). Tables showing the 25th percentile female and 75th 7. �percentile male's acceptable loads (that is, the load acceptable to 75% of the women and 25% of the men) can be used to test the appropriateness of the existing frequency factor in determining AL and MPL values, respectively, for fixed values of H, V, and D. Another area for improvement of the current frequency factor is in the calculation of lifting frequency and duration. In the NIOSH Work Practices Guide for Manual Lifting, the authors recommend that the average number of lifts per minute be used to determine lifting frequency. Lifts of less than one every 3 minutes, even if done for the majority of the shift are considered infrequent and do not have a frequency correction for acceptable weight. Lifts that are done more than once every 3 minutes for a period of up to one hour per shift are considered "occasional high frequency," and lifting at more than once every 3 minutes for more than one hour continuously is considered a "continuous high frequency" task. Many occupational lifting tasks involve intermittent lifting. A truck may be unloaded, a pallet loaded, supplies may be obtained for delivery to another location, raw materials may be loaded into reaction vessels, etc. The lifting frequency during the� work periods may be 10 per minute, but there are equal periods of no lifting that might reduce the average lifting frequency to 5 per minute over the shift. Physiologically, the 1 O per minute load and the length of the recovery period probably have a greater impact on the risk for muscle overexertion. 8. �Suggestions of how to calculate lifting frequency are given in the examples at the end of Chapter 8 of the NIOSH Manual Lifting Guide. For frequent lifting tasks such as loading and unloading pallets and handling several different products on an assembly line, the lifting frequencies are calculated individually for each tier of the pallet and each product handled. For the palletizing task, for example, the rate of lifting was 12 per minute, but in evaluating the task tier by tier, a lifting frequency of 2.4 per minute was used for each of the five tiers. Since the actual frequency of lifting at each tier is still 12 boxes per minute, this approach is not appropriate, although it is a necessary one to get a reasonable AL using the current frequency factor. If a 12 per minute rate is used at each tier, the AL drops to 0 (and, therefore, the MPL = 0, too) for the 3 tiers below 75 cm. This suggests that the task cannot be performed safely by anyone. The availability of 2 durations only, 1 hour or less versus more than 1 hour, does not recognize the variability in work patterns in industry and the extreme differences between the demands of lifting very frequently for short periods intermittently throughout the shift and lifting continuously at lower frequencies for a full shift. The metabolic considerations can be largely accounted for through the use of two duration categories. But, the local muscle fatigue factor, which probably plays an equal role in determining job suitability in these tasks, is determined by the recovery time available as well as by the actual frequency during the work period. 9. �II. Comparisons of Predicted vs Observed Frequency Correction Factors In developing a correction factor for lifting frequency, one must express a complex set of relationships in as simple a form as possible. Some accuracy can be sacrificed for this simplicity, but the degree of error should be known and understood when using the formula to make decisions about the risk factors for manual lifting injuries. A study of industrial jobs that had been studied by measuring the physiological responses of workers during handling tasks found that the frequency correction factor was too conservative. It predicted much lower AL and MPL values than those that were routinely obseNed in trailer loading, can handling, conveyor unloading, and bag handling tasks (Rodgers and Badger, 1988). A 1.5 to 2.0-fold difference in the AL appeared to be acceptable in many cases. A plot of the NIOSH 1981 frequency correction factors and the factors derived from Ciriello and Snook's 1986 summary of their psychophysical studies of acceptable load is shown in Figure 1. The NIOSH formula best reflects the empirical data from psychophysical studies between 1 lift every 5 minutes and 2 lifts per minute but gives too low values at very low and at high frequencies (> 6/minute). 10. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource A Proposed Revision of the Frequency Factor for the NIOSH Work Practices Guide for Manual Lifting Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Badger, Donald E. Ciriello, Vincent Garg, Arun Hohensee, Hollis Lovested, Gary Mital, Anil Snook, Stover H. Yates, JW Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_024 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-20 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 10 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/281107ea836a1f63023c9b8ba64e86e2.pdf 730e96ce55027274f5da158a27b24aae PDF Text Text Comments on the June 4, 1993 ANSI 2365 Draft "Control of Cumulative Trauma Disorders" Page# Comments 1 -1 " ...intended for use by persons who have responsibility for design and operation of work equipment..." - there is very little in the proposed standard that addresses the design of work equipment. I think there should be more general m aterial in this category, but right now I would say that that purpose of the standard has not been met by this document. 3- 1 "ergonomic stressors" - the use of this term (and "ergonomic hazard") must be stopped as it is oxymoronic and inaccurate . If something is ergonomic, the stressors are minimal. Either use "non-ergonomic stressors" or use "stressors" without a modifier. 3-2 2nd paragraph - labor§ important but not2 times in one list. Perhaps it should be labor representatives (union) for one and the wage worker (associate, hourly worker on the job of interest) for the other. Figure3-1 3-3 This still represents only the reactive side of the program. Should include another block for the proactive side which includes the design of facilities, equipment, environments, and jobs within ergonomic guidelines. Could also include team involvement in process safety reviews, accident investigations, etc. 3rd paragraph - "... Medical. . ." should be "Health and Safety ... " since many plants do not have medical personnel on site and safety or human resources fulfills their role along with an off-site clinic. 3.4 Employee Participation - add problem solving sessions and "fiddle sessions" where they make things work. These are essential roles that the hourly workers play in the successful implementation of ergonomic changes. �2. Page# Comments 4-1 Include California State Standard, Title 8, Chapter 4, Group 15, Article 106: Ergonomic Hazards, 1993. Also include new ANSI Standard on Machine Tools as it should be out by the time this one is printed. 5- 1 2nd big paragraph " ...ergonomic risk factors ..." should be "non-ergonomic risk factors... " 5-2 5.2.2 Active surveillance definition - need to distinguish between "symptoms" and "discomfort" more carefully. They tend to get used interchangeably and they should not be. Need a better discussion of how this information will be used (paragraph 2) since many people do not report discomfort so their jobs will not be changed. 5.3 Surveillance ... - this is still primarily a reactive approach. A major function of a good ergonomics program is to reduce work-related musculoskeletal problems through ergonomic design of workplaces, tools, equipment, environments, and jobs. 5-3 5.3.2 Role of Screening in CTD Surveillance - 2nd paragraph use of electrodiagnostic testing - since it's not recommended for routine screening, please leave it out. It is a reasearch study, not something that should be done as part of a cumulative trauma disorders control program. The base data (nerve conduction time) is weak and such a unidimensional study would yield little useful information, anyway. The workers will give more accurate readings of their discomfort or symptomatology. 5-5 Figure 5-1 : - Risk Factor Surveillance - I have many problems with this whole approach, especially the surveillance for CTDs that says 1 case per 100 employee years is enough to require level 2 risk factor evaulation and level 2 CTD surveillance. Although, it is stated that there are many ways to do risk factor surveillance at levels 1 and 2, the chart is tied into the trigger score approach that is presented in Appendix A. Has that approach been validated ? If it is required by this standard, then it should be validated and tested on a large range of jobs. A quick application of the �3. technique to jobs I have studied shows that it over weights the biomechanical elements of work and badly under weights the physiological components. For example, the scores suggest that lifting a heavy object slowly is better than lifting it at a moderate pace. This decision was affected by concerns about peak velocities but ignores the potential muscle fatigue and increased recovery time needed when the lift is made more slowly. There are other parts of the weighting of factors that seem arbitrary (e.g., the multiplicative psychosocial factors). Since it is likely that Appendix A will be used by OSHA compliance officers if the DOL accepts the ANSI standard as "notification of hazard", it is essential that any "endorsed" risk factor evaluation and quantification scheme be validated and tested across all types of jobs. 5-6 End of last paragraph "... (less than 5% incidence on passive surveillance") - how does this relate to a 1 % incidence used to trigger level 2 surveillance and risk factor evaluations ? Does it include low backs? 5-7 Last paragraph - still confusing discomfort and CTDs in many of the level 1 and 2 surveillance questions. True level 2 surveillance should result in diagnoses if symptoms are present. Much of the discomfort relates to sustained postures - light effort sustained for minutes/hours. Job pattern and job control determines how likely it is that the discomfort will lead to a diagnosis of a bursitis or thoracic outlet syndrome, for example. It is not appropriate to just count risk factors and take the jobs with the greatest number first, because these factors are interactive and are modified by job patterns. Using a risk factors checklist approach where the number rather than the interactions are sufficient to trigger a positive RF rating, one can expect to find a lot of RF+/CTD jobs. I have found it much more fruitful to follow a discomfort survey (where both the frequency and intensity of discomfort are rated by the workers) with a review of factors that could contribute to discomfort in each body part identified. This works across all body parts, not just the upper extremities. Figure 5.2 - neck disorders should be included (cervical spondylitis, costal-clavicular syndrome, etc.) �4. 5- 8 Throughout this discussion there is an interchanging of "symptoms" and "discomfort" that should be clarified. Also, too much checklist reliance. Could we agree that "symptoms" are collected only if a medical professional is administering the questionnaire? 5- 9 Comparing national data to company data is only appropriate if we are asking the exact same questions in all cases. A great benefit of this document would be if it phrased the questions to be asked in Levels 1 and 2 active surveillance. For many plants, the need to do statistical studies of their potential problems is small. Once they have identified problems and defined where they can reduce them, they will make the changes and monitor their effectiveness. The statistics will come in if they don't appear to have a problem and someone tells them they do (based on an outside evaluation of the job in most instances). Some companies, in an attempt to avoid a costly intervention, will then play the numbers game and try to prove the problem is less significant than the consultant suggested. The money spent to prove the point is often more than a more creative, less expensive, solution would cost to improve the job. I'd rather see the time spent on workplace improvements than on consultants, statisticians, and lawyers. CTD prevalence data by industry, region, age groups, sex, and by length of service would be very valuable to help in prioritizing which jobs to attack firs1, but I do not think such data is available now. A national prevalence rate is only helpful to a company if they collect their company data using the same instrument. Table 5.2 - Is this suggested as the comparison data for the users of the standard to compare their rates to? If so, even with non-occupational cases included, why is the value of 1 case of CTDs per 100 employee years used as a trigger point when more than 10% of the population may have hand/wrist' finger discomfort for more than 1 week and> 20 times per year? 5 - 11 Same problem with trigger at a CTD rate of 1 per 200,000 hours or 100 employee years. - not consistent with background rate data. 5 - 12 5.5.2 - 3rd paragraph - "Mean scores should decrease over time (Appendix A1)." This is only the case if everything �remains the same, which is rarely the case ! Still same difficulty accepting the rating scheme for risk factors without a validation study. Too much reliance on this tool as a quantitative technique. The best analytical tools are the ones that lead you to solutions that are effective and reasonably inexpensive. I don't think that the risk factor analysis approach shown in Appendix A will meet that need. 5.6 - Additional Surveillance Tools - this should be moved up in the section so more than one analytical technique is offered. Although the standard should not force companies to use .Q.llii method for analysis of risk factors, it could indicate a number of different approaches that are currently in use in American or international companies. Then, the company can chose the ones that apply most to their types of jobs, using an ergonomist to assist them in that decision but not necessarily to do the evaluations. 5 �Job Analysis and Design 6. Page# Comments 6- 1 6.1 Risk Factors and Definitions - this philosophy should be put forward in the other sections, too, especially surveillance and training. A need to reconcile the sections for consistency is apparent. "The greater the exposure to a single risk factor, the greater the risk." - Define the parameter intended here - is it the intensity of exposure or the freguency or the duration? Or all three? 6.1.1 In the example, if the effort level is the same in both motions (raising and lowering the hammer), then it could be considered one motion instead of two. It becomes 2 motions if the effort level changes or if there is a break in the effort between parts of the over-all motion. 6-2 Thanks for adding duration and recovery time. There are still some areas of confusion, but it's much closer to the original intention. I use holding time (work time), recovery time (light dynamic work or rest) and total time of sustaining that work pattern before another pattern occurs. The latter could be task time or time to the first break. Duration in terms of total time per shift may also be relevant in some jobs. 6-4 6.1.5 Posture - It is not a neutral posture to hold the elbow angle at go 0 - unless you are supporting the arm. The usual neutral posture for the forearm is with hands to the side and forearms supinated slightly. Keeping the elbow at go 0 entails muscle work, whether standing or seated, unless the forearm is supported. 6-5 6.1.6 Work Organization - for an important topic this came out very small in the document. Perhaps this is a place to explore the multiplicative effects of psychosocial factors that have been included in the trigger point risk factor analysis approach given in Appendix A. 6.1.7 Environment - !:ie.a.t is also a risk factor for carpal tunnel syndrome and possibly for other nerve entrapment syndromes. It probably acts through an effect on body water balance (increases retention) and contributes to symptoms as �an individual risk factor. It should be included in this section. 6- 6 Methods of Measurement - These measurements should be described without making it part of the standard to measure them one way ("should, must, etc."). Direction in the analysis is appreciated, but there can be legitimate differences of opinion about how to do the measurement depending on which analytical technique you use. For example, I do not use range of motion to describe repetition rate. I use it to determine effort level, since using a joint at an extreme range of motion often results in reduced capacity and, therefore, a higher percentage of maximal effort used for the task. Repetition rate - I thought there was a paper suggesting that at a rate of 30/minute even light effort contributed to CTDs. Should that be mentioned here ? 6-7 6.2.4 Force - Measurements of force beyond force gauge use and psychophysical measures are inappropriate for inclusion in the standard since the techniques are invasive and not very applicable to on-site use (laboratory use of them is even questionnable !). Psychophysical scaling of forces (repeat the exerted force on a gauge set up to ressemble the task) is quite repeatable and should be included here. I find that estimates of force (in terms of light, moderate, or heavy) are not difficult to obtain from the workers on a job as long as they do not confuse duration or frequency with effort level (how it feels if the effort is done just once for 3 to 4 seconds). Internal force measurements cannot be measured using EMG unless you use needle electrodes. Then you are only looking at a few fibers and not the whole muscle. Use of EMG to state how much force is being exerted is a very inexact science with surface electrodes since the muscle mass changes when the link positon changes (moving forearm from the neutral position to pronation, for example) and one does not know how to interpret the data when this happens. EMG is best used to detect gualitative muscle use (which ones are active) and static muscle loading. It is also useful for looking at work and recovery times for active muscles in repetitive tasks. I would leave it out of this document entirely. More detail is needed in the calculation of forces for direct 7. �8. force measurement if that paragraph is to be left in. I'd keep it simple as the real question is, is it of concern in terms of tissue injuries (peak loads that can result in tearing of tendons or muscles fibers) or in terms of sustained efforts and repetitions that could result in CTDs? Need to include velocity and acceleration in here. 6.2.5 Posture - Measurement of posture is a research project, not one that is needed to define risk in a plant. One can estimate angles and bends in the body and define them in time to establish how they influence the effort level required. If one collects the electrogoniometer data for several joints, how is it going to be used to determine risk ? I know of no data that quantifies how much deviation of a joint at different rates contributes to the etiology of CTDs. I do know that the deviation of joints contributes to the % of effort required to do a task because there is less strength available when wrist or shoulder joints reach their extremes of motion. The interactions can be described in a risk factor listing and do not need extensive measurement. I have collected much of that kind of data and finally concluded that I do not know how to interpret it. Problems can be solved without that degree of analysis, and that is what the standard should be addressing. 6-8 The postural angles can be measured quite simply through grouping them into ones where there is slight, moderate, or extreme deviation. There is very inadequate data available to be able to relate the angles to changes in strength or capacity of the muscles and support structures. If you want to suggest these techniques as ones that will quantify posture, please put it in an Appendix and not as part of the standard. I find that too much time is spent in analyzing the postures and not enough in analyzing the reasons for the postures that will lead to problem resolution. 6.2.7.1 Vibration - I have not measured vibration extensively but isn't much of the needed information provided by the tool vendors? If you give the plants a value to shoot for, couldn't they ask the vendor to do the tests and establish that the risk is minimal ? Refer to vibration standard here. 6.2.7.2 Cold - add "Heat" and suggest that the temperature should be measured with a WBGT (wet bulb globe �thermometer) system. This will give you shielded dry bulb (non-radiant heat dry bulb temperature), globe (radiant heat), and natural wet bulb (humidity/dewpoint) readings of the ambient environment. A thermistor could be useful if surface temperature readings are needed (as in assessing the cold generated by an air tool venting over the wrist). 6 - 10 9. " ...but in the hands of inadequately trained people, checklists can and have been grossly misused." - I hate to say it, but they are grossly misused in the hands of some highly trained people, too. The usual problem is that the interactions are not evaluated together and some factors get very heavily weighted because they appear in multiple places on the checklist while others (that are not risks if they occur independently of the interactions) are not included. An example of the latter is light work that is sustained for more than 20 seconds continuously and where the pattern is repeated for many hours during a shift. The interactive form-based approach shouldn't be discarded because of cost and time because there are methods available that are already developed and are being used effectively in several industries. Efficacy studies have not been done on many of them, but their focus is to initiate the problem solving process, not to prove linkages between work and CTDs. The most effective methods lead from risk factor identification and quantification to determinations of how much the risk factor has to be modified (in simple terms) to reduce the problem. 6.3.1 Preparation - add "production needs" to the list of information collected. It is unrealistic to assume that one of the things you can change is the production goal by slowing down rates or increasing break times, for instance. One can most often achieve the production goals while reducing the risk for injuries by defining what impacts the job or task demands have on productivity and quality performance (as well as on injury and illness). 6.3.2 Step Breakdown - Here is a place where the ANSI standard should follow the ADA legislation rather than creating a whole new way to analyze jobs. Using a listing of the "essential" and "non-essential" tasks first, one can then home in on the priorities for modification of the job. What �10. you miss in using a standard human factors job analysis approach is the recognition of conditions or situations that can add to risk but are not a regular part of the job. For example, a seasonal task, such as shovelling snow, may be part of a building custodian's job on an occasional basis, yet it might trigger a shoulder or back problem. If the job is reviewed in the summer, this task might not get evaluated. By splitting the job tasks into ones that are done all of the time (mopping, sweeping, emptying trash, etc.) and those that are done less frequently (seasonal jobs or rare events), the need for workplace modification versus administrative changes will be clearer. 6.3.3 Description - This should be simple but should include some quantification. If it is a handling job, for instance, make a rough estimate of how many lifts are made per shift (that is not necessarily the same as the number of products made since some items are handled several times a shift). If some of the work is heavy, estimate what% of the shift time is spent doing these tasks. If it is machine paced, indicate that. Also indicate the shift schedule (8- or 10- or 12-hour shifts, which shift, any regular overtime, etc.) and the degree of control a worker has over their pattern of work. 6 - 11 6.3.5 Step Problems - Add "poor visibility" to the list of problems that might result in the extreme wrist flexion. This opens up the possibilities a little more to show that the problem isn't always a height, orientation, tool, or fixture issue. 6.3.5 Risk Factor and Problem Summary - My problem solving form is very simple. Column 1 = "Body Parts of Concern" (the ones mentioned by people doing the job). Column 2 is a listing of "Risk Factors" for each of those body parts identified in the job analysis. Column 3 is "Why?" and becomes an analysis of the problems that result in the risk factors identified. For example, if the wrist is flexed strongly, all of the reasons for that flexion are identified (orientation, height, tool, product design, etc.). This will often uncover problems that are outside of the team's control now but could be passed on to selectors or designers of the next workplace, product, tool, etc. Column 4 is "Strategies to Reduce the Risk" and includes ways to reduce the intensity of effort, duration of effort, repetition frequency, etc. so the risk factor is minimized. �11. The value of the form comes from how well the team does the "Whys?" and identifies root causes for the risk factors so they can be reduced. This invariably leads to inexpensive and effective interventions rather than automation and major workplace changes. It also empowers the team to solve their own problems with assistance from engineers and maintenance specialists. 6.3.8 Solutions - "opinions of the workers doing the job are invaluable " - change "invaluable" to "essential" - without their input there will be many well-meaning white elephants generated. Re-emphasize root cause analysis to get the solutions since very often the change that is needed relates to improved communications and more involvement of the workers in process changes. 6.3.9 Implementation and Follow-Up - emphasize the importance of communicating and involving the workers across shifts. Too often the analysis and changes are made on the day shift with little involvement of the other shifts' personnel. As a result, something that worked well on day shift was thrown out during the afternoon or night shift. This can be avoided by good communications and involvement of people across all shifts. 6 - 12 The references on job analysis are heavily biased towards University of Michigan publications and do not recognize methods that are in the literature and are in use in many companies. I attach a copy of my own "A Functional Job Evaluation Technique" paper that was published in October of 1992. It is currently being used in Ford, GE, Goodyear, Amoco, SmithKline Beecham, Mobil, GM, Kodak, Arco, and several smaller plants around the country. While no validation studies have been done, it has proved very effective as a way of training people to work together to solve problems and to implement change. In one comparison study at a meat packing plant, the rating scheme predicted the jobs where CTDs might be expected better than two other analysis techniques based on risk factor checklists (one being the instrument published with the red meatcutters OSHA guideline). The value of the rating technique has been that it stimulates discussion (to agree on the ratings), involves measurements of duration and frequency from videotaped or observed jobs, requires the person doing the job to participate because of the need to �define effort levels by body part, and has the interactions between intensity, duration of effort, and frequency built into the priority rating process. By defining the greatest contributors to risk for each body part, the problem solving process is started, and a solution can be evaluated before it is implemented using the same approach. It takes about 6 hours to teach people how to use this approach, I find and a little 1 hour follow-up will catch any methodological errors quite quickly. The best part of it is that the solutions are creative, not often the same from problem to problem, and are less likely to create new problems when implemented. Other job analysis approaches that should be referenced include Nigel Corlett's work, Colin Drury's analyses, the Ergonomics checklists, the National Safety Council checklist, the EEC ergonomics checklist and analysis methods, etc. Perhaps the literature was not searched for job analysis methods, but the current reference list is very limited and must be expanded. Last paragraph - add "communications improvements" to the administrative controls. I find that at least half of our inteNentions have an "administrative control" focus and they rarely relate to rotation or changing line rates. They run from agreeing to schedule maintenance on machines (instead of waiting until they break down), to changing the shipping orders on products or parts, to modifying a policy on utilization of grinding wheels until they can no longer do the job (resulting in excessive time to grind a part), to changing the wage grade on a job to permit more people to rotate through it (a physically demanding job aerobically), to agreeing to train machine operators to do minor maintenance tasks on their production equipment so set-ups are more consistent. The definition of administrative controls is too narrow in the meatcutters' guideline and in this document. 6 - 13 First paragraph - I agree that engineering changes are very effective, but they are also often apt to eliminate a person's job. With the job picture looking rather bleak in U.S. manufacturing today, I think we may want to reduce the emphasis on engineering out the "problems" and focus more on helping the worker work without much risk. The problem solving approach usually helps to reach that goal and to do it at low cost. Helping to define when a task is best done by a 12. �13. machine than by a person would be a valuable tool for designers and would help companies put a priority on jobs that are likely to contribute to CTDs. For example, I use the following as indicators for possible overexertion risk: Handling any objects weighing more than 51 pounds (begins to limit available workforce significantly because of strength requirements). 2. Handling objects weighing more than 40 pounds at rates of or above 1 lift every 5 minutes. 3. Handling any objects at a rate of 6 times per minute below knuckle height for 4 hours or more (aerobic limit). 4. Sustained work above shoulder height or below knee height. 5. Lifting objects above shoulder height unless they can be boosted. 6. Doing light repetitive work with the same muscle groups for several hours per shift at rates greater than 30 per minute. 7. Doing heavy repetitive work at rates greater than 6 times a minute for 2 or more hours continuously. 8. Exerting forces or handling materials more than 20 inches in front of the body. 9. Grasping objects repetitively when grip span exceeds 3.5 inches (2 parallel surfaces) or 2 inches in diameter. 10. Controlling material with pinch grips exceeding 15 pound of force. 11. Sustained work with the torso twisted to one side because of access or clearance problems. 1. There are others, but this is a start. These help to define some design parameters for engineers but also give the teams a way to prioritize which problems they should select first. "Specific postures that workplace design should seek to eliminate are:" - This is both unrealistic and inappropriate. The postures are not a problem if they aren't sustained or happen infrequently. I would either eliminate this or use a tabular form to define good, okay, and poor postures. Page 697 of my paper (attached) uses such a technique for effort estimation. To take an example from the paragraph in this draft, if the forearms should never be rotated fully or almost fully in either direction, we will have to eliminate all typing �14. tasks except with specialized keyboards (which are neat ideas and totally impractical - try answering the phone and typing a note simultaneously with one of the specialized keyboards !). Avoid the use of the term "eliminate" but focus on the need to minimize the sustained use of the muscles and joints in these postures. 6 - 13 6.4.1.1 Workplace Design - the key factor in good workplace design is allowing flexibility in choosing postures for the work. The problems that arise relate both to awkward postures and also to the task performed and the duration of postural stress. Keeping the body in a neutral position may rule out work in many cases and still will be problematic if the person has to remain in that position for several hours. Paragraph 2 under Workplace Design - define what is meant by " ...for a range of operators". What parameters are used to define the design needs ? Example of choosing a tool for a particular work location will not work if you have people doing their jobs in several planes (vertical, horizontal, lateral, etc). People will use� rather than 3 tools if they can when working on a paced line on for incentive pay. 6 - 14 First paragraph - Workers who have to hold their arms above their shoulders do not need "frequent work breaks," necessarily; they need an opportunity to get adequate recovery time for the shoulder, neck, and back muscles. That can be accomplished by varying the tasks so not all of the work is done overhead. Avoid "should" statements like this one as they assume that there is only one solution to a problem. Overhead work is a problem when it is sustained or when the recovery time is inadequate because the work is repetitive and the effort, duration, and frequency interact to produce significant fatigue in certain muscle groups. It is not a problem if recovery time is built into the work cycle by following the overhead work with a task that can be done closer to elbow height. �15. Page# Comments 6-14 Paragraph 3 - "location and orientation of a tool... " to " ...accommodate workers of different sizes." - this should be broadened to include more than tools. All equipment is relevant here, and the important individual characteristics are not just body size data (especially not height !) but strength, endurance, and visual capabilities as well. 5th paragraph - define "extremely repetitious tasks" 30/minute ? Suggested use of a hoist for extremely repetitive tasks is inappropriate since they usually take too long even in low repetition rate tasks. 6.4.1.2 Tool Design - 1st paragraph - " ...by sizing and shaping the tool to fit the human hand." - This is only a good idea in some cases such as in power tool (pistol grip) design. One has to consider the motions required when using the same concept for knife design, for instance. A knife that sits beautifully in the hand and is optimized for cutting becomes very difficult to manipulate when changes in orientation of the tip are required. 6 - 15 Paragraph 1 - the maximum grip span of 3.5 inches is only appropriate for pliers and wire cutters with that type of inverted V-shaped handles. If the grip is across two parallel surfaces, the span should not exceed 2.5 inches. Paragraph 2 - the soft coatings may not be a good idea if particles (metal shavings, dirt, or chips) can get embedded in them. The design issues should be given their own section or put into a more detailed Appendix. The material is lost in here and is very narrow in range. Consider specifying good design and indicating where the engineers or purchasing people should review the design from an ergonomic standpoint. There should be more on equipment design other than air tools and hand tools. Refer to ANSI Standard on Machine Tools in future (in review now). Avoid the use of the word "shall" in the specifications of designs - it should be recommendations, not standards, because many of these tools are not yet generally available. �16. 6.4.1.4 Methods Design - the whole section will run into problems because it directly affects union and management prerogatives in the setting of job requirements and productivity goals. This can be avoided by focussing on the design of job activities to minimize the development of fatigue rather than talking about "job enlargement" (a trigger phrase based on some mistakes made in the 1970s). Basically, the methods design should be designing� for people by recognizing their physiological, physical, and mental needs. Pace issues should be addressed by determining what the stressors are and finding ways to optimize the rates for the highest quality, largest volume production. 6 - 16 3rd paragraph - There is still some confusion here on job design approaches to reduce risk. It is best handled through modification of the task cycle's work and recovery pattern rather than by adjusting the larger task and light work cycles. Incentive work - good theory, very difficult to alter; I doubt you'll get very far by including it in the standard. That tells companies and unions how to reward performance and really doesn't belong in a standard, no matter how appropriate it might sound. 6.4.2 Administrative Controls - needs a more global approach as discussed earlier in root cause evaluations. "Ergonomic stressors" should be "non-ergonomic stressors". 6.4.2.1 Work Scheduling - extended workdays not only increase task duration, they reduce recovery time. Management does not have the information to be able to determine the best recovery time schedule, so it is best to design the recovery into the task rather than increasing the number of breaks (other than the increase that occurs naturally with added hours per shift (every 2 hours)). Management can set the stage to be sure employees are given adequate rest breaks, but it is not feasible to expect them to enforce the breaks. That will be determined by production needs and individual work styles. 6 - 17 Top paragraph - I'd eliminate computer monitoring for other reasons, but this is not appropriate in this document. �17. Where is the evidence that shift work and CTDs are positively linked ? Is there an increased incidence on late night shifts or an increased reporting rate ? I have heard of no studies that show a link between the two ! Some people prefer shift work to day work and have less stress when they are less bothered by day shift service groups and supervision, so the link with occupational stress is not necessarily present. Machine pacing's effect is mainly through its restriction of options for the worker to regulate work and recovery times in the task cycles. Self-paced tasks are by nature "designed" for the worker as they set their own pattern of work. 6.4.2.2 Training - Initial job training not done at line speed and return to work or job change "break-in" training should be included here as ways to reduce early cumulative trauma disorders in a new job. 6.4.3.1 Vibration - the requirement for workers to wear A/V full finger gloves does not take into account the dexterity requirements of the job which may make glove use impractical. This should not be a "should" statement. " ...taking non-vibration rest breaks..." should read "recovery periods" as it could be another light activity without vibration exposure. Avoiding smoking is a good idea, but can you put that in a standard ? I don't think so. 6 - 17 "... No acceptable levels for exposure for the hands to the cold..." - There is data on this from Army Studies in 1957 by Dusek, ER (Manual Performance and Finger Temperatures as a Funtion of Ambient Te mperatures. Tech Report #EP-68, Natick, Mass) and by LS. Rubin in 1957 ("Manual dexterity of the gloved and bare hand as a function of the ambient temperature and duration of exposure", J. Appl Psycho! il!m,:377). The studies are summarized in Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volume 1, page 254, Figure VD-2. Section 7 Medical Management I have not had time to thoroughly review this section. There are some general concerns about it, though, and they relate to the appropriateness of a committee largely made up of allied health professionals writing methods of diagnosis and �18. descriptions of illnesses that are usually written by specialists in orthopaedics or neurology. Any definitions and diagnoses should be passed through the professional standards committees of The American Orthopaedic, Occupational Medicine, Hand Surgeons, and Neurological Societies, before they get into a national standard. "Ergonomic risk factors" should be "non-ergonomic risk factors". Any procedures suggested here should be similar to the ones required in the ADA legislation (Americans with Disabilities Act of 1991) so the company doesn't have to follow two sets of procedures for the same basic process (getting a person back to work in a timely manner). 8-1 8.0 Training, Table 8.1 - The approach is too narrow. In addition to educating the managers and supervisors about the risk factors for CTDs, you should be talking about how the risk factors reduce the employees' ability to perform or sustain their performance on the tasks. You have to relate the ergonomics advantages to the business as well as to the health and safety concerns if you want to get their commitment. A lecture on anatomy is quite ineffective unless you address the performance issue. 8-2 Too much reliance on the recommended checklist (Appendix A) unless it has been tested much more widely than it appears to have been. How much time does it take to train people to apply it consistently, and how much variability is there in individual ratings ? I really do not want to see one approach "blessed" by this standard unless it has been used and accepted widely, is shown to be very accurate in determining risk on a job and is agreed to be superior to other methods. There are other methods that are successfully used by many companies, and this endorsement of one will lead to much duplication of effort without necessarily improving the implementation of needed changes. 8-2 to 8-10 The entire training section tends to "institutionalize" one way of doing surveillance for CTDs and risk factor evaluations. I find the model acceptable in some ways, but by no means the only way to address CTD control in the workplace. I do not mind having this material set forth as one example of an �approach for employers to use, but that is not how it is set out. It is full of "should" and "must" and suggests that no other approach would accomplish the goals of controlling CTDs. Many programs exist where training and surveillance is less rigorous, yet ergonomic improvements are made on a regular basis and people with less content training are effectvely resolving problems on the floor. Incidence rates and prevalence of CTDs in these plants has fallen 58 to 85% in 2 years, so we know that the goals are being met. By getting so specific about training and analytical techniques, the ergonomics process becomes more mystical than it needs to be and companies will think that they need to hire outside consultants to deal with their ergonomic concerns. I don't think they should feel constrained in that way, if only because there are not enough applied ergonomists available to help them. Also, this approach moves away from the current trend of "empowerment" of their people to solve their own problems. The outside expert is seen as the owner of the problem unless he/she empowers the workers to solve their own problems. If the outside expert "solves" the problem, the chances are about even that it will get implemented. The chances that the solution will be accepted by the workers are also about even, unless the consultant developed their interest through involvement in the problem solving process. There is practically no training of plant personnel here in good problem solving techniques; it focusses on how to analyze the risk and surveillance data. I have found that the most effective training is in teaching people to get to the reasons for the risk factors being present (the "Whys?" of the analysis approach discussed in the attached article). It is through this analysis of the root cuases that the individual contributions to the team become recognized and are built on to come to a concensus for solving the problem. If all of the training is designed to define the risk and none goes to teaching them how to reduce that risk through problem solving, the team work is less effective. The people with more education will take over the analysis and the people with less education will sit back and answer questions or wait to see what the engineers come up with. Their next role is to explain why the suggested solution won't work, and an adversarial relationship, rather than a symbiotic one, is perpetuated. Using a simple problem solving approach (Why? and What Else?), the people who know the most about the job 19. �are on an equal footing with the technical people and they learn to respect each other's knowledge and contributions. The solutions invariably succeed because they have emerged in an atmosphere of respect for each other's opinions and concerns. The process can be repeated on other shifts and with other groups; more solutions can be generated if the first ideas meet with some resistance. It is a powerful process and the team always comes up with solutions that an outside ergonomist is unlikely to have thought of. Most are quickly implemented. 20. Some other basic skills are important to give the ergonomics team because they relate to the team's effectiveness in making change. The team members should have some training in how to make good presentations and would benefit from basic courses on how to lead meetings and how to make decisions and analyze problems (Kepner Tregoe training is a good example of the latter). I don't know if this belongs in a standard, but it does belong in an Appendix that gives examples of training programs. 8-7 to 8-9 The references in this section are very naive. I have a feeling that the person who suggested them only read the titles and didn't check out the content. Either improve the referencing here or reserve all of the references to the end (section 9) and just cite appropriate references in the text (e.g., Corlett et al, 1986). 9-1 to 9-8 References - This reference list appears to be an adaptation of the original list prepared by Dr. Armstrong and handed out at the first meeting. As I indicated earlier in a ANSI 2365 meeting, that list is woefully short of physiological references. It is my understanding that over 1500 references were evaluated by the 2365 committee and I heard a very good presentation about many of them in a Job Analysis and Design session. Where is that summary ? Why are there no references in languages other than English? The work of Jacques Monod, Walter Rehmert and his colleagues at Dortmund, and many others deserve to be included in the bibliography. I would also appreciate it if the attached paper was referenced since it is directly relevant to the topic and is based on 25 years of experience in addressing cumulative trauma disorders in industry. �Appendix A - 2&3 Comments on this analytical tool have been given earlier in responding to the Surveillance section. I did not comment on the ambient temperature scaling, which does not follow the physiological data very accurately. It is not just the ambient temperature but the ambient airflow that determines the impact on dexterity and manual coordination in a hand task. The factor that has to be measured to anticipate the degree of impairment there is for hand work in a cold environment is the hand's skin temperature. A person who is using the hands dynamically may have less CTD risk at a lower temperature than does a person using the hands statically at a higher temperature, for example. I have trouble accepting an analytical technique that treats these factors additively ad then multiplies the score by a psychosocial rating that is additive and not weighted for the importance of each of the factors. Are incentive pay, electronic monitoring, and monotonous work really egually contributing to the risk of CTDs ? Are they each as important as lack of control of the job, routine overtime, and machine pacing ? And if they are all present, should they increase the risk of CTDs 1.6 times or should it be more like 4 or 5 times ? My guess is that, if all of those factors are present, you will see much more reporting of CTDs but I don't know that the true incidence will be much higher. Again, too much weight is given to this particular analysis method, and I am not convinced that it is superior to other analytical techniques that seek to quanitfy the risk for CTDs. A-4 This checklist is more to my liking because it tries to relate total work duration to specific risk factors. I believe the second column should be <1 hour (not <4 hr). The incentive work ratings should probably be 1, 2, 2 not 2, 2, - as shown, but that would have to be tested. There is too much separation between category 2 (1-4 hour) and category 3 (>4 hrs) in the ratings of risk for the load and force values. For example, lifting 15 to 30 lbs every few minutes for 1 to 4 hours would get 1 point and if it is the same task for more than 4 hours, it gets 3 points. In physiological terms, the difference in metabolic cost or muscle fatigue between 3 hours and 8 hours would be minimal if the lift time is short and is only done once every few minutes. All typing jobs will probably have to go to a level 2 21. �22. surveillance and risk factor evaluation because postural stresses are heavily weighted (neck, forearm and wrist all get 2 points if the task is done more than 4 hours) and high repetition gets 3 points even if the force is light. That appears to overweight light, repetitive tasks, especially with the additional factor of continuous keyboard use (how can that have ratings of <1 hour or 1 to 4 hours ? If it is continuous, it is > 4 hours and we have double weighted that variable). With improvements, I'd rather see this kind of checklist recommended than the more complex one on A2 and 3 that is less specific about forces and weights. A-5 to A-7 Symptom Questionnaire - I have real problems with symptom surveys done in workplaces when there is no system set up to address the concerns. I have seen serious problems occur in a plant because the employees were given a symptom survey to fill out and there was no follow-up on their responses. The company was accused of not caring about the workers when the real problem was that the outsiude consultants never gave the company the information needed to do the follow-ups. Discomfort surveys are better. I use the type of survey shown on pages A-8 to 9 but use the G. Borg Large Muscle Group Activity Scale along with the body diagram. Follow-up on individual concerns is done during the job analysis and training sessions. From the discomfort surveys for people on a given job, we can go right into the fatigue analysis and problem solving process to identify contributing factors and root causes. People who are not highly literate have not had difficulty with this approach. The simpler these instruments are, the better their participation in the over-all process. A-1O to11 The example is useful but the decision about which jobs will be addressed will not be made on a scientific basis. The questions that are more likely to be asked are: 1) How many people are affected ? 2) How much has the problem cost us in the past 2 years ? (Workers' Comp, absenteeism, training time, turnover, restricted time, etc.) 3) What will it take to make it better ? Because there are often only a few people on a given job, incidence rates get blown out of proportion (like the Shipping job in the example cited). The basic information needed in the �plant to decide which problems to tackle first is to know how much of a problem the job or task is an d how it can be made better. The rest is primarily of interest to researchers, lawyers, and statisticians, not production personnel. 23. B-1 to B-9 Are these the 1500 references summarized ? I wish that the categories were more extensive and included psychosocial as well as physical factors. The main problem with this format is that the interactions between factors are not clear (since they were assembled by risk factor). There is no way to evaluate the interactions, particularly those interactions of force with frequency and duration. C-1 to C-3 The forms should not be "recommended", but rather presented as an example of a data collection instrument. Most industrial medicine practitioners get unhappy if someone tells them how to do their work. D-2 to D-6 These descriptions should be sent to the appropriate professional societies for review before they are published as part of this standard. To my knowledge, the majority of the subcommittee members who developed these definitions were not practicing orthopaedists or neurologists, so the experts should be asked for their input. Appendices - I would like to see the following additions to the appendices: A. A more detailed set of ergonomic design guidelines to accomplish the standard's goal of providing information that can be used pro-actively in the design of workplaces, tools, jobs, and environments to control cumulative trauma disorders. B. A listing of resources in applied ergonomics for the plants to use that would include more general references, training courses, educational programs, professional societies, journals, govenmental agencies, etc. C. A more complete summary of the literature reviewed and a summary table showing where there are holes in the research and where more work needs to be done (somewhat like the matrix developed by Herrin and Chaffin prior to the Manual Lifting guidelines project initiation). �24. D. More examples of levels 1 and 2 suNeillance and job analysis techniques in Appendix A. Respectfully submitted, , C, \0i .,di..,:..,_J Ci-,'\_ "'-L- '- � K4__.)......-,G Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. 9/10/93 (716) 544-3587 Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph,D. CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS ROCHESTER, NEW YORK 14622 �Suggested Questions for Review of ANPR of 29 CFR Part 1910, Ergonomic Safety and Health Management Program (Start with an introductory statement but please avoid the use of terms like "ergonomic hazards" or "ergonomic risk factors". If anything they should be "non-ergonomic hazards" and "injury/illness risk factors". Suggest that if a company has more than one program and they are substantially different, they should submit information or. each separately.) A. General Information 1. What level of ergonomics activity is present in your company today ? _ None, see no need for it _ None, but planning to start some _ None, some in past, let drop _ None, some in past, not effective _ Some activity, not formal _ Activity in localized areas in company _ Pilot projects in process now _ Some activity related to citations _ Company-wide activity Other ___________ 2. If you have had an unsuccessful experience with ergonomics, why do you think it failed ? _ Management commitment low _ Lack of employee participation/support _ No depth - "one-man show" _ Lack of expertise in-house _ Budget and personnel cuts _ High costs relative to benefits seen _ Impractical solutions recommended by outside consultant _ Inability to give ergonomics a priority Other _______________________ 3. If you do have some ergonomics activity or are about to start some, what stimulated your interest in it ? _ Low back problems _ Repetitive work problems _ Union grievances _ Employee discomfort _ Union negotiations Cost control measures _ Increased knowledge of field Discussions with other companies/plants OSHA citation _ Anticipation of legislation _ Team approach philosophy _ Continuous improvement philosophy _ Design improvement process _ Competitivity issue _ Corporate policy _ Media attention to topic _ Concern about long term health of employees Other _______________________ = 4. What department/person is charged with the responsibility of overseeing the ergonomic activity in your company/plant :· ____________ 5. Please describe briefly the organization of vour ergonomics program/process and attach any examples of documentation ·on the program that you can. Problem Identification Approaches: ______________ Problem Analysis and Resolution Approaches: __________ �2. Project Prioritization Techniques: _______________ Approval Requirements: __________________ Funding Sources: _____________________ Implementation Processes: __________________ Follow-Up Procedures: __________________ Program Evaluation Techniques: _______________ Communications Techniques:----�-----------Education and Training Strategies: _______________ Use of Outside Consultants and Trainers: ____________ 6. Do you have an ergonomics process in place for your office workers ? _ Yes _ No Describe any concerns you have about a general ergonomics standard that includes office workers' jobs ? _______________ 7. What have been some of the impacts of ergonomics approaches to reduce overexertion injuries and discomfort in the workplace m your company? Please mark the extent of the impact in the columns to the right for those measurement5 you have observed. Impact # of Injuries Cost of injuries Absenteeism Level Job Turnover Level # of Job Restrictions Job Reputation Training Time Quality Performance Level �Impact � � � 3. Sienificant Very Lar2e Productivity Amount of Rework Scrap or Waste Levels Employee Morale Supervisory Stress Levels Lost Time Days Ability to Meet EEO Goals Other _______ Other -------- B. W orksite Analysis 1. Which of the following guidelines/information have you used to develop ergonomic policies or for analysis of problem jobs?: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ OSHA Red Meat Cutters' Ergonomic Program Standard, 1990 NIOSH Guidelines for Manual Lifting (1981, 19'.)1 ?) NIOSH Guidelines on Vibration Exposure (198�) NIOSH Guidelines on Exposure to Hot Environments (1972, 1978, 1986 ?) NIOSH Monograph on Cumulative Trauma Problems - V. Putz-Anderson Biomechanical Models (U of Michigan, etc) Metabolic Models (Garg, U of Mich, etc) Fatigue Models (Work/Recovery Needs) Liberty-Mutual (Snook) Tables Checklists Methods Provided by Outside Consultants Methods Developed Internally Methods Learned at Conferences/Courses Methods Taken from the Literature Methods/Guidelines Developed by Other Plants/Companies Other -------------------------- Which 3 sources of information have you found to be most effective and useful in your program? ________________________ 2. Who performs the worksite analyses and develops the solutions ? _____ ' Who is involved in looking at ergonomics issues in the design of new workplaces, jobs, and layouts or in the reworking of an existing workplace or machine? -------------------------3. How is a proposed solution introduced to the floor? __________ �4. What control do the :people affected by the change have during the implementation penod? ____________________ I 4. Videotaping can be an important tool for analyzing jobs, particularly jobs that are highly repetitive and ones that are done intermittently. Do you have any concerns about suggesting videotaping as a recommended part of the worksite evaluation process ? _ Yes _ No Explain your concerns, if there are any. 5. What qualifications have/will you look for wh�n having a worksite evaluation performed by either an inside or outside "expert"? __________ How will/did you find an expert in ergonomics ? __________ C. Hazard Prevention and Control 1. Which of the following hazard prevention and control strategies have you used to improve jobs/workplaces/equipment/environments from an ergonomic standpoint ? Automation Assist devices (hoists, lifts) Outsourcing Reduce speed of line/machine Change specs on parts Job rotation _ Splints, belts, restraints _ Employee education/awareness _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _,_ _ _ _ _ _ Semi-automation Height adjustability Add labor to job Modify production goals Redesign product for better assembly Job reassignment Job redesign (changed content) Fitress/wellness program Team approach - self-directed workforce for problem solving Environmental improvements (lighting, noise, vibration controls) Workplace redesign (heights, reaches, clearances) Improved processes to reduce more difficult tasks Selection of employees for more difficult tasks (or Swot teams) Set Purchasing guidelines to value ergonomic qualities of furniture/equipment Build safety/ergonomics performance into personnel rating system Other ----------------------- 2. Which of the above strategies used have appeared to be the most cost-effective ? 1. ----------------------- 2. ----------------------3. _______________________ What are the average times for implementation of the above most effective ergonomics intervention strategies ? 1. ---------------2. ---------------- 3. ---------------- �5. 3. Have you documented before/after measurements of productivity, quality, personnel issues, health, and safety statistics to determine the impact of your ergonomics program ? _ Yes _ No If not, why not ? ______ 4. What size of budget do you think is needed to initiate and to sustain an ergonomics process/program in a plant/company ? __________ What level of expenditure requires a high level of approval in your company ? How much can be commited by a department head without having to go to higher levels (except in the initial budget process) ? _______ D. Medical Management 1. What processes have you used to detect early signs of potential ergonomics problems in the workplace ? _ OSHA 200 logs _ Employee suggestions Grievances _ Productivity problems _ Symptom surveys Absenteeism data Job turnover rates _ High repair or rework _ Long training times Other ________ _ Medical or first aid logs _ Safety meetings Job restrictions _ Qu�lity performance problems _ Usr- of outside expert to survey jobs _ Use of internal audits to survey jobs _ Difiiculty staffing jobs _ High scrap rate _ Die:iculty meeting EEO goals (women, older workers) Which three of th�se I?rocesses have you found most effective for identifying areas for ergononncs nnprovements ? 1. -------------- 2. -------------3. ______________ 2. What processes have you set up to encourage employees to report early signs of sustained musculoskeletal discomfort ? --------------3. What approaches have you used to decrease discomfort after an employee has reported symptoms ? _ Sent to dispensary Sent to clinic _ Referred to own physician _ Sent to specialist _ Observed employee at work and recommended approaches to reduce the stress on the affected muscle/joint _ Initiated an ergonomics review of the job _ Identified a job accommodation and implemented it _ Provided assistance to employee for the tasks most difficult to perform �_ Provided employee with a brace/splint/assist device _ Educated empoyee about risk factors at job and at home 6. _ Removed employee from her/his job for: _ a few hours the shift less than a week a month the forseeable future until the symptoms abated _ until the job was modified = Other ______________________ 4. What are the most effective parts of your company's job restriction and return to work policies? _______________________ What areas for improvement do you see ? ______________ 5. Symptom surveys have been used in many meat cutting plants to identify the magnitude of ergonomic problems. What are tbe positive and negative aspects of doing employee symptom surveys in your company? Positive Impacts 1. Negative Impacts 1. 2. 2. 3. 3. How else can the magnitude of the symptoms in the workforce be determined ? 6. Have you been successful in returning people to their original jobs (unmodified) after an absence of more than 3 weeks for a musculoskeletal problem without incurring a repeat problem? _ Yes _ No What approaches were used? _ Employee awareness/education _ Work hardening _ Reduced job demands or help given _ SpEnts/protective equipment _ FitI'.ess/wellness program _ Ch,mged tools/workplace intuitively (not aware it was ergonomics) 7. Do you have a process for evaluating jobs when a person has been out for more than 3 weeks with a musculoskeletal injwy/illness that may be work-related? _ Yes _ No If so, please describe the process and how the job information is communicated to the medical people making the return-to-work determination for the employee. _________________ �7. 8. If a person enters a new job, is there a pol;icy of phasing her/him into that job gradually so the skills and strengths can be developed without excessive stress during the break-in period? _ Yes _ No What concerns would your company have if a policy of work "acclimatization" is suggested to reduce the risk for injuries in the initial stages of learning a new job? E. Training and Education 1. For the following people or groups in your company, please indicate the type of ergonomic training or awareness you think is needed to provide the basis of an effective program/process. N= None, A= Awareness, B= Basic training, I= Intensive Training _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Top management Line supervisors/Dept heads Key operators Medical specialists Industrial engineers Job Placement specialists Process engineers Skilled trades specialists Facilities engineers Trainers Office workers _ Purchasing specialists _ Industrial hygienists _ Product engineers Other -------- _ Middle management Foremen Union stewards _ Safety specialists _ Labor Relations specialists _ Production planners _ Design engineers _ Tocl and Die specialists _ Maintenance specialists _ Materials Handling specialists Production workers Service workers _ Wellness/Fitness specialists _ Union leadership Other ________ 2. In what order were people made aware of ergonomics in your plant? First: ------------------Second: -----------------Third: ------------------Fourth: ------------------Would you change this order if you were starting again? What changes would you make and why ? Yes No 3. Who has done the employee awareness training in your company? _ _ _ _ _ _ Outside consultant/trainer Ergonomics team members Internal company ergonomist Industrial hygienist Industrial engineer Production supervisor Other: ________ _ _ _ _ _ _ Internal company trainer Ergonomics Coordinating Committee Safety specialist Medical or Fitness/Wellness specialist Personnel specialist Co-op student or summer employee �4. Where have you obtained the materials for your awareness courses? _ _ _ _ 8. Developed by the corporation _ Developed in-house Purchased commercially _ Obtained from seminars, courses Taken from publications _ Adapted from published programs Purchased or taken from other companies with programs 5. What approaches have you used to obtain more intensive training for your staff and employees? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Outside consultant on site _ Outside training firm on site Sent people to outside courses _ Sent people to outside seminars Purchased training packages _ Hired ergonomist Hired student with ergonomics training Developed an ergonomics library Brought in experts from other plants Sent people to professional meetings Visited other plants and studied their programs and approaches Other ______________________ Which of the approaches has appeared to be the most cost effective? ___ 5. How often do you provide ergonomics awareness or training programs or schedule a discussion of ergonomics topics in a typical year (once the initial phases of the program have been completed)? __________ Is ergonomics included in employee orientation or new job training programs? No Yes 6. What means have you used to communicate ergonomics program successes inand outside of your company? _ Grapevine _ Safoty meetings _ Production meetings Conferences _ Quarterly meetings _ Joint meetings of teams Bulletin boards _ Conpany newsletter Plant newsletter Union newsletter _ Recognition ceremonies _ Suggestion System tie-in _ Videotape on internal TV _ Health and safety reports _ Audit results reports _ Ergonomics reports _ Local community media _ Presentations at professional meetings _ Management reports _ Health fairs/Open houses _ Lobby displays _ Professional publications Other: ___________ F. Other 1. Do you think there is a need for an OSHA regulation for the establishment of an Ergonomic Safety and Health Management Program to reduce No Yes musculoskeletal Injuries and illnesses in the workplace? Please explain why or why not. _________________ �9. 2. If you already have an ergonomics program, which three of its elements do you think have contributed the most to its effectiveness ? 1. ------------------------ 2. ------------------------- 3. ---------------'---------- Thank you for your assistance in responding to this request for comments. Please mail your responses to: Hersha! W. Hensley, Director etc. (8/12/91 S.H. Rodgers, Ph.D.) (716) 544-3587 Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS ROCHESTER. NEW YORK 14622 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Comments on the June 4, 1993 ANSI 2365 Draft "Control of Cumulative Trauma Disorders" Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1993-09-10 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_023 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-20 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 33 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/fe1beeeaa6ea8a74ae0793fca2d70692.pdf c9b8c8065bf8af5bc9b8f4f866d99ae4 PDF Text Text ,. Comments on Protocol for Cumulative Trauma Disorders Manual Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. 6/19/82 Overall ·Organization: Since this is a manual for occupational health and safety practitioners in industry, the major sections should reflect subject matter that they are familiar with or the answers to questions that they might ask. Although all of the appropriate material is covered in the three sections given, there is sub stantial overlap; this could produce an editorial problem, as well as confuse the medical newcomer to this field. As an occupational health practitioner, one is interested in the following information: Diagnosis of the problem - which includes the part of the upper extremity (and shoulder) affected and the path ology or functional limitation; Determination of whether the person can go back to the job, needs work restriction, or needs further medical treatment; and Evaluation of the ability of the patient to return to work after further treatment. Also, assessment of the proper placement of a person on a repetitive motions task if he or she has a history of CTD. Because the last two topics cover much of the same information, I would suggest that the material be rearranged to the following three sections: 1. Recognition of Cumulative Trauma Disorders • Definitions, using ICD classifications • CTD statistics: prevalence, incidence, severity, etc. • Diagnosis methods for the most common CTDs 2. Job or Workplace Characteristics Associated with CTD • • . • • Position of joints, limb, etc • Forces or strength required Repetitiveness Duration Environmental factors, such as vibration or time pressure �3. Programs to Control CHO in Industry • Monitoring of health and safety data • Administrative controls • Engineering Controls With this overall structure, it should be possible to con solidate the statistical and ergonomics analyses that would otherwise be being written by more than one person. A breakdown of how the individual sections might be handled follows. 1. Recognition of Cumulative Trauma Disorders, CTD In this section all of the possible diagnoses for upper ex tremity CTD should be listed by !CD code number. This is needed be able to differentiate, for example, between true tendonitis diagnoses like "sore arm" or "arm strain". It also is a basis for analysis of medical records so one can define the true incidence of CTD in a given workplace. After the !CD diagnoses have been presented, their prevalence, etc., should be given. Then, those with the highest probability of occurring in the workplace should be defined, and the accepted methods to differentially diagnose them should be presented. Comment: One of the biggest problems in defining the extent of the the CTD problem in industry is in having the appropriate diag nosis made when a person complains of a sore arm, hand, wrist, elbow, or shoulder. People who are skilled at detecting tendon itis report a great deal more of it than do their less special ized colleagues. It is, therefore, important to define each of the major diagnostic entities in a way to assure that reporting will be somewhat consistent from place to place and between medical practitioners. I believe that this section should be written by an orthopedics or rheumatology specialist who can speak the medical person's language. Dr. Hadler would be be an exellent choice. Dr. M. Laurens Rowe, now retired from Kodak, is very knowledgable in this area and has done this type of classification; he may be willing to help out too. �2. Job or Workplace Characteristics Associated with CTD This section would focus on the work factors that appear to be associated with CTD of the upper extremity as we under stand them. One could start with a listing of the industries and jobs most often associated with CTD problems, using the Department of Labor job classification scheme to standardize jobs between industries. There is a fair literature in this area, even though some of it is misleading. A further breakdown could be by tasks within jobs (e.g., housewife is the job, win dow washing and weeding are the tasks). After the initial analyses of industries, jobs, and tasks that gre associated with upper extremity CTD, some specific biomechnical, physiological, environmental, and behavioral analyses of motions, work patterns, and task requirements associated with CTD should be given. This allows the studies of Armstrong, Arndt, Keyserling, and others to be presented in a form that the medical people can appreciate. With that background they should have little trouble extrapolating to the tasks and jobs in the industries they serve. 3. Programs To Control CTD in Industry From the material that has been left out of section two in the original outline, it would appear that this would be a massive section. However, I think all of the remaining material can be included under three headings: monitoring of data, admin istrative controls, and engineering controls. 3.1 Monitoring of Health and Safety Data The first part should include a description of data that can be used to assess the seriousness of CTD in a plant or job and how reliable it is. The latter task is not an easy one to quantify, but at least a qualitative appreciation of how accurate CTD reporting is would be valuable. For exam ple, I have observed that OSHA data has about 331 of cases seen in a medical department, and about 151 of the symptoms reported in worker's interviews and questionnaires). The second part of this section should include some in formation on how to do an epidemiological evaluation of the seriousness of the situation once a job or task is identified as having CTD problems. Too often we jump in with a shotgun to solve a problem before identifying whether it is real or �,, a chance occurrence. Because of problems in the way people re port accidents and illnesses and differences in the diagnostic skill of medical practitioners, there are opportunities for misinterpretation of the seriousness of a CTD problem unless a proper epidemiological study is done. The third part of this section should provide a des cription of how better health and safety data can be collec ted to control CTD in the plant. This is often linked to awareness programs for workers in repetitive jobs, which is covered under training in the next part. 3.2 Administrative Controls The first part of this section should identify the roles played by different people in the plant, as shown in 3.1 of the original outline. This then leads in to the other types of controls available. Worker rotation should be discussed from both a medical and administrative standpoint. In some unionized industries, the person may not have an opportunity to move to another less-demanding job because he or she does not have the seniority to take it. The impact of a job restriction (versus redesigning the job, for instance) is very large in that situation. Whoever writes this section should be familiar with the feasibility of worker rotation in different types of industries. Worker training can be discussed in terms of initial placement on the job, return to work after an absence that is not CTD-related (such as vacation), and return to work after a CTD-related problem. Worker placement should be discussed both in terms of whether a person is susceptible to CTD illness (from the medical history or other validated tests), and as related to decisions about a person's return to the job after a problem with CTD • .3,J c---._ Engineering Controls This section could follow up on the second one by sug gesting ways to improve workplaces, design products, select tools, and organize the work in repetititive jobs in order to reduce the potential for CTD to occur. Simple solutions as well as more elegant forms of automation should be included, preferably illustrated with case studies. Case studies should be available from NIOSH studies and in the literature. Per haps some could be solicited from industries that have done work in this area. �Suggested Outline for Cumulative Trauma Disorders Manual 1. Recognition of Cumulative Trauma Disorders of the Upper Extremity, CTD 1.1 Diagnostic Categories Associated With CTD of the Upper Extremity 1.2 CTD Statistics - Prevalence, Incidence, Severity, etc. 1.3 Definitions and Testing Methods for Most Common CTDs 2. Job or Workplace Characteristics Associated With CTD 2.1 Industries, Jobs , and Tasks Associated with CTD 2.2 Ergonomic Evaluations of CTD-Related Workplace and Job Characteristics 2.2.1 Biomechanical factors 2.2.2 Physiological factors 2.2.3 Environmental factors 2.2.4 Work organization factors 3. Programs to Control CTD in Industry 3.1 Monitoring of Health and Safety Data 3.1.1 Data sources available and their reliability 3.1.2 Epidemiological determination of the seriousness a CTD problem 3.1.3 Improved data systems to monitor health and safety data 3.2 Administrative Controls 3.2.1 Human resources available and their roles 3.2.2 Worker rotation 3.2.3 Worker training 3.2.4 worker placement 3.3 Engineering Controls 3.3.1 Ergonomically-designed workplaces and jobs 3.3.2 Case studies �Suggestions for Writing Assignments Based on Revised Outline Section 1 Dr. Hadler Dr. Rowe Section 2 2.1 2.2 Or. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. Section 3 3.1 3.2 NIOSH, DSHEFS, OSR, DBBS Dr. Hopkins Dr. Hadler (placement) Dr. Tichauer Dr. Armstrong 3.3 Hadler Armstrong Arndt Keyserling Konz These are based primarily on your existing list; Dr. Drury is not included because of my ignorance of his experience in this field� not from any feeling that he may not be capable of writ ing a section. I can see that this new outline produces addi tional problems for dividing up the material to be written. In sections such as 2.2, perhaps one person could do the initial write-up with the others acting as referees. That might save you some expense but still permit several investigators to have their views incorporated in the final Manual. I have assigned Dr. Hadler several sections you had original ly assigned to others. This is because those sections need the perspective of a physician more than the others. Having read most of Dr. Hadler's articles over the past 10 years, I am sure that he can successfully get the attention of his medical col leagues so that �hey will consider the manual 'theirs' • � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Comments on Protocol for Cumulative Trauma Disorders Manual Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1982-06-19 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_022 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-20 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 6 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/d0c64e13e4f42a407df59a304d9e63df.pdf 85b143bc542e60ed96310a81a9a4531b PDF Text Text "THE HEAVY JOB" A talk given by Dr. Suzanne Rodgers at the Symposium on "The Advancement of Women in Industry", sponsored by the Advisory Committee on the Economic Role of Women, Washington, D .C., on September 20, 1973. For the past 15 years, the Human Factors Section of the Health and Safety Laboratory at Kodak has been studying the physiological re sponses of people doing physically demanding jobs. The purpose of the studies has been to eliminate unnecessary effort by optimizing ,job, equipment, and workplace design, thereby bringing the heavier jobs within the capacities of most people. Our work in this area has allowed us to develop an approach to the 11 heavy 11 job that reduces barriers to the advancement of women in production departments. Research in the United States and Scandinavia has shown that the averap:e worr an has about '55% of the muscle strength of the average rran (this ranges from 42 to 75% depending on the nmscle group) (Figure I) and about t7;0 of his endurance capacity (Figure II). The overlap of the distributions is such that about 1/3 of the men have capacities within the range of the women's capacities. If a job requires high strength or extended heavy work r:,cre wor:-,en than men will be likely to find it limiting. What can be done to resolve this situation? The following analysis of the "heavy" job will serve to direct our thindng (Figure III). The first question to ask is "Is the ;job really heavy?" If not, the probler. can be resolved by education of manacenent and employees. If so, the next question would be "Does the hea,.ry part of the job exist rnore than 5}; of the time?" In sorce 11 cases the 11heavy element may only occur seasonally or as part of occasional maintenance work, or in rssponse to a low probability emergency situation, or as a low derr.and production item, and may not occur 5% of the time. In this case it is usually possible to redesign that activity or to move it to some other job that does not lie in the path of progression. If the heavy activity requires more than 5% of the work period, one should note if the job is in the line of progression. If not, then redesign is at the discretion of the department; but if so, redesign of the job to bring it within the capacities of most people, removal of the job from the progression line, setting up a parallel progression line or restructuring the job requirements would each be ways to assist advancement through the department. 1 �2 The remainder of this presentation will focus on misperception of effort and ways to redesign jobs. The most common form of misperception of effort results from ne glecting the presence of handling aids which significantly reduce the physical work load. Pushing a cart weighing 2000 pounds does not require a force of 2000 pounds if the casters are chosen properly, the handle is positioned at the best level and the floor surface is well rraintained. A person handling large size packing board on a square cutter can have a significant reduction in work load if levelators and air tables are used. Another area of misperception is in neglecting the effect of the acquisition of skill in reducing the physical work load. It may take several days or weeks or months to develop the skill, but as skill in creases, physical work usually decreases. Operating an industrial elec tric floor buffer may require a great deal of effort for the untrained person who is struggling to control it, but only minimal effort as one learns to rrake it do the work. Once a job with a heavy element has been identified, the feasi bility of redesign should be considered. Several questions should be asked, such as: How heavy is the job at present? What % of the labor force would find it difficult to perform? Is there above-average attri tion on the job? If the job appears to be heavy enough to limit a majority of the labor force from performing it safely and/or if it is hard to find people to do it or stay on it, redesign is the most feasible alternative. One should also ask uWhat �{; of the job needs redesign?, How many people are doing the job?, and What is the probable cost of re design?". If a relatively small % of the job needs redesign, it is usually more feasible to take this route than if a large part of the job is involved. If the customer desires a large-sized product whose pro duction cannot be easily redesigned, removing the job from the depart mental progression line may offer the best alternative. Some ways in which jobs can be redesigned have been shown earlier. 1. The use of handling aids such as overhead hoists, levelators, air tables, and carts, and the reduction of friction through the proper selection of casters and the polishing of work surfaces can reduce the energy requirements of many produc tion jobs. 2. Physical effort can also be reduced by designing the pro duction sequence to minimize rehandling of materials. 3. Work-rest cycles can be structured to reduce total work load and bring it within the capacities of most people. �3 4. Awkward biomechanical work postures can be eliminated by redesign of equipment or the workplace as an example from a paper making operation studied in 1968 shows. Before redesign, the employee had to lift waste paper weighing up to 55 pounds from the roller to the side of the machine where it could be carted away. The limited work space required twisting the body while lifting, a poor biomechanical work posture. The simple expedient of cutting a hole in the machine floor to allow the paper to be pushed down to a bin below for mechanical removal considerably reduced the effort and brought it within the capacities of a majority of the labor force. This presentation has only dealt with the possible "barriers" that physically demanding jobs may have to the advancement of women in pro duction departments. Miny of these same barriers exist for about 1/3 of the men. It is important to note that redesign of heavy job activity will most often benefit all people working in a pr.eduction area, parti cularly if the effort required is not really necessary but a result of non-optimally designed equipment, workplaces, or jobs. �FIGURE I RELATIVE fflUS[lE STREDGTHS OF womEn us mEn MUSCLE GROUP WOMEN'S STRENGTH AS PERCENT OF MEN'S FOREARM FLEXORS AND EXTENSORS (B) .................... 55% ELBOW FLEXORS (A) .......................................46% TRUNK EXTENSORS AND FLEXORS, AND FINGER FLEXORS AND FOOT EXTENSORS (B) ...............60% ANKLE EXTENSORS (A) .....................................73% FINGER ADDUCTORS, SHANK EXTENSORS, AND ARM SINKERS (B) ................................... 65% KNEE EXTENSORS (A) ......................................60% HAND EXTENSORS AND FLEXORS, AND FINGER ADDUCTORS (8) .................................75% SHOULDER FLEXORS (A) ...................................42% REFERENCES A. CHAFFIN, D. B.: "A COMPUTERIZED BIOMECHANICAL MODEL FOR ANALYSIS OF SYMMETRIC SAGITTAL PLANE LIFTING," JOURNAL OF AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING, VOL. 11, MARCH, 1970. B. HETTINGER, T.: PHYSIOLOGY OF STRENGTH, CHARLES C. THOMAS CO., SPRINGFIELD, ILL, 1961. THIS TABLE FROM CHAFFIN, D. B., "SOME ASPECTS OF PHYSICAL EXERTION," JULY 1972. �FIGURE II AEROBIC CAPACITIES OF AD IDDUSTRIAL POPULATIOD % OF POPULATION 30. WOMEN N =35 x = 1.88 MEN N = 132 x = 2.98 20· 31% OF MEN FALL WITHIN CAPACITY RANGE OF WOMEN 10· 1.0 . 2.0 . 3.0 . 4.0 LITERS/MINUTE OXYGEN CONSUMPTION PREDICTED MAXIMUM 5.0 �FIGURE III C' ADALY515 OF THE .,HEAUV" JOB I I EDUCATION CONSIDER REDESIGN 1 "HEAVY" JOB 1� MISPERCEPTION? L----.L-- ' NO ---7 YES s,r= YE "HEAVY" ACTIVITY LESS � REDESIGN � REDESIGN ��_j FEASIBLE? lHAN 5% OF JOB? � ACTIVITY � :...:.:.:,� -__:__:,___J .____:_:, I =NO NO f NO ..,_1 JOB IN PROGRESSION I LINE? YES t REDESIGN FEASIBLE? , � f YES REDESIGN JOB t RESTRUCTURE JOB r-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-:.....-_-_-_-____ REMOVE JOB FROM PROGRESSIVE LINE OR SET UP ALTERNATE ROUTE � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource "The Heavy Job" Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Description An account of the resource A talk given by Dr. Suzanne Rodgers at the Symposium on "The Advancement of Women in Industry", sponsored by the Advisory Committee on the Economic Role of Women, Washington, D.C., on September 20, 1973. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1973-09-20 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_021 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-20 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 6 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/9949d4ae65666618e34155a82cd8abcb.pdf 59f8b379e810aa6f68a9cb123e2523ae PDF Text Text The Physiology of Playing the Flute Summary of the Major Points Made in a Talk on August 25, 1984 to the National Flute Association Convention, Chicago, Ill. I. Review of Ergonomics - Fitting the Job to the Capacities of the Workforce - Design Within Most People 0 s Capabilities. A. Whole Body Effort - study of the total energy demands of jobs and their 8-hour requirements as well as peak demands. Limited usually by the fitness of the cardiovascular system (heart and blood vessels). Job demands are measured by looking at a person ° s heart rate and energy usage (oxygen consumption) throughout the shift. Can measure the capa cities of workers by having them do a staged exercise test (treadmill, bicycle ergometer) and determining their max imum aerobic capacity for this type of work. Job demands have to be related to the number of active muscles, usually broken down into whole body or upper body work. Upper body work capacity is about 70% of whole body work capacity. For 8 hours of work - should not average out to more than 33% of maximum aerobic work capacity For 1 hour of work - 50% of maximum aerobic capacity is � upper limit For 20 min�tes of work - 85% of maximum aerobic capacity is the upper limit. When you work at more than 50% of maximum aerobic work capacity, you begin to need almost as much recovery time as you have work time. At 65% of maximum, you need equal amounts of rest for every minute of work. Above this value you need more rest time than work time. Therefore, it is unwise to ask a person to work for very long at very heavy work loads. B. Local Muscles and Joints - Study of the strengths and endurances needed to perform tasks, including highly repe titive light effort tasks. The limits to performing this type of work are the strength of the muscle of interest, how long that effort has to be sustained, and how often the effort has to be repeated (how much recovery time between efforts). Using grip strength, for instance, the amount of grip strength available will vary according to the posi tion of the wrist, the span over which the grip is exerted, and whether the person is wearing gloves or not. Endurance is related to the percent of strength required by the task �and this can be measured using a force gauge, like a fish scale. A task that requires 100% of grip strength can only be sustained for a few seconds. If a task takes 50% of grip strength, it can be sustained up to 1 minute. If it takes 70% of grip strength, it can be sustained for about 40 seconds. A task that requires a sustained effort for up to 4 min utes should require only about 15% of maximum strength. Recovery times are much greater for static than for dynamic muscle work, requiring sometimes up to 45 minutes to com pletely recover from a few seconds of maximal muscle effort. c. Repetitive tasks can result in muscle and joint soreness, particularly if the force being exerted is a high percent of the muscle 0 s strength in that position. The repetitiv ity will influence the amount of recovery time after an effort, and higher repetition rates can result in inade quate recovery between exertions. This will result in a build-up of fatigue in the muscles and can cause swelling and soreness in the joints, too. Design of the task so the person has the maximum amount of muscle strength available for a task helps to reduce this overload sit uation. In the case of gripping tasks, the design should permit the wrists to remain as close as possible to their neutral position, not be cocked up or down or angled to the thumb or little finger side of the hand. Time Pressure - study of the effects of social and envi ronmental factor that may influence the pattern of work. Time pressure can be imposed on a job through external factors, such as a conveyor line speed, peer or supervisory pressure, or equipment response times (as in using computers). It may be inherent in the task, as in the timing requirements of performing an orchestral job. Time pressure can also be generated internally by sched uling tightly, a desire to make extra pay by working above the job standard, or by setting deadlines that are not comfortable. The major effects of time pressure are to reduce an individual 0 s ability to organize the job demands so they can be done most comfortably. Time is constant and people are variable, so the tighter the time con straint is, the more people are going to feel uncomfortable with it. The feeling of being controlled rather than controlling one 0 s performance is one that produces dis satisfaction if sustained for long periods. It can result in stress-related symptoms of stomach problems, anxiety, and nervousness. �II. Reserve Capacity and Work The ability to perform work implies a capacity for work, whether it be a strength, an aerobic work capacity, an ability to handle information, or a tolerance of an environmental ex posure like heat. The true maximum values of these capacities are only attained with hard work (or practice), but we all have maximum values that depend upon our current level of condition ing or learning. In addition, we all have minimum, or resting, values of these capacities which may be zero for muscle strengths but are above zero for resting oxygen usage and heart rate. The latter is called our basal metabolism, the energy needed to keep our organs working and to sustain life. Our reserve capacity is the difference between our current maximum capacity and our minimum, or basal, level. It can be increased by improving the fitness of the circulatory system (running, swimming) or of the muscles ("working out"), depending on which capacity is involved. Other factors decrease reserve capacity, however, in addition to the deconditioning associated with not keeping up an exercise program. These other factors increase the basal or resting levels so that reserve capacity is eroded from the bottom up. Examples of them are tension, which is an increase in the resting muscle effort often caused by anxiety-producing situations. For instance, muscle tension may be elevated in jobs where the timing is tight and a person never gets to relax totally between operations. Tension can also be present because of the social conditions, including performance requirements for a soloist or the tension of perfor ming a solo passage in the orchestral repertoire where peer pressure as well as "supervisory" pressure can be felt. Another environmental factor that influences the minimum level of a capacity is heat, which elevates the demands on the heart prior to doing work and then very dramatically increases the demands when work is done in the heat. Illness or injury usually erode our reserve capacities from the top. We have less capacity to either perform or sustain performance, thus our reserve capacity is less. By giving our selves recovery time and by reconditioning our muscles, we can reestablish much of the lost capacity, or we can find other ways to do the task that require less strength or endurance. Posture adds to our minimum level requirements in many jobs. Static muscle loading associated with poor or awkward postures robs energy from productive work. Examples of static muscle loading include: standing still twisting the trunk holding objects crouching raising the elbows leaning to one side hyperextending the back unsupported feet sitting �slouching extended reaches wrists out of neutral position bending forward The best postures distribute the weight over the spine and have minimal static loading of muscles. The Alexander and Feldenkrais Methods both teach ways to keep this minimum level of effort low. III. Applying These Ergonomics Principles to Flute Playing A. Factors Affecting Maximum Capacities for Flute Playing muscle fitness, breathing capacities, and endurance capa bilities are best brought to their highest levels by alot of PRACTICE. Regular shorter periods of practice (45 min utes every day) are better than occasional longer practice periods (2 hours every third day) as far as keeping the muscles fit. If long hours will be practiced each day, it is better to break them up into one hour periods with about 30-60 minutes between them than to sustain one 4 hour prac tice period. For breathing capacities, abdominal breathing exercises should be done. Inhalation through the nose during those exercises will force you to take deeper breaths because the resistance to breathing is higher that way. Practicing rapid inhalation of air through the nose should strengthen the abdominal muscles and diaphragm the best. B. Factors Affecting the Minimum Levels of Effort in a Capa city - Tension is the primary robber of capacity in flute playing, so techniques to reduce it should improve perfor ance. Poor postures can be remedied to reduce this level of effort. Unnecessary static loading of the face muscles involved in forming the embouchure can be eliminated by appropriate coaching. Often a student is not aware of the amount of tension in the embouchure until he or she can maximally tense those muscles and then to tally relax them. By defining the range of tension in the muscles, it is easier to determine where one is in that range and, therefore, to be able to move towards the "less tension" end. Learning to cope with the strains of performance can also best be done through practice and experience, but the best reducer of performance tension is probably excellent preparation of the music. Memorizing the music and then still using the music in performance is possibly the combination where the least non-productive tension will be generated. Some tension is good but not so much that it seriously degrades capacity. One other factor associated with tension that influ ences flute performance is the resting level of carbon dioxide tension in the blood. This level increases during the performance of a sustained phrase because that playing is similar to holding one 0 s breath. No new air is coming �in to help get rid of the carbon dioxide and to reduce its concentration in the blood. The need to breathe is con trolled primarily by the amount of carbon dioxide in the arterial blood. The oxygen level also contributes to a drive to breathe as do receptors in the lungs that sense lung volume. During the playing of a long phrase, the carbon dioxide level of the arterial blood is increasing, the oxygen level is falling, and the lung stretch receptors are initially activated and then later the deflation recep tors come into play. All of these factors are telling the flutist to breathe. By practicing, the flutist can learn to ignore the oxygen level and lung receptor drives in order to complete the phrase. He or she cannot ignore the carbon dioxide drive, but it will take a little longer to reach the top level ("breaking point") if the other inputs are ignored. A tense player increases the amount of carbon dioxide produced and oxygen used and may not be able to get in a large breath because the shoulder muscles may be less involved due to tension. Thus, all of the factors that limit the breath holding capability of the player will be coming to their critical values sooner and the phrase will not be sustained. Finally, time pressure can increase general body ten sion, as can be seen when you take an exam and are madly rushing to write out the last essay as the teacher is asking to have all of the papers collected. Handwriting usually deteriorates badly due to excessive grip and tremor associated with the time pressure stress. In flute playing this pressure may result in less agile finger movements, problems with the embouchure and throat muscles, and shoulder tension that reduces breathing depth capabilities. Time pressure is best dealt with by avoiding it where it is under one 0 s control, such as arriving in plenty of time for a performance or not procrastinating in preparing for a performance, and by being fully prepared for solo or orchestral performances so that timing problems are not severe. Learning to relax is another way of coping with time stress, e.g., developing a way of thinking that re duces the stress of time pressure. The use of beta blockers or other drugs to reduce the tension of perfor mence, however, is not generally recommended since they change many other physiological variables. Their primary effects will be on the upper capacity levels, by reducing the endurance times for muscle work and possibly by chang ing the sensitivity of the body to the carbon dioxide, oxygen, and lung receptor drives in breathing. IV. Summary - Practice is the best way to sustain one 0 s capacity for flute playing. This assumes that good technique is practiced! Good posture and techniques to relax can help to keep the resting level of effort as low as possible so that the reserve capacity is large. 9/1/84 SHR � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The Physiology of Playing the Flute Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Description An account of the resource Summary of the Major Points Made in a Talk on August 25, 1984 to the National Flute Association Convention, Chicago, IL Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1984-09-01 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_020 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-20 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 5 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/6884623c53bc576eb25e6ba9a833ae63.pdf 84dc552d9826e1d5141ae10cc1a42fd1 PDF Text Text 5/05 Curriculum Vita Suzanne H.Rodgers, Ph.D. Consultant in Ergonomics Address: 169 Huntington Hills Rochester, New York 14622-1121 Phone: (585) 544-3587; (585) 266-8749 FAX e-mail: SHRODGERS @ AOL.com Education: A.B. 1961 Vassar College- Physiology major Ph.D. 1967 University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Physiology major Work Experience: 1966-1968 Postdoctoral Fellow (USPHS), Middlesex Hospital Medical School, London, England, Department of Physiology 1968-1982 Eastman Kodak Company, Health, Safety and Human Factors Laboratory, Physiologist/Ergonomist inHuman Factors 1968-1989 University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Assistant Professor of Physiology, Part-time 1982- 1988 State University of New York at Buffalo, Industrial Engineering (Human Factors), Adjunct Lecturer 1982- Now Consultant in Ergonomics (Self~Employed) Areas of Expertise: . Manual Materials Handling Heat Stress The Aging Worker Rehabilitation to Work/ADA Accident AnalysisComputer Workplaces General.&gonomics .Repetitive Motions Injuries Women in the Workplace · Job Design · Work Physiology Respiratory Physiology Hours of Work/Shift Work Low Back Pain Publications: Technical editor and principal author of the 2-volume work on industrial human factors/ergonomics by Eastman Kodak Company, Ergonomic Design for People at Work (Volume 1 published 1983, Volume 2 in 1986by Van Nostrand Reinhold, now owned by JWiley & Sons). Co-editor of and contributor to the revised edition out in October, 2003. Author of Working With Backache, published July, 1985. New, revised edition due in 2006. Editor of "Repetitive Motions Injuries", the March, 1987 issue of Seminars in Occupational Medicine. Several chapters and articles in medical and ergonomics proceedings and books. Principal Clients: General Electric, City of Rochester, Eastman Kodak, State Compensation Insurance Fund of California, Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Rochester, Reflexite, Industrial Management Council of the Greater Rochester Area Chamber of Commerce, CalOSHA, Amoco Chemical, Mobil Chemical, General Motors, and Ford/UAW Joint Safety and Health Committee. �2. Professional Positions, Honors, etc.: President, Western New York Human Factors Society (1971~1972) .. Group Leader, Plant, Human Factors, Eastman Kodak(1975-1979) Acting Supervisor, Human Factors Section, Eastman Kodak (most of 1976) Fellow, U.S. Public Health Service, 2-Year Postdoctoral Fellowship, Middlesex Hospital Medical School, London, England (1966-1968) Current Member of HFES, ACSM, Greater Rochester C of C Who's Who in the USA, World, Science, American Women (2000s) Consulting: US Air Force (1979)- Women in Non-Traditional Jobs NIOSH (1979)- One-Handed Lifting Proposal Review (1983) - Review of Manual Handling Guidelines (1985)- Developed Improved Lifting Frequency Factor (1986-90)- Manual Lifting Guide Revisions (1992)- Retail Food Worker Epidemiology Study . (1996)- Reviewed Monographs on Model Ergonomics Programs and on the Epidemiology of Repetitive Motions Disorders of the Upper Extremity; Seminar on Ergonomics and Accident Analysis for the Safety Research Division (1998)- Seminar on Accident Analysis from an Ergonomics Perspective Eastman Kodak (1982- now)- Training, Guidelines Development (especially in Job Design), Surveys, Project Team Training, Program Development Consulting, Production Line Consulting, Methodology Development, EDFPAW Revisions; General Consulting Mobil Chemical -Plastics, Film, Consumer Product Divisions (1983-1994) -Ergonomics Training Programs, Consulting on Back and Repetitive Motions Problems, Control Panel and Machine Design, Ergonomics Program Development, Line Design Wegmans Food Markets, Inc. (1983)- Repetitive Motions- Cutting Meat George Heisl Company (1982)- Ambulance Dispatching St. Mary's Hospital (1984)- Manual Handling- Linen University Health Service, U. of Rochester (1984-1988)- Paced Work on Cafeteria Tray Line, Overexertion Injuries, Training, Facilities Design, and Patient Transportation Studies Bausch and Lomb (1985-7, 1993- 1999)- Ergonomics Awareness Courses, Computerization of Anthropometric Data for Engineering, Ergonomics Program Development, Engineering Training, Production Team Training, and Project Work re Workplace Design and Evaluation and Product Development General Motors Corporation (1984-95 ) -Ergonomics Training (Courses given at BuickOlds-Cadillac Assembly, Engine, and Fabricating Plants, Chevrolet~Pontiac-GM Canada Assembly and Engine Plants, Truck and Van Assembly and Fabricating Plants, DelcoMoraine Brake Plants, Delco (Roch), and Rochester Products). Disability Management Program, Training, Consulting,Workplace and Job Analyses. Team Training in Production Areas and Engineering Training. Problem Solving Consulting in Many of Plants. City of Rochester (1987- now)- Trash Collection Injury Prevention, 911 Center Ergonomics (including design of new Center), Recycling Study, Police Records Study,Water Treatment Plant Shift Schedule Research, Office Ergonomics, Physical Capacity �3. Assessment for Waste Collection, Library Book Handling, Parks Operations Equipment Handling, Accident Data Analysis, Ergonomics Awareness Training Westinghouse/Electric Power Research Institute (1985-87)- Reviewing Heat Stress Management Program Kidde Consumer Durables, Keystone Lamp Manufacturing Co.(1985)- Overexertion Injuries and Workplace/Job Design Crouse-Irving Memorial Hospital (1986)- Low Back Management Program Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company (1986-1993)- Ergonomics Team Training, Program Development, Manual Handling Problem Solving, VDT Workplace and Job Design, Surveys, Engineering Project Training and Consultation (87 plants- Worldwide Program) John Deere Company (1987-91)- Training and Program Development, Consulting on Overexertion Injury Prevention (4 plants) General Electric Corporation (1988- present) Job Analysis- Repetitive Motions Disorders (Bridgeport); Team Training and Program Development in 6 Aircraft Engine,? Engine Services, 3 Aerospace, 4 Appliances, 3 Medical Systems, 1Transportation Systems, 1 Gear, 1 Electrical Distribution, 1 Meter, 2 Power Systems, 1 GE Capital Company, 1 Superabrasives, and 5 Motors Plants. Training of Nurses across Corporation, Participation in Corporate Handbook on Ergonomics, Computer Workplace Studies Xerox Corporation (1989-96)- Study of Furniture Movers, Trash Collection, Ergonomics Problem Solving Training, Product Assembly Review, Program Development, Consulting, Assistance in Corporate Design Guideline Development, and in Development of Ergonomics Design Resource Center International Paper (1989-92)- Overexertion Injury Prevention, Ergonomics Training, Program Development, New Plant Construction Input Amoco Corporation (1989'- 96)- Ergonomics Training for 15 Foam, Fabrics and Fibers, Chemical Plants; Program Development, Corporate Office Ergonomics IBM (1989)- Ergonomics Training, Awareness, Consulting (Rochester, MN and Corporate) E.l. deNemours DuPont Co. (1989)- Overexertion Injury Prevention, Engineering Awareness, Program Development Assistance Crouse-Hinds Company (1989)- Evaluation of Repetitive Tasks for Injury Prevention, Syracuse, NY Occupational Rehabilitation Center, Rochester, N.Y. (1988-91)- Program Development, Ergonomics Training, Job Evaluation Techniques, Capacity Assessments (multidisciplinary team), Food Warehouse Lifting Evaluation Rohm & Haas (1989-91) -Ergonomics Training and Program Development, 4 plants Erie Plastics (1989-91)- Ergonomics Training, Consulting- Repetitive Work, Manual Handling Oneida Silver (1989-91)- Ergonomics Consulting/Training, Program Development Owens Coming Fiberglas ( 1990) - Ergonomics Awareness Training Astro-Valcour (1991-95)- Ergonomics Program Development, Training, Consulting U.S. Computer Services (1991-3, '99)- Ergonomics Program Development, Engineering Training Sacramento Valley Insurance (1992)- Ergonomics Consulting EBI, Milwaukee (1992)- Ergonomics Training for Loss Control Reps �4. SmithKlineBeecham (1991 - 98) Worldwide Ergonomics Program Development and Team Training for Clinical Labs & Manufacturing Plants in USA, UK, Singapore, Argentina, Puerto Rico. (15 Clinical Labs and 15 plants visited). Consulting in UK on Paced Bottling Line Ergonomics for Medical Department. Granite Hill Physical Therapy, Brunswick, ME (1990); The Source Physical Therapy, Boise, ID (1992); Syracuse Pf Users' Group (1991) -Ergonomics Training and Consultation in Program Development Sara Lee Meatcutting Division (1991-1992) - Consulting Assistance Touchstone (1993) - Ergonomics evaluations and awareness trainiug Linq Industrial Fabrics (1994)- Ergonomics Team training Thomson Publishers (1994-5) -Ergonomics Team Training and Consulting Roche Pharmaceutical, Pao Alto, CA (1996)- Review of Jobs Ford Motor Company (1996- 2001) - Ergonomic Job Analysis Consulting and RFP Development; Ford/UAW Joint Health and Safety Committee -External Reviewer of Occupational MSD Job Analysis· Project (1997-2001) Blue Cross/ Blue Shield of Rochester, NY ( 1997- 99) - New Building Design and Equipment Evaluation/Selection, Office Ergonomics, Employee Training California OSHA (1998-1999)- Reviewed and Contributed to Easy Ergonomics Manual for Small Businesses; Conducted 4 Training Courses for Compliance and Research Personnel inCA (with Ira Janowitz); Reviewer of guideline documents. OSHA (2000)- Expert Testimony at DOL Hearing on the 1999 Proposed Ergonomics Standard Rulemaking Eastman Kodak (2000) - Review of 43 Jobs in Paper Finishing Division (2002-4) - Review of 36 jobs in Shops and Construction; team training for Logistics and Shops/Construction Food and Allied Services Trades H & S (2001)- Ergonomic Job Analysis Training Chiron (2001)- Review of Vial Inspection Jobs Xelus, Inc (2001)- Survey of38 Office Jobs B. G. Sulzle (2001, 2005)- Ergonomics Team Training, Train the Trainer Follow-Up Training Industrial Management Council for the Greater Rochester Chamber of Commerce (2001) Ergonomics Training for Small Businesses - 5 Seminar Series Reflexite (2003-4)- Consults on 2 inspection workplaces State Compensation Insurance Fund of California (2001-present) -Advanced Ergonomics Training for Loss Control and Ergonomics specialists; Development of Low Back Injury Prevention program for clients of SCIF as part of a team ; Literature Review of Occupational Low Back Injury Prevention Programs as part of a team. �5. Topics On Which Public Presentations Have Been Made: Quality Performance and Ergonomic Design - discussion of job, tool design factors that may make it difficult to sustain quality shift. Techniques to identify these factors and reduce them. workplace and work over a Higher Productivity Through Job Design - how productivity can be increased by designing jobs ergonomically to better utilize human resources and decrease job stress. Repetitive Tasks - review of factors that may contribute to cumulative trauma disorders at work. Examples of ways to reduce them through job and workplace design. Low Back Pain in Industry- an analysis of workplace and job factors that contribute to low back problems and extend disability. Design guidelines to reduce these factors in the workplace and to help accommodate the worker with discogenic disease. Manual Lifting Guidelines- review of the 1981 and 1991 NIOSH guidelines including an analysis of how to apply them in the plant, places for improvement, guidelines for carrying, 1-handed lifting, and force exertion. The Partially-Automated Workplace· Who's In Control?- An analysis of the human factors/ergonomics problems that need to be considered in assembly lines or workplaces that are partially, but not fully, automated or computer-controlled. Overview of Human Factors/Ergonomics - introduction to ergo as it relates to manufacturing systems design and job design, especially. Also extended to include a discussion of why it is difficult to get ergonomics into the design process. Use of Human FactorS/Ergonomics Data in Assessing the Suitability of Returning a Person to Work After an Extended Illness- discussion of job demands relative to individual capacities for work which focuses on the person with cardiovascular, respiratory, or musculoskeletal problems. Relate ADA needs for "reasonable accommodation" to available ergonomic job and capacity assessment techniques. Working in Hot Environments - discussion of ways to reduce the stress of working in high heat loads through job pattern control and work practices. The Ergonomics of Shift Work and Overtime Schedules - A discussion of the design of hours of work according to ergonomics principles. Information about the psychosocial and physiological effects of different shift and overtime schedules. Impact of overtime and extended work time on acceptable total workloads. Women in the Workplace- discussion of physically-demanding jobs and their impact on women trying to move into non-traditional jobs. Recommendations for ways to improve these jobs. Use of Heart Rate and Oxygen Consumption to Categorize Job Demands methods to quantify job demands in terms of stress on the heart and the amount of energy required. Definition of appropriate job demands for most people in relation to work capacities. Job Fitness- discussion of the impact of physically-demanding jobs on a person's cardiovascular fitness level, and on the responses of individuals with different fitness �6. levels to the same physically- demanding job. Programs to improve cardiovascular and musculoskeletal fitness. Office Ergonomics/VDT Workplaces - a review of the factors that contribute to reduced performance and discomfort in office work. Special attention to visual and postural needs and to job pattern control by the worker. Self-help assists to allow the worker to identify ways to improve comfort at a VDT workplace. An Ergonomic Approach to Accident Analysis · a technique for looking at all aspects of an accident to get to root causes for injuries at work. Focuses on the individual, task, environmental, and organizational factors that can contribute to accidents, and identifies ways to reduce the risk through ergonomic improvements. Do We Need an Ergonomics Standard?- discussion of whether we need an ergonomics standard through OSHA legislation and what it should look like if the answer is "yes". Includes information about what measurements are appropriate for cost/benefit analyses of ergonomic interventions. Applied Ergonomics in an Out-sourced World- a think-piece on the challenges of doing applied ergonomics in different cultures and of finding better ways of designing work at home. Keynote address at the 2005 Applied Ergonomics Conference. Some Groups to Whom These Presentations Have Been Given (1974-2005): American College of Sports Medicine American Occupational Therapy Association/Canadian Occupational Therapy Assn American Industrial Hygiene Association American Occupational Medicine Association American Society of Hand Therapists American Society of Safety Engineers, Genesee Valley Chapter Applied Ergonomics Conference - liE Brouha Work Physiology Symposium C.A.I.R.E. Conference (Rehabilitation) Canadian Kinesiology Association Center for Office Technology/OSHA/NIOSH Managing Ergonomics Seminar Central New York Labor Agency, Inc. Computer Automated Systems Association Council of Economic Advisors' Subcommittee on the Advancement of Women in Industry Association of Canadian Ergonomists (old HFAC) Student Chapter Eastwood Hospital Seminar Series, Memphis, Tenn. ErgoCon '97 and '98 - Silicon Valley Ergonomics Institute Meetings Genesee Valley Safety Conference · · Governor's Safety Conference- Portland, OR HFAC (now ACE) in Toronto, Kingston, and Halifax Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Industrial Accident Prevention Conference, Toronto Industrial Health Foundation Institute for Behavioral Medicine Seminar International Ergonomics Association Meetings International Occupational Safety and Ergonomics Symposium Meeting Planners' Industrial Medicine for Physical Therapists, Applied Ergonomics National Association of Rehabilitation Centers National Institutes of Occupational Safety and Health �7. National Safety Council NIOSHIOSHA Seminar on Successful Ergonomics Programs NYS.National Association Rehabilitation Professionals Section New York University Department of Rehabilitation Medicine Occupational Health Northwest Seminar Ontario (Canada} Physiotherapy Association Organization Resources Counselors (ORC), Washington, DC Physical Medicine Research Foundation, Vancouver, BC- Symposium Polinsky Rehabilitation Center Functional Capacities. Network · Professional Training Seminars (Toronto, Vancouver, Calgary,,Edmonton) Rehabilitation Research Conference, Halifax, NS Rochester Chapter of the ATIE Rochester Chapter of Robotics International Rochester Safety Council and Industrial Management Council Rocky Mountain Academy of Medicine Safety Executives of New York Texas Occupational Medicine Society Toronto Academy of Medicine- Occupational Medicine Section United States Post Office Training Program University of Colorado Kinesiology Department University of Iowa Physical Therapy Programs University of Rochester Medical School University of Windsor, Ontario Seminar on Ergonomics (IE Dept) Wisconsin Physical Therapy Association Wisconsin Safety Council Teaching Experience: 1960-1961 Laboratory teaching assistant in the introductory Biology course, Vassar 1962-1989 · Respiratory physiology, some cardiovascular, neuromuscular, and metabolic physiology - to 1st year medical students and graduate students - U of Rochester Medical Center. From 1966-1968, teaching same material to znd year medical students in London. 1964 7th grade natural science., 9th and 12th grade Biology in a private school for the spring term (replacement for absent teacher) 1964-1966 Assisted in the physiology section of the graduate nursing program (University of Rochester). 1969-1982 Overviews of Human Factors- awareness course offered through Kodak's training department. 1975-1982 Assisted in training industrial nurses to analyze job effort levels, physical environmental stressors, etc. 1978-1982 Human Factors section of Principles of Safety Management, course offered through the Safety Department at Kodak Park - emphasis on safety-related topics and accident analysis. 1982-1988 Physiological Basis of Ergonomics/Human Factors, course offered to seniors and required of graduate students in SUNY Buffalo's Industrial Engineering �.. 8. department - emphasis on learning to identify and analyze design problems in existing workplaces and designing to prevent those problems in future workplaces and jobs. 1982- now Ergonomics Awareness and Training Courses ranging from 1 hour to 8 days with the preponderance being 3 to 4 days in length to train ergonomics teams in a plant. About 450 courses given in past 20 years. Hobbies : Music, reading, gardening, photography, sailing, silent films Community Activities : 1978- 1988 Monroe County Board of Health - Chair of School Health Advisory Committee,1978-1985; Vice President, 1982-84; President, 1984-1986 1981 - 1995 Rochester Friendly Home (private nursing facility) - Long-Range Planning Committee 1985- 1987 Heart Health Education Committee, Genesee Valley Chapter, American Heart Association 1977- 1986 Research Review Committee, Park Ridge Hospital; Chairman, 1984-86 1982 - 1986 Irondequoit Council of the Chamber of Commerce, Board of Directors 1969- 1980 Rochester Philharmonic Orchestra (RPO) Association, holding a variety of positions: Vice-President of the Board (1973-1975), co-chairman of Special Gifts Drive (1973 and 1974), member of Endowment Committee (1973 to 1980), and head of team that did a functional analysis of Board and Staff responsibilities (1974-5) 1971 - 1975 Opera Theatre of Rochester Board 1987- 1999 Citizens for a Quality Philharmonic, Steering Committee (RPO Public Input Group) Other Activities: 1981- 1987 Board of Corporators, Dana Hall School 1987- 1988 Rochester Torch Club (lecture club), President 5/05 SHR � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Curriculum Vita Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Consultant in Ergonomics Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Description An account of the resource Curriculum Vita updated May 2005 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2005-05 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_019 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-20 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 8 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/f4f0b20848cc4c633fceebdc35896303.pdf 8e30067ad1ce28f5fbf69b9c13947693 PDF Text Text 1/00 Curriculum Vita Suzanne H.Rodgers, Ph.D. Consultant in Ergonomics Address: 169 Huntington Hills ;. Rochester, New York 14642 Phone: (716) 544-3587; (716) 266-8749 FAX e-mail: SHRODGERS@ AOL.com Education: A.B. 1961 Vassar College- Physiology major Ph.D. 1967 University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Physiology major Work Experience: 1966-1968 Postdoctoral Fellow (USPHS), Middlesex Hospital Medical School, London, England, Department of Physiology 1968-1982 Eastman Kodak Company, Health, Safety and Human Factors Laboratory, Physiologist/Ergonomist in Human Factors 1968- 1989 University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Assistant Professor of Physiology, Part-time 1982- 1988 State University of New York at Buffalo, Industrial Engineering · (Human Factors), Adjunct Lecturer 1982- Present Consultant in Ergonomics (Self-Employed) Areas of Expertise: Manual Materials Handling Heat Stress The Aging Worker Rehabilitation to Work/ADA Accident Analysis Computer Workplaces General Ergonomics Repetitive Motions Injuries Women in the Workplace Job Design . Work Physiology Respiratory Physiology Hours of Work/Shift Work · Low Back Pain Publications: Technical editor and principal author of the 2-volume work on industrial human factors/ergonomics by Eastman Kodak Company, Ergonomic Design for People at Work (Volume 1 published in 1983, Volume 2 in 1986 by Van Nostrand Rembold). Author of Working With Backache, published July, 1985. Editor of "Repetitive Motions Injuries", the March, 1987 issue of Seminars in Occupational Medicine. Several chapters and articles in medical and ergonomics proceedings and books. P~incipal Clients: General Electric, City of Rochester, Eastman Kodak, Bausch & Lomb, CalOSHA, Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Rochester, US Computer Services, U.of Rochester Center for Occ Rehab, and Ford/UAW Joint Safety and Health Committee. �.. 2. Professional Positions, Honors, etc" : President, Western New York Human Factors Society (1971-1972) Group Leader, Plant, Human Factors, Eastman Kodak(1975-1979) Acting Supervisor, Human Factors Section, Eastman Kodak (most of 1976) Fellow, U.S. Public Health Service, 2-Year Postdoctoral Fellowship, Middlesex Hospital Medical School, London, England (1966-1968) Consulting (open-ended dates mean current activity with that client) : US Air Force (1979)- Women in Non-Traditional Jobs NIOSH (1979)- One-Handed Lifting Proposal Review (1983) - Review of Manual Handling Guidelines (1985) - Develop Improved Lifting Frequency Factor (1986-90) - Manual Lifting Guide Revisions (1992)- Retail Food Worker Epidemiology Study (1996) - Review Monographs on Model Ergonomics Programs and on the Epidemiology of Repetitive Motions Disorders of the Upper Extremity; Seminar on Ergonomics and Accident Analysis for · Safety Research Division (1998) - Seminar on Accident Analysis from an Ergonomics Perspective Eastman Kodak (1982- ) - Training Others, Guidelines Development (especially in Job Design), Surveys, Project Team Training, Program Development Consulting, Production Line Consulting, Methodology Development, EDFPAW Revisions; General Consultmg Mobil Chemical- Plastics, Film, Consumer Product Divisions (1983-1994) - Ergonomics Training Programs, Consulting on Back and Repetitive Motions Problems, Control Panel and Machine Design, Ergonomics Program Development, Line Design Wegmans Food Markets, Inc. (1983)- Repetitive Motions- Cutting Meat George Heisl Company (1982)- Ambulance Dispatching St. Mary's Hospital (1984)- Manual Handling- Linen . University Health Service, U. of Rochester (1984-1988)Paced Work on Cafeteria Line, Overexertion Injuries, Training, Facilities Design, Patient Transportation Studies · Bausch and Lomb (1985-7, 1993- 1999)- Ergonomics Awareness Courses, Computerization of Anthropometric Data for Engineering, Ergonomics Pro~ram Development, Engineering Training, Production Team Training, and ProJect Work re Workplace Design-and Evaluation and Product Development General Motors Corporation (1984-95 ) - Ergonomics Training (Courses given at Buick-Olds-Cadilhic Assembly, Engine, and Fabricating Plants, Chevrolet-Pontiac-OM Canada Assembly and Engine Plants, Truck and Van Assembly and Fabricating Plants, Delco Moraine Brake Plants, Delco (Roch), and Rochester Products). Disability Management Program, Training, Consulting, Workplace and Job Analyses. Team Training in Production Areas and Engineering Training. Problem Solving Consulting in Many of Plants. �' . '· City of Rochester (1987-)- Trash Collection Injury Prevention, 3. 911 Center Ergonomics, Recycling Study, Police Records Study, Water Treatment Plant Shift Schedule Research, Office Ergonomics, Physical Capacity Assessment for Waste Collection, Library Book Handling, Parks Operations Equipment Handling Activities Westinghouse/Electric Power Research Institute (1985-87)Reviewing Heat Stress Management Program Kidde Consumer Durables, Keystone Lamp Manufacturing Co.(1985)- Overexertion InJuries and Workplace/Job Design Crouse-Irving Memorial Hospital (1986)- Low Back Management Program Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company (1986-1993)- Ergonomics Training, Program Development, Manual Handling Problem · Solving, VDT Workplace and Job Design, Surveys, Engineering Project Training and Consultation (87 plants- Worldwide Program) John Deere Company (1987-91)- Training and Program Development, Consulting on Overexertion Injury Prevention (4 plants) General Electric Corporation (1988- ) Job Analysis- Repetitive Motions Disorders (Bridgeport); Training; Program Development in 6 Aircraft Engine,7 Engine Services, 3 Aerospace, 4 Appliances, 3 Medical Systems, 1Transportation Systems, 1 Gear, 1 Electrical Distribution, 1 Meter, 1 GE Capital Company, and 5 Motors Plants. Training of Nurses across Corporation, Participation in Corporate Handbook on Ergonomics, Computer Workplace Studies ·· Xerox Corporation (1989-96)- Study of Furniture Movers, Trash Collection, Ergonomics Problem Solving Training, Product Assembly Review, Program Development, Consulting, Assistance in Corporate Design Guideline Development and in Development of Ergonomics Design Resource Center International Paper (1989-92)- Overexertion Injury Prevention, Ergonomics Training, Program Develo_pment, New Plant Consquction Input Amoco Corporation (1989- 96)- Ergonomics Training for 15 Foam, Fabrics and Fibers, Chemical Plants; Program Development, Corporate Office Ergonomics ' ffiM (1989)- Ergonomics Training, Awareness, Consulting (Rochester, MN and Corporate) E.I. deNemours DuPont Co. (1989)- Overexertion Injury Prevention, Engineering Awareness, Program Development Assistance Crouse-Hinds Coml?any (1989)- Evaluation of Repetitive Tasks for Injury Prevention, Syracuse, NY Occupational Rehabilitation Center, Rochester, N.Y. (1988-91)Program Development, Ergonomics Training, Job Evaluation Techniques and Capacity Assessments (multidisciplinary team), Food Warehouse Manual Lifting Evaluation �r Rohm & Haas (1989-91)- Ergonomics Training and Program Development, 4 plants Erie Plastics (1989-91)- Ergonomics Training, Consulting- Repetitive Work, Manual Handling 4. Oneida Silver (1989-91)- Ergonom~cs Consulting and Training, Program Development . . · · Owens Coming Fiberglas (1990)- Ergonomics Awareness Training Astro-Valcour (1991 -)- Ergcmomics Program Development, Training, Consulting U.S. Computer Services (1991-3, '99)- Ergonomics Program Development, Engineering Training . Sacramento Vallex Insurance (1992)- Ergonomics Consulting EBI, Milwaukee (1992)- Ergonomics Training for Loss Coritrol Reps SmithKlineBeecham (1991- 98) Worldwide Ergonomics Program Development and Team Training for Clinical Labs & Manufacturing Plants in USA, UK, "Singapore, Argentina, Puerto Rico. (15 Clinical Labs and 15 plants visited). Consulting in UK on Paced Bottling Line Ergonomics for Medical Department. Granite Hill Physical Therapy, Brunswick, ME (1990); The Source Physical Therapy, Boise, ID (1992); Syracuse PT Users' Group (1991)Ergonomics Training and Consultation in Program Development Sara Lee Meatcutting Division (1991-1992)- Consulting Assistance Touchstone (1993)- Ergonomics evaluations and awareness trainiug Linq Industrial Fabrics (1994)- Ergonomics Team training Thomson Publishers (1994-5)- Ergonomics Team Training and Consulting Roche Pharmaceutical, Pao Alto, CA (1996)- Review of Jobs Ford Motor Company (1996-)- Ergonomic Job Analysis Consulting and RFP Development; Ford/UAW Joint Health and Safety Committee- Extremal Reviewet of Occupational MSD Job Analysis Project (1997-2000) Blue Cross/ Blue Shield of Rochester, NY ( 1997- 99)- New Building Design anc Equipment Selection, Office Ergonomics, Employee Training. California OSHA (1998-1999)- Reviewed and Contributed to Easy Ergonomics Manual for Small Businesses; Conducted 4 Training Courses for Compliance and Research Personnel inCA (with Ira Janowitz) OSHA (2000) - Expert Testimony at DOL Hearing on Proposed Ergonomics Standard Rulemaking Topics On Which Public Presentations Have Been Made: Quality Performance and Ergonomic Design - discussion of job, workplace and tool design factors that may make it difficult to sustain quality · . work over a shift. Techniques to identify these factors and reduce them. · Higher Productivity Through Job Design- how productivity can be mcreased by designing jobs ergonomically to better utilize human resources and decrease job stress. �r 5. Repetitive Tasks - review of factors that may contribute to cumulative trauma disorders at work. Examples of ways to reduce them through job and workplace design. Low Back Pain in Industry - an analysis of workplace and job factors that contribute to low back problems and extend disability. Design guidelines to reduce these factors in the workplace and to help accommodate the worker with discogenic disease. · Manual Lifting Guidelines- review of the 1981 and 1991 NIOSH ~uidelines including an analysis of how to apply them in the plant, places for Improvement, plus guidelines for carrying, one-handed lifting, and force exertion. The Partially-Automated Workplace- Who's In Control?- An analysis of the human factors/er~onomics problems that need to be considered in assembly bnes or workplaces that are partially, but not fully, automated or computer-controlled. Overview of Human Factors/Ergonomics - introduction to the area as it relates to manufacturin~ systems design and job design, especially. Also extended to include a discussion of why it is difficult to get ergonomics into the design process. Use of Human Factors/Ergonomics Data in Assessing the Suitability of Returning a Person to Work After an Extended Illness - discussion of job demands relative to individual capacities for work which focuses on the person with cardiovascular, respiratory, or musculoskeletal problems. Relate ADA needs for "reasonable accommodation" to available ergonomic job and capacity assessment techniques. Working in Hot Environments - discussion of ways to reduce the stress of working in high heat loads through job pattern control and work practices. The Ergonomics of Shift Work and Overtime Schedules- A discussion of the design of hours of work according to ergonomics principles. Information about the psychosocial and physiological effects of different shift and overtime schedules. Women in the Workplace - discussion of physically-demanding jobs and their impact on women trying to move into non-traditional jobs. Recommendations for ways to Improve these jobs. Use of Heart Rate and Oxygen Consumption to Categorize Job Demands - methods to quantify job demands in terms of stress on the heart and the amount of ener~y required. Definition of appropriate job demands for most people m relation to work capacities. Job Fitness - discussion of the impact of physically-demanding jobs on a person's cardiovascular fitness level, and on the responses of individuals with different fitness levels to the same physically- demanding job. Programs to improve cardiovascular and musculoskeletal fitness. �Office Ergonomics/VDT Worl{places- a review of the factors 6. that contribute to reduced performance and discomfort in office work. Special attention to visual and postural needs and to job pattern control by the worker. Self-help assists to allow the worker to identify ways to improve comfort at a VDT workplace. An Ergonomic Approach to Accident Analysis - a technique for looking at all aspects of an accident to get to root causes for injuries at work. Focuses on the individual, task, environmental, and organizational factors that can contribute to accidents, and identifies ways to reduce the risk through ergonomic improvements. Do We Need an Ergonomics Standard ? - discussion of whether we need an ergonomics standard through OSHA legislation and what it should look like if the answer is "yes". Includes information about what measurements are appropriate for cost/benefit analyses of ergonomic interventions. Some Groups to Whmn These Presentations Have Been Given (1974-1999): American College of Sforts Medicine American Occupationa Therapy Association/Canadian Occ Therapy Assn American Industrial Hygiene Association American Occupational Medicine Association American Society of Hand Therapists American Society of Safety Engineers, Genesee Valley Chapter Brouha Work Physiology SymP.osium C.A.I.R.E. Conference (Rehabilitation) Center for Office Technology/OSHA/NIOSH Managing Ergonomics Seminar Central New York Labor Agency, Inc. Computer Automated Systems Association . Council of Economic Advisors' Subcomittee on the Advancement of Women in Industry Association of Canadian Ergonomists (old HFAC) Student Chapter Eastwood Hospital Seminar Series, Memphis, Tenn. ErgoCon '97 and '98 - Silicon Valley Ergonomics Institute Meetings Governor's Safety Conference - Portland, OR HFAC, Toronto and Halifax ' · Human Factors and Ergono~ics Society Industrial Accident Prevention Conference, Toronto Industrial Health Foundation Institute for Behavioural Medicine Seminar International Ergonomics Association Meetings International Occupational Ergonomics and Safety Symposium Meeting Planners' Industrial Med for Physical Therapists, Applied Ergonomics National Association of Rehabilitation Centers National Institutes of Occupational Safety and Health National Safety Council NIOSH/OSHA Seminar on Successful Ergonomics Programs NYS Nat'l Assn Rehabilitation Professionals Section New York University Department of Rehabilitation Medicine Occupational Health Northwest Seminar Ontario (Canada) Physiotherapy Association Organization Resources Counselors (ORC), Washington, DC Physical Medicine Research Fndtn, Vancouver, BC - Symposium Polinsky Rehabilitation Center Functional Capacities Network �7.. Professional Training Seminars (Toronto, Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton) Rehabilitation Research Conference, Halifax, NS Rochester Chapter of the AilE Rochester Chapter of Robotics International Rochester Safety Council and Industrial Management Council Rocky Mountain Academy of Medicine Safety Executives of New York Texas Occupational Medicine Society Toronto Academy of Medicine - Occupational Medicine Section United States Post Office Training Program University of Colorado Kinesiology Department University of Iowa Physical Therapy Programs University of Rochester Medical School University of Windsor, Ontario Seminar on Ergonomics (IE Dept) Wisconsin Physical Therapy Association Wisconsin Safety Council Teaching Experience: 1960-1961 Laboratory teaching assistant in the introductory Biology course, Vassar 1962-1989 Respiratory physiology, some cardiovascular, neuromuscular, and metabolic physiology to 1st year medical students and graduate students- U of Rochester. From 1966-1968 teaching same material to 2nd year medical students in London. 1964 7th grade natural science, 9th and 12th grade biology in a private school for the spring term (replacement for absent teacher) 1964-1966 Assisted in the physiology section of the graduate nursing program (U of Rochester). 1969-1982 Overviews of Human Factors - awareness course offered through Kodak's training department. 1975-1982 Assisting in training industrial nurses to analyze job effort levels, physical environmental stressors, etc. 1978-1982 Human Factors section of Principles of Safety Management, course offered through the Safety Department at Kodak Park - emphasis on safety-related topics and accident analysis. 1982- 1988 Physiological B,asis of Ergonomics/Human Factors, course offered to seniors and required of graduate students in SUNY Buffalo's Industrial Engineering department - emphasis on learning to identify and analyze design problems in existing workplaces and designing to prevent those problems in future workplaces and jobs. �. . . 8. 1982- Now Ergonomics Awareness and Training Courses ranging from 1 hour to 8 days with the preponderance being 3 to 4 days in length to train ergonomics teams in a plant. About 430 courses given in past 18 years. Hobbies : Music, reading, gardening, photography, sailing, silent films Community Activities : 1978- 1988 Monroe County Board of Health, chair of School Health Advisory Committee,1978-1985; Vice President, 1982-84; President, 1984-1986 1981 - 1995 Rochester Friendly Home (private nursing facility) Long-Range Planning Committee 1985- 1987 Heart Health Education Committee, Genesee Valley Chapter, American Heart Association 1982- 1986 Irondequoit Council of the Chamber of Commerce, Board of Directors 1977- 1986 Research Review Committee, Park Ridge Hospital; Chairman, 1984-86 1969- 1980 Rochester Phill;larmonic Orchestra (RPO) Association, holding a variety of positions: Vice-President of the Board (1973-1975), co-chairman of Special Gifts Drive (1973 and 1974), member of Endowment Committee (1973 to 1980), and head of team that did a functional analysis of board and staff responsibilities (197 4-197 5). 1971 - 1975 Opera Theatre of R~chester Board 1987- 1999 Citizens for a Quality Philharmonic, Steering Committee (RPO Public Input Group) Other Activities : 1981 - 1987 . Board of Corporators, Dana Hall School 1987- 1988 Rochester Torch Club (lecture club), President 1/20/00 update � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Curriculum Vita Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Consultant in Ergonomics Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Description An account of the resource Curriculum Vita updated 2000-01-20 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2000-01-20 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_018 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-20 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 8 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/4b548f6105d22c8d1d62e13fdb674616.pdf 7a7150d88ba3c03f12745cd77be67fe5 PDF Text Text Biography of Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D., Consultant in Ergonomics, Rochester, NY Sue received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry. After a 2-year USPHS Post-Doctoral Fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate, and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists, and computer and statistical specialists, Sue spent the next 13 years studying people at work and doing research on the work capacities of a 27,000-person industrial workforce. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on building teams within companies to do the ergonomics problem solving. Among her clients are and have been Kodak, Xerox, Bausch and Lomb, General Electric, General Motors, BP-Amoco, International Paper, Rohm and Haas, Glaxo-SmithKline Beecham, Goodyear, John Deere, Exxon-Mobil, State Compensation Insurance Fund of California, the City of Rochester, the University of Rochester Medical Center, Oneida Silver, and NIOSH. Sue was the principal author and technical editor for Kodak's two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work ( 1983 and 1986, now in revision for 2002), and has also written a book on ergonomics for people with back discomfort , Working With Backache (1985, in revision for 2003 ). She has contributed articles and chapters to several ergonomics and medical publications and speaks frequently at professional conferences on ergonomics and fatigue reduction. 119/02 SHR �Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. - Biographical Information Dr. Rodgers is a consultant in ergonomics/human factors with a background in physiology and 19 years of industrial experience. She is on the part-time faculties of the Physiology Department at the University of Rochester Medical Center and of the Industrial Engineering Department at the State University of New York at Buffalo. Research interests include manual materials handling and repetitive motions injuries. She is the author of Workino With Backache (1985) and principal author and technical editor of the 2volume source books on industrial ergonomics, Ergonomic Design for People at Work by the Eastman Kodak Company Ergonomics and Human Factors Groups (1983 and 1986). She is also the editor of the March, 1987 issue of Seminars in Occupational Medicine on "Repetitive Motions Injuries". She is a member of the Human Factors Society and its Western New York Chapter. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Autobiographies Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Description An account of the resource Autobiographies used by Dr. Rodgers Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_017 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-20 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 2 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/c517372e530a062fd3a37a37329ab3a5.pdf 128f143766432d451b9c11faaf8d70a9 PDF Text Text � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Portrait Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Description An account of the resource A portrait of Dr. Rodgers Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_016 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-20 Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Extent The size or duration of the resource. 1 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/fbdd4e02fc3b23884dccfd3ee011af32.pdf f240ef19e956ba7e7024e21e92daf1e0 PDF Text Text Exercise Physiology Laboratory �·., University of Louisville Louisville, Kentucky 40292 (502) 588-6649 RSI1Yof IDUI Al\J\lS� I$ ) ,qc;� 'I ' 1,/\1\. V\ � \ S, \l. -tt. 7:: J �\- ··\.\.'\� � Y O \J. I \,,\ +, II\,\ (._ I L-1 tV101V\l> +�t,t-¼""e r als� W1.o.,le.d a. �PY -h Altw York. ::r Wt!Julf h \( e.. •-lo .51t' t�'-S o� s ��"" .., , J' p�ts ,loll . £ dt � a wf>.y I I W\o.rL.. s�M a..d.d,h-o"'-s as wtll aJ wio/Ay c holltf1 � s u��sw 1o.., Go,.5. :r -Jh �U:Jh} tAJt c��ld 0.CKY!Or,.J /ulj( 6Cl'� -r.-r yov\ ../-�1nk ,Ji.i,s I> C\S he>.vHJ (e.vttv.1411 .J,� mtlnuSC<' pJ. 1 Q pnb]� ) /t-t l'Y\{ k 117<:JW 10ikt Co..rt �r y our�-ttf ��-: ·.,. r\�.--.:� J- PHYSIOLOGICAL COST OF ffiGH FREQUENCY LIFTING: A REVIEW by · J.W. Yates, Ph.D. Exercise Physiology Laboratory University of Louisville, Louisville, Ky 40292 and Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. 169 Hunting Hills Rochester, Ny 10016 Reprint Requests: Dr. J.W. Yates, Exercise Physiology Lab, Crawford Gym, University of Louisville, Louisville, Ky 40292 �r, ,., .. 2 (:August 1 5, 1 990 1. Introduction Ergonomists spend much of their time evaluating a task relative to the potential for injury and then redesigning the job in order to reduce the incidence of injury to the worker. Therefore, all ergonomists are well aware of the tremendous costs associated with injuries that occur during manual materials handling. Due to the magnitude of the problem, a large volume of literature dealing with repetitive lifting has been published over the past 30 years. Scientists have attempted to define lifting limits using a number of different methods, including biomechanical models, psychophysically determined limits, and measurements of metabolic rate. It seems to be the general consensus that biomechanical models best define limits for infrequent lifts (< 1 lift/min) while the psychophysical method is the most appropriate for lifts from 1 to 4 or 6 per minute. Physiological measurements seem to be more valid when the lifting frequency exceeds 4 lifts/min (NIOSH, 1981). The goal of this paper is to provide a critical review the body of literature dealing with high frequency lifts. For the purpose of this paper, high frequency lifts are define as a rate of 4 lifts/min or higher. This lifting frequency includes limits which are determined using the psychophysical method as well as the physiological method. Recent publications suggest that the psychophysical method for determining the maximum acceptable �\August 1 5, 1 990 lift is valid up to a frequency of 4 to 6 lifts/min (Ciriello et al., 1990; Karwowski and Yates, 1984; 1986; Mital, 1983) A number of factors affect the metabolic cost of repetitive lifting. The weight lifted and the frequency of lift are the two most important parameters and will be discussed in detail. Factors such as the distance of the lift. its beginning position, the lifting posture used, and the container dimensions also affect the physiological demands of the job. Each of these factors and their interactions will also be discussed. 2. Measuring the Metabolic Cost of Lifting Activities Direct determination of the metabolic demands of industrial tasks has not always been readily available or possible. Therefore, in the past, work physiologists often relied on measurements of heart rate to estimate the physiological demands of the job. However, portable devices such as the Oxylog are now readily available which allow the direct measurement of oxygen consumption during the performance of the task. This device is light weight and does not interfere with the movement of the worker. Thus it is possible for the ergonomist to measure the oxygen demands of manual materials handling on the job itself and not during a laboratory simulation. This is best accomplished by having the worker complete several cycles of the job so that a steady state oxygen uptake is reached. Monitoring the heart rate also provides valuable information concerning the physiological 3 �C: f\ugust 15, 1990 finding was probably due to the variation in the relationship between 02 consumption and work load and lifting efficiency seen among subjects. One possible explanation for the different findings involves the relationship between lifting frequency and weight of lift. It is known that for a given height of lift, the metabolic demands change (Frederik, 1959). Thus, if a progressive test increases the weight of the lift and holds the frequency of lift constant, efficiency changes. This change in efficiency is illustrated by the data of Garg and Herrin (1979). These authors plotted the frequency of lift which resulted in a metabolic rate of 5.2 Kcal/min against weight of the lift in kg. A weight of 25 kg could be lifted over 5 times/min while a weight of 7 kg could be lifted 11 times/min. Over 125 kg of weight can be lifted per minute when lifting 25 kg while only 77 kg of weight is lifted per minute when a 7 kg unit is handled, yet both work loads result in the same metabolic cost. Thus, for this situation, 02 uptake and work load are not linear. Other data shows that the relationship between the two variables changes with the height of lift and the muscle mass involved (Genaidy et al., 1985). Given the complexity of lifting activities compared to treadmill or cycle ergometer activity, it not unreasonable to suspect that the relationship between metabolic rate and work load is non-linear in certain situations. 3. Factors Influencing the Metabolic Costs of Lifting Tasks 5 �( !jAugust 15, 1990 3.1 Beginning Position of Lift and Vertical Travel Distance When considering the physiological cost of lifting, it is necessary to account for the cost of moving the load as well as the cost of moving the body. When a lift is made from the floor, the worker must lift his/her own body weight in addition to the weight of the box. The cost of lifting the body increases the energy requirements of the task when compared to the energy needed to lift the same weight from a table upward. Therefore, lifts which begin from the floor require more energy expenditure than lifts which begin from table level. For example, Aquilano (1968) published 02 consumption values for 6 men who were lifting 10 and 25 pound cartons from the floor to waist level and from waist to head height. Estimates from figures published in the article show that when lifting a 25 pound carton at a rate of 11 lifts/min, required a total energy expenditure of 4.4 Kcal/min for the waist to head lift. However, lifting the same carton from the floor to the waist resulted in a caloric expenditure of 6.3 Kcal/min, a 43% increase in energy expenditure. The data of Frederik (1959) shown in Figure ????? supports this point by showing that the most efficient lifting range is from 40 to 60 inches for materials ranging from 20 to 60 pounds. Lifting from 0 to 20 inches results in the greatest energy expenditure for weights ranging from 20 to 55 pounds. These data emphasize the important role played by the beginning position of lift in determining the total energy expenditure of the task. The data are quite clear concerning the effect of lifting distance on metabolic rate. As lifting distance increases, so does the energy 6 �August 15, 1 990 requirement of the job (Aquilano, 1968; Genaidy et al., 1985; Khalil et al., 1985). When a 11 kg weight was lifted from the floor to waist height (92 cm) or to head height (168 cm) at a pace of 11 and 10 lifts/min respectively, the corresponding energy expenditures were 5.21 and 6.58 Kcal/min. The exact relationship between metabolic rate and vertical travel distance is affected by the body posture used to lift the weight. This aspect of lifting will be discussed below. 3.2 Lifting Technique The method used to lift the weight from the floor also has an impact on the physiological cost (Brown, 1973; Garg and Herrin, 1979). Three body postures used to lift objects from the floor have been studied: squat (straight back, bent knee), stoop (bent back, straight knee), and free style (as chosen by the worker). The squat lift results in higher levels of energy expenditure than the other forms of lifting. Garg and Saxena (1979) showed that at a work load of 60 kgm/min, the free style lift resulted in a metabolic rate of approximately 4.2 Kcal/min while the squat lift yielded a metabolic rate of 5.7 Kcal/min. This 36% increase in energy expenditure is partially the result of raising and lowering the center of gravity of the body during the squat lift. The differences in metabolic rates between the styles of lifting is a function of the total work performed, or in this case the frequency of the lift. At a work rate of 30 kgm/min, only a 14% difference exists between the two lifting styles (3.15 Kcal/min vs 3.60 Kcal/min). Garg and Saxena followed up on this study by evaluating the lifting techniques of 6 male 7 �,f,ugust 1 5, 1 990 industrial subjects filling dry grocery orders in a warehouse (1985). They reported that the energy expenditure rate was 5.8 Kcal/min when using the free style technique compared to 7 .5 Kcal/min with the squat technique. In addition, the workers were able to meet their performance index using the free style technique, but failed to meet the standard using the squat technique. Brown (1973) plotted the relationship between the weight of the lift and energy expenditure in Kcal/kg body weight/min. This method of expressing the energy expenditure serves to normalize the data relative to the body weight of the subject. The free style form of lifting was still found to be more efficient than the squat lift. Kumar (1984) reported that the stoop technique was less metabolically expensive than either the free style or the squat technique. This investigator measured the 02 consumed while lifting a 10 kg weight a beginning position of 13.5 cm to a final position of 91cm, at a frequency of 6 lifts/min. The 02 consumption for the stoop, free style and squat techniques of lifting was .676, .804, and 1.06 liters/min, respectively. However, the distance between the subjects and the weight was kept constant at 3/4 of reach distance. This constraint probably contributed to the higher oxygen consumption of the freestyle lift when compared to the stoop lift. On a subjective basis, the squat technique was rated as the most tiring and the free style technique the least tiring. Even though the stoop technique resulted in a lower metabolic rate, it was more tiring, subjectively, than the free style technique. Kumar also reported that, for the same lifting task, the absolute 02 consumed (liters/min) was always higher 8 �I. f\ugust 15, 1990 for males; however, when the values were adjusted for body weight (ml/kg · body wt/min), the females' oxygen consumption rates were higher. Thus, when performing the same lifting task, females are working at higher percentages of their maximum 02 consumption than males and are therefore more susceptible to fatigue. 3.3 Effects of Work load (Frequency and Weight) on Metabolic Rate Lifting frequen�;r and the weight of the lift are so entwined that it is impossible to separate them when discussing their impact on physiological parameters. Manipulation of either one of these factors will change the total work performed by the· worker and, hence, their energy expenditure (02 consumed). The efficiency of the work performed is also a function of the weight-frequency combination used during the lifting task. Frederik (1959) was one of the first to publish data concerning the metabolic cost of lifting. These data indicated that the cost of lifting loads was a function of the weight of the object and the starting location of the lift. Lifts performed from a height of 40 to 60 inches required less energy per foot-pound of work than lifts from other heights. Of the range of weights and heights studied, a lift of 40 pounds from 40 to 60 inches resulted in the highest efficiency. Lifts in the range from the floor to 20 inches resulted in the greatest energy expenditure. Hamilton and Chase (1969) also collected data concerning the relationship between 02 consumption and work rate when lifting IO to 25 9 ��ugust 15, 1990 pounds a height of 10 in. These authors stated that the relationship between the variables was linear over the range measured. The authors incorrectly interpreted this finding to mean that no optimal work load exists over the range of variables measured. However, the data published in Table 2 of the paper by Hamilton and Chase clearly shows that when two combinations of frequency and load result in the same work rate, the combination with the greatest weight and lowest frequency results in a lower metabolic rate. For example, lifting a 25 pound carton 9 times/min (a total weight of 225 pounds/min) yielded an energy expenditure of 5.85 Kcal/min (1.17 liter O2/min). However, a lift involving a 15 pound carton and a frequency of 15/min (also 225 pounds/min) resulted in a metabolic rate of 6.88 Kcal/min (an 18% increase). The lift in this case involved raising a carton from a table and placing it on a conveyor belt 10 in above the table. Even though this study used a lifting height of only 10 in, all of the weights studied (10, 15, 20, and 25 lbs) resulted in a metabolic rate greater than 5 Kcal/min when lifted at a frequency of 15/min. At 12 lifts/min only the 10 pound weight yielded a metabolic rate of less than 5 Kcal/min. At 6 lifts/min all of the weights were acceptable when based on a limit of 5 Kcal/min. The data cited above suggests that when metabolic demands become too high, the weight of the lift should be increased while the frequency of the lift is decreased. These changes will lower the metabolic demands of the job. However, there is clearly a trade-off when balancing the metabolic demands with the biomechanical stresses imposed by lifting more weight 10 �.. 4\ugust 1 5, 1 990 less frequently (Garg and Herrin, 1979). Biomechanical data suggests that in order to minimize stress to the low back, the load should be reduced and the lifting frequency should be increased. Thus the problem becomes one of balancing the metabolic demands with the biomechanical stresses on the muscles and low back region. Along this line Yates et al. (1990) recently measured changes in blood lactate that occurred during a progressive lifting task using various weights and lifting frequencies. These data showed that lifting a light weight (7 kg.) from the floor to a table at a high frequency results in higher blood lactate levels than lifting a heavy weight (28 kg.) at a lower frequency even though the total amount of product moved was kept constant. The increased metabolic demands, as indicated by blood lactate levels, was partially a function of moving the body of the worker. Thus high lifting frequencies impose additional stress to the worker when they require him/her to raise and lower their center of gravity. Interestingly, these authors did show that a lifting frequency of 12 lifts/min was more efficient than 6 or 24 lifts/min. This lifting frequency may be a compromise between the muscular demands of 6 lifts/min with a heavy weight versus the metabolic demands of 24 lifts/min with a light weight. Asfour and his colleagues (1990) reached similar conclusions to those of Yates et al. (1990) by measuring the endurance time when lifting various combinations of weight and frequencies. These authors had subjects lift 5, 10, or 15 kg. loads at 8, 12, or 16 lifts/min. They concluded that lifting frequency had a more pronounced effect on endurance than did the weight 11 �• 4\Ugust 15, 1990 of the load. Thus, these data also support the need to find a compromise between frequency and weight of the lift. Genaidy et al. (1990) had subjects work at 3 and 6 lifts/min but allowed them to adjust their work and rest periods. Despite working less total time when lifting at 6 times/min, the subjects handling 1.8 times more load than when lifting at 3 times/min. Therefore it is possible to. maintain high productivity with high frequency lifting if sufficient rest is_ allowed. A number. of investigations have determined the relationship between work load and oxygen uptake during lifting. When work loads are matched between cycling and lifting activities, 02 uptake is always higher during lifting activities than during cycling, but VO2 max is almost always lower for lifting than for cycling (Petrofsky and Lind, 1978a). Williams and colleagues (1982) did report that when a group of females lifted using the squat technique, 02 uptake for heavy loads was equal to VO2 max on the cycle ergometer. Petrofsky and Lind (1978a) also reported that the VO2 max achieved during a lifting task was directly related to the weight being lifted. As the weight of lift increases, so does the VO2 max. Heart rate and minute ventilation (VE) follow a pattern similar to that for 02 uptake. At the same submaximal work loads, HR and VE are lower during cycle ergometry than during lifting. As the weight of the lift increases, so does the peak HR and VE. However, the values achieved during lifting do not reach the highest values seen while riding the cycle ergometer. In an attempt to evaluate time standards set for industrial tasks, 12 �• August 15, 1990 Aquilano (1968) had male subjects lift cartons of 10 and 25 pounds from the floor to waist, floor to head height, and waist to head height. Depending upon the height of the lift, lifting frequencies ranged from 4 to 26/min. As the subjects increased the lifting frequency for a given weight, 02 consumption increased in a linear fashion. However, the slope of the increase varied depending upon the weight being lifted and the location of the lift. For a given increase in work performed, the increase in energy expenditure was less for the heavier weight. This finding was related to the lesser change in frequency necessary for the heavier weight in order to result in the same absolute increase in work load. Data of Mital, Asfour and Ayoub (1982) support this principle. Genaidy and Asfour (1989) measured the endurance times for a group of 11 young males during a lifting task. The subjects were asked to lift boxes weighing 5, 10, 15, and 20 kg from the floor to a table at frequencies of 4, 6, 8, and 10/min. Subjects continued lifting using the squat method (up to 8 hrs) until they were unable to continue due to fatigue. The average endurance time for a lift of 5 kg at a frequency of 4/min was 471 minutes (7.85 hrs). However, subjects were able to continue for only 27 minutes . when lifting 20 kg at 10/min. Endurance times were 400 and 132 minutes for a load of 15 kg at 4 and 8 lifts/min, respectively. These data are not in agreement with those published by Mital (1984). Using the psychophysical method Mital reported that subjects were willing to lift 15.42 and 14.99 kg for 8 hours at 4 and 8/min, respectively. However, subjects in Mital's study used the free style technique while the squat method of lifting was used by 13 �II f\ugust 15, 1990 Genaidy and Asfour. This difference could account for some of the differences between the two studies. Legg and Pateman (1984) reported that eight soldiers were able to lift 22.4 kg, 12 times/min for 54 min before becoming exhausted. Furthermore, these same subjects lifted 44.8 kg at a · rate of 4/min for one hour and estimated they could have lifted that load for a total of 104 minutes. Khalil et al. (1985) used a progressive resistartce lifting test to estimate VO2 max for different combinations of weight, frequency and height of lift. The authors then used 33% of the predicted VO2 max to recommend the lift load for combinations of frequency and lift height; however, the exact method used to arrive at these values is unclear. These data suggested that no lifting work should be performed at frequencies above 10/min for any height of lift. These data are not supported by others. Garg and Herrin (1979) found that a weight of approximately 7 kg resulted in a metabolic expenditure of 5.2 Kcal/min when lifted 11 times/min from the floor to knuckle height. Mital (1984) reported a 02 uptake of .92 liters/min (4.6 Kcal/min) when subjects lifted a weight of 11.3 kg from knuckle to shoulder height at 12/min. Samanta and Chatterjee (1981) published data showing a metabolic rate of 4.89 Kcal/min when lifting a 9 kg load a vertical distance of .66 meters at 12 times/min. It is unclear why such dramatic differences exist between the data of Khalil et al. (1985) and those of others. However, it is reasonable to assume that some errors result when VO2 max is estimated from submaximal work loads which is what was done by Khalil et al. (1985). When performing this 14 �,August 1 5, 1 990 calculation it is assumed that the relationship between HR and work load and HR and 02 uptake are linear. This relationship is under dispute as was discussed earlier. Jorgensen and Poulsen (1974) tested four males and four females while lifting loads of 10, 25, 50, and 75% of maximum single lifting capacity. Each of these loads was lifted for 20 min at frequencies ranging from 2 to 12 L/min while HR and 02 uptake were measured. They reported that, on the average, the maximum lifting capacity of females was 70% of that of males. This work also suggested that during repetitive lifting, capability was determined by maximum aerobic capacity in addition to back strength. Doolittle (1989) supports the impact of aerobic capacity on repetitive lifting. He contends that many frequency-mass combinations, as determined from the NIOSH guide, will result in metabolic rates which exceed a lifting capacity based on 33% of maximum aerobic capacity. Thus, even with sound ergonomic design, some aerobic testing of subjects is in order if an attempt to remain below 33% of maximum capacity is made for all individuals. The frequency and weight of the lift directly effects the metabolic rate of the task, however, it also has an impact on local muscle fatigue. As frequency increases, the rest interval decreases. The rest period needed to recovery from a static holding task increases as an exponential function of the intensity of the holding task (Rohmert, 1960). Therefore, as the weight and frequency of the lift increase, so does the local muscle fatigue. The weight increases the intensity of the task while the increase in frequency results in a shorter recovery time. Both of these factors will result in 15 �II August 15, 1990 greater local fatigue and could therefore have an impact on short term or long term performance. 3.4 Lifting'Versus Lowering An eccentric movement (or negative work) occurs when muscle length increases while contracting. The metabolic requirements of negative work are much less than those for doing an equivalent amount of positive work. When a job requires the lowering of an object, negative work is being done. Thus, the capacity of an individual to lower objects differs from the capacity to lift objects. This is true for force generation as well as from a metabolic standpoint. Many industrial tasks are combinations of negative work and positive work. A task that involves both forms of work is less physiologically demanding than one requiring positive work only. Failure to account for this factor may play a role in the discrepancies that occur between the AL or MPL recommended by the NIOSH Guide (1981) and actual performance seen in industcy. It has recently been suggested that the maximum acceptable weight for a combination task is limited by the lowest acceptable weight of any of the components (Ciriello et al., 1990). Petrofsky and Lind (1978a) measured the effect of lifting and lowering loads on metabolic rate when lifting and lowering from 6 to 60 cm. For light weight boxes and low work loads, the difference between the two tasks is minimum. However, at a work load of approximately 500 kgm/min (a high work load), lifting requires over 75% more energy expenditure than does 16 �Cl •August 15, 1 990 lowering. Investigations ·using the psychophysical methodology showed that subjects are willing to lower more weight than they will lift (Ciriello and Snook, 1983; Mital et al., 1982). Despite this difference, negative work (lowering) results in an 02 consumption of approximately 15% less than that of positive (lifting) work (Ciriello and Snook, 1983; Ciriello et al., 1990). 3.5 Special Lifting Situations A limited amount of physiological data are available for special lifting situations. These are discussed below. 3.5.1 Sittin" - Yates and Karwowski (1987) measured the physiological demands of lifting from a sitting posture and compared them to standing lifts. Eight males subjects used the psychophysical method to chose MAWL while lifting at rate of 1 and 4/min. Subjects lifted significantly less weight (8% to 25%) during sitting positions than during standing lifts. HR during sitting lifts was less than 88 b/min while 02 consumption was always less than 1 7% of V02 max. 3.5.2 Asymmetrical - If the psychophysical method is used to determine the MAWL during an asymmetrical lift, the resulting load will be less than that acceptable during a sagittal plane lift (Garg and Banaag, 1988; Mital and Fard, 1986; and Yates and Karwowski, 1987). Even though the MAWL is less 17 �.August 15, 1990 18 during asymmetrical lifts, 02 consumption does not change when the results are compared to symmetrical lifts (Mital and Fard, 1986; Yates and Karwowski, 1987). 3.5.3 Special Postures - Morrissey (1987) reviewed the effect of task posture on the physiological demands of lifting. Walking in a stooped posture (such as would occur in a medium or low seam coal mine) will increase 02 consumption. Walking at a height of 60% of normal almost doubles 02 requirements. When shovelling at a fI.Xed rate, working in the kneeling posture will increase 02 uptake over that which occurs while in normal posture. Gallagher and associates (1988) showed that lifting in the kneeling posture is more demanding that lifting in the stooped posture in terms of HR and 02 uptake. 4. Relationship Between Psychophysically Acceptable Weights and the Metabolic Cost of Lifting Determining the maximum acceptable weight during repetitive lifting is a complex task affected by many different factors. In attempting to solve this problem, investigators have taken a number of different approaches. The first approach, which was discussed above, involved determining the relationship between work rate and 02 consumption and finding which �" ;.ugust 19 15, 1990 loads resulted in fatigue of the subjects. The occurrence of fatigue was judged by a variety of methods. The second approach involves letting the subject choose the weight which he feels is acceptable to lift given the requirements of frequency and height of lift (psychophysical method). Many investigators have used the psychophysical method to determine acceptable lifting loads and then measured the resulting metabolic rate. Garg and Saxena (1979) compared the physiological fatigue criterion of 5 Kcal/min with psychophysical fatigue criteria. These authors reported that physiological fatigue criteria resulted in more liberal standards of work load at low frequencies of lift while the psychophysical method resulted in higher standards at high frequencies of lift. This conclusion is supported by others (Asfour et al., 1985; Fernandez and Ayoub, 1988; Karwowski and Yates, 1986). Based on these data, numerous investigators have concluded that the psychophysical methodology is invalid for high· frequencies of lift (Asfour et al, 1985; Ciriello and Snook, 1983; Ciriello et al, 1990; Fernandez and Ayoub, 1988; Karwowski and Yates, 1986). 5. Oxygen Consumption Prediction Models Garg, Chaffin and Herrin (1978) published an extensive prediction model based on the measurement of metabolic rate during 28 manual materials handling tasks. A basic assumption of the model was that the job could be divided into simple tasks and that the metabolic expendifure of �0 11 August 15, 1 990 complex jobs could be predicted by summing the energy demands of the simple tasks. ·In validating the model, a total of 48 comparisons were made between measured and predicted metabolic expenditure rates. The model validation showed a correlation coefficient of .95 between the predicted and measured metabolic rates and a coefficient of variation of 10.2 percent. However, the absolute difference between the predicted and the measured metabolic expenditure rates ranged from .2 to 33% (mean absolute difference = 8.6%). The model over predicted energy expenditure in 34 of the 48 cases and under predicted for the remaining 14 cases. Ayoub et al. (1980) points out t:1?-at this model and others prior to 1980 (Aberg et al., 1968; Qhaffin, 1967; Frederik, 1959), were valid for lifts in the sagittal plane but did not take into account the effect of task variables such as frequency of lift and box size. In addition, authors of the models mentioned above failed· to train their subjects. Genaidy et al. (1985) pointed another weakness of the Garg et al. model. These authors found that the separate tasks were not additive. For example, the metabolic cost of lifting from the floor to shoulder height does not equal the sum of lifting from the floor to knuckle height plus the cost of lifting from knuckle height to shoulder height. Therefore, a basic assumption of the model is invalid and probably contributes to the errors involved in prediction of energy expenditure. Nevertheless, these models do allow the investigator to divide a job into various tasks which can show which component requires the highest energy expenditure. This capability can be useful in job redesign. Mital (1985), Mital and Shell (1984), and Mital et al. (1984) 20 �.August 15, 1990 developed models to predict energy expenditure over extended work periods using the psychophysical method to determine the acceptable weight. A low correlation was obtained between task variables and oxygen · .. consumption and therefore may limit the application of these data. Energy prediction models can provide valuable information to an informed user. However, often the user is unaware of the assumptions and limitations of the model, hence misapplication of the data can occur. Therefore these models should be used with caution and the scope of their application should be limited. 6. Determination of Work Capacity Limits Based on Aerobic Work Capacities To establish guidelines for frequent lifting tasks based on physiological data, it necessary to find some value of oxygen consumption which should not be exceeded for the work period involved (1 hr, 2 hr, 8 hr, etc.). Astrand and Rodahl (1970) reported that well-trained men could perform up to 50% of their cycle ergometer maximum oxygen consumption (VO2 max) for an 8-h workday but they were fatigued. Untrained workers could work at 50% of VO2 max for 1 hour and at 25% of VO2 max for 8 hours. Initially, these criterion were applied to other types of work, however, more recent evidence shows that VO2 max is task specific. Hence, the VO2 max for lifting is different from VO2 max for walking on a treadmill or riding a cycle ergometer. 21 �C! .August 15, 1990 Petrofsky and Lind (1978) addressed this issue by using a progressive resistance test to measure 02 consumption on a cycle ergometer and a staged lifting task using boxes of different weights (.91, 6.82, 22.73, and 36.36 kg) at increasing frequencies. The subjects used the free style method to lift from a height of 6 cm to 60 cm ( 24 inches). 02 consumption was linearly related to work load for boxes of all weights; however, the slopes of the relationships• were dramatically different. For the two lightest boxes, the limiting factor reported by the subjects was their inability to raise and lower the trunk, head, and box at a faster rate. With the heaviest box, the limiting factor was reported to be fatigue in the arms or hands. VO2 max was highest for the cycle ergometer and progressively decreased as the weight of the lift decreased. HR followed a pattern similar to 02 consumption. When the same amount of work was performed lifting boxes as when riding the cycle ergometer.L 02 consumption was significantly greater for lifting boxes than for riding the cycle ergometer. A follow-up study found that 50% of VO2 max for each specific box weight could be maintained for 4 hour periods; however, clear evidence of fatigue was found (Petrofsky and Lind, 1978b). Blood lactate showed little increase up to 40% of VO2 max but increased dramatically when 02 levels increased above 1.0 liter/min. These data are in agreement with those of Astrand (1967). Williams Petrofsky and Lind (1982) reported slightly different results on seven female students. Measured VO2 max values for treadm�ll. cycle ergometer and for lifting boxes of 15.9 and 22.7 kg were not significantly 22 �$ August 15, 1990 different. The differing results were ascribed to the fact that the women in this study preferred to use the squat method of lift while the men used the stoop method. Since the squat method of lifting involves the use of the legs and therefore requires more energy expenditure, the women achieved VO2 max values for box lifting. Both methods of lifting resulted in a linear relationship between work load and 02 consumption. Based on loss of grip endurance following the lifting tasks, the authors recommended 30% of VO2 max be used to set lifting standards. Legg and Pateman (1984) took a different approach in an attempt to answer this question. These investigators had 11 soldiers lift loads corresponding to 25, 50, and 75% (22 .4, 44.8 and 67.2 kg) of maximum lifting capacity from the floor to 40% of their height. Lifting rates varied from 2 to 12/min. Subjects were asked to lift for l hour or until exhausted. If the subjects were able to complete the 1 hour period, they estimated how long they could have continued at the same lifting rate. Lifting times were as short as 30 minutes when lifting 75% of maximum lifting capacity (MLC) at a rate of 4 /min and were estimated as long as 158 min when lifting 25% of MLC at 8 lifts/min. Based on these data the authors recommended that lifting activities should not exceed 23% of treadmill VO2 max. Based on a studies of industrial lifting, Rodgers (1976) supported a value of 33% of either whole body or upper body capacity. Rodgers suggests that this level of 02 consumption will involve integration of factors such as biomechanical aspects of the materials to be handled, environmental 23 �• August 15, 1990 conditions of the work place, individual fitness and skill levels, and static components of the job. The 33% ofVO2 max (treadmill) value was chosen as the upper limit of oxygen consumption by the first edition of the NIOSH Work Practices Guide for Manual Lifting and, therefore, has received widespread application. Based on an assumed aerobic capacity of 3.0 liters O2/min for an average, young man, this puts the upper limit of 02 consumption at 1.0 liter O2/min for sustained manual materials handling. One liter of O2/min is equivalent to 5 Kcal/min. These values are often quoted when determining maximum work capacity for lifting situations. However, as discussed above, VO2 max is job specific. Therefore, one must be cautious when using the 1.0 liter O2/min for all types of jobs. In addition, average VO2 max for young females is closer to 2.0 I/min, therefore an upper working limit of 1.0 liters O2/min is closer to 50% of VO2 max for females. Another factor which cannot be ignored is the decline inVO2 max that naturally occurs with increasing age. As workers age, their maximum work capacity decreases, hence the work load which results in a percentage ofVO2 max also decreases. Jobs involving leg work have higher maximum work capacities than jobs involving arm work. Therefore, 33% of treadmill or cycle ergometer VO2 max may exceed the capacity of the worker when performing a job consisting primarily of arm work. Many of the studies discussed above measured physiological parameters such as muscular endurance and blood lactate to determine if 24 �.August 15, 1990 the work loads were of sufficient intensity to result in fatigue. The purpose of making these measurements was to set a work load, as a percentage of VO2 max, which would not cause undue fatigue and, thereby, increase the incidence of injuries. Other studies have taken a different approach. Numerous investigators have used the psychophysical method to decide the maximum acceptable weight of lift (MAWL} and have then measured the resulting 02 consumption. By using this method the investigators are assuming that the psychophysical method is a valid way of setting lifting limits and that these values will be reflected by the 02 consumption. Ciriello and Snook (1983} reported that subjects were willing to handle 22 kg when lifting from the floor to knuckle height at a rate of 12/min. . This lifting frequency resulted in an 02 consumption of 1.46 liters O2/min. When the lifting frequency was reduced to 9 or 6 lifts/min, 02 consumption decreased to 1.11 and 0.93 liters O2/min, respectively. The 02 consumption resulting from the two highest frequencies is higher than that recommended as the upper limit by the previous NIOSH guideline of 1.0 liters 02/min. Garg and Saxena (1979) reported much different MAWLs for frequencies of 9 and 12 lifts/min of 0.97 and 1.11 liters O2/min, respectively. The differences between the results of Ciriello and Snook (1983} and Garg and Saxena (1979} may be due to the inability of people using the psychophysical method to accurately predict lifting capacity at high lifting frequencies. Numerous authors have come to the conclusion that the 25 �(1 26 . ,.August 15, 1990 psychophysical method over estimates work capacity at high lifting frequencies (Ciriello and Snook, 1983; Karwowski and Ayoub, 1984; Fernandez and Ayoub, 1987; Karwowski and Yates, 1984; 1986; Mital, 1984a; 1984b; 1987). Karwowski and Yates (1984; 1986) showed that female subjects are unwilling to lift the psychophysically chosen weight at frequencies above 6 / min over a period of 4 hours if given the chance to change it. At the end of the 4-hour period, subjects had decreased the weight of the lift by 23% from their MAWL, predicted at a lifting rate of 8 or 12 lifts/min. These data lead to the suggestion of 25% of treadmill VO2 max as the upper limit for 02 consumption when lifting for a 4-hour period. Mital (1984) has suggested that 28% of MAWL can be maintained for an 8 eight-hour work period. In summarizing the data concerning the limits of work capacity, it becomes clear that jobs requiring 50% of treadmill or �ycle ergometer VO2 max will exceed the capability of most workers. Values in the range of 40% of the job specific VO2 max may be tolerated by some workers, however, most data now suggests that the range should between 25 and 30% of treadmill or cycle ergometer VO2 max. 6.Summary When reviewing the literature dealing with high frequency lifting it �� .. . August 1 5, 1 990 becomes clear that the volume of data is large and growing quickly. It is the opinion of these authors that much of this data is misinterpreted and misapplied, hence leading to problems in it's application. While black and white statements can rarely hold up under severe attack, we believe the following statements concerning high frequency lifting to generally be true. 1. The relationship between work load and oxygen uptake is linear in some situations but non-linear in others. 2. Lifting from the floor to a given height is more metabolically expensive than lifting from a table to a given height. The added metabolic cost comes from raising and lowering the center of gravity of the body. 3. The freestyle forn1 of lifting is less metabolically expensive than the squat or stoop lift. 4. If the total amount of work is held constant, it is oxygen consumption is higher when the lifting frequency is high and the weight is low as compared to a low frequency and a high weight. Some compromise between the two variables may be the most efficient in terms of oxygen consumption. 5. Lifting a weight requires more oxygen than lowering a weight. 6. Lifting limits determined using the psychophysical methodology are probably too high when used for frequencies above 4 to 6 lifts/min. For lifting frequencies above 4 lifts/min, limits should usually be based on physiological methods. 7. Work capacity limits based on energy expenditure should probably not 27 �28 .. ,, August 1 5, 1 990 exceed 25 to 30% of the job specific maximum oxygen uptake for an 8 hour shift. Acknowledgments The authors would like to thank Arun Garg for his review of this manuscript prior to submission for publication. This work was supported in part by Contract#?????????? from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. References Aquilano, N.J., 1968, A physiological evaluation of time standards for strenuous work as set by stopwatch time study and two predetermined motion time data systems. Journal of Industrial Engineering, 19(9), 425432. Asfour, S.S., Ayoub, M.M., and Mital, A., 1984, Effects of an endurance and strength training programme on lifting capability of males. Ergonomics.,_ 27(4), 435-442. Asfour, S.S., Genaidy, A.M., and Mital, A., 1988, Physiological guidelines for the design of manual lifting and lowering tasks: the state of the art. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal.,_ 49(4), 150-160. Asfour, S.S., Genaidy, A.M., Fahmy, M.W., Younis, A. and Waly, S.M., 1990, Endurance time and physiological responses for high frequency lifting tasks: a preliminary report. In Advances in Industrial Ergonomics and Safety II, (Edited by B. Das) (New York: Taylor and Francis), pp. 655-660. Asfour, S.S., Genaidy, A.M., Khalil, T.M., and Greco, E.C., 1985, Lifting capacity norms based on strength and endurance of workers. In Trends in Ergonomics/Human Factors II.,_ (Editors R.E. Eberts and C.G. Eberts) (North Holland: Elsevier Science Publishers), pp. 609-615. Asfour, S.S., Genaidy, A.M., Khalil, T.M., and Greco. E.C., 1985, A combined approach for determination of lifting capacity. In Trends in �29 , • August 15, 1990 Ergonomics/Human Factors II, (Editors R.E. Eberts and C.G. Eberts) (North Holland: Elsevier Science Publishers), pp. 617-623. Astrand, I., 1967, Degree of strain during building work as related to individual aerobic work capacity. Ergonomics� 10, 293-303. Borg, G., Hassmen, P., and Lagerstrom, M., 1987, Perceived exertion related to heart rate and blood lactate during arm and leg exercise. European Journal of Applied Physiology� 65, 679-685. Brown. J.R., 1973, Lifting as an industrial hazard. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal, 34, 292-297. Ciriello, V.M. and Snook, S.H., 1983, A study of size, distance, height, and frequency on manual handling tasks. Human Factors, 25(5): 473-483. Ciriello, V.M., Snook, S.H., Blick, A.C., and Wilkinson, P.L., 1990, The effects of task duration on psychophysically-determined maximum acceptable weights and forces.. Ergonomics, 33(2), 187-200. Doolittle, T., 1989, Aerobic testing for manual handling jobs. In Advances in Industrial Ergonomics and Sqfety I, (Edited by A. Mital) (New York: Taylor and Francis), pp. 105-112. Doolittle, T., 1989, Selection standards for manual handling tasks using dynamic strength tests. In Advances in Industrial Ergonomics and Safety I, (Edited by A. Mital) (New York: Taylor and Francis), pp. 515-521. Fernandez, J.E., and Ayoub, M.M., 1988, The psychophysical approach: the valid measure of lifting capacity. In Trends in Ergonomics/Human Factors V, (Edited by F. Aghazadeh), (North-Holland: Elsevier Science Publishers), pp. 837-845. Fernandez, J.E. and Ayoub, M.M., 1987, Maximum acceptable weight lifted over extended periods. In Trends in Ergonomics/Human Factors W, (Edited by S.S. Asfour) (North-Holland: Elsevier Science Publishers), pp. 917-923. Frederik, W.S., 1959, Human energy in manual lifting. Modem Materials Handling, March, 74-76. Gallagher, S., Marras, W.S., and Babick, T.G., 1988, Lifting in stooped and kneeling postures: effects on lifting capacity, metabolic costs, and electromyography of eight trunk muscles. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 3, 65-76. Gamberale, F., 1972, Perceived exertion, heart rate, oxygen uptake and blood lactate in different work operations. Ergonomics, 15(5), 545-554. Garg, A., Chaffin, D.B., and Herrin, G.D., 1978, Prediction of metabolic rates 0 �• · . ·• 11 August 15, I 990 for manual materials handling jobs. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal, 39, 661-674. Garg, A., and Herrin, G.D., 1979, Stoop or squat: A biomechanical and metabolic evaluation. AIIE Transactions, 11(4), 293-302. Garg, A., and Saxena,· u., 1979, Effects of lifting frequency and technique on physical fatigue with special reference to psychophysical methodology and metabolic rate. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal 40(10), · 894-903. Garg, A. and Saxena, U., 1982, Maximum frequency acceptable to female workers for one-handed lifts in the horizontal plane. Ergonomics, 25(9), 839-853. Garg, A., 1983, Physiological responses to one-handed lift in the horizontal plane by female workers. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal, 44(3), 190-200. Garg, A. and Saxena, U., 1985, Physiological stresses in warehouse operations with special reference to lifting technique and gender: a case study. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal 46(2), 53-59. Garg, A., Hagglund, G., and Mericle, K., 1986, A physiological evaluation of time standards for warehouse operations as set by traditional work measurement techniques. AIIE Transactions, pp. 235-245. Garg, A., 1987, A psychophysical, physiological and biomechanical evaluation of NIOSH guidelines for manual handling. In Trends in Ergonomics/Human Factors IV, {Edited by S.S. Asfour) {North-Holland: Elsevier Science Publishers), pp. 925-931. Garg, A. and Banaag, J., 1988, Psychophysical and physiological responses to asymmetric lifting. In Trends in Ergonomics/Human Factors V, {Edited by F. Aghazadeh) {North-Holland: Elsevier Science Publishers ), pp. 871-877. Garg, A. and Banaag, J., 1988, Maximum acceptable weights, heart rates and RPEs for one hour's repetitive asymmetric lifting. Ergonomics, 31(1), 7796. Genaidy, A.M., Asfour, S.S., Khalil, T.M. and Waly, S.M., 1985, Physiologic issues in manual materials handling. In Trends in Ergonomics/Human Factors II, {Edited by R.E. Eberts and C.G. Eberts) {North-Holland: Elsevier Science Publishers), pp. 571-576. Genaidy, A.M., and Asfour, S.S., 1987, Review and evaluation of physiological cost prediction models for manual materials handling. Human Factors, 29(4), 465-476. 30 �� , • August 15, 1 990 Genaidy, A.M., and Asfour, S.S., 1989, Effects of frequency and load of lift on endurance time. Ergonomics, 32(1), 51-57. Genaidy, A.M., Mital, A., and Bafna, K.M., 1989, An endurance training programme for frequent manual carrying tasks. Ergonomics, 32(2), 149155. Genaidy, A.M., Al-Rayes, S., and Dickinson, A., 1990, An ergonomic study of the effect of task frequency on work-rest schedules. In Advances in Industrial Ergonomics and Safety II, (Edited by B. Das) (New York: Taylor and Francis), pp. 63-67. Hake, M., and Michael, Jr., E.D., 1977, The physiological cost of box lifting. Journal of Human Ergology, 6, 167-178. Hamilton, B.J., and Chase, R.B., 1969, A work physiology study of the relative effects of pace and weight in a carton handling task. AIIE Transactions, 1(2), 106-111. Intaranont, K., Ayoub, M.M., Bobo, W.M., and Smith, J.L., 1986, Physical lifting capacity: the anaerobic threshold approach. In Trends in Ergonomics/Human Factors III, (Edited by W. Karwowski) (North-Holland: Elsevier Science Publishers), pp. 835-846. Jorgensen, K., and Poulsen, E., 197 4, Physiological problems in repetitive lifting with special reference to tolerance limits to the maximum lifting frequency. Ergonomics, 17(1), 31-39. Kaman, E., 1982, Physiological basis for the design of work and rest," In Handbook of Industrial Engineering, (Edited by G. Salvendy) (New York: Wiley), pp. 6.4.1-6.4.17. Karwowski, W., and Yates, J.W., 1984, The effect of time in the psychophysical study of the maximum acceptable amounts of liquid lifted by females. Proceedings of the Human Factors Society's, 28th Annual Meeting, San Antonio, Texas, pp. 586-590. Karwowski, W., and Yates, J.W., 1986, Reliability of the psychophysical approach to manual lifting of liquids by females. Ergonomics, 29(2), 237248. Karwowski, W., and Ayoub, M.M., 1984, Effect of frequency on the maximum acceptable weight of lift. In Trends in Ergonomics/Human Factors I, (Edited by A. Mital) (North-Holland: Elsevier Science Publishers), pp. 167-172. . Khalil, T.M., Genaidy, A.M., Asfour, S.S., and Vinciguerra, T., 1985, Physiological limits of lifting. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal, 46(4), 220-224. 31 �.. , • i.August 15, 1990 32 -'·· Kumar. S., 1984, The physiological cost of three different methods of lifting in the sagittal and lateral planes. Ergonomics, 27(4), 425-433. Kumar. S., 1988, The effects of the reach and level of lifting/lowering tasks on the metabolic cost in symmetric and asymmetric planes. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 2, 273-284. Legg, S.J., and Pateman, C.M. A physiological study of the repetitive lifting capabilities of healthy young males. Ergonomics, 27(3), 259-272. Ljungberg, A.-S., Gamberale, F., and Kilborn, A., 1982, Horizontal lifting physiological and psychophysical responses. Ergonomics, 25(8), 741-757. London, M., and Bhattacharya, A., 1985, The relation between frequency of industrial lifting and the fatigue produced. Journal of Human Ergology, 14, 3 -:13. Louhevaara, V., Teraslinna, P., Piirila, P., Salmio, S., and Ilmarinen, J., 1988, Physiological responses during and after intermittent sorting of postal parcels. Ergonomics, -31(8), 1165-1175. Maas, S.: Kok, M.L.J., Westra, H.G., and Kemper, H.C.G., 1989, The validity of the use of heart rate in estimating oxygen consumption in static and in combined static/dynamic: exercise. Ergonomics, 32(2), 141-148. Miller, J.C., Farlow, D.E. and Seltzer, M.L., 1977, Physiological analysis of repetitive lifting. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, 48(10), 984988. Mital, A., Asfour, S.S., and Ayoub, M.M., 1982, Physiological approach in manual lifting: work rate recommendations and a comparison with the psychophysical approach. Journal of Human Ergology, 11, 143-156. Mital, A., 1983, The psychophysical approach in manual lifting - a verification study. Human Factors, 25(5), 485-491. Mital, A., 1983, Maximum frequencies acceptable to males for one-handed horizontal lifting in the sagittal plane. Human Factors, 25(5), 563-571. Mital, A., 1984, Maximum weights of lift acceptable to males and female industrial workers for extended work shifts. Ergonomics, 27(11), 11151126. Mital, A., 1984, Comprehensive maximum acceptable weight of lift database for regular 8-hour work shifts. Ergonomics, 27(11), 1127-1138. Mital, A., and Shell, R.L., 1984, A comprehensive metaboliq energy model for determining rest allowances for physical tasks. Journal of Methods-Time Measurement, 11(2), 2-8. �� ,. • r.,August 15, 1990 Mital, A., 1985, A comparison between psychophysical and physiological approaches across low and high frequency ranges. Journal of Human Ergology, 14, 59-64. Mital, A., 1985, Models for predicting maximum acceptable weight of lift and heart rate and oxygen uptake at that weight. Journal of Occupational Accidents, 7, 75-82. · Mital, A., and Fard, H.F., 1986, Psychophysical and physiological responses to lifting symmetrical and asymmetrical load symmetrically and asymmetrically. Ergonomics, 29(10), 1263-1272. Mital, A., Fard, H.F.,.Khaledi, H., and Channaveeraiah, C., 1987, Are manual lifting weight limits based on the physiological approach realistic and practical. In TI-ends in Ergonomics/Human Factors N. (Edited by S.S. Asfour) (North-Holland: Elsevier Science Publishers), pp. 973-977. Mital, A., 1987, Patterns of differences between the maximum weights of lift acceptable to experienced and inexperienced materials handlers. Ergonomics, 30(8), 1137-1147. Morrissey, S.J., 1987, Influences of task posture on physiological task responses, International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 1, 209-217. Nicholson, L.M., and Legg, S.J., 1986, A psychophysical study of the effects of load and frequency· upon selection of work load in repetitive lifting, Ergonomics, 29(7), 903-911. Nicholson, L.M., and Legg, S.J., 1984, The effect of load and frequency upon selection of work load in repetitive lifting using the psychophysical methodology. Proceedings of the International Confe,:ence on Occupational Ergonomics,_pp. 328-331. NIOSH Technical Report, 1981, Work practices guide for manual lifting. DHHS Publication No. 81-122. Petrofsky, J.S., and Lind, A.R., 1978a, Metabolic, cardiovascular, and respiratory factors in the development of fatigue in lifting tasks. Journal of Applied Physiology, 45(1), 64-68. Petrofsky, J.S., and Lind, A.R., 1978b, Comparison of metabolic and ventilatory responses of men to various lifting tasks and bicycle ergometry. Journal of Applied Physiology, 45(1), 60-63. Rohmert, W., 1960, Ermittlung von erholungspausen fur statische arbeit des .menschen. Int. Z. Angew. Physiol..1. 18,123. Ronnholm, N., Karvonen, M.J., and Lapinleimu, V.O., Mechanical efficiency 33 �,1 • �r:August 15, 1990 of rhythmic and paced work of lifting. Journal of Applied Physiology, 17(5), 768-770. Samanta, A., and Chatterjee, B.B., 1981, A physiological study of manual lifting of loads in Indians. Ergonomics, 24(7), 557-564. Sharp, M.A., Harman, E., Vogel, J.A., Knapik, J.J., and Legg, S.J., 1988, Maximal aerobic capacity with three standard exercise testing modes. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 57, 753-760. Taboun, S.M., and Dutta, S.P., 1987, Effect of task variables and their interactions in intermittent carrying tasks. In Trends in Ergonomics/Human Factors N, (Edited by S.S. Asfour) (North-Holland: Elsevier Science Publishers), pp. 995-1002. Williams, C.A., Petrofsky, J.S., and Lind, A.R., 1982, Physiological responses of women during lifting exercise. European Journal of Applied .Physiology, 50, 133-144. Yates, J.W., and Karwowski, W., 1987, Maximum acceptable lifting loads during seated and standing work postures. Applied Ergonomics, 18(3), 239243. Yates, J.W., Pickering, K., and Karwowski, W., 1990, High frequency lifting and blood lactate production. In Advances in Industrial Ergonomics and Sqfety II, (Edited by B. Das) (New York: Taylor and Francis), pp. 643-650. 34 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Physiological Cost of High Frequency Lifting: A Review Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Yates, JW Description An account of the resource This is a draft manuscript that Dr. Rodgers contributed to. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1990-08-15 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_015 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-19 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 34 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/f97ff00bd7cb0887eb71c39ddc4ca2b0.pdf f0cb2c00f8e614eb3adec45613adc066 PDF Text Text > I.!' ,I . . \ � . k i\t i1f .3Z.. � FU ROAD NATIONAL TSING HUA UNIVERSITY NO. 101. SEC. 2, HSINCHU, (CABLE Uv\� -i-D r- pl(M,,,,. � ki-lAA.t -ftv..:J � +n le. :I �°{Q � ADD., I I:::: >-J-OVL,e �s o� = � p/.e_tJ.r-e � �c>--P As <.>.eY51t.-. <pv ""i �ks : 1 � 0--tA S ,'t,,.,. ,_ +t> -1-o �e:,{ +t,. � ,;:,,t -A b..e w ,- 1 / ')1,c� �o(_ � �of f,.,iv,t,vj .T � lode __;:,) ai..- +o +lu:o �� ,- � /r--� Ji.�. p 7tu:J- ..fl.,..s � � · IA,A.k hJ' u. �) ,u,/ U�Y-P�j ¼ fJ- . A-/ f--'v.. fp i,,-,4' / 1 11 ;)Hpa.A..1 � +.,�� ;;:__. T='wL!,c. 7l-e v�<-t.. opp�� 2-- NAP v--,--�,-+- f C'-[ZL-- :r � � , � ¾_o.R. wL..J./.p evv+-�Iy ) �.-- h. p J e,_p-vv� ;:,t / TSINGHUAJ -+-l..z. oRJi o-t,._J-- e_� CHINA -fi--� 0r.,,.,-.d 1� � V' � KUANG TAIWAN, !--tM !-e �· ,5 iy.QJ, iv-..e fi-/;1,..,.)W, I >wW w-ti/ �The effect of wrist position on grip strength Mao-Jiun J. Wang Department cf Industrial Engineering National Tsin Hua University, Hsin Chu, Taiwan, ROC 1 i Suz.;:\nnf.:1 H. Rodg(;?l'"t:S Consultant in Ergonomics 169 Huntington Hills, Rochester, N.Y., 14622, USA Awkward wrist position can be induced by the use cf hand tools. It has been reported that grasping force exertion in extreme wrist trauma disorders.The purpose cf this study is to evaluate how wrist position changes can affect grip strength performance. Thi F"ty mii:\le,.;; p,articipated the experiment. The experiment design included positions ulnii:\r deivia\ticin) !• and (1rwist li·Jl'"iSt f 1 en-, .ic,n �• and devi.;ition !' thr�e fou� levels within position. The wrist position was controlled a goniometer. The strength was subject's dominant hand measured by a hand each by grip dynamometer. Results indicated significant reduction on grip strength from was found when wrist deviated neutral position fer all the four positions • .1.. Intrc.1d1.1c:tic:)n Grip force strength is defined as the maximum momentary exerted en a hand dynamometer. The force is squeeze generated by �isometric contraction of hand and forearm muscles. The first reported use cf hand grip as a test for determining strength was early in 1880 by Sargent. Since that time, g(ip strength has been used as routine disability and Further, grip design I of the examination of rehabilition evaluation ,and strength hand maximize neurologic � l.'r ratio hand also an important tools. An efficient ·hand patients, skill test. parameter tool of tool force output to hand in design hand the should force input (Tichauer and Gage, 1977). In the literature, many factors have been reported to have an effect on grip strength. For handedness, among 231 male steel workers, the main grip strength was found to be 5.8 perc-nt the major hand predominating (Toews, 1964). As per and height, a multiple regression n�del on 57 college wo�en G � 6 calculated: was 0.58 H + body correlation and height (H) and body weight coefficient (r) was 0.32. age weight 0.19 W; the dependent va�iable the major hand grip strength, and the independent were sex + body with (W). The and (G) variables reported (Lunde, et al. 1972). effect, a study with 1,128 males was 80 For females concluded that grip strength was directly proportional to age up to 32 years and then inversely proportional there after ( Schmidt and Toews, 1970). Also, the mean grip strength for males was significantly higher than females. In such addition to the individual factors, some as handle significant indicated task spacing and gloves were also found effect on grip strength. For span variables tc spacing, that maximum grip strength is exerted when have a studies separtaion �between the grip span is between 2 1982). grip et II to 2.5 II (Hertzberg, 1955 With respect to gloves, significant and reduction strength has been reported (Riley, et al., 1985, and / .,,\1. , gloves 1987). The l�vel of reduction depends on worn. · All these findings are useful for the on Wang, type of evaluating the dei;;;ign of hand tc)c.1lr"' ,t\nd its rf.�lated jGbs. A poorly designed hand tool may cau-e abnormal position wrist which may increase the risk of wrist injuries (e.g. tunnel syndrome, and tenosynovitis). It has been on carpal reported that excessive application of hand .force�in a pecular position with repetitive manner are the main stress components to wrist Tichauer and Gage, 1977). The position of the a trauma wrist can directly influence gripping ability of the fingers. The objective of this study is to evaluate how wrist position changes can affect grip strength. 2. Experimentation Thirty handed. positions male subjects whose ages range from 20 to The experiment which were: 1··.,1 •.e>_ � , •. deviation 30 r;l design included (1) .Neutral 0 .;011 .·..:,_5,_·0, ui.::._J. v � �"1__ ... o , years different wrist ,(2) Radial deviation IJ'Jr�·, . .• 1<::, r d"''V.;"' ,.: ·•·<=• ti·on (L') ·1· (6) Fle>d.c.m ,..,. •.,_:i nine 30 . ,:_•o \ r-. '7) -1 f:l:-:.1.rJn oO , 1 ,.Jr._Cj , w1··ist trials. The maximum one of the two was ta�en as the performance for v-Jith ·:;;pan dist,ance se�t o:\t 5 • .1. (:m ( 2 "). hand , E:-:t.ension (f.3) position with at least two minute rest scheduled between Tha grip strength was measured by a ) Ulnar- ( �5) ,i,::·O �J , ancI (9) Extension 60'.). Two trials were taken fclr· each position. C: ,.__ 1!"\ each dynamometer �The wrist position was controlled by a goniometer which 1n Figure 1. The angle was marked on a semi-circular can which frame be turned to .( either is wood horizontal position. A steel rectangular ring with a slotted plate encircled the frame. The ring can be moved along the frame to be various set angle positions. A steel rod welded on a plate was for sewn on a adjustable open fingers glove (Figure 1). Tc measure grip strength under certain poosition, the ring was first moved to the specified position. Then the who was in a sitting position was asked to wear the steel subject glove. steel rod was inserted in the slot cf the steel ring on the Once dynamometer the wrist position was The wood carefully- set, was placed in the subject·s hand. In the mean timG! ,, break was scheduled after each trial and the subject's wri�t allowed in a neutral position. After finishing two was replications, goniometer was then adjusted for the next position. " • 1 HJ. ,L grip measurements were taken in a random sequence. 2.1 Ulnar and radial deviation Ulnar deviation is movement of the hand towards the finger side, and thumb radial deviation is movement of the hand toward side. For grip strength measurement under ulnar or elev i,,,1.ticn, the lit.tlE,� semi-circular wood frame of the radial goniometer position. The subject was seated and <=\dj U�::-tE•id was hr:1d the hand dynamometer with his dominant hand. The forearm was laid D!"l the table and was properly aligned in position with the adjustable wood track. The subject was then instructed to exert a �maximum force. See Figure 2. 2.2 Wrist flexicn and deviation Wrist between flexicn adjacent iJ movement of the hand w�ereby bones is decreased, and wrist the angles deviation •i r00 ..t..:.":1- movement of the hand whereby the angles between adjacent bones is inc: r·E;i.;;\ Sf?d For • grip strength measurement under flexion or· the semi-circular frame of the goniometer was set v<;?r·t.i.c,a 1 pc.is.i.tion. Again, the subject was seated grasping the hand dynamometer with his dominant ��nd. The forearm was laid the table and was properly adjusted in position with in on the f.:\djus;t,-abl<?. woc:ic:I t1··ack. Thf? isub.:i€�ct was then instructed to e:{ert a maximum force. See figure 3. A one-way analysis of variance CANOVA) was computed fdr of four positions ( wr+st flexion; wrist the deviation range and radial deviation). In addition, ulna1·· extension, Tukey's test was applied to evaluate the significant each multLple differences. Table 1 shows the results of ANOVAs for the four positions.As was expected, wrist positions. reduction Figure position 4 was a significant to 7 presents the mean factor and cf mean grip strength within each wrist the for all percent position for all the four positions. The results in general indicated that the more wrist deviation from neutral position, the larger reduction on maximum grip strength • . Table 2 summarizes the results of the results of Tukey's �multiple range test. The result cf pair comparisons the statistically 30 ° differences (ulnar 15 ° ..... .... ...... and significant. The line between ulnar 15 th,::,t shew ..::.•...! ° and ulnar indicates that ther� is no significant reduction on mean grip strength when wrist deviated from 15 ° to 30 ° in ulnar position. The lack of significant differences may be explained by the fact that '-�() CJ the limit maximum for ulnar deviation :.i.. S::- ei 1--··cJLtn cl Perhaps, a significant reduction can be found when the ii;;; c 1 ose •I• ,.. •... •...) •• 1... r•, C, le:.: J••••,.1,1�. w •• i•• ... 1' /I {") 0 ', , .,.,.. ; ti deviation •t .; ••• ,.• . .:so.,C. r•, ., •! .,.I,:::, 4. Discussion and Conclusion The ANDVA results indicated that wrist position significant effect en maximum gripping abilities of the fingers. The significant reduction en maximum isometric grip strength can be explained by Gordon's force-length curve (Gorden et al.,1966). When wrist deviates from neutral position, the muscle sacromeres' the forearm shortens which causes a therefore, less force is drop of muscle exerted. disadvantages, some cumulative wrist disorders can be induced by performing job in a pecular wrist position. Armstrong and Chaffin that membranes median nerve in surrounding thE! tunne1 e;-;t.r".ini:::. .i.c:: tendons can be compressed when app1ying grip fcirce with the wrist f1exed or extended. Pro1onged irritation of the median nerve is ccinductive to carpal tunnel problem . Furthermore, strong and ulnar deviation may produce high incidence of tennis tEinci·,;,;ynovi ti�::- deviation of wrist elbows (Tichauer and Gage, 1977). in occupational envir�iment can not only �impair productivity but also stress tissues in hand and wrist severly. Awkward wrist positdons can very often be induced by the use I of hand tools. A poorly designed hand tool (e.g. plier) can cau=e ulnar deviation of the wrist. Force exertion in an extreme position �an aggregrate the incidence of wrist trauma carpal (e.g. is tunnel syndrome). Therefore, it wrist disorders necessary design a hand tool so that the handle can permit the wrist to kept straight offseting tool during force exertion. Simple can often handle modification the reduce wrist be like deviation problem. factor Another workplace layout layout. of that can cause poor wrist The height of the workbench workpiece, and the pos�ticn of posture the and chair, the tools Lctil machine directly affect operator's working posture and wrist position. In general, the solutions like changing work surface height or worksurface ( or workpiece) towards the operator tilting can often help. One fundmental approach to evaluate the poor wrist position biomechanical job analysis. The job can be analyzed element by element through the problem in application the workplace is to conduct a of video recording technique. Element involved with poor wrist posture can be improved by changing work methods, hand tool and workplace design. Wherefore, and productivity can be promoted. occupational and safety �Table 1. Results of ANOVA for the Four Wrist Positions d.f. Source Mean squares F Ft? !I g·7 , n.n�l Significant " ----------------------�----------------------------------------w,�ist pr.>sition ( E:-:tEmsir.m) Er ,,. c:l ,,. �s Total l-'-Jr·i:;t pc:!sition (Fle>:icJn) E1··rc:Jr1::; Total 2 \. J- .1 .. ._ ., 1506. •:ii :l.24. 07 87 E!9 18 .. 6 6241..7 2 Wrist position (Ulnar deviation) ::::; u Yes .1.::::: E r-· i--· o 1·· r,; Ti::it,m.l Wrist position 2 (Radial deviation) Errors 87 Total 89 :375. 4. :3: 13 n 24. �3 Table 2. Results of Tukey's Multiple Range Test !>Jd.st po:;ition Flt':!>:ion Angles ( C ) 0 45 60 0 45 60 UlrH::i.r- di;,�viation 0 • r.:· .L .:i �)() Radial deviation 0 1. 5 25 �Figure 1. The goniometer. Figure 2. Grip strengt� measurement under ulnar deviation. Fiqure Grip strength measurement under wrist extension. Fiqure 4. Mean and percent reduction of grip strength under wrist extension. Figure 5. Mean and percent reduction of grip strength under wrist flexion. Figure 6. Mean and percent reduction of grip strength under ulnar deviation. Fiqure 7. Mean and percent reduction of grip strength under radial deviation. �(.:1 ,.... rn 1:s t.r.. C) n f.:\ '.:::• p •::? C t �;; F;: 1?. t '"'' 1'-E� n c (\:: is T. J., and Chaffin, D. B., 1979, Some biomechanical Bicmechanics,12, 567Cl i' the carpal tunnel. Journal of 1�� , . ·t .( 1 r.;1 f:.:, l::z , M .. , Hu:-:. 1:,�y 1, Pi .. F., ,:ind ,JulL::-,n, F. J., f:3ci1·..·c:ic)r1 f� li?.nf1th J.. '.::, if�OmE,tl''·ic tension with sacromere \! �1. ,..- i t:':\ t:. :i. C) n Journal of Physiology, 184, VE: I''. t !*: b I'.. <i:\ t (:·? mu�;;c 1 i-2 f i bl''.€'21::;. !' II 'T'hE� iri Hertzberg, H. T .. E .. , 1955, Some contributions of applied physical anthropology to human engineering. Annals of New York Academy, <":':\ n c.i t:3 C.i 1·... c:: i 21 !' :···· " A t_ t.l r! cf(:;;� !i I-:3 i< !I :B r· <-=: v-..., e: i · , l-·..J " [) strength of college women. Archives cf Physical Rehabilitation, 53, 491-493 .. u ,1 r ti , Riley, M. W., Cochran, D. J., and Sfhanbacher, C .. capability differences due to gloves, Ergonomics, II i1 1. r9 ·7 �2 , t3i--i.p Medicine and {1. ' 1985 !' FOl'"C:(:"' 1880, Strength test and the -�=-t i---c; n c;J tn 12 n Physiological Education Review, .LL:, lOB .. f::lc.,\1'··/JE,n t :• H-:::l.i'.. va1'"c!, Schmidt, R. T .. , and Toews, J. V., 1976, Grip strength as measured by the Jamar c!ynamcmeter, Archieves cf · Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 51, 321-327. ·r i c: h ,:::i. u. i!:? ;-·· :• �- R., and Gage, H. G .. b ��·t �:; .i C: hand tool design. t. CJ Association Journal, 38, 622-634. ;I ·J c>•-. -;.·--·i• .-• I .-• ,.!., !l Ergonomic principles Industrial Hygiene l C) f:.� V·J s:..:;. ?i i.J V., 1964, A grip strength study among hi V('!:11::; 01° Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, If f�ll'"C Wang, M. J., 1982, A study cf grip strength from static efforts and anthropometric measurements, Unpublished Masters project, University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Wang, M. J.,Bishu, R .. R., and Rodgers, c:� changes when wearing three types cf Interface 87, 349-354 .. ....} It H., 1987, Grip strength �Figure 1. The goniometer. �Figure 2. Grip strength measurement under ulnar deviation. �I� I I I Figure 3. Grip strength measurement under wrist extension. �).y;l c.d,) " 50 43.Z57 37,£,7°�.. .>f/. 710 10 0 - Figure 4. Mean and percent reduction of grip strength under wrist extension. r �; " 43.25'} �f-o'.70 -'b-• 22? 1.0 /D ' 0 60° Figure 5. Mean and percent reduction of grip strength under wrist flexion. �,I' .( /1.3.257__ ..)C> I �8.. 98] �6.140 " (0 Figure 6. Mean and percent reduction of grip �trength under ulnar deviation. �' ' . 4j.J5? :3.7.54? . :34.17° " ,o 0 15 ° Figure 7. Mean and percent reduction of grip strength under radial deviation. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Draft Manuscript: The effect of wrist position on grip strength Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Wang, Mao-Jiun J. Description An account of the resource Draft of a manuscript Dr. Rodgers co-authored Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1989-01-31 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_014 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-19 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 18 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/db491cb21ca657242190d3a97359830c.pdf aa5e2557f912d367af58452e1b905506 PDF Text Text 1 2-Day Ergonomics Training Course Evaluations, SBCL Chicago, April 23-24,1997 I. Over-all Evaluation of the Course 1. Very informative and easily demonstrated. I feel confident that I will be able to go back to my lab and evaluate jobs to help employees' workstations (CRC Detroit). 2. Excellent (CRC). 3. I enjoyed the course for its content and direct impact on my present working environment (Cytotechnologist). 4. Excellent!! Organization of course was efficacious (Group Leader- Specimen Proc/DE). 5. Very informative - lots of information that can be used immediately (Microbiology Technologist). 6. Very good, valuable information (Processing). 7. Good (QA/Safety St. Louis). 8. Good. Kept my interest for 2 days (16 hours) (Supv, Branch /Lab Operations). 9. Great information and very applicable (Supv, Chemistry). 10. Excellent. Learned how to evaluate problems or complaints and relate these to how individual is using body to perform job functions (Supv, Client Services). 11. The course was very informative- as to what ergonomics really means, how to look at situation- what to look for; what to change (Supv, Distribution, Cleveland). 12. Excellent, especially the in-depth statistical analysis (Supv, Distribution). 13. Good (Not Indicated). II. Most Useful InFormation 1. Hands-on evaluations (CRC Detroit). 2. SBCL is committed to making employees comfortable. Employees don't have to live with discomfort. There is a "simply better" way (CRC). 3. Awareness of the need to be sensitive to the employee (associate) (Cytotechnologist). 4. Methods for analysis of problems. Anecdotes were especially helpful (Group Leader - Specimen Proc/DE). . 5. Adjusting positions for optimal comfort in the work environment (Microbiology Technologist). 6. Analysis of problem solving and resolution (Processing). 7. New ideas (QA/Safety St. Louis). 8. Principles of good ergonomics. Analysis tools (references, etc.) (Supv, Branch /Lab Operations). 9. Project analysis. Consultant evaluation of specific job (Supv, Chemistry). 10. Value the subjective complaints of the individual with the problem. Learn how to use the data- statistics - to evaluate particular problem (Supv, Client Services). 11. Changing one thing may put everything else off kilter ! Find core problem and start from there ! (Supv., Distribution, Cleveland). 12. The way the analysis tries to accommodate the median in order to optimize the best approach to solve a problem (Supv, Distribution). 13. Liked real life examples from work experience. Helped put things in perspective (Not Indicated). �2 III. Least Useful Information 1. N/A (CRC Detroit). 2. Very detailed scientific data (CRC). 3. Not least useful, but too many numbers over short period to digest (Cytotechnologist). 4. I enjoyed it all (Processing). 5. Graphs (Supv, Chemistry). 6. Info related to activities not concerned with (Supv, Client Services). 7. In some cases, possibly too many statistics (Supv, Distribution). 8. Just me, but measurements were dull. I understand importance of measurements, but actually doing, looking at ranges, etc., dull (Not Indicated). IV. Specific Suggestions for Improvement 1. Possibly longer by a day or two so that we could do more case problems (CRC Detroit). 2. None- unless it could be longer (CRC). 3. Overwhelming amount of information - maybe longer seminar (Cytotechnologist). 4. Make this a longer and even more informative course (Group Leader- Specimen Proc/DE) 5. None (Processing). 6. More examples, more time training, evaluating (QA/Safety St. Louis). 7. Well balanced. Good presentation and opportunity for questions and observation (Supv, Client Services}. 8. More hands-on projects- Continuing education (Supv, Distribution, Cleveland). 9. Maybe give examples put on overheads (Supv, Distribution). 4/25/97 SHR � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Ergonomic Training Course Evaluation Feedback Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Description An account of the resource Ergonomics Training Course Evaluations (2-Day) Summarized Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1997-05-23 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_013 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-19 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 2 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/f799fcefe0fc59e6f6a1d73a0251d5cc.pdf 4530177c3ac325d9469325a3c94d5e04 PDF Text Text �� Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Feedback from Sue to Colleague, Henry Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Description An account of the resource Written letter from Sue providing feedback. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_012 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-19 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 2 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/d9cd09b3be2e4ba0721a9c5836c59613.pdf 261f15bb77a5b49b47da50f582f7a7dd PDF Text Text HUMAN FACTORS SECTION - HEALTH AND SAFETY LABORATORY PHYSICAL CAPACITY TEST REPORT M~~-----·~~--~~------Subject:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Age: Job: Height: _ _ _ _ __ ------ --------------------------- Department: _ _ _ _ _ _ _,.,..______ Weight: _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Division: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Surface Area: _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Reason for T e s t : - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Predicted Maximum Heart Rate: -------- Average Values Treadmill - 2! ffiPh - Calories/minute (Heart Rate): Grade 0% Men Women 4.5i(l02) 3.4 (108) 6.0 (114) 4.5 (121) 10% 8.1 (129) 5.8 (141) 15% 10.1 (146) 7.1 (157) Resting Blood Pressure: 134/86 "You 114/77 Average Maximum Caloric Expenditure: Men 14."8 Women 9.4 You Cardiovascular Fitness Score: (Maximum Oxygen Usa.ge Adjusted for Surface Area and Age). -Men Women 1.62 1.20 Your Fitness Percentile: -You �Standing Arm Capacity = _____%of Whole Body Capacity (Treadmill) Your ResEonse to the Job Average Calories per minute; _ _ _ _ _ __ Peak Calories/minute: _ _ _ _ _ __ Average Heart Peak Heart Rate: Rate~_....._ _ _ _ _ __ ---------------- %of Capacity used: _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Comments: For further information please contact~ Dr. c. I. Miller Ext. 73808 Dr. s. H. Rodgers Ext. 73303 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Physical Capacity Test Report Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_011 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-19 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 2 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/743e6fc1dab5abe1e58c233c3ffe621d.pdf 7e58bd26e7adf30258ec9d69e43ccaae PDF Text Text DRAFT Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Consultant in Ergonomics 169 Huntington Hills Rochester, NY 14622-1121 585-544-3587 phone 585-766-8556 cell shrodgers@aol.com Anne McFarland, Safety Program Assistant Sherman G. Manchester, Safety Coordinator Ontario County Employee Safety 3019 County Complex Drive Canandaigua, NY 14424 Proposal for Training Ergonomics Problem Solving Teams for Injury Prevention in the County of Ontario, NY Goals: To train 3 teams to be able to identify, analyze, and develop risk reduction solutions to job and workplace factors that have or may contribute to injuries in Public Works, Health Care, and Office jobs in Ontario County. The focus will be on musculoskeletal injuries and illnesses, particularly those of the back, shoulders, upper extremities, and knees. To work with the teams to develop short training programs for employee training in risk factor reduction and problem solving for each area. To provide the teams with analysis and prioritization forms they can use in proactive surveys ofjobs where injuries have been seen. Techniques to Achieve the Goals: 1. Use the Ontario County incident data base for the past 2 years to identify the types of injuries and incidents in each of the 3 areas, Public Works, Health Care, and Office Work. This information will be used to identify examples of problems that will be used in the 2-day training course for each area. 2. Train 3 teams of 6 or more people for 2 days on how to identify, analyze, and develop solutions for musculoskeletal risk factors on their jobs. See attachment for an outline of the course content. 3. Provide team members with a survey form to be used by them in training employees and in doing proactive work. 4. Work with the teams to develop a short injury prevention and ergonomics awareness problem solving course appropriate to their areas that they can provide to other employees. 5. Provide the teams with information on how to prioritize risk factors and show � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Draft Training Session Proposal Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_010 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-19 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 1 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/8a1a2acd6f3d4d7714ff949e8ff27533.pdf 833e9315f8d08d1dceb775a36e72e25f PDF Text Text VISU·A-L CO N CE.R NS ··. . at the computer wo~kstati~~- ..· \ ' : . ' ' ··. ··. .... . ,........ .. :. ~ ·' ,.. ____.. __ ·. .· .-' ·lm· ·• Inger M. ·Williams: Ph.D. 0 Suzann~ H. ~<.?d~ers! Ph.D. Consultants iri Ergonomics: . Inget M. Williams, Ph.D. $uz~nne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. 28 Shel_ter'Creek Lane • Fairport • NY :14450. • Phone P .16) 3l_l-7i91 '• .Fax (716)266-8749 ·: This infOfmation d.oeS not replace y0ut Ofganiz.a.tion's hea'tth a.nd safety policies. ·- 0 . ~ ,. . . . .. . . . .. 'otnoer M. Wiliafns, Ph.08tld SuzaMi t:.t. Ac:lcSgtn.Ph.O. .. . ·. ' ~. . . Consult;nts in Ergonomics • . �J. l '-. I I '\. ._., '\. '\. -:, - 1 ~ - . inadequate.contrast, the display · .1 f~cus, and/~r brightness of text on . "- __..,.;;;;;; J '-. .1: _.....-::; -~ -~ _....,. ~-- Learn how to adj):JSt the dis~lay. En-sure the display is pr6p.er1y maintained ' Glare and reflections from overhead l_ights, windows, an_d task lights Pr9vide overhead lights with louvers. or baffles.: Install, preferably, vertrcalblird.s or coat wirdows with dark f ilm.' Ensure that task iights:are properly positioned. The computer display should be peq:~endrcular to .overhead flu9rescen.t lights and ~indows · · ' · · · Glare and.reflections from wails and table tops Ensure that ·wallpaper has ·~- matte finish. En~ure that tabl-e tops do nofhav·e a gl;ssy fin'ish; 'if they do, cover ..;,ith !ntrod~ce a11ti-gfare filter:; on the disp-lay · · Glare and reflectioos from clothes' The display might need an anti-.glare filter or anti-glare Overhead light'levels too high ~educe overall. light ie:vekto 300-400 l~x (30-40 footcandl~s). T~sk lights, if neede~, s~0uld be ~OO. lux (50 f~ot candle~) Viewing distance not adjusted properly for individval 'Adjust display an·d work·f!laterial until both are dearly seen . . . pap~r. coating: Wear darker clothes until-'changes are made YQ\.Ir_ability to focus at ne~r .viewing distances is impaired · perhaps·due to natural.change~ in ·vision, with age. Eye e?<arl)inatiori recommended and a reass~ssment of~uirently· used eye_glasses prescription could.be made. Cons\Cler.prescriptions for computer work . . Your focusing .ability foF far distances .tempo~arily impaired · due to long periods ofn~ar work · ·· Reduce th~ cont iriu.ous lef')gth of t ime you vi~w a display and otrer material at close does not require near viewjng . . '. · General fatigue l~troduce physical stretch exercises a~d readjust the eyes b~ looking.into the distance frequently. tntrod_uce a new task Examination ·of e'ye r:riuscle balance and vergen~e if s~mpt()ms persist . You might have an ~ye musde balan~e prab~e·m, problem) ~Iewing di~tan~e~. l~tr~dU<;e a task that · . .. _. _(vergenc~ ,· . . ' White objects can appear pink after p'rolonged viewing' of ·. a greeri _disP.Iay. Similarly, white objects might appear bluish · · after prol.ong~d viewing of an .a!f~ber display. These ·perceive_d colo~ ch~ng~s·are normal adaptive proc~sses that occur' automatically within the eye: If you find t~em botliers_ome, chan·~e~ the polarity of the. screen occasionaily . .. Infrequent blinking; sustained staring at"th~ display. ·_ s quinting for -l~ng periods o.f time due to poor vi!;ibility of the display . . · . · . . . 0 • • . Feelings of dry ·eye$ could.be .caused:by dry air and/or the use ·of c;ontact lenses · High contrast.-.fine detail and/c;>r llibrant colors on nearby surrowiding pan,els and ~orfaces · · . Try to reduce long periods of closeJup wor~. Adjust the.image quality of the display: increase contrast, change brightness, · and adjust text sharpness . · . Eval~ate . the hu.midity . in the office..If you are .. using contact le'nses, ~ye d·~ops. can reduce the symptoms ~ lntrodu~e less pattern~d and colorful material in the immediate vicfnity of the co_IT!P..uteJ display � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Visual Concerns at the Computer Workstation Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Williams, Inger M. Description An account of the resource Brochure Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_009 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-19 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 2 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/d0c97ca859ed94cafe9f5b4ed4fddd0e.pdf 7e23ff88cfe3f3a42946d008fcf80621 PDF Text Text POSTURAL CONCE-RNS . <;tt t h e .computer WQtkstatioh .. - , ·,·. .. · 0; .. , .. : ·, ·. Inget M: Williams;Ph:D. • Suzafrne H. Rodgers; Ph.D: Consultants in E rgohomics ~. : . Inger M . 'wHfiams, Ph.D. Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D, . .-. 28 Shelter Cre.~k Lane • fairport • NY • 14450 • Phone (716) 377''1791 ·· Fax "<716)266-8l49 _ · This information does not ~eplace your .Organizatiqn·~ health_and safety·policies. ·, .. Consultants in Ergonomics ·_ , �Chair height is not adjusted properly Adjust the chair height to fit yo·ur personal needs. In multiple user v.iorkstations and in workstations where you mus.t work at more than one height, use chairs thatcan. be easilyadjusted, preferably with a pneumatic. adjust mechanism ·. : ' • ' t I · ' ~· Feet not pla~ed flat on the floor . , · _ ' - -·. Chair and/or keyboard heights need to be ·aajust~d and/or footrests shol!ld be available I . Sitting ont~e edge of the chair, therefore riot getting adequate lowe·r back support · . Confined. posture from contoured seat pan Adjust backrest to SL!pport the small of yourback, Ensure .tha:t the backre.st canbe adjusted both in/ oUt a~d up/down and/or :. pr?videa separate attachable back support. Evaluate c~air and keyboard heights. Check thigh .clearance-remove obstructions A Improper alignment of work mate'rial making you and/or turn t~e bodyawkwardly t~ist . Poor visibility of text on the display ca~sing you to lean forward, move head forward, and/or squint sorn~what flat seat pan is recomrrl~nded for- prolonged seated work. Use pillow tO reduce contour . ·· Reposition keyboard, display, and hard copyto help organize work space. Deterrnine optimal placement of work material according to.task req.uirements : · · ·· ·· · ·Adjust display ()rightness at:~d contrast. Reduce reflections and glare by reducing overhead light /e~e/s, installing louvers,. placing · bJinds on windows, installing anti-glare filters, or reorienting the display relative to overhead lights a~d windows. ProVide · individual.task lights if needed , Confirm glasses prescription. . . Awkward head; neck, and sh.oulderl>ostures assumed due to us~ of bi-· .trifocals .. . Adjust display height and viewir1gdistance. Re"assess eye glasses prescription with an optometrist'or.ophtha/mologist Continu,c)u~ seated work for too long a ti.:Ue .. Do sOme tasks that alt_ow you to walk avv.ay period[ca/Jy. Also, look away from the dispiay and or . ' . .· . ·, . ·' ··. d~c.~ments regularly lr.~trodu~e appropriate· armrests on .c::ha.i·r. Sp~~ify ne~ chair. design Qeeds for f~tuce purchases :>. ·;;· _,,. . . -:;:.. . ''• No ·placeto.resn1r~sand/or t)ands .on keyl:loardand/or ~ j • works~,Jrface . . .. . . . ·..~ while ·usinga . rrn:>d~e · · · · ·· · · · · ·.· ,, , . . ::f,:' . _,,_ ' ' ..:. ··:<· '· Proyide corhfortable rest space . . W~i~ts and/orarm·s restiQg o~~harp~dge whiletYpirig or .. .....;;,, "'' . · Highly repetitive finger activi*y condUcted over iong: periods of't!rne. . . . . .. . .... Use·of keyboard holder with hi:> roor:n forn;wus.e.and '. --~· - . ' • bY adtu~tirig pla<i~·rD~.ntof work rna:te;!al onthewbrk ~urface'' . 'instal/ soft padded' i'n~teri~l th,at can q)Ver sb;irp, ¢9ges ..;Prqvicte wrist ~uppqtts "ot_approprjate·thic~nyss. Reorient wo.rkstatron .to provide better: artr;~ stipp(?rt f$5(the: ar!Jl an:d hand that is using the mouse or p.r~vide surta~e ~extensionJor ther~ouse · · · •··• . ·a ' lntrodu~e~orn·e other task that a.'iio~syou .to take an: arm ; :.i'nand, ·~nd•• -•.wris' t break,'Ev~ldate the;w .ork/pad . • -. • • "j ' · .· ~, . . .- . - • .,~ . molls~ pad ..cat,~sing ybu to .reach for. moys~ and iean • ',. ' '' . ,f ;;· .. .. . · place keyboard and, fl10U5e dos~ to15ether, especiaUylfor. frequent mou.se anct keyboard user{ LooK .into the us~ ~f a · .· .turbo (trackhali).mouse , · .· . · · .· • ·I .· · · . · · · . ·· . · • · · · · ' · . · ·. . . . .. .. . . . . ." . . . ·arm. ag(li'r1st sharp edge· ~·· ·~· Adjust workrhaterial or-iedtation and workhtights. Keep arms, · · :Remove qrm'rests' ifth~y inte.lfei:~ with good,wor-king. postures Pressure on the back of thighs · .: .. loqk into seat height adjustment Pad seat pan ' .. .. ;~ , han~s;and ;_,r,ists app~oxirnately para/1~1 ~o the working sJrfa~e' · · · · ' • · to provide a. contoured front edge, · hei~hts. Ch~nge tah/e, Thighs ~om pressed betweendesk and chair l.nappropriateworkstation Inadequate:forward leg clearance at knee arid .footlevel ; .Inappropriate. workstation design. Adjust articulating keyboard holder, and/ or,.rem6ve material underthe table . keyboard, and/ or chair he,iglits · � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Postural Concerns at the Computer Workstation Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Williams, Inger M. Description An account of the resource Brochure Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_008 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-19 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 2 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/4633f6569d9d98e1a305e177847c327a.pdf bd09000072d00d4d416fbcfe627f709f PDF Text Text � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Cover Page Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Description An account of the resource Dr. Rodgers' created several drawings for use in her work. This is a collage of those drawings. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_007 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-13 Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Extent The size or duration of the resource. 1 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/df3ed7d44fe1f6e2eca3a2303f61e1c7.pdf 2939d05d890076ba7267f9ba35eb2af5 PDF Text Text Dr. Rodgers’ Edits and Feedback on Several Pages from the Draft Chapter of a Book She Contributed To �glucose blood FFA gl,ucose lactic acid (anaerobic) FFA l r} ~ f Glycolysis rj/c---, :J!_~J \ \ ~ If oxidation H20 + C02 ---+-r::;2\ _:_~a:_SfJ~-~t-l ;ATP \~ ~p PvnMo Ao;d 2 ATP* . \ mitochondria (aerobic) ATP Contraction muscle fiber Figure II-1: - (!.)L> " ~ v-r-· .. X ADP icp,j L, __ Anaerobic and Aerobic Metabolism ~__/ fiA~-W=~~~J a "~ \ ~t~~ C ~4 ... r~ooJUII' I Tr <1 The chemical pathways for the metabolism ofAglucose and free fatty acids are ahQxn_ror work done in ~~~usence (~~~-~obi~-~ col~sis) or the presence (aerol>rc;:....g:r----ci:tri.c. aci:_~..J?..l..C?..~e) of oxygen (02 • The upper level represents blood, which supplies_, the glucose, and free fatty acids (FFA) and removes some lactic acid from the muscle fiber. The muscle fiber also gets its oxygen from the blood, shown at the lower margin of the diagram. Inside the muscle fiber are found mitochondria in which the aerobic, or oxidative, and electron transport reactions take pla uvic acid and the free fatty acids form acetyl-coenzyme A B-oxidation· this enters the Krebs citric acid crcle to be bro en own 1n o carbon dioxide (C02) and water (H20). The hydrogen released in oxidation reactions is trapped by the electron transport system and passed on eventually to 02 to form more H20. Anaerobic glycolysis involves the phosphorylation (adding a high-energy phosphate bond) ~~d 1 of glucose to form glucose-6-phosphate (G6P). This form can be .A·Jtr: '\'C._ b~-. J;~o molecu~~!£ aid by' .~he ~nz_l!!l~ho\_(r_uctokinase JmL oi-" lt can be condensed vltn aaditional G6P mOiicUiii~to build up glycogen, the storage form of glucose. Pyruvic acid accumulation in anaerobic work will trigger the formation of ~actic acid. In the rresence of oxygen, about 20~ cl~ of this is oxldi.zeU,o__~uviQ a...o.id an9 .the rest 1!~v~_rted ~ 4 LC" t~. .n.~l~y_th.!il liY!U:. . .lHarper, 1959). The primary differ~ence between anaerobic and aerobic'li:1'e:taDolism is the amount ~~of ATP formed in each. This is indicated in the middle part of Jb.A. ~c£- the diagram. The ATP so formed is used 1 in muscular contraction, ~~~.forming ADP (adenosine diphosphate). The creatine phosphate (CP) ~ store supplies a high-energr phosphate bond to ADP to !"estore the ATP level. This is shown in the lower left side of the diagram. See the text for further discussion. p~ 5h, �3) ADP ------;> ATP + Lactic Acid This describes how the formation of lactic acid in anaerobic metabolism helps to restore some of the ATP needed for muscle work. 4) Glycogen and Free Fatty Acids + -------~ . o.J.. ~~ + ADP + -9-26&2 + -H26 + ATP C-D~ H2,.o N. This describes how aerobic metabolism generates ATP. ~b~~ _cL..uMk (C-Ol-) ~ l.da..t~ ( ~l..o) o..r~ oJ-a .t,-rd w\u.., o"-j~ ( o~..-) IS f"..fs-4" c;k..t.M."'j T~ ~"\ o{- ~l:.uky~":t;; ~ ,?.:t; , Figure II-2: High Energy Phosphate Systems The ATP (adenosine triphosphate) and CP (creatine phosphate) high~energy phosphate systems are described. The four primary reactions where ATP and CP are formed or used are given at the bottom half of the figure, with a short definition of the importance of each. See the text for more information. A ~ p~ "'<M.AJ... '-(10-.v.._-' A ~~~~ ._.N>.cl·-''-"""'~~ ~· ~ ~.l.t C\"-.'<.. "--Q. dA-Pc~:.'",>~R_J {Vt;;U.J,"'Vl~ ~ 0-Jv--.. ~"i ~J .$ ~c.sz. ~~ l _;,j:- d..~ ~ f3.1\A.J jc}..M._ lvv-.~ ~-to -:1;~4 ~r<..J:-. "(.v ~J- . �Figure II-3: Energy Supplies in the First Minutes of Moderately Heavy Work '") rek-hv~ ~ ..l;v.. ~ Four curves are shown representing the percent usag~ (vert ical axis, left side) of high energy phosphate stores, ATJ:' ( ) and CP ( ), anaerobic glycolysis (lactic aid)( ), and aerobic metabolism ( ) to provide energy for moderately heavy muscle work. Only the first few minutes of exercise are shown (horizontal axis). The ATP stores are exhausted in a few seconds, while the CP stores last about 45 seconds at this workload (02 inintake, right side vertical scale). Anaerobic glycolysis supplies less and less of the energy required as the duration of exercise increases and aerobic metabolism takes over. The im before 100~ ~ of the energy suppl~ is provided by ~ero~=~__g. glycolY:~~s represents-··? l .J an "oxygen. debt" wh1ch must b.e. "repa1d" \·ur1ng .fie subsequent re- (J2.-o..r.t covery per1od. · ·· . .<1:. a- -~o ~ec...-'· C... I . 0-9--A,J_~(_ ~~".~•"~~ f::F-A ~'t~.~, . ~ ~1':••.<::&.· ENERGY SUPPLY 0 2 INTAKE " 100. I/ min 1 50 0 1 2 4 3 TIME min I �Figure_II-4 : Gross and Microscopic Anatomy of Human Skeletal Muscle The gross structure of a skeletal muscle, such as the gastrocnemius musle of the lower leg (calf), is sho·wn in part "a". A cross section of the whole muscle is designated as "AA" and shows multiple bundles, or fasciculi, of muscle fibers. The membranes surroungJna..:::~JuLJ.Adi.Llli.!!J. fibers, fasc;icu~i, and whole muscle are endomysium t.o:r ... saoPe&ie.Diilia:D, per1mys1um, and epimysl\iii"; respectively. · ey jon~ muscle tendon, which attaches the muscle to the skeleton. ~ par:t? "b" the di vision of the muscle fiber into myofibrils ~_sho~jthese are made up of sarcomeres, the functional unit of muscle. The sarcomere is composed of filaments of actin and myosin, which combine to form actomysin in muscle contraction. The Z discs, I, H, and A zones of the sacomere are indicated. They are discussed in etail in the text.· · ..ft.N..J ttY'A"t~~SG-/\ C..~-·-~•.N"~'<''"'l ' ' �motor nerve fiber plasma membrane synaptic cleft Figure II-6: The Myoneural Junction A muscle fiber (voluntary muscle) is shown with its outer membra~r sarcolemma. A motor nerve fiber, which is the axon .lfsv·~""~~o.!-_a.~i!!_!!.P motor neuron, is shown as. it joins the muscle J\.u ~.:-.;;; f1ber. The axon has several knobs at 1ts end, or end feet, and -~~.DJUUL.~a.~,@t'ache"d-to~~·a:m·em~. ~is plasma memb.r.a,ne_i.~n '? 1 direct contact with the sarcomeres of the. mu.gu::.l..e.-~iluu'_,,~~bJli..,!QX..ms '' ~..:::::<::1 ef.1; . . . ili.~.QJ:l.~~!!~E!-Jl.§.t..Y.~""Jmp,y,l,M~,.JJJY..§_"t.-~..cr..osa....t.o~~-.:t.Ua.:t~e_,_,;t.h.e-.m.ae.: SJC'~~--!-~ The chemical acetylcholine is released at the end feet and crosses the synaptic cleft t~aetivate the m-u-s-ele fiber. The excitation-contraction process is described in the text. •"''''''•·-'·• "''''--'''"''"" j''''-'"'1i""""u'...'"""'""""""'•~----~"'-'O'I .......'~'""J!~~-~-;>/f0~~·~"'"'~ ---rl-L 1'\".~c·.N;.J,I\~t,~ ~~ '{\....s._ ...su.....d ~tt ~ a.._ f(}.;d;o,.~, ol't tt~ C~1-RSJ1.{:; /'1. �~- ~- )<t n-,,, 1; \ I ' l SYNArTIC I ·I .• I I i I I. I I II II 1 1 plate patenttat 1 ~ ' 1 nerve termonatl " I 1 ) • • J ) ...... I I. II I · I LOQI I) actoon_ I Co- 1'1'- II '"'·ht ........ ........,r-t e.,..,... II dePOiarozation II I CA.\ i...,......e.. · I I I 1 I I II II I II I I I" I Figure II-8: I I I 1 I reouorong Ca·" II II II 1 usr~ 1 I I 1 I I I I ' 1 · t wt I Retene of 1repressoon of Klon-myos,n I mteract•on due to trooonon I Ca .. bo&.nd by ••opon.n 1 I hy~roly~·s of I Formahon •ofAlP I Khve acton. I mYoson link I I I Release ot ~ [MilSion ot Ca • ,. frOM Ca • • to ler"'•nal contr.achte SICS) w¥' fll.amenls soread of ll""ulus (I( ATP prc..:bc::~; ADP • work • hE-at , 1 Inward ""4 (1I t 1 ~ ! ca·HJ,~" I 1010 S•h~'iPIM~ I actove """. · ~ c:...,o..t; I I 1 ACTIN~~~- I ~"'"" Ot'VE-h.JIJ'•d ATP ._,. A•f' , I ACH KrOSS 1 -& 1-~~ ~ ! s~ ••.•t.~Ao. I c•.,. .~" , ... ""' I . CONTRACTILE FILAMEtnS OF I I· svsTEM _ _ -!PrOPagated lllftUICie actoan 1)' II DOtential • II I II I ttvsoon of tYNDtoc: gap .. , I I SARCOPLASMIC! RETICULUM ts.R 1 . SARCOPLASM! Loal ell'.l 1 I by dei)Oiarozation I TRANSVERSE }eyJ"I TUBULAR :I .. ~ Storall't of ACH in pac~e:s . p.DePOiarozlloon wu.nla release of ACH oncreaMd • II II II , !I A>te<r,._ ........ I 1 I SEIIUES ELASTIC ELEMF...,T I 1 1 LOAD I ! I ,s..,.,.. ~nt4sto~;. I ) 5llerc:~o i I$ .,., COOIIolCh~ k••C:t.' unttl lt-nso:>:\ 1n ,1 eQuals !O.Jd w· """'='CUCK'n m"""' Shorte:~s 1 I I 1 I I L-·"' ..... '' llhed anc:t work ., cton. by muscte I I I 1 I I The Sequence of Events in the Control of Muscle Contraction Nine muscle and nerve elements that play a role in muscle contraction and the beneficiary of that effort, the load, are shown across the top of the figure. A flow diagram indica~~~"-W:h_~t t happens in each element. The role of acetylcholine ( ACH) C!Jt s_!!_c>l!ID """'··""'"r~.c.c_ in the end feet of the motor axon, and in the synaptic clef~. The depolarization of the muscle cell occurs after a local effect requiring calcium ions (Ca++) in the plasma membrane. This action potential is carried by the T-tubule system to the sarcoplasmic reticulm where the events described in Figure II-7 occur. Once contraction occurs, ATP (adenosine triphosphate) is used to pump theCa++ back ~to the sarcoplasmic reticul~, preparing the sarcomere for the nex~-~-t..lo.n_~pa:t..e. • ThE¥~~1as_ll_c_e_l.eJ!~!!t_ . _ _ . ., . _.· h~.r J_.,.Q..J of the muscle (a_~-~-~~~-~_E~d.J:.!.te,.r~-~ilL_the tex ~es thE? load~.,u, ~r~o.'t:c_t,~J u.rx-~c.~O tti:>J""'.r"" ~~J ~:-k- DY-±>t.J requirements to the force developed by the actomysin l1nks, ~~r--~~''\5i..J.."-.ll..,-:±:e. ~\ +~ }.A -~ ~-·rand the load is lifted. ' ~ 'jJ M L tL.. J ~3; fJJ':;f·.,..t.,.R-4 {6.-l~r, _ ~jn'\Q.J\A..i:::-1 �··---- .............---... + Shorten Velocity Figure II-13: ...M. ·. . I lf'J...O Force-Velocity Curv~s at Different Percentages of Muscl~ii--P·e-n-g.th .!!."'Concentric and Eccentr"1c Contractions The amount of force that can be generated by a muscle (vertical axis) as it is affected by the speed, or velocity, of shortening or lengthening (horizontal axis) is shown. Curves are given for four strengths of contraction, 25, 50, 75, and 100% of maximum voluntary contraction tension. Increasing positive velocity is a concentric, or shortening, contraction. The amount of force generated talls sharply as the speed of concentric contraction i>~H~r~.~~-~-a,-L.reflecting a reduction in cross-bridge formation in ~he sarcomere~ A lengthening of the muscle during contraction is known as an eccentric contraction. As the speed of this contraction increases, more force can be developed by the muscle, reflecting a!Pontinued optimum condition for cross-bridge formation /1n the sarcomereS\ Eccentric contractions can occur when a person 1/ picks up a heavy~oad and is unable to support it in the desired Y position. The muscles lengthen even though the signals to them are / stimulating them to shorten. More discussion of eccentric ! and concentric contractions can be found in the text. \:; ~"-'·"-~"<"'•::\' __\_,.. --T- ..:1 .,.--:/~~' n/. ~ S1"<S--"' ,..· . - t··"" ~ -1 • -r- d ~ ."L G ~,~...._::~;~, ... r C' ,,_,_.,,.,J,."""'-.1;) (:<.1'.~''-''l,:._l~.J . 1'-L -f7C..~-<-\<:'.Jl. '1.)....9.3!'1 'tJ."'"; h • [/ . -n _.Q..,'I':.i,IC ..\l:••.•-·-'\f\A•. I:; 'Y-J..."-,\)_J;·f'" Q••.. (@_J0,_\l:J\.~~~'-I'>·;:;._a tf"J<. '""r;___,.Jtel~f>,.~ .i:~ . - \ ~~·- (?_c;~o ~\} .•< <.J-."-.lL --~-1:.} f 1 ·. ~ f ~--. .\ · \"'-.D .J..~<=t·+~) -r\:t-r·--~!f.;·~· '-' : uk(;..&-V-.e> 1,'-.!··~-~\U.._ (?_"-A.i'·'··''-51~. (;...tv..r:.;JV,f'..f"'-,.J..eM'- ~\Jv-...!~"'i;- '- ~R._ ~- ~~~ c~.......J(}_.p -)...~Q J\..9-('._A._oT~--"'~ ~- o--f-,~~ p<>J'._::f.· 7{ �B c D Figure II-15 : Muscle Fiber Arrangements Four kinds of skeletal muscle fiber arrangements are illustrated in "a:" fusiform, or longitudinal ("A"); unipennate ("B"), bipennate ("C"), and multipennate ("D"). The pennate, or penniform, muscles can develop higher forces than the fusiform ones can, but they have less range of motion because they shorten over less distance. The reason penniform muscles can develop more tension is illustrated in "b." Muscle strength is proportional to its physiological cross-sectional area. The fusiform muscle exerts tension on the bones at the ends of either tendon. Its cross-sectional , area is shown by the line horizontal to the fibers at the j,) ~~- ·\\~ belly of the muscle. The penniform muscle on the right of .)_ -1(~ ,_,.. ·.t\ ··'·"' -the drawing is attached to the upper bone at two points. _:;::;;j d-"-~~~)~~~..~9:.-~-<> The p~ysiological cross-secti~nal area for tens!on develop- ~;,y~~c""-:~~.;;:. 1 ment 1s the sum of the four l1nes drawn perpend1cular to }~ ".-<:5"--~"-'_,.o-i,}j. u:r-. the fibers, or the distance ~et!een the two ends of the \~. ~ :Js.::·:i;,a:J'·a' muscle on the upper bone. Th1s 1s represented by the dotted _;-~ '-'~1:··· line to the right of the lower cross-section. The greater ~~~ cross-sectional area of the pennate muscle gives it almost 3.5 times as _much strength as a fusiform muscle of the same thickness. j �a--t--Alpha motor neuron Gamma motor neuron Figure II-18 : The Muscle Spindle Proprioceptor A muscle spindle and its neural connections in the spinal cord and to the brain are illustrated. The spindle lies parallel to the muscle fibers and monitors their changes in length. Any stretch of the spindles, as will ~roccur ~the muscle is loaded in a handling task, will send impulses out the sensory neuron to the anterior horn of the spinal cord. Here they will ifl-e-P-ea-s-e-the--s-e-n-s-itlvJ:ty o_f_t_h.e-m-et-e-p--n-euron·s (-AMNs-,--or·-alpha--motor---n.eur.ons.)~..and increase the activation of motor units to produce more muscle tension. The spindles can also be stimulated to b.Jeftd- impulses -.5"''".-t to the cord by aetivity i~~ the sensorimotor cortex. This pathway is important in voluntary movement as it triggers the development of appropriate muscle tension prior to actually loading a muscle. Impulses travel from the brain to the spinal cord where they influence the activity of the gamma motor neurons. These are smaller than the alpha motor neurons and innervate the spindle, rather than the muscle, ~!~:~~~t~!~:~i~~i~~~~n c~~~r~~~m:t:~~~~ ::~~~E_T_J!r;fo=s ;J . C 1~tretch on the part ·of 'tai··-e_···.·s_]>T·ii·····_al_ e that monitors musc_ _ le_. ·:r-urey it .J.J:.ltQ thinking the muscle has .. b_~~.!L~----··e···~ <13,~~~1gb~~ })y -a-:roa;a~~oth the alpha and gamma motor neurons ~llow close moni~~i1rig and adjustment of muscle tension in \J._~t~~-~-~-~_!ools" ~e-~~~-~~0.::~;;:~ ~d~~-:d.~- "~ ~.:Sl... . CJ itv....._._,_.'j._..._g -tl_.,_ o.i1J...~LQ_>.~ +o c..\.tc.D ~~ ·,.l.l!..t....-..")'I~A<'\·.<~ s~<>:vGr.,,,~d ..AA;._ ~"~~.X b~<p;.N?- <Lv-d JCh».<; +~ f\j'\;U.A.J1C..~ U.I~.._,_\Q.d. b.€_ }.,_r:,..i:, 5 '/, �Mechanism ------------------ Effect on Blood Flow Local muscle temperature increase Increased C02 and metabolites in a muscle Increased blood flow within the muscle - opening up of additional capillary beds Increased sympathetic nervous system vasoconstrictor discharge - stimulated via baroreceptor reflexes or skin thermal receptors Increased resistance and decreased blood flow through the vessels of the digestive system organs, kidney, and resting muscles. More blood flow is shunted to the working muscles. Increased sympathetic vasodilator activity triggered through the midbrain, associated with emotional stress Increased dilatation of the vessels of the active skeletal muscles results in increased blood flow to them. Increased body temperature Increased blood flow to the skin diverted from the working muscles, if necessary Release of adrenaline from the adrenal glands Increased blood flow in the working muscles due to vasodilatation - very large effect initially; it is quickly reduced, and a slight vasodilatation is sustained for some time afterward. This may be related to local metabolites in the muscles. Mechanical pressure on limb blood vessels intermittent A/~ /ti+~ ( \>( ) ) ~/ · P(\(..{ ) (~ d. ~"J(W\~ 1.\,,.:,~"Q . Increased venous return through better pumping of the blood back to the heart against gravity. This will increase cardiac output and deliver more blood to the working muscles as long as the pressure is intermittent (see text). . l'Y\ ~ \--;,_~, ~ ~"·-' ~1.c·. ~ ~<>-·"'-·* A,<lV··'·'[~ \o-IJ..r<>J) .j(J:ie,_,t;,,,,/ Table II-6: ~),0 ~,,.,Jl.tf::sL9 _Yo Circulatory Controls to Adjust Blood Flow During Work Si~ circulatory control mechanisms are given in column one and the1r effect on blood flow is described in column two. Muscle blood flow is given primary consideration as it is the t regulation of blood flow and its distribution during work that . \~ ~~~ · determinesa person's maximum aerobic work capacity. The cardiovasc~lar controls are designed to maximize blood flow to the work1ng auscles at the expense of blood flow to most other parts of the body, except for the beart muscle and the brain. <.,~~Q �. fr;~ ' R •R R -- ~ \ \rA T p i\ Q II s 'T p ~\ lr-'\ ~q O,f 9, ~ -t-\~ ~~ ( ~ J+,:_,_) 1( 1"'\ho.L. Figure II-31: "0. : - '/-t.-.fHt.ut : b~ l I 3.~ ~~ 2-C) \w..:r $ 1I ,. TIME ISECONOSJ R- R v- lfC~ j,~ s .1 ... 1.1. I r I{W' _, ~ 1 CJ'I" ~f-t,..__,_ k.t.H+ Y:l. Heart Rate Calculations from the Electrocardiogram A technique for calculating the heart rate, in beats per ~~~c~t~rocardiogram (ECG) trace is shown. The trace _ the e heart's electrical activity, or its ~tage, on t ver ical axis and time on the horizontal axis. Time is determined by the speed of the recording paper when the ECG is made. The electrocardiogram has three distinct components. The P-vwave represents the depolarization of the atria, or upper chambers of the heart. The QRS complex represents the depolarization of the ventricles. The R spike can be used to measure the time between beats of the heart; the interval is the time for one beat. The transformation of this to the heart rate in beats per minute is shown below the trace. This technique permits one to measure changes in heart rate over short intervals and is more accurate than taking a pulse rate over the same time period. ~ (}....U ....9.. r·,_ s~-""& ·-(1~.,~ ~.. 0-f'\,_. i s.-Q"'<U-...S4.cl :0~_;+ \J~~~'-.A. .:d::;._,..~v""-, -~ -1;:-l-<.... '' trv--A..Jls>.J<>..r. ,'-'···,.t f2_uvv·-p.f/:;u)<:i_iJ -1-ec, f( ~~K . J~••N:t!'r:J:u.,_£7 ~:J G. . .<:.s:._<}..~o.:"-'"'·''·.:j........ ~.. -..J)J,.:;_.,,v. .!J ~ -~~oo._,..--, . ~"'-"'-~\\cl~\-_~'-'~LA � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Feedback on Draft Book Chapter Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Description An account of the resource Dr. Rodgers’ Edits and Feedback on Several Pages from the Draft Chapter of a Book She Contributed To Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_006 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-18 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 12 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/d1fc573fd92fda69aa76f8d77d337fa0.pdf 41ca26e02051c4147b2df51157ef5a32 PDF Text Text Handwritten Draft for Section of Book Chapter Regarding Motor Control �,·_.- .... • I· ' -L__________ _J.___ .... ----··· lt>tor Control A oanplex ·and versatile machine like the hllnan body· rEqUires ari ~l.aborate control systfllll. - . . . r our D>tor control system continually .. . . . . . . processes senaory information relating to oUr .JIOVanent and force . I . ',! . ·.. · . requirements and initiates the carmarids. necessary for suc~sful task . . ~ ·.. . . Caapletion. ibis sensory information 'is sen~all levels of the_ .· ' . .central netvpus ayst~. (~), .th~ cerepra1 oottex, cerebellum, brain .· --------:---~ stan, ·lnd sp~ cor~. · ·'lhe }ntegratf!CS res~~ of the systan detemnes' what Woilllltion ,. the anterlot DK>to~ '~euron (AMN) t~iv~ and translates irito mavanent" 1 ·.,.·,··:·' ! • ,. • •• ~ 1 ··~e major ~t-er-:.~Ubdi~i;io~······of: th~ ~. ·., .· . nervou~ systen ~. 1J -='· I~ I~ f.~. , <):[of' c.. cr·N<.:-'·..._v,~(J~~~ -~ ~~ \I 1 r I ..' ' , 1 • .':.'· ,: .... ·.·. ' I , ', .. , ,, ·; :,,fol~ows. I' r I I ~....:Qi.~)-.r,. . -- . -I· · t\ - .··- .,J ~ ~ ·.-::~~.:place._;-~~~ ~c~ssion of 11 . . 1 ' _ ' . · · . .., . • .· . ProcessiJ;lg of M,l'lSC)ry information and initiation of mtor ~ctivity A ,•. ,, .: ••• ,. Pigure II-8 shOAs· a block diagran of . .· , -~./~, ' •; ' ' . . ',. • each of these mtor .. rontrol . e eent~rs . ~~I eoiltrpl is, :OOWever, a oanplex process.' ~e ' ,. '; .·, I .· . ·.. interested r~ader .,uld refer to standard texts on neurophysiology, JOotor behaviOr 1 and neuroanatany for detai~ed infOrmatiOn (ChUSidr ··· l979l ~gui·rre; 1969; Sage,_~)?'77J. ! . ;-'; .. r, f"'· •· .. ' " v·.... ·"· -.,. . ..::r~~- .... ·.··· ·. . . I ·:'<. ,' \ . .' '.~'»>-,<(.,'"\,,\,.e.,."'A'S.:-~.~-x~..h~ ,1 ! ! ~ .i ~ . .... s . _~u,.~,~~--t..._~ d . VJ->flc.h-~ ~ ~~ t--~-~ ~~--~~ \~ e~~ --~ c..~"~ ~~ ~ (Y'A~ .... ,·'': �'\.11 rt.Jn .;./+ ~~....~~ -~ ft., ~ ~eL.. . t ~~- ~ . <..~ct:~ ~~ cis.,~~~ b_ ~ ~ _\.A lJ. : .•. .-.l -~ k <!.~-~d :· -~eL._ ~~ ~~~ ~~- ....,@slarau{l ~ ~ .... ~~b-~~ ~-~ ~-~ ~- 't ~_.t'U._$;Av~'h:~ ~ ' ~ ~ {e 1 !J"'\. G...~~~~~ ~\ H~!V.M.. o... tv'-~~ ~~ 4~~ ' ~~ ~-~ ~ ,. Gcs1r ..J;:;:;,J.~ ~ ...... ~ ~~w.Jct ~ ~~ ~ �~ 1~'""':6 -'"";,,~,~...~~· J ~~ ..._ '')_" (}.j_~~~ v--t~'~<N\ �b. ~~sJ (r ) C~eJ) . -~ M~ maO-A C~cJJ .AAR.~ ~ ' . I &~ rfJlAA ~; ~ ~ {-k 4~ ~~o-1- ~ tle- c~cJJ -~~ ~~ ~ ~ b cr ~ -~~L.~ c,v~. f-"'o-~-~ ~ ~~- ~) ~ ~cEI;_~ ~~ ~ ~ ~· ~AJJ\J ·~ e~ ~J 1+k ~~k 't ~._:.... c~ ~d-1) ~ ~ ~-. . . fu V\M.J-0-r\ tk. 'o~S ~t~~ ' ..:a ~stU"\ <-~~ ) (_~ u~ ' Q__~ w-·L.it " t~ ~~ ,:t- h t'l"-~. I ~ ~ t4_ ~<1 ~ . (!)~ ~ -It . I �~~.,._;±:~ +- ~ cii~ ~~. b.~~ 1 ~~'\ 'fu ~ ~~ ~r ~ ~~ ~~~· ~a:t_tM. Q~"el~""~~J i '-J\9..{.~.~~ . ~d ~ ~~ ~~ r'M.~ ~ ~ ~ ..l* D~o.!_~ ~~..._ -t-~~~~ Q_~·~ --A_~) r1 ~··~~~ ~~, <!_~aD ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ C Eu~, (tt73) . - ~~" ~ . 1--k <'J..r-..~tv.,~ ·~~ o..io?) pl~ ~ l"k ~~ �As~~~ ~J ().) ~.~~, p~·~S t~ tVt~~ lh ~~~ ert ~~;:t__~ C~.JJ " ~ ~~ ~ if -1-..Ao-t\A. t~ ~~ f-AQ-~~~~ b~ - (.<:;N.......~~ C.c~,_;:r' 4~:te.~~ ~ Q/\J\_Q_.. ~~-- ~ ~ ~ .J.--.~4~ ~o--JA ~ • ~ ~ l!Vl~~ �7 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Draft on Book Chapter Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Description An account of the resource Handwritten draft for section of book chapter regarding motor control Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_005 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-18 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 8 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/32ed9d93bbdd6c26c3b6723b32861caf.pdf 5cab1f1dcf960ea8e40021ef1e30f6b8 PDF Text Text Dr. Rodgers was a significant contributor of the Eastman Kodak series: Ergonomic Design for People at Work Eastman Kodak Company. Human Factors Section., & Eastman Kodak Company. Ergonomics Group. (1983). Ergonomic design for people at work: A source book for human factors practitioners in industry including safety, design, and industrial engineers, medical, industrial hygiene, and industrial relations personnel, and management. Belmont, Calif.: Lifetime Learning Publications. Eastman Kodak Company. (2004). Kodak's ergonomic design for people at work. Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley. �ERGONOMIC DESIGN FOR PEOPLE AT WORK. VOLUME I ,•",\ �ERGONOMIC DESIGN FOR PEOPLE .AT WORK Suzanne H. Rodgers Technical Editor Elizabeth M. Eggleton, Editor Commercial. Publications Eastman Kodak Company Volume I Workplace, Equipment, and Environmental besign and Information Transfer Contributing Authofs Stanley H. Caplan Paul C. Champney Kenneth G. Corl Brian Crist William H. Cushman Harry L. Davis Terrence W. Faulkner Richard M. Little Richard L. Lucas *Thomas J. Murphy Waldo J. Nielsen *Richard E. Pugsley *Suzanne H. Rodgers John A. Stevens Human Factors Section Eastman Kodak Company I A Source Book for Human Factors Practitioners in Industry including safety, design, and industrial engineers, .r.nedical, industrial hygiene, and industrial relations personnel, and management. by: The Human Factors Section Health, Safety and Human Factors Laboratory Eastman Kodak Company Designed by William Sabia * No longer associated with Eastman Kodak Company Lifetime Learning Publications Belmont, California A division of Wadsworth, Inc. T .nnrlnn «:;ino-::innrP. SvdnPv. Toronto. Mexico Citv �NOTICE The Human Factors Section of Eastman Kodak Company acknowledges with gratitude permission received froin the following companies and organizations to use material reprinted from their publications in the development of· this book. Specific references are noted in the text, complete citations follow in the bibliography at the end of each chapter. American Book Company, New York, N.Y; American Institute of Physics, New York, N.Y. ASHA Publications, Rockville, Md. Butterworth Scientific Ltd., Guildford, Surrey, U.K. CMP Publications, Inc., Manhasset, N.Y. Flournoy Publishers, Inc., Chicago, ill. Journal Publishing Affiliates, Santa Barbara, .Calif. McGraw-'Hill Book Company, New York, N.Y. Pendell Publishing Company,· Midlan�, Ml Prentice-Hall, Inc�, Englewood Cliffsi N.J. Taylor and Francis Ltd., London, England The Human Factors Society, Publications Div., Santa Monica, Calif. 90406 University of California Press, Berkeley, Calif; Western Electric Company, New York, N.Y./ John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, N.Y. Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., Inc., New York, N.Y. © 1983 by Eastman Kodak Company. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transcribed, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the copyright owner, Eastman Kodak Company. Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Main entry under title: Ergonomic Design for People at Work Volume I Bi�liography: v. 1, p. Includes index. 1. Human engineering-Handbooks, manuals, etc. I. Eastman Kodak Company. Human Factors Section. T59.7.E714 1983 . 620.8'2 83-719 We believe the information provided in this work is reliable and useful, but it is furnished without warranty of any kind from either the author, Eastman Kodak Company, or the publisher, or the editors and contributing authors. Readers should make their own determination of the suitability or completeness of any material or procedure for a specific purpose and adopt such safety� health, and other precautions as may be necessary. Of course, no license under any patent or other proprietary right is granted or to be inferred from our provision of this information. �CONTENTS List of Illustrations List of Tables · Preface Acknowled�ents Chapter I. Using This Book for Ergonomics in Industry: Introduction xiv xix xxii xxiii xxvi - 1. Ergonomics/Human Factors in Industry: An Explanation and History of the Subject a. Explanation b: History of Ergonomics and Human Factors 2. Human Factors at Eastman Kodak Company 3. Scope and Purpose of the Book -4. Summary of the Contents --S. Criteria for Design: Who? References•for Chapter I 5 6 8 8 11 Chapter JI. Workplace Design 12 Section IIA. Layout 14 1. Workplaces �a. Sitting Workplaces b. Standing Workplaces c. Sit/Stand Workplaces d. Special Case: Design of VDU (Video Display Unit) Workplaces e. Special Case: Design of Chemical Hoods and Glove (Isolation) Boxes 3 3 4 15 18 23 26 28 30 2. Aisles and Corridors 3. Floors and Ramps a. Floors b. Ramps 34 36 36 40 4. Stairs anq. Ladders a. Stairs b. Ladders 41 41 45 5. Conveyors -6. Dimensions for Visual Work a. Viewing Angles 48 50 50 �CONTENTS CONTENTS c. Eye Glasses d. Visual Work Area Section IIB. Adjustable Design Approaches 52 52 52 1. Adjusting the Workplace a. Shape b. Location: Height and Distance c. Orientation 55 56 56 57 2. Adjusting the Person Relative to the Workplace - a. Chairs b. Support Stools, Swing-Bracket Stools, and Other Props C; Platforms, Step-ups, and Mechanical Lifts ------ d. Footrests e. Armrests 57 57 58 60 60 63 3. Adjusting the Workpiece or Product a. Jigs, Clamps, and Vises b. Circuit Board Assembly c. Parts Bins d. Lift Tables, Levelators, and Similar Equipment 63 63 63 65 65 4. Adjusting the Tool a. Design and Location of Tools b. Trays and Carriers 66 66 67 a. Auditory Presentation b. Visual Presentation for Detection of a Signal 3. Visual Displays for Information Transfer a. Dial Design b. Viewing Dista,nce c. Installation of Displays: Design and Environment d. Electronic Display Design and Installation 4. Video Display Unit (VDU) or Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Displays a. Hardware Selection Characteristics b. Software Enhancement of VDU Displays .107 112 112 113 115 115 117 134 134 135 135 137 140 140 References for Chapter II 74 Chapter HI. Equipment Design 78 Section HID. Hand Tool Selection and Design Section IIIA. Design of Production Machinery: General Principles 82 3. Environment and Safety 89 Section IIIB. Displays 90 1. Signal Detection 90 101 101 103 --- 1. Population Stereotypes · 2. Design, Selection, and Location of Controls a. Location b. Spacing c. Shape Coding d. Control Resistance e. Types of Controls 67 86 87 97 98 107 Section UC. Clearance Dimensions 82 84 93 95 97 Section IIIC. Controls and Keysets - 3. Keyboards for Data Entry ---· a. The Nature of the Task b. Operator Proficiency c. Keyboard Layout d. Keyboard Parameters e. Locating the Keyboard in the Workplace 1. Reaches and Clearances 2. Maintainability a. Areas to Consider When Planning Maintainability Needs b. Other Maintenance Design Features 93 93 1. Factors of Concern in Hand Tool Design a. Static Muscle Loading: Fatigue and Soreness b. Awkward Hand Positions c. Pressure on Tissues or Joints d. Vibration and Noise e. Pinch Points f. Other Factors 140 140 142 144 145 145 145 2. Design and Selection Recommendations a. Handle Length b. Handle Diameter c. Handle Span d. Other Features of Handle Desi1m 146 146 146 147 147 �CONTENTS · CONTENTS 150 150 152 References for Chapter III 154 2. The Effects of Electric Shock a. The Body's Resistance to Sh,ock · b. Threshold Perception c. Pain Chapter IV. Information Transfer 160 Section IVA. Person-to-Person Transfer 162 3. Prevention of Electric Shock a. Protecting the Worker b. Workplace Design Considerations e. Switches and Stops f. Tool Weight and Suspension g. Special-Purpose Tools 1. Instructions 2. Forms a. Sequence b. Readability and Comprehensibility c. Space and Content -3. Questionnaires a. Design of the Questions. · b. Design of the Questionnaire Format ·- c. Use of the Questionnaire Data 4. Labels and Signs a. Comprehensibility b. Legibility c. Readability 5. Coding a. Alphanumeric Coding b. Shape Coding c. Color Coding Section IVB. Product-to-Person Transfer: Visual Inspection 1. Factors Influencing Inspection Performance a. Measures of Performance b. Individual Factors c. Physical and Environmental Factors d. Task Factors e. Organizational Factors 2. Guidelines to Improve Inspection Performance 162 164 166 166 166 166 167 167 168 168 168 170 173 174 175 177 178 179 180 180 182 183 187 190 191 References for Chapter IV 194 Chapter V. Environment 198 Section VA. Electric Shock 201 ... ,..,., � T.....- ......... _£ 'I...J ____ ...;i .... !- LL-. 'IAT--la_l ___ Section VB. Noise and Vibration 203 203 208 208 208 208 209 209 1. Noise a. Criteria for Noise Exposure b. Performance Effects of Noise c. Approaches to Reducing Noise in the Workplace d. Special Considerations 210 211 218 2. Vibration a. Effects on the Body b. Ways to Reduce Vibration Exposure 221 221 224 Section VC. Illumination and Color 1. Illumination a. Recommended Light Levels for Different Tasks b. Selection of Higher-Efficiency Light Sources c. Direct and Indirect Lighting d. Task Lighting e. Miflimizing Glare f. Special-Purpose Lighting 2. Color Section VJ?. Temperature and Humidity 219 219 225 225 226 228 228 230 230 234 240 241 1. Body Heat Balance 2. The Comfort Zone a. Zone Definition b. Factors Affecting the Feeling of Comfort Within the Zone 242 244 244 3. The Discomfort Zone a. Guidelines for Acceptable Heat Exposures in the Discomfort Zone b. Guidelines for Acceptable Cold Exposures in 250 thP Oi!'.cnmfnrt ZnnP 244 252 ?.f:i? �CONTENTS CONTENTS c. Techniques to Reduce Discomfort in the Hot and Cold Discomfort Zones 4. The Health Risk Zone a. Zone Definition b. Cold Injury c. Heat/Humidity Illness and Injury 5. Working in Wet Environments a. Wet Oothing b. Hand and Forearm Water Immersion c. Using Safety Showers and Eye Baths 6. Surface Temperatures a. Hot Surfaces b. Cold Surfaces References for Chapter V Chapter VI. Appendices Section VIA. Appendix A: Anthropometric Data 1. Limitations in the Use of Anthropometric Data in Design a. Defining the Population b. Effects of Oothing and Posture c. Designs Involving Several Anthropometric Variables 2. Anthropometric Measurements a. The Data b. The Definitions 3. Examples of the Use of Anthropometric Data a. Criteria for New Design b. Evaluation of Existing Design Section VIB. Appendix B: Methods 1. Aids for Human Factors/Ergonomics Field Surveys a. Survey Techniques b. Presentation of Survey Results 2. Environmental Measurement Protocols a '. Temperature, Humidity, and Air Velocity b. Noise 254 263 263 263 265 268 269 269 269 270 270 270 273 282 284 285 285 287 288 289 290 299 311 311 312 313 313 313 319 320 320 328 3. Psychophysical Scaling Methods a. Types of Scales for Psychophysical Evaluations b. Interval Scales in Psychophysical Data Collection c. Rating of Perceived Exertion 333 333 334 338 Section VIC. Appendix C: Problems with Solutions 342 1. Workplace Design a. Problem 1-Seated Workplace b. Problem 2-Standing Inspection Workplace 342 2. Equipment Design a. Problem 1-Selecting a Pop Riveter b. Problem 2-Safety Shower Handle Height 348 348 350 3. Information Transfer a. Problem-Inventory Control Card Design 4. Environment a. P;�blem 1-Warning Alarm Characteristics b. Problem 2....,..Noise Levels in Office Area c. Problem 3-Humid Heat Exposure References for Chapter VI A Selective Annotated Bibliography on the Subject of Human Factors 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Genetal Workplace Design Equipment Design Information Transfer Environment Human Capacities J9urnals 342 344 353 353 355 355 356 358 361 365 ·365 367 368 369 369 370 372 Glossary of Human Factors Terms 375 Index 389 �LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS UST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Chapter I. Using This Book for Ergonomics in Industry: Introduction Figure 1-1: Designing with Anthropometric Data Chapter II. Workplace Design Figure IIA-1: The Seated Workspace Figure IIA-2: Forward Reach Capability of a Small Operator, Seated Figure IIA-3: Recommended Dimensions for a Seated Workplace With a Footrest Figure IIA-4: Recommended Dimensions for a Seated Workplace Without a Footrest Figure IIA-5: The Standing Reach Area, One Arm Figure IIA-6: The Standing Reach Area, Two Arms Figure IIA-7: Recommended Standing Workplace Dimensions Figure IIA-8: Seated VDU Workplace Dimensions Figure IIA-9: Standing VDU Workplace Dimensions Figure IIA-10: Example of a Glove Box Figure IIA-11: Minimum Oearances for Aisles and Corridors Figure IIA-12: Workplace Catch-Trough Figure IIA-13: Shoe Sole Design to Reduce Slippage Figure IIA-14: Ramp Design for Pedestrian and Vehicular Traffic Figure IIA-15: Fixed Stairway Design Figure I¼-16: Fixed Stair Slope Range Figure IIA-17: Handrail Design Guidelines Figure IIA-18: Design of Stair Ladders and Ladders Figure IIA-19: Portable Stairs and a Step Stool Figure IIA-20: Standing Workplace at a Conveyor Figure IIA-21: Preferred Viewing Angles Figure IIA-22: Visual Work Dimensions for Seated Workplaces Figure IIA-23: Visual Work Dimensions for Standing Workplaces Figure 11B-1: Seated Workplace with a Cutout to Reduce Reach Requirements Figure 11B-2: Recommended Chair Characteristics Figure 11B-3: Examples of Support Stools T,_! ____._ TTD A. r'\LL-.- D---.-. /.-- ("\_-_,.....,.,__.,.� ;_ C-1-""'-,-1;'"-rr lA7n'1'"1,'1"11'!1,...0C! 10 19 20 21 22 24 25 27 29 31 33 35 39 40 41 42 44 45 46 47 49 51 53 54 56 58 59 �1 Figure 11B-5: Figure 11B-6: Figure 11B-7: Figure 11B-8: Figure IIC-1: Figure IIC-2: Figure IIC-3: Figure IIC-4: Figure IIC-5: Figure IIC-6: Examples of Footrests for Seated Workplaces Circuit Board Assembly Aid Parts Bins for Small Parts Assembly Lift Table for Adjusting the Height of a Pallet Minimum Clearances for Walking Work Area Clearances, Horizontal Work Area Clearances, Upright and Prone Clearances for Entering Open�Top Vessels Some Selected Clearances for Arms and Hands Minimum Full-Body Access Port Clearances · Chapter HI. Equipment Design Figure IIIA-1: Industrial Lathe Design: Human Interface Figure IIIA-2: Examples of Fasteners Figure IIIB-1: Examples of Visual Displays Figure 111B-2: Target Zone Markings on Dials Figure IIIB-3: Alignment of Dials to Detect Normal Functioning Figure IIIB-4: Examples of Poor and Good Display Panel Dial Design Figure 111B-5: Segmented and NAMEL Font Figure 111B-6: Examples of Dot Matrix Character Styles Figure IIIB-7: Response Time to Locate Information as a Function of Display Density Figure IIIC-1: Movement Stereotypes for Rotary Controls Figui;e IIIC-2: Arrangements of Controlling Knobs and Their Displays on a Control Panel Figure IIIC-3: Examples of Poor and Good ControlMovement Design · Figure IIIC-4: Toggle Switch Ch.µacteristics Figure II(C-5: Push-Button Characteristics Figure IIIC-:- 6: Examples of Rotary Selector Switches Figure IIIC-7: · Recommended Design Criteria for Rotary Seledor Switches ··c Figure IIIC-8: Knob Design Recommendations Figure IIIC-9: Criteria for Valve Design Figure IIIC-10: Recommendations for Crank Design Figure IIIC-11: Criteria for Lever Design 11.;.,....... n,r_ 1 ?• r,-Hp,-i::i fn,- H:mdwheel Desi1m. 62 64. 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 85 88 95 96 98 99 99 100 105 108 111 116 119 121 122 123 124 126 128 130 131 �LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Figure IIIC-13: Figure IIIC-14: Figure IIIC-15: Figure IIIC-16: Figure IIIC-17: Figure IIIC-18: Figure 111D-1: Figure 111D-2: Figure 111D-3: Figure IiID-4: Figure 111D-5: Figure 111D-6: Figure 111D-7: Figure 111D-8: Figure IIID...;9·: Figure 111D-10: Figure 111D-11: Figure 111D-12: Foot Pedal Dimensions and Counterpressures Touch Telephone Numeric Keyset Adding Machine Numeric Keyset Scholes Keyboard Dvorak Keyboard Recommended Key Design Shoulder Abduction (Elbow Elevation) with Soldering Iron Use Soldering Iron with Tip Designed to Reduce Shoulder Abduction Electric Drill With Stabilizing Handle Wrist Angles During Tool Use Pressure Point in Palm Stops on Two-Handled Tools to Reduce Pinches Handle Dimensions for a Cutout Handle Handle Span for Force Grips Handle Design: Grooves and Ridges Handle Design: Finger Recesses Thumb Stop on a Tool Holding Tool for a Chisel · Chapter IV. Information Transfer Figure IVA-1: Examples of Fonts Figure IVA-2: Definitions of Font Characteristics Figure IVA-3: Spacing and Borders That Improve Readability Figure IVA-4: Shape Coding of Controls Figure IVB-1: Percentage Errors in Using Three Aids to Assist In Color Inspection of Electronic Chips Figure IVB-2: Increase in Agreement Among Inspectors Resulting from Use of Photographic Aids Figure IVB-3: Defec;:t Rate and Inspection Accuracy Figure IVB-4: Inspection of Moving Product; Direction of Viewing Chapter V. Environment Figure VA-1: Examples of Current Flow in Contacts with Electricity Figure VB-1: Guidelines for Noise Exposure to Protect Hearing; Recommended Maximum Duration Versus Noise 132 136 136 137 137 138 141 141 142 143 144 145 147 i48 149 149 150 153 171 171 174 177 186 187 188 192 204 ........ "' 1 Figure VB-2: Figure VB-3: Figure VB-4: Figure VB-5: F�gure VC-1: Figure VC-2: Figure VD-1: Figure VD-2: Figure VD-3: Figure VD-4: Preferred Noise Criterion (PNC) Curves Evaluation of Pump Noise in a Foreman's Office Preferred Speech Interference Levels (PSIL} as a Function of Distance and Ease of Communication Whole-Body Vertical Vibration Tolerances Direct and Indirect Glare Zones for an Operator Direct and Indirect Glare Zones for a Luminaire, or Lighting Unit The Thermal Comfort Zone The Effect of Cold on Manual Performance Ice Vest for Improving Heat Loss in Hot Environments A Vortex Suit for Use in High-Heat Areas Chapter VI. Appendices Figure VIA-1: Percentiles and the z-Statistic in an Anthropometric Data Distribution " Figure VIA-2: Functional Hand Grasp Dimensions Figure VIA-3: Anthropometric Dimensions, Standing and Sitting Figure VIA-4: Anthropometric Dimensions, Hand, Face, and Foot Figure VIA-5: Measurement of Abdominal Extension Depth Figure VIA-6: Measurement of Functional Overhead Reach (Standing) Figure VIA-7: Measurement of Elbow-to-Fist Length (Forearm Length) Figure VIA-8: Measurement of Hand Breadth Figure VIA�9: Measurements of the Range of Wrist Motion Figure VIB-1: Instrumentation for Workplace Measurements of Temperature, Humidity, and Air Velocity Figure VIB-2: Temperature and Humidity Levels in a Manufacturing Workplace Figure VIB-3: Frequency of Occurrence of Given Temperature ··· Conditions, Rochester, New York Figure VIB-4: Instrumentation for Noise Measurement Figure VIB-5: Instrumentation for Measuring Illuminance and Luminance Figure VIB-6: Example of a Scaling Experiment Figure VIB-7: Paired-Comparison Study of Mail Routes T'.'.!----·- -..:TTD . O. D-----1 .... .L.:-- c�....� ..... -...... �n� 1- c.��lo.o 214 216 217 222 231 231 245 254 259 259 286 298 300 301 302 304 306 308 309 322 326 327 329 331 335 337 ':l.':l.Q �LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Figure VIB-9: The Rating of Perceived Exertion (RPE) Scales Figure VIB-10: Force Changes with Constant RPE Handgrip Figure VIC-1: Existing Design of a Bottle Inspection and Bottle-'Packing Workplace Figure VIC-2: Design of a Paper-Web Inspectipn Workplace Figure VIC-3: Examples of Pop Riveters Figure VIC-4: Safety. Shower. Handle Height Figure VIC-5: Example of an Inventory Control Computer Card Used for Order Picking Figure VIC-6: Recommended Changes to Control Carq. Used in Order Picking 340 341 343 346 349 352 354 355 UST OF TABLES Chapter I. Using This Book for Ergonomics in Industry: Introduction Scope and Purpose of the Book Table 1-1: Chapter II. Workplace Design Table IIA-1: Choice of Workplace Type by Task Variables Table IIA-2: Effect of Fixed Stair Slope on Recommended Riser Height and Tread Depth Table IIB-1: Levels of Adjustment . Table IIC-1: Minim.um Clearances for the Working Hand Chapter III. Equipment Design Table IIIA-1: Humans Versus Machines Table IIIB-1: Task Conditions Affecting Signal Detectability During Extended Monitoring Table 111B-2: Visuat Versus Auditory Presentation of Signals Table IIIB-3: Types of Information Displayed and Recommended Displays for Each Table IIIC-1: United States Stereotypes for Up and Down Switch Settings Table IIIC-2: Recommended Separations for Various Types of Controls Table IIIC--:3: Characteristics of Common Controls Table IIIC-4: Maximum Torques That Can Be Applied to a Round Knob as a Function of Knob Diameter and Depth Table IIIB-1: Power Tool Weights and Trigger Activation Forces Chapter IV. Information Transfer Table IV-1: Examples of Error Opportunities Table IVA-1: Use of Two-Column Format in an Instruction Set Table IVA-2: Factors Affecting the Written Communication Process Table IVA-3: Letter or Number Height Versus Viewing Distance for Labels Table IVA-4: Legibility of Color Combinations in White Light Table IVA-5: Error Opportunities in Coding Table IVB-1: Factors That May Influence Inspection Performance Table IVB-2: Reasons for Not Reporting Defects by Two Groups of 7 16 43 55 73 83 91 92 94 110 114 118 125 151 163 165 169 172 173 176 181 183 �LIST OF TABLES LIST OF TABLES Table IVB-3: Amount of Information in Absolute Judgments of Various Stimulus Dimensions Table IVB-4: Effects of Task Variables on Inspection Performance 185 · 189 Chapter V. Environment Table V-1: Health and Performance Effects of Some Physical Environmental Factors Table VA-1: Skin Resistance for Various Contact Conditions Table VA-2: Electric Shock Thresholds Table VB-1: Noise Complaints Over a Twenty-Year Period Table VB-2: Recommended PNC Curves and Sound Pressure Levels for. Several Categories of Activity Table VB-3: Characteristics of Vibration That Are Within the Safe Range for Transmission to the Hands Table VC-1: Recommended Range of Illuminance for Various Types of Tasks Table VC-2: Artificial Light Sources Table VC-3: Techniques for Controlling Glare Table VC-4: IES Recommended Maximum Luminance Ratios for Visual Tasks Table VC-5: Special.;.Purpose Lighting for Inspection Tasks Table VD-1: Body Heat Balance Table VD-2: The Influence of Several Factors on the Thermal Comfort Zone Limits Clothing Table VD-3: The Insulation Value (do) of Various · Ensembles Table VD-4: Recommended Maximum Work Loads, Heat Discomfort Zone Table VD-5: Metabolic Demands of Industrial Tasks Table VD-6: Equivalent Temperatures for Several.Combinations of Low Temperature and Air Velocity Table VD-7: Recommended Maximum Temperatures for Short-Duration Exposure to High-Heat Environments (up to 70°C, or 158°F) Table VD-8: Contact with Hot Surfaces, Maximum Temperatures Chapter VI. Appendices Table VIA-1: Percentile Rankings for Several Hand Dimensions Table VIA-2: Anthropometric Data, Centimeters 202 205 206 210 215 223 227 229 232 233 235 743 247 248 251 257 264 266 271 288 290-297 Table VIA-3: Anthropometric Data, Inches 298 Table VIB-1: Advantages and Disadvantages of Human Factors/Ergonomics Field Surveys 314 Table VIB-2: Human Factors/Ergonomics Survey Descriptor List 316 Table VIB-3: Survey Checklist 317-319 Table VIB-4: Examples of Workplace Situations in Each of the / Survey Result Categories 321 Table VIB-5: Examples of Measurement Scales 333 �PREFACE ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volumes I and II, are definitive works on industrial human factors/ergonomics. This book, the first in the series, is directed to a practical discussion of workplace, equipment, environmental design and of the transfer of information in the workplace. Its contents and purpose are further explained in Chapter I. The second volume will include guidelines for job design, manual materials handling, and shift work. The application of human factors/ergonomics principles to the workplace has been of interest to Eastman Kodak Company for many years. This series summarizes current data, experience, and thoughts assembled from the pub lished literature, internal research, and observation by the members of the Human Factors Section. The selection of material has been guided by the types of problems the section has been asked to address over the past 22 · years. The guidelines and examples of approaches to design problems are most often drawn from case studies. The principles have been successfully applied in the workplace to reduce the potential for occupational injury, increase the number of people who can perform a job, and improve perfor mance on the job, thereby increasing productivity and quality. Members of the Human Factors Section have each brought their special expertise to the material included in these volumes. It is our hope that the experience w e have gained from p roblem solving in an industrial setting with a group that includes many disciplines will be of value to others with fewer resources available to them, and that the material will be useful in the solution of human factors and ergonomics problems in industries in many countries. Members of the Human Factors Section who contributed' to the research and writing of each section of this book are listed opposite the title page and at the beginning of each chapter. 1 Lending support to the proje ct were Harry L. Davis, Supervisor of the fJuman Factors Section; Kenneth T. Lassiter, Publications Director, Con sumer/Professional and Finishing Markets; and Alexander Kugushev, Pub lisher, Lifetime Learning Publications. Eastman Kodak Company The following people reviewed a draft of the manuscript and offered valuable suggestions for its improvement: Thomas S. Ely, M. D., Assistant Director, Health, Safety and Human Factors Laboratory, Eastman Kodak Company David Alexander, M.S., and Hart Kaudewitz, M5., Human Factors Group, Tennessee Eastman Division, Eastman Kodak Company Stover H. Snook, Ph.D., Liberty Mutual Insurance Company Thomas Bernard, Ph.D., Westinghouse Corporation Harry Snyder, P�_.D., Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University · Thomas J. Armstrong, Ph.D., The University of Michigan School of Public Health W. Monroe Keyserling, Ph.D., Harvard University School of Public Health Eliezer Kamon, Ph.D., Pennsylvania State University, and David Kiser, Ph.D., Human Factors Section, Eastman Kodak Company, each review ed the temperature and humidity section. Carol McCreary, Human Factors Section, provided extensive technical as sistance and tr�ce� m�ny of the ref�r�nces for this project; she has our grati tude and admiration. Our appreciation also goes to Anne Wilkinson and Gerry Bommelje of the Photo Services Section, Research Division, Eastman Kodak Company, for their initial artwork. Elaine Villa and Shereta Harris are especially thanked for typing the manuscript. Allan Fink and Leslie Smade s of �e Kodak Park Ind�strial Studio provided the pho.tography. F�ally, �e woul� like to th�nk McGraw-Hill, publishers of Human Engi neering Guide to Equipment Design by Morgan, Cook, Chapanis, and Lund (1963), for permission to use much of the material in the equipment design ·· ·· chapter of this book. . The Human Factors Section Health, Safety and Human Factors Laboratory �DESIGNING FOR PEOPLE AT WORK Volume I: Workplace, Equipment, and Environmental Design, and Information Transfer By the Eastman Kodak Co., 600 pages, 6½ x 9¼ From Eastman Kodak's Health, Safety, and Human Factors Laboratory comes the latest tech niques for designing jobs, workplaces, and equipment that improve job performance. Focusing on current research in the multidisciplinary field of ergonomics, this book includes data from a cross section of the U.S. industrial population. Numerous tables and illustrations help explain human capabilities and workplace designs that stimulate high output. BEHAVIORAL ISSUES IN OFFICE DESIGN Edited by Jean Wineman, 256 pages, 6 x 9 Are the needs of office workers important to organizational effectiveness? Is worker satisfac tion relevant to productivity? How does the design of the physical workspace affect employee satisfaction and productivity? It has been projected that by 1990 over 10 million new workers will be employed in the white-collar sector. As the number of office jobs grows, the above ques tions and other pertinent matters will spur designers, architects, office managers, and admini strators to seek better guides to office planning and design. Behavioral Issues in Office Design offers a compilation of research on current issues in the field as well as theoretical explorations of the role of human behavior and values in the planning, design, and management of office settings. PROGRAMMING THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT Edited by Wolfgang F. E. Preiser, 192 pages, 8½ x 11 Architectural programming-the analysis of any given environment to best satisfy users' needs-has become a given prerequisite to the design process. Preparing such a program to meet these needs in a cost-effective way is one of the keystones to successful architectural design. In Programming the Built Environment, 11 prominent architects examine a range of applications for different client groups. Included are a variety of programming approaches for health-care facilities, cross-cultural student housing, and community markets. Every aspect of the programming process, from initial planning considerations to post-occupancy evaluation, is explored in these case studies. Wolfgang F. E. Preiser received a 1984 Progressive Architec ture award for architectural education. INDUSTRIAL TOXICOLOGY Safety and Health Applications in the Workplace by Phillip Lindly Williams and James Leland Burson, 416 pages, 6½ x 9¼ Ergonomic Design for People at Work ••• •• • •• •••• • • • • •• • • •• • •• •• • • •• • • • • •• • \'OLUME2 Essential information for preventing, mitigating, and treating industrial toxicological problems is provided in this practical sourcebook. Williams and Burson explain how toxic agents in the body are absorbed, distributed, and eliminated. They discuss the effects of heavy metals, pes ticides, and solvents on the blood, liver, kidneys, nerves, skin, and lungs. Coverage includes epidemiological manifestations and significant research on carcinogenesis, mutagenesis, and reproductive toxicology. BV EASTMAN KODAK COMP4NV Ergonomics Group Health and Environment Laboratories ISBN □ -442-22103-7 �About the Authors ERGONOMIC DESIGN FOR PEOPLE AT WORK Volume 2 Job Design and Manual Handling By Eastman Kodak Company Ergonomics/human factors is a multidisciplin ary science that uses knowledge of human capacities and capabilities to assist in the design of safe and productive jobs, workplaces, equipment, and products. Eastman Kodak, with over twenty-five years of applied research and practical experience in ergonomics, is at the forefront of this developing field. The Ergonomics Group and Human Factors Section of the Eastman Kodak Company have been involved in applied ergonomics research and problem solving for over twenty five years. Their focus has been on the preven tion of accidents and injuries in the workplace while at the same time optimizing the perfor mance of people. The guidelines and data presented in this book are taken from suc cessful ergonomic applications within the Eastman Kodak Company. The first volume of this comprehensive ergonomics resource presented principles by which safe and highly effective workplaces, equipment, and environments could be designed. This second volume complements Volume I by drawing on physiology, psychology, engineer ing, medicine, and environmental sciences to provide practical information for the design of jobs and work tasks. The guidelines and pro cedures included are based on ergonomic ap proaches that have proven to be effective within Kodak. Topics covered in this volume include: • The Physiological Basis of Work • Evaluation of Job Demands • Patterns of Work with Information on Repetitive and Paced Work • Hours of Work Including Shiftwork and Overtime • Manual Materials Handling Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volume 2 offers a realistic approach to the science of ergonomics. Special consideration is given to the broad range of capabilities of the industrial population as determined by their age, sex, and health status. Over 140 illustrations graphically present key concepts that help identify solu tions to many problems. Ergonomics and human factors specialists, health and safety professionals, industrial hygienists, industrial engineers, equipment designers, architects, and labor relations specialists will find this volume an indispens able reference. VAN NOSTRAND REINHOLD COMPANY A VAN NOSTRAND REINHOLD BOOK �ERGONOMIC DESIGN FOR PEOPLE AT WORK Volume 2 The rDesign of Jobs, including Work Patterns, Hours of Work, Manual Materials Handling Tasks, Methods to Evaluate Job Demands, and the Physiological Basis of Work Suzanne H. Rodgers Principal Author and Technical Editor Deborah A. Kenworthy, Editor Elizabeth M. Eggleton, Editor Commercial Publications Eastman Kodak Company Contributing Authors David M. Kiser *Thomas J. Murphy *Waldo J. Nielsen *Suzanne H. Rodgers Ergonomics Group and Human Factors Section Eastman. Kodak Company A Source Book for Human Factors Practitioners in Industry including safety, design, and industrial engineers; medical, industrial hygiene, and industrial relations personnel, and management. by: The Ergonomics Group Health and Environment Laboratories Eastman Kodak Company Artwork by William Sabia *No longer associated with Eastman Kodak Company � VAN NOSTRAND REINHOLD COMPANY � ______________ New York �The Ergonomics Group of Eastman Kodak Company acknowledges with gratitude permission received from the following companies and organizations to use material reprinted from their publications in the development of this book. Specific references are noted in the text, and complete citations follow in the bibliography at the end of each chapter. © 1986 by Eastman Kodak Company. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transcribed, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the copyright owner, Eastman Kodak Company.' Printed in the United States of America Van Nostrand Reinhold Company Inc. 115 Fifth Avenue New York, New York 10003 Van Nostrand Reinhold Company Limited Molly Millars Lane Wokingham, Berkshire RG 11 2PY, England Van Nostrand Reinhold 480 La Trobe Street Melbourne, Victoria 3000, Australia Macmillan of Canada Division of Canada Publishing Corporation 164 Commander Boulevard Agincourt, Ontario MlS 3C7, Canada 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Main entry under title: Ergonomic design for people at wo�k. Includes bibliographies and indexes. Contei:ts: v. 1. Work place, equipment, and environmental design and . mformation transfer-v. 2. The design of jobs including work patterns, hours of work, manual materials, handling tasks, methods to evaluate job demands, and the physiological basis of work. 1. Human engineering-Handbooks, manuals, etc. I. Eastman Kodak Company. Human Factors Section. T59.7.E714 1983 83-719 620.8'2 ISBN 0-534-97962-9 (v. 1) ISBN 0-442-22103-7 (v. 2) Academic Press, Inc., New York, New York Amer;tan Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, Chicago, Illinois American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine, Chicago, Illinois American Industrial Hygiene Association, Akron, Ohio American Physical Therapy Association, Fairfax, Virginia British Association of Rheumatology and Rehabilitation, London, England Butterworth Scientific Ltd., Guildford, England Flournoy Publishers, Inc., Chicago, Illinois Gower Press, Industrial Society, London, England Human Factors Society, Santa Monica, California Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden Lea and Febiger, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Alan R. Liss, Inc., New York, New York McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, New York Methuen, Inc. New York;·New York NASA Scientific and Technical Information Office, Yellow Springs, Ohio National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Washington, D.C. Pergamon Press, Inc., Elmsford, New York S. P. Medical & Scientific Books, Jamaica, New York W. B. Saunders Co., Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Scientific American, Inc., New York, New York Taylor & Francis, Ltd., Basingstoke, England George Thieme Verlag, Stuttgart, Germany and New York, New York C. C. Thomas, Springfield, Illinois Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., Inc. New York, New York John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, New York Wright Air Development Center, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio Year Book Medical Publishers, Inc., Chicago, Illinois �NOTICE We believe the information provided in this work is reliable and useful, but it is furnished without warranty of any· kind from either the author, Eastman Kodak Company, or the publisher, or the editors and contributing authors. Readers should make their own determinations of the suitability or completeness of any material or procedure for a specific purpose and adopt such safety, health, and other precautions as may be necessary. Of course, no license under any patent or other proprietary right is granted or to be inferred from our provision of this information. Contents List of Illustrations List of Tables Preface Acknowledgments xix xxv xxxi xxxiii PART I. Introduction 1 Chapter 1. Introduction 2 A. The Contents of This Book B. Industrial Need for Ergonomic Job Design 1. Improve Worker Productivity 2. Increase Available Work Force by Reducing Problematic Tasks 3. Provide More Jobs for Older Workers and Women C. Possible Impacts of Poorly Designed Jobs D. Options Other Than the Ergonomic Design of Jobs for Addressing Difficult Jobs E. Whom to Design Jobs For References PART II. The Physiological Basis of Work 4 6 7 9 9 9 11 13 15 17 , Chapter 2. Muscular Contraction and Movement 20 A. Metabolism, Energy Transformation, and Energy Utilization 1. Aerobic and Anaerobic Combustion of Nutrients 2. The Formation and Utilization of High-Energy Compounds ,, B. Anatomy of Muscle and Muscular Contraction 1. Anatomy of Muscle 2. Muscular Contraction C. Motor Units 24 24 25 27 28 28 30 �viii CONTENTS D. Muscle Mechanics and Movement 1. Muscle Mechanics 2. Movement E. Motor Control 1. Proprioceptors 2. Supraspinal Control a. Motor Control Areas of the Brain b. Ascending and Descending Pathways for Motor Control F. Motor Learning and Skill Acquisition G. Fatigue and Performance Impairment References Chapter 3. Circulatory and Respiratory Adjustments to Work A. The Circulatory System 1. The Role of the Blood a. Oxygen Transport b. Carbon Dioxide Transport 2. Blood Flow a. Determinants b. Distribution c. Muscle Blood Flow 3. Measures of Circulatory and Respiratory Adjustments to Work a. Heart Rate b. Blood Pressure B. The Respiratory System 1. Lung Capacities and the Work of Breathing 2. The Control of Alveolar Ventilation 3. The Relationship Between Gas Exchange in the Lung and Tissue Metabolism References Chapter 4. Biological Rhythms A. Biological Rhythms-Terminology and Descriptions 1. Terminology 2. Descriptions a. Internal versus External Generation b. Entrainment of Rhythms c. Amplitude Changes in the Rhythm d. Hormonal Rhythms e. Effects of Time Zone Changes on Body Temperature Rhythms f. Menstrual Cycle g. Physical, Emotional, and Intellectual Biorhythms h. Ultradian Rhythms CONTENTS 32 32 34 39 39 41 41 41 42 43 45 48 50 50 50 51 52 54 54 57 59 61 62 64 64 67 67 68 70 72 72 72 72 74 74 74 76 77 78 78 B. Body Temperature Rhythm and Performance 1. Twenty-Four-Hour Temperature Rhythms 2. Less Than 24-Hour Temperature Curves in Shift Workers 3. Body Temperature Rhythm Adaption Over Longer Shift-Rotation Periods 4. Body Temperature and Task Performance C. Activity Cycles and Sleep D. Sleep Loss and Performance References ix 79 79 80 83 83 86 88 90 PART III. Evaluation of Job Demands 95 Chapter 5. Survey Methods 98 A. Primary Analysis of the Problem B. Measuring What the Person Is Doing on the Job C. Performance Measures and Physiological and Psychophysical Responses in the Evaluation of Job Demands 1. Performance Measur�s 2. Physiological and Psychophysical Responses to Work D. Strategies for Resolving Problems with Job Demands , References Chapter 6. Timed Activity Analyses A. B. C. D. Job Activity Analysis Work Task Analyses Work Cycle Analysis Methods-Time Measurement (MTM) References Chapter 7. Biomechanical Analyses of Work A. Force and Torque Relationships in the Body 1. Lever Systems 2. Torque and Moment a. Calculation of Simple Torque b. Calculation of Torque for Nonperpendicular Force Applications c. Torque Calculations Including Body-Segment Contributions : . B. Biomechanics of the Back 1. Lifting and Back Stress 2. Postures and Back Stress , ,Shoulder Biomechanics Biomechanics of Grasp - 100 101 102 102 103 108 108 111 113 114 118 118 121 122 124 124 127 127 129 132 135 135 142 145 1."i1 �X CONTENTS CONTENTS E. Dynamic Biomechanical Relationships 1. Force-Mass Relationships 2. Lifting Dynamics F. Steps in Identifying and Solving Biomechanical Problems References 151 153 154 156 157 Chapter 8. Techniques for Analyzing Human Motion 160 A. Direct Measurement Techniques 1. Electrogoniometers 2. Force Transducers 3. Accelerometers 4. Force Plates B. Indirect Measurement Using Imaging Techniques 1. Cinematography 2. Video Recorders 3. Multiple Exposure Techniques 4. Optoelectric Techniques C. Summary of Motion Analysis Techniques References 162 162 163 167 167 169 169 172 172 172 173 173 Chapter 9. Heart Rate Interpretation Methodology A. Methods for Collecting Heart Rate Information on the Job B. Information Available From Heart Rate Recordings 1. Heart Rate Level, Elevation, and Percent of Range 2. Upward-Sloping Heart Rate Patterns a. Fatigue or Heat Accumulation b. Frustration 3. Peak Loads C. Use of Recovery Heart Rate Information To Evaluate Work Stress and Individual Fitness Level 1. Recovery From Physical Work-Indication of Fitness Levels 2. Recovery From Emergency Stress-Duration Effect 3. Recovery Heart Rates with Light Activity 4. Recovery From Work in the Heat 5. Whole-Body Fatigue From Sleep Loss D. Use of Individual Heart Rate Data to Assess Group Responses to Job Demands References Chapter 10. Estimation of the Energy Demands of Jobs A. Primary Physical Effort Requirements B. Supplementary Physical Effort Requirements C. Estimate of Total Job Energy Demands 174 176 177 178 179 179 180 181 183 183 183 186 186 186 186 191 192 194 199 200 xi PART IV. Patterns of Work 203 Chapter 11. Work/Rest Cycles 206 A. Physically Demanding Jobs 1. Dynamic Work .;i.. Duration and Intensity Relationships rb. Estimating the Percentage of Maximum Aerobic Capacity Used c. Guidelines for Acceptable Workloads in Dynamic Tasks d. Determining Rest or Recovery Times Needed in Dynamic Tasks 2. Static Work 3. Environmental Effects-Heat and Humidity B. Light Effort and Perceptual Work 1. Performance Effects 2. Guidelines to Reduce Performance Decrements in Light Effort and Perceptual Work a. Varying the Tasks b. Making the Tas�s Easier to Do References Chapter 12. Work Pace A. Variability in Work Rate B. Machine Pace and Productivity-A Case Study 1. The Job 2. The Analysis of Job Requirements 3. Determination of the Time Stress on the Operator 4. An Ergonomic Approach to Reducing the Machine-Pacing Pressure C. Job Pacing and Stress D. Design Guidelines for Paced Jobs References Chapter 13. Repetitive Work A. Repetitive-Motion Disorders B. Individual and Task Factors Associated with Repetitive-Motion Disorders 1. Individual Factors 2. Job and Workplace Factors C. Guidelines for the Design of Jobs with Repetitive Activity 1. General Guidelines :· �pee�� D��ign Guidelines 209 210 210 210 213 213 217 220 222 222 223 224 226 227 230 232 234 234 234 236 237 237 240 241 244 246 247 249 251 253 254 255 �xii CONTENTS CONTENTS 4. Management of Repetitive-Motion Disorders in the Workplace References Chapter 14. Training A. Job Design That Minimizes Training Time B. Physically Demanding Jobs-Training Guidelines C. Training Programs 1. Learning and Skill Acquisition in Training Programs a. Task Complexity b. Abilities of Trainees c. Ability of Trainers d. Type and Amount of Training 2. Training Methods a. Lectures b. On-the-Job Training and Simulation c. Job Rotation d. Sound Motion Pictures and Videotapes e. Demonstrations and Other Visual Aids 3. Training Aids in the Workplace References 256 257 260 262 266 267 268 268 268 269 269 271 271 272 272 272 273 273 274 PART V. Hours of Work 275 Chapter 15. Overtime 276 A. Job Demands in Relation to Choosing Overtime Schedules 1. Psychosocial Factors 2. Physical and Environmental Job Demands 3. Mental and Perceptual Job Demands B. Other Factors Affecting Productivity in Overtime Schedules 1. Measuring Productivity 2. Type of Pay Plan-Incentive or Time-Based 3. Worker- or Machine-Paced Jobs C. Overtime by Increasing the Days Worked Per Week D. Guidelines for Overtime Scheduling References Chapter 16. Shift Work-Use and Effects A. The Need for Shift Work B. Patterns of Use of Shift Work 1. Type of Industry 2. Availability of Skilled Labor 3. Nature of the Work 279 279 279 281 282 282 283 283 283 283 284 286 288 289 290 292 293 4. The Economics of Shift Work and Product Profit Margin 5. Flexibility for Supervision C. Factors to Consider in Designing Shift Work Schedules 1. Job Performance a. Measuring Productivity b. Error Rates . c. Accident Rates 2, Psychosocial Effects a. Worker Behavior b. Leisure Activity c. Family Life References Chapter 17. Shift Schedules A. Five-Day Shift Schedules 1. Two Eight-Hour Shifts 2. Three Eight-Hour Shifts-Three-Shift Discontinuous Schedules 3. Twelve-Hour Shifts B. Seven-Day Shift Sche.dules 1. Eight-Hour Shifts ...'._ Fixed 2. Eight-Hour Shifts-"Weekly" Rotation 3. Eight-Hour Shifts-Rapid Rotation 4. Eight-Hour Shifts-Combination Fixed and Rotating 5. Twelve-Hour Shifts 6. Combination Eight- and 12-Hour Shifts _C. Special Five- and Seven-Day Shift Schedules 1. Five-Day with Consistent Saturday Overtime 2. Reduced Hours Per Week-Weekday/Weekend Plan 3. Reduced Hours Per Week-40 Hours or Less, Five or Nine Crews References Chapter 18. Alternative Work Schedules and Guidelines for Shift Workers A. Alternative Work Schedules 1. Flextime 2. Compressed Work Weeks 3. Part-Time Employment and Job Sharing B. Guidelines for the Design or Selection of Shift Systems . C. Guidelines for Shift Workers 1. Sleeping 2. Digestion References xiii 294 295 295 295 295 297 297 299 299 299 301 301 304 306 307 308 310 311 312 313 313 316 317 320 321 321 321 322 324 326 328 328 330 331 332 333 333 335 336 �xiv CONTENTS CONTENTS PART VI. Manual Materials Handling 337 Chapter 19. Manual Handling in Industry 338 A. Manual Handling and Musculoskeletal Problems B. Strategies for Reducing Manual Handling Injuries 1. The Systems Approach 2. Education-Teaching People to Lift 3. Selection 4. Redesigning Workplaces and Jobs References Chapter 20. Factors Impinging on the Manual Handling of Materials A. Grasp 1. Pinch or Precision Grasp 2. Power or Cylindrical Grasp 3. Oblique Grasp 4. Hook Grasp 5. Palm-Up and Palm-Down Grasps B. Design of Handles for Manual Handling Tasks References Chapter 21. Design and Selection of Containers, Hand Carts, and Hand Trucks A. Trays 1. Weight 2. Size 3. Stability 4. Grasping Characteristics 5. Large Trays B. Shipping Cases and Boxes 1. Case Dimensions a. Guidelines for New Case Design b. Implications of Exceeding the Recommended Dimensions c. Effect of Lifting Frequency on Acceptable Weight and Case Dimensions d. Maximum Dimensions 2. Provision of Handholds C. Hand Carts and Trucks 1. Selection of Manual versus Powered Trucks and Carts 2. Design and Selection Factors a. Wheels and Casters b. Handle Type and Location ..., T...... 1�1.,- ".'llo't"lrl r'3 .....f- n;manc;nnc 3. Handling Factors References Chapter 22. Exerting Forces 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 A. B. C. D. Chapter 23. Lifting 348 350 350 352 352 355 356 357 359 360 362 362 363 364 364 368 368 370 371 371 372 373 373 374 376 376 378 378 379 Horizontal Forces Away from and Toward the Body Ver�ical Pushing and Pulling Tr�nsverse or Lateral Forces Applied Horizontally Forces Developed by the Hand References i ! A. Factors Contributing to the Acceptable Weight for Lifting B. The NIOSH Manual Lifting Guidelines and Industrial Tasks 1. The Assumptions Behind the Guidelines 2. The Guidelines for Occasional Lifts 3. Frequent Lifting 4. Other Limits to Lifting Capability C. Occasional Lifts-Two Hands, Sagittal Plane, Compact Load 1. Guidelines 2. Load Location a. Distance in Front of the Body b. Height Above the Floor 3. Actions Defined by Weight-Limit Curves D. Guidelines for Repetitive Lifts 1. Low Lifts 2. Higher Lifts E. Guidelines for One-Handed Lifting References Chapter 24. Carrying and Shoveling A. Carrying B. Shoveling 1. Factors of Concern in Shoveling 2. Guidelines for Shoveling Workload References i:. �pter 25. Special Considerations in Manual Handling Tasks ,ti.. Drum, Carboy, and Bag Handling 1. Prum Handling a. Metal Drums b. Nonmetal 208-Liter (55-Gallon) Drums c. Fiber Drums � •, . 2. Carboy Handling xv 380 381 384 387 389 391 391 392 394 396 397 397 399 401 401 403 403 406 406 406 407 408 408 412 412 414 418 420 421 423 424 425 426 428 428 428 433 433 434 �xvi CONTENTS CONTENTS 3. Bag Handling a. Chemical and Food Bags b. Mail Bags B. Wooden Pallet Handling C. Large-Size Sheet Handling D. Two-Person Handling References 434 434 439 439 441 443 444 PART VII. Appendices 445 Chapter 26. Apppendix A: Human Capacities and Job Demands 446 A. Anthropometric Information for Biomechanical Analyses 1. Body Size and Segment Length 2. The Masses and Centers of Gravity of Body Segments 3. The Ranges of Joint Motion 4. Muscle Cross-Sectional Areas B. Muscle Strength Data 1. Forearm Flexion and Extension 2. Forearm Rotation and Movements of the Hand at the Wrist 3. Grip Strength 4. Shoulder Flexion Strength 5. Isometric Lifting Strengths and Push-Pull Forces 6. Male-Female Strength Comparisons C. Aerobic Work Capacity 1. Whole-Body Maximum Aerobic Capacities 2. Upper Body Maximum Aerobic Capacity 3. Maximum Aerobic Capacities for Lifting Tasks D. The Energy Requirements of Occupational Tasks 1. Light Effort 2. Moderate Effort 3. Heavy Effort 4. Very Heavy Effort 5. Extremely Heavy Effort References Chapter 27. Appendix B: Methods to Evaluate Maximum Capacities and to Measure Job Demands A. Strength Testing in Industry 1. Static Stength-Testing Techniques a. Standard Procedures for Static Muscle Strength Testing (1) Measurement of Static Strength (2) Subject Description 448 448 449 451 452 453 462 463 466 469 469 472 473 475 479 480 480 482 482 482 483 485 492 496 498 498 498 499 499 (3) Instructions to Subjects (4) Test Procedures (5) Reporting the Test Results b. Tray-Lifting Strength 2. Dynamic Strength Testing a. Psychophysical Methods .b. Isotonic Dynamic Tests , c. Isokinetic Strength Testing in Industry B. Aerobic Work Capacity Tests 1. Whole-Body Aerobic Capacity Tests a. General Design of Tests b. Examples of Capacity Tests 2. Upper Body Aerobic Capacity Tests C. Cardiovascular and Metabolic Measurements 1. Heart Rate 2. Blood Pressure 3. Minute Ventilation 4. Oxygen Consumption and Carbon Dioxide Production a. Oxygen Consumption b. Carbon Dioxide.Production D. Review of Trigonome'try for Biomechanical Analyses References Chapter 28. Appendix C: Problems A. Evaluation of Job Demands 1. Problem 1-Pulling Supply Rolls from Storage Shelves to a Transfer Truck 2. Problem 2-Air Gun Design and Static Muscle Loading B. Patterns of Work 1. Problem 3-Shipping Dock Workload 2. Problem 4-Determining Staffing Requirements for a Production Machine Operation 3. Problem 5-Repetitive Motion and Knife Handle Design 4. Problem 6-Repetitive Motions in a Packaging Job C. Hours of Work 1. Problem 7-Overtime versus Increased Labor to Accomplish a Task 2. Problem 8-Scheduling of a Maintenance Project D. Manual Materials Handling 1. Problem 9-Job Design for a Packaging Line 2. Problem 10-Loading Parts into a Hopper on an Assembly Machine 3. Problem 11-Weight of a Sample Case for a Sales Representative xvii 500 500 501 501 505 506 506 507 509 511 513 515 517 520 522 525 527 527 527 529 529 530 534 536 536 538 540 540 542 545 546 548 548 549 551 551 553 554 �CONTENTS xviii E. Strength and Capacity for Work 1. Problem 12-Floor Scrubber and Handle Design 2. Problem 13-Wrapping and Packing Job Suitability Selected Annotated Bibliography Relating to Ergonomics and Job Design 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. General Ergonomics The Physiological Basis of Work Evaluation of Job Demands Patterns of Work Hours of Work Manual Materials Handling Human Capacities Journals 555 555 556 559 559 560 561 563 563 565 566 567 List of Illustrations PART I. Chapter 1. Glossary 569 Figure 1-1: Index 591 PART II. Chapter 2. Figure 2-1: Figure 2-2: Figure 2-3: Figure 2-4: Figure 2-5: Figure 2-6: Figure 2-7: Strength Distributions of an Industrial Population Energy Supplies in the First Minutes of Moderately Heavy Work Gross and Microscopic Anatomy of Human Skeletal Muscle Length-Tension Curves As a Function of the Percentage of Maximum Strength Used Force-Velocity Curves at Different Percentages of Muscle Strength-Concentric and Eccentric Contractions The Lever Sy�tem of the Forearm The Effect of Joint Angle on Measured Force for Equal Muscle Forces Nervous System Centers Involved in Movement Control 14 27 29 33 35 37 38 40 Chapter 3. Figure 3-1: Figure 3-2: Figure 3-3: <figure 3-4: 4-1: 4-2: The Anatomy of the Circulatory and Respiratory Systems Muscle Capillaries Functional Lung Volumes at Rest and During Exercise Heart Rate Changes in Intermittent WorkSteady versus Nonsteady State 53 58 65 Terminology Used in Biorhythm Research Daily Variation in Plasma Cortisol Levels 73 75 66 �xx LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 4-3: Figure 4-4: Figure 4-5: Average Oral Temperature Readings During a 24-Hour Period Average Oral Temperatures of 17 Packaging Operators Average Oral Temperatures of Chemical Operators on a Rapidly Rotating 12-Hour Shift Schedule LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 79 80 Figure 7-25: Compressive and Shear Forces on the Low Back During Lifting Figure 7-26: Force and Acceleration Measurings During Lifting 84 Chapter 8. Figure �1: Figure iS-2: Figure 8-3: PART III. Chapter 5. Figure 5-1: Primary Analysis of a Perceived Problem in an Existing Job Figure 8-4: 100 Figure 8-5: Chapter 6. Figure 6-1: Figure 6-2: Examples of Timed Activity Analyses Identification of Problem Tasks in a Job 112 116 A First-Class Lever A Second-Class Lever A Third-Class Lever Torque Calculations Performance and Recovery Times as a Function of Percentage of Maximum Strength Capacity Calculating Muscle Force in a Static Equilibrium Condition A One-Handed Lifting Task Static Torque at the Elbow Joint in One-Handed Lifting Biomechanical Analysis of Box Handling Tray Lifting Lifting over a Vertical Obstruction Lifting with an Extended Reach Low Lifting of Sheet Materials Biomechanical Analysis of Two-Handed Load Carrying Biomechanical Analysis of Bending at the Waist Biomechanical Analysis of Three Lifting Techniques Sitting Posture at an Electronics Workbench Compressive Forces on a Lumbar Disc in Different Postures The Lever Arm of the Spine in Sitting and Standing Effects of Chair Design on Back Stress Maintenance Work with Elbow Elevation The Biomechanics of Shoulder Abduction Shoulder Moment Arm Differences in a Handling Task The Biomechanics of a Grasping Task 125 126 126 128 Figure 8-6: Chapter 7. Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure 7-1: 7-2: 7-3: 7-4: 7-5: Figure 7-6: Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure 7-7: 7-8: 7-9: 7-10: 7-11: 7--12: 7-13: 7-14: 7-15: 7-16: 7-17: 7-18: Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure 7-19: 7-20: 7--21: 7-22: 7-23: 7-24: Measurement of Motion with an Electrogoniometer Examples of Mechanical Force Transducers Using a Mechanical Force Transducer to Measure Pushing and Pulling Forces Measuring the Forces Required to Push or Pull a Hand Truck Using an Electronic Force Transducer to Measure the Forces Required in an Industrial Task Using a Triaxial Accelerometer to Measure Movement During an Assembly Task xxi 155 156 163 164 166 168 170 171 Chapter 9. 130 131 133 134 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 152 Measuring Job Demands by Electrocardiogram Example of a Fatigue Heart Rate Pattern Heart Rate Elevation with Machine Jam Stress Peak Heart Rate Response in Firefighting Heart Rate Recovery from Physical Effort Heart Rate Recovery from Emergencies Heart Rate Recovery with Light Effort or Rest During the Recovery Period Figure 9-8: Heart Rate Patterns During Work in the Heat Figure 9-9: Heart Rate Response Due to Sleep Loss Figure 9-10: Heart Rate Responses of Several People Doing the Same Job Figure 9-1: Figure 9-2: Figure 9-3: Figure 9-4: Figure 9-5: Figure 9-6: figure 9-7: 1 177 180 181 182 184 185 187 188 189 190 Chapter 10. ··• lfigure 10-1: Categories of Physical Effort-Intensity and Duration .· ,.figure 10-2: The Relationship Between Job Points and Average ::r Oxygen Consumption Requirements Effect of Duration on the Percent of Maximum Aerobic Work Capacity That Can Be Used for Dynamic Work Rest Allowance in Dynamic Work Rest Allowances for Static Effort Activities Effect of Work/Rest Cycle Patterns on Productivity in a Light Assembly Task 195 201 211 215 219 226 �xxii LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Chapter 12. Chapter 22. Figure 12-1: Variability in Time to Perform a Self-Paced Assembly Task 233 239 Figure 12-2: Catecholamine Excretion Rates in Different Occupations Figure 22-1: Transverse Force Application Chapter 14. Figure 14-1. Figure 14-2: Figure 14-3: Figure 14-4: Training Time on a Repetitive Assembly Task A Systems Approach to Training The Relationship of Task Performance to the Amount of Practice in Assembly Tasks Performance Curve Variations-The Effects of Practice with and without Feedback Figure 15-1: Workload Limits as a Function of Continous Hours Worked 264 269 270 271 281 Chapter 16. Figure 16-1: Response Time and Workload for Teleprinter Switchboard Operators on a Continuous Shift System 296 Figure 16-2: Number of Errors per Hour of the Day at Two Swedish Gasworks and a Paper Mill 298 PART VI. Chapter 20. 20-1: 20-2: 20-3: 20-4: 20-5: 20-6: 392 Chapter 23. PART V. Chapter 15. Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure xxiii Figure 23.-1: The NIOSH Guidelines for Occasional Lifts in the Sagittal Plane I Figure 23-2: The Vertical Location and Travel Distance Corrections of the NIOSH Manual Lifting Guide Guidelines for Occasional Lifts-Two Hands, ure 23-3: Fig Sagittal Plane, Compact Load Figure 23-4: Recommended Upper Limit for Design of Repetitive Lifting Tasks Below 76 cm (30 in.)-Two Hands, Sagittal Plane, Compact Load e 23-5: Frequency Adjustment for Medium-Height Range LiftsFigur Two Hands, Sagittal Plane, Compact Load Figure 23-6: Guidelines for the Upper Limit of Weight Lifted with One Hand at Heights from 63 to 127 cm (25 to 50 in.) Above the Floor 400 402 404 409 413 414 Chapter 24. Figure 24-1: Guidelines for Carrying Figure 24-2: Examples of One-Handed and Two-Handed Carrying 421 422 Chapter 25. Pinch or Precision Grasp Power or Cylindrical Grasp Oblique Grasp Hook Grasp Palm-Up and Palm-Down Grasps Recommended Handle Dimensions 351 353 354 355 356 358 21-1: Recommended Tray Dimensions 21-2: Examples of Tray Handholds 21-3: Comfort Ratings for Four Handle Configurations 21-4: Recommended Dimensions for Selected Tray Handle Types Figure 21-5: Large-Tray Handling Figure 21-6: Maximum Dimensions Recommended for New Shipping Case Design J:;'.;.,........ ..,.a ?1-7• �v:amnlP<: of Hand Carts and Trucks 364 365 366 Figure 25-1: Figure 25-2: F1gure 25-3: · Figure 25-4: Figure 25-5: lJgure 25-6: F,�ure 25-7: Examples of Chemical and Food Containers Manual Handling of Drums Drum Carts Tipping Aid for Emptying Bottles or Carboys Bag Handling Pallet Handling Techniques Large-Size Sheet Handling 429 430 432 435 436 440 442 Chapter 21. Figure Figure Figure Figure 367 369 371 375 re 26-1: Body Segment Length in Proportion to Stature-Males e 26-2: Body Segment Length in Proportion to Stature-Females e 26-3: Estimated Body-Segment Centers of Gravity Expressed as a Percent of Segment Length e 26-4: Ranges of Motion of the Forearm and Wrist "� 26-5: Ranges of Motion of the Arm and Shoulder f 26-6: Ranges of Motion of the Cervical Spine and Spine Rotation 451 452 454 456 457 458 �xxiv LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 26-7: Ranges of Motion of the Spine Figure 26-8: Ranges of Motion of the Knee and Ankle Figure 26-9: Effect of Elbow Angle and Velocity Changes on Elbow Flexor Torque in Men and Women Figure 26-10: Effect of Elbow Angle and Velocity Changes on Elbow Extensor Torque in Men and Women Figure 26-11: Effects of Grip Span on Maximum Isometric Grip Strength Figure 26-12: Grip Strength Changes with Wrist Position Figure 26-13: Maximum Isometric Push and Pull Forces Measured with a Force Transducer-Two Hands Close Together Figure 26-14: A Cumulative Frequency Distribution of the Maximum Aerobic Work Capacities Measured on a Treadmill Test 459 460 464 465 469 470 List of Tables 474 PART I. Chapter 1. 477 Table 1-1: Table 1-2: Chapter 27. Figure 27-1: Static Force Development and Recommended Measurement Time Figure 27-2: Equipment for Measuring Static Strength Capacities Figure 27-3: Measurement of Muscle Group Strengths for a Static Lifting Strength Study Figure 27-4: Vertical Lifting Locations for a Static Tray Lifting Force Study Figure 27-5: A Modified Isokinetic Device for Force and Velocity Measurements Figure 27-6: Force and Velocity Curves During a Simulated Isokinetic Tray Lift Figure 27-7: Whole-Body Aerobic Capacity Test Protocols Figure 27-8: Upper-Body Aerobic Capacity Test Protocols Figure 27-9: Heart Rate Calculations from the Electrocardiogram Figure 27-10: Heart Rate Monitoring Equipment Figure 27-11: Blood Pressure Measurement Figure 27-12: Effect of Heart Rate on the Diastolic Blood Pressure Reading Figure 27-13: Oxygen Consumption Measurement Figure 27-14: A Right Triangle for Trigonometric Analysis 499 502 Table 2-1: Table 2-2: 504 Chapter 3. 508 Table 3-1: Table 3-2: Table 3-3: 526 528 530 8 Types of Muscle Effort in Several Work Tasks Characteristics of Motor Units 22 31 Blood Flow Distribution in Different Working Conditions Circulatory Controls to Adjust Blood Flow During Work Circulatory and Respiratory Adjustments to Work 55 57 60 Departure and Arrival Time Coefficients Body Temperature Curve Adaptations to Different Work Schedules Average Hours of Sleep at Night Following Day-Shift Work Average Hours of Sleep on Several Shift Schedules 77 PART II. Chapter 2. 503 509 514 521 523 524 525 7 Ergonomic Input to the Job Design Process Job Design Factors that Contribute to Losses in Productivity Chapter 4. Table 4-1: Table 4-2: Table 4-3: Table 4-4: 81 87 89 Chapter 28. Figure Figure Figure Figure 28-1: 28-2: 28-3: 28-4: Paper Roll Handling Task Air Gun Design and Static Muscle Loading Production Machine Layout Meat Cutting Knife Handle and Grip Style 537 539 543 545 Uses of Job Evaluation Techniques Factors Analyzed to Assess the Physical Work Load on a Job Factors Measured to Assess Environmental, Mental, . and Perceptual Job Demands Performance Measures for Assessing Job Demands Physiological and Psychophysical Measures Used in the Assessment of Job Demands 96 102 103 104 105 �xxvi LIST OFTABLES Table 5-6: Table 5-7: Physiological and Psychophysical Measures Used in Characterizing Job Demands Strategies for Solving Job Problems LIST OFTABLES Table 13-3: 106 107 Table 13-4: Table 13-5: Chapter 6. Table 6-1: Table 6-2: Table 6-3: Table 6-4: Table 6-5: Job Activity Analysis for a Handler Timed Activity Analysis of Job Tasks and Effort Levels Analysis of Time-Shared Work Tasks in a Machine Operator's Job Work Cycle Analysis for a Shipping Dock Handler's Job Motion Analysis of a Graphic Artist 113 115 Primary Physical Effort Requirements Time Analyses-Percent of Time At Different Effort Levels per Shift Points-Primary Requirements Supplementary Physical Effort Requirements Points-Supplementary Requirements 196 Table 10-3: Table 10-4: Table 10-5: Table 14-1: 117 119 120 Table 15-1: Table 11-3: Table 11-4: Table 11-5: 214 216 218 221 225 Chapter 12. Table 12-1: Table 12-2: Percentage of Time Spent in Different Activities as a Function of Machine Speed Impact of Increased Machine Speed on Time for Inspecting One Pack of Product 235 236 Chapter 13. Table 13-1: Table 13-2: Body Part Affected-Upper Extremity Disorders Tasks and Occupations That May Aggravate Repetitive-Motion Disorders 247 248 Estimated Repetition Frequency Needed to Become Fully Skilled at a Task 263 Effect of Extended Hours of Work on Leisure Time 280 Chapter 16. 197 198 199 200 Table 16-1: Table 16-2: Table 16-3: Maximum Workloads for Whole-Body Dynamic Work Intermittent versus Continuous Work at an Extremely Heavy Workload Static Work Duration As a Function of Intensity Effect of Temperature on Time for Work at Different Effort Levels Work Improvement with Task Variation 252 254 250 PARTY. Chapter 15. PART IV. Chapter 11. Table 11-1: Table 11-2: Individual and Workplace Factors Associated with Repetitive-Motion Disorders Percent of Time in Different Hand and Wrist Positions and Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Grip Strength Reduction with Glove Use Chapter 14. Chapter 10. Table 10-1: Table 10-2: xxvii ;� . f Percent of Total Workers in Shift Work by Industry Type-Unite1 States, 1975 Percentage of Shift Workers on Three Schedules by Industry Type-United Kingdom, 1964 Shift Payment Differentials as a Percentage of the Minimum Hourly Rate-United Kingdom, 1968 291 293 294 Chapter 17. Five-Day Shift Schedules-Two Eight-Hour Shifts Five-Day Shift Schedules-Three Eight-Hour Shifts Five-Day Shift Schedules-12-Hour Shifts Seven-Day Shift Schedules-Eight-Hour Shifts, Fixed, 12 Crews Table 17-5: Seven-Day Shift Schedules-Eight-Hour Shifts, Weekly Rotation Seven-Day Shift Schedules-Eight-Hour Shifts, Rapid Rotation Seven-Day Shift Schedules-Eight-Hour Shifts, Combination Fixed and Rotating Seven-Day Shift Schedules-12-Hour Shifts Seven-Day Shift Schedules-Combination Eightand 12-Hour Shifts ": le 17-10: Special Shift Schedules-Five-Day Shifts with Consistent Saturday Overtime le 17-11: Special Shift Schedules-Reduced Hours per Week, Less Than 40 Hours Table 17-1: Table 17-2: Table 17-3: Table 17-4: 307 309 311 312 314 315 318 319 320 322 323 �xxviii LIST OF TABLES LIST OF TABLES PART VI. Chapter 21. Table 21-1: Perceived Effort in Large-Tray Handling Table 21-2: Impact of Increased Case Dimensions on the Acceptable Load for Manual Materials Handling Recommended Limits in the Selection of Hand Table 21-3: and Powered Trucks and Carts Chapter 22. Table 22-1: Recommended Upper Force Limits for Horizontal Pushing and Pulling Tasks Table 22-2: Recommended Upper Limits for Vertical Pushing and Pulling Forces in Standing Tasks 370 372 377 389 390 Chapter 23. Table 23-1: Factors Influencing the Suitability of Manual Handling Tasks Table 23-2: Weight Handled per Minute for Low Lifts as a Function of Item Weight and Lifting Frequency-Two-Handed Sagittal Plane Lifts of Compact Objects 398 411 Chapter 24. Table 24-1: Maximum Shoveling Workload for Three Conditions and Two Durations 424 Chapter 25. Table 25-1: Table 26-8: Maximum Isometric Torques in Handle and Key TurningForearm Pronation and Supitllation Maximum Isometric Torques Generated in Movements Table 26-9: of the Hand Around the Wrist Table 26-10: Maximum Grip Strength Values Table 26:-11: Maximum Isometric Shoulder Flexor Strength and Torque at Two Positions Table 26-12: Maximum Isometric Pull Strength on a Tray Table 26-13: Loss in Tray Pull Strength with Increasing Lift Height and Distance from the Ankles Table 26-14: Relative Muscle Strengths of Women and Men Table 26-15: The Whole-Body Maximum Aerobic Work Capacities of Industrial Men and Women Table 26-16: Comparisons of Whole-Body Maximum Aerobic Work Capacities for Industrial and Civilian Populations Table 26-17: Upper Body Maximum Aerobic Work Capacity as a Percent of Whole-Body Aerobic Work Capacity Table 26-18: Lifting Task Maximum Aerobic Capacities as a Function of Box Weight Table 26-19: Lift Effort Tasks Table 26-20: Moderate Effort Tasks Table 26-21: Heavy Effort Tasks Table 26-22: Very Heavy Effort Tasks Table 26-23: Extremely Heavy Effort Tasks Table 26-24: Effort Category Definitions in Terms of Aerobic Work Requirements xxix 466 467 468 471 472 473 475 476 478 479 481 483 484 486 488 490 492 Chapter 27. Maximum Number of Bags to Be Lifted per Shift by One Person 438 PART VII. Chapter 26. Table 26-1: Anthropometric Size Data-Centimeters Table 26-2: Anthropometric Size Data-Inches Table 26-3: Regression Equations for Estimating the Mass of Body Segments Table 26-4: Normal Ranges of Joint Motion Table 26-5: The Approximate Cross-Sectional Areas of Selected Muscle Groups Table 26-6: Isometric Forearm Flexion and Extension StrengthsOne Arm Table 26-7: Dynamic Forearm Flexion Strength and TorqueTwo Arms 449 450 453 455 461 Table 27-1: A Dynamic Lifting Profile for One Subject Lifting at a Velocity of One Meter per Second Maximum Simulated Lift Forces and Corresponding Vertical Heights Aerobic Demands of Step Test Work Levels Aerobic Demands of Treadmill Levels Aerobic Demands of a Staged Treadmill Task Used in Industrial Stress Testing Aerobic Demands of Bicycle Ergometer Work Levels Equations for the Estimation of Energy Expenditures During Various Activities Equivalents for Standard Units in Capacity Testing 510 511 515 516 517 518 519 520 462 463 "e 2R-,- Factors Influencing Selection of an Overtime Schedule An-::1lT7&'.."t�'"' ,,.....(. lAT..-.. .... 1., 1-. .... ....t f.-...,.. 0,...,,..,1, .... -.;._,.,.. T .;_.,.... (""\._,,....,,.,.,1--.....,r, 550 t::t::") �KODAK'S Ergonomic Design for People at wOrk mm • �T his newly updated, single-volume edition of the most respected and widely used guidelines to ergonomics in the workplace, Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work, offers a concise and straightforward presentation of information, data, and how-to guidelines for implementing solutions to human factors and ergonomics problems in industries worldwide. Written for those who are on the job but not necessarily professionally trained ergonomists, the principles and approaches detailed here have all been imple mented in real-world workplace environments and proven successful in reducing the potential for occupational injury, increasing the number of people who can perform a job, and improving employee performance on the job. More than 150 clear and informative illustrations and tables help convey data and information in eight sections: • Ergonomics design philosophy • Human reliability and information transfer • Evaluation of job demands • Work design • Workplace design • Manual handling in occupational tasks • Equipment design • Environment Complete with numerous case studies illustrating applied ergonomics, Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Second Edition is an essential guide for human factors and ergonomics specialists, engineers, and occupational health specialists. EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY, INC., is the global leader in imaging. Between 1911 and 1936, Kodak established a safety committee to evaluate workplace conditions, became a charter member of the National Safety Council, and opened a Medical Department and a Laboratory of Industrial Medicine and Toxicology. In 1960, Kodak formed an Ergonomics Department, which became a global force in ergonomic research, producing the first edition of Ergonomic Design for People at Work (Vol. 1: 1983, Vol. 2: 1986). Kodak is committed to maintaining its position as a leader in health, safety, and environmental performance, while driving continual improvements in operations and products. Cover Design, Anne Michele Abbott Subscribe to our free Engineering eNewsletter at www.wiley.com/enewsletters Visit www.wiley.com/engineering ffiWILEY wiley.corn �1 i Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work �Sec9nd Edition The Eastman Kodak Company WILEY John Wiley & Sons, Inc. �Contents This book is printed on acid-free paper. Copyright © 2004 by Eastman Kodak Company. All rights reserved. Previously published by Van Nostrand/Reinhold under the following titles: Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volume I, copyright © 1983 by Eastman Kodak Company, all rights reserved; Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volume II, copyright © 1986 by Eastman Kodak Company, all rights reserved. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey Published simultaneously in Canada No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by arty means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning, or otherwise, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without the prior written permission of the Eastman Kodak Company. Requests to the Eastman Kodak Company for permission should be addressed to Corporate Clearance, Eastman Kodak Com pany, 1999 Lake Avenue, Rochester, NY 14650-2218, (585) 588-6323, fax (585) 477-9752, e-mail: corpclr@kodak.com. Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher, Eastman Kodak Company, the editors and the contributors have used their best efforts in preparing this book, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this book and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particu lar purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives or written sales materials. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a professional where appropriate. Neither the publisher nor Eastman Kodak Company nor any or the editors or contributors shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages. For general information on our other products and services or for technical support, please con tact our Customer Care Department within the United States at (800) 762-2974, outside the United States at (317) 572-3993 or fax (317) 572-4002. Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available in electronic books. For more information about Wiley products, visit our web site at www.wiley.com. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data: Ergonimic design for people at work Eastman Kodak Company.-2nd ed. p. cm. ISBN 0-471-41863-3 (Cloth) 1. Human engineering-Handbooks, manuals, etc. I. Eastman Kodak Company. T59. 7 .E7145 2003 620. 8'2-dc21 2003001240 Printed in the United States of America 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Preface Acknowledgments XXV xxvii 1 Ergonomics Design Philosophy Ergonomics and Human Factors The Scope and Purpose of This Book Definitions The Benefits of Ergonomics and Human Factors Ergonomics at Eastman Kodak Company Ergonomics Program Characteristics in Other Companies Influences on Ergonomics Programs Regulatory Influences Level of Responsiveness Mature Ergonomics Efforts: Programs to Processes Participatory Ergonomics Specific Ergonomks Process Issues Globalization Integrating Productivity Enhancements Program Examples OSHA Ergonomics and Record-Keeping Agreement in a Manufacturing Facility A Mature Ergonomics Process in a Moderate to Heavy Manufacturing Facility Some Program/Process Traps to Avoid Summary An Ergonomics Problem-Solving Technique Background Sources Contributing to This Problem-Solving Technique The Problem-Solving Process Step 1: Identifying Jobs with Ergonomics Opportunities 1 1 1 2 2 3 5 5 5 6 8 10 11 11 12 13 13 15 16 17 18 18 18 19 19 V �vi Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work Step 2: Defining the Job Demands Step 3: Identify Risk Factors by Body Part for Each Task of Concern Step 4: For Each Risk Factor, Ask Why It Is Present Until a Dead End Is Reached Step 5: Develop Strategies for How to Address the Root Causes and Generate at Least Three Solutions for Each Task of Concern Step 6: Choose the Solution(s) That Will Substantially Reduce the Ergonomic Problems and Be Within Affordable Cost Guidelines for the Plant For Whom Do We Design? Accommodate the Functional Capacities and Capabilities of a Large Majority of the Potential Workforce Why Design for the Large Majority? Less Opportunity for Overexertion Injuries and Illnesses Flexibility in Staffing When People Are on Vacation Ability to Stay on the Job Longer Enhancement of Cellular or Modular Teamwork Ability to Meet EEO and ADA Regulations and Guidelines Determining Whom to Design for So Most People Can Work -Comfortably Designing Airplane and Auditorium Seating: Distribution of a Body Size Characteristic Buttocks-to-Popliteal Length (Upper Leg Length) Determining the Maximum Heights for Valves or Controls: Distribution of Overhead Reach (Standing) Determining Force Requirements for Performing a Repetitive Task (Manual Crimping): Distribution of Grip Strength Designing Tasks That Require Lifting Items Above Shoulder Height Determining Acceptable Workloads for Eight-Hour Shifts: Distribution of Aerobic Work Capacity Designing Tasks That Use Perceptual, Sensory, Cognitive, and Memory Capabilities Designing to Accommodate the Needs of Employees with Disabilities or Reduced Work Capacities General Design to Include People with Disabilities: Access Specific Accommodations for People with Disabilities: Workplaces 19 22 22 25 26 27 27 28 28 29 29 29 29 30 31 32 32 34 35 36 37 37 39 Contents vii The Effect of Aging on Perceptual and Cognitive Abilities Perceptual Abilities Cognitive Skills . Design of Lifting Tasks for People with Low Back Disorders Capacity and Capability Data Anthropometric Data The Data: United States Other Ethnic or Regional Data Range of Motion and Joint Centers of Motion Cautions on the Use of Anthropometric Data in Design Military Versus Industrial Population Data Using Anthropometric Data for Design When More than One Measurement Is Involved Muscle Strength Data Grip Strength Upper-Extremity Strengths Whole-Body Pulling Strength Aerobic Wor½; Capacities of the Workforce and Aerobic Demands of Tasks Aerobic Work Capacities Aerobic Demands of Some Occupational Tasks United States and International Standards Related to Ergonomics Internet Locations for European and International Standards International Standards International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Other International Standards Groups European Standards European Union (EU) Mandatory Directives Directive 89/391/EEC: Health and Safety at Work Noise Directive 86/188/EEC Machinery Directive 98/37/EC Safety of Machinery: Human Physical Performance Draft EN-1005 European Nonmandatory Standards United Kingdom (UK) Mandatory Regulations Nonmandatory Standards United States of America (USA) Occupational Safety and Health Act: Mandatory Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA): Public Law 101-336 40 40 42 44 45 46 47 51 55 58 58 59 62 63 64 65 65 67 70 74 75 75 75 76 76 76 78 78 79 79 79 79 79 80 80 80 80 �viii Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work. California Ergonomics Standard Washington State Ergonomics Standard Repealed Ergonomics Program Standard ANSI Standards ANSI/HFS 100-1988, American National Standard for Human Factors Engineering of Visual Display Terminals ASC Z-365, Management of Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders ASC Z-10, Occupational Health Safety Systems HFES 200, Software User Interface Standard ACGIH TLVs NIST Miscellaneous Standard-Setting Groups Canada British Columbia (BC) Ontario (ON) Canadian Standards Association (CSA) Australia National Occupational Health and Safety Commission (NOHSC) Comcare New South Wales (NSW) Workcover Authority Victorian Workcover Authority South Australian Workcover Authority Worksafe Western Australia Queensland Division of Workplace Health and Safety Workplace Standards Tasmania Australian Capital Territory (ACT) Northern Territory Work Health Authority Standards Australia Japan Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare National Institute of Industrial Safety (NHS) National Institute of Industrial Health (NIIH) Japanese Standards Association (JSA) Japan International Center for Occupational Safety and Health (JICOSH) 81 81 81 82 82 82 82 83 83 83 83 84 84 84 84 84 85 85 85 86 86 86 87 87 87 87 88 88 88 89 89 89 89 Contents Evaluation of Job Demands Principles Biomechanics Biomechanics of Posture Biomechanics of Holding Biomechanics of Gripping Dynamic Motion Static Muscle Work Dynamic Work Psychophysical Scaling Methods Psychophysical Scales Subjective Rating Methods Ratings of Perceived Exertion and Discomfort Analysis Methods Qualitative Methods Job Safety A,.p.alysis and Job Hazard Analysis Checklists Semiquantitative Methods MSD Analysis Guide Rodgers Muscle Fatigue Assessment Liberty Mutual Tables for Manual Materials Handling University of Utah Back Compressive Force Model Shoulder Moment ACGIH TLV for Hand Activity Level WISHA Hano-Arm Vibration Analysis Quantitative Methods Strength and Biomechanics Static Work: Endurance and Work/Recovery Cycles Dynamic Work: Endurance and Work/Recovery• Cycles Estimation of Metabolic Rate NIOSH Revised Lifting Equation Moore-Garg Strain Index Dynamic Work: Heart Rate Analysis ix 99 101 101 102 106 110 112 112 115 117 117 118 119 121 121 123 124 127 127 137 152 159 159 162 165 165 165 167 168 169 174 180 181 3 Workplace Design GeJJeral Workplace Layout and Dimensions Sitting Workplaces The Seated Work Area 191 191 194 194 �X Contents Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work Seated Workplace Height Standing Workplaces The Standing Work Area Standing Workplace Height Computer Workstations Selection of Computer Equipment Workstation Design Work Surface Dimensions and Design Clearances Under the Work Surface Work Surface Height Depth and Width of Work Surface Type of Work Surface Summary of Dimensions for Computer Workstations Workstation Layout · Workstation Placement Computer Equipment and Work Material Layout Laboratories General Principles of Laboratory Bench Design Workbench Equipment Installation Equipment Layout Containment Cabinets and Glove Boxes Containment Cabinets Glove Boxes Microscope Workstations Standing Workstation Seated Workstation Workstation Modifications Microscope Modifications Liquid Dispensing Stations Visual Work Dimensions Visual Field Viewing Angle Viewing Distance Size of Visual Targets Floors, Ranips, and Stairs Floors Floor Material Floor Maintenance Footwear Ramps 197 197 197 201 Stairs arid Ladders Stairs Stair Dimensions Stair Surfaces Visual Considerations in Stair Design Handrails Ladders and Step Stools Conveyors Adjustable Workstations Adjusting the Workplace Shape Location: Height and Distance Orientation Adjusting the Person Relative to the Workplace Chairs Support Stools, Swing-Bracket Stools, and Other Props Platforms, Step-Ups, and Mechanical Lifts Footrests Armrests Adjusting the Workpiece or the Product Jigs, Clamps, and Vises Circuit Board Assembly Parts Bins Lift Tables, Levelators, and Similar Equipment Adjusting the Tool (Design and Location of Tools) 203 203 204 206 208 208 211 212 213 213 214 215 217 218 218 219 220 220 221 223 224 226 226 226 227 227 228 228 230 233 233 234 237 237 238 239 240 xi 242 242 243 243 244 245 246 247 249 251 251 251 251 251 252 253 254 255 256 256 257 257 257 257 257 4 \ Equipment Design Overall Considerations Physical Capability Environment and Safety Maintainability · Areas to Consider When Planning Maintainability Requirements Prime Equipment Test Equipment Maintenance Manuals Tools Installation and Accessibility 269 270 270 272 273 273 274 274 274 274 274 �xii ' ! Contents Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work Connectors and Couplings Labeling Design of Displays Modes of Display Tactile/Haptic Mode Auditory and Visual Modes Equipment Visual Displays Light Displays Instrument Displays Dials and Gauges Digital Installation of Instrument Displays Electronic Displays Light-Emitting Diode (LED) Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) LCD or CRT? Plasma Display Panel (PDP) Installation of Displays Design of Controls Behavioral Stereotypes General Population Stereotypes Control Movement Stereotypes Display and Control Relationship Stereotypes (Compatibility) Design, Selection, and Location of Controls Location Spacing Shape Coding Control Resistance Types of Controls Computer Input Devices Keyboard Types of Keyboards Characteristics of Standard Keyboards Numeric Pad Alternative Keyboards Notebook Keyboards Mouse Trackball Mouse Versus Trackball 277 279 280 282 282 283 283 285 286 286 289 289 290 291 292 292 293 293 294 294 295 295 296 297 299 300 301 302 302 304 304 305 305 319 320 321 322 322 324 324 � xiii Joystick and Touchpad Graphic Tablet Touch Screen Voice Computer Interface Controls Understanding the User Understanding the Control System Technology Constraints Total System Structure . Designing Controls Matching the User's Expectations Limit Precision to What the User Needs Match Order of Control with Objective Make the System Consistent Make the System Flexible Control Relevant Data Keep False Alarm Rate Low Make Use qf Memory-Aid Principles Make Each Control Self-Explanatory Minimize the Need for the User to Translate, Transpose, Interpret, or Refer to Documentation Keep Input and Output Messages Brief to Minimize the Probability of Error Use Chunking for Lengthy Input and Output Provide Computer Prompts Provide Immediate Feedback Avoid Perceptual Saturation Aid Sequential and Timed Control Tasks Aid Seldom-Performed Control Tasks Group Controls Consistency in Grouping Label Controls Label Coding Code Selection Feedback Negative Response Response Time Error Messages and Error Handling Control Integration Wide Angle Landmarks 1 324 325 325 326 328 329 329 329 330 331 331 332 332 332 332 332 333 333 333 333 334 334 334 334 334 334 334 334 335 335 335 336 336 336 337 337 337 337 337 �xiv Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work Overlap Evaluation Reiteration Task-Based Evaluation Talk-Through Mockup Procedure Usability Testing Tool Design Postural Stress and Muscle Fatigue During Tool Use Pressure Points on the Hand Safety Aspects of Hand Tool Design Design and Selection Recommendations for Hand Tools Handle Design Switches and Stops Other Tool Characteristics Special-Purpose Tools Pipettes Design to Reduce Repetition Design to Reduce Forces, Especially on the Thumb Lay Out the Workstation to Adopt a Neutral, Relaxed Posture Evaluation and Selection of Equipment List of Criteria Evaluation Scales and Scale Weighting Evaluation Step Scoring Overall Ranking 338 339 339 340 341 341 341 342 343 346 347 349 349 350 351 352 354 354 354 357 358 359 359 360 361 363 5 Human Reliability and Information Transfer Human Reliability Human Reliability Analysis (HRA) Techniques Techniques for Human Error Rate Prediction (THERP) Success Likelihood Index Methodology (SLIM) Human Error Assessment and Reduction Technique (HEART) Absolute Probability Judgment (APJ) Cautions When Using HRAs Information Transfer Warnings 373 373 374 375 376 379 380 381 382 382 Contents Visual Warnings Auditory Warnings Speech Signals Nonspeech Signals Evacuation Alarms Alarms and Ear Protection Auditory Icons Instructions Coding Alphanumeric Coding Shape Coding Color Coding Forms and Surveys Question Design Survey Design Data Analysis Labels and Signs Compreheq�ibility Legibility Readability xv 384 386 386 387 390 390 391 392 395 395 396 398 398 400 401 401 402 402 402 404 6 Work Design Organizational Factors in Work Design · The Importance of Organizational Factors in Work Design· Organizational Factors Influencing Job Demands Organizational Demands and Stressors and Their Management Workplace Stressors Associated with Occupational Illnesses 'Stressors in a Computer-Based Workplace Macroergonomics Organizational Factors Contributing to Occupational Stress from the Workers' Perspective Guidelines to Improve the Organizational Factors in Job Design General Guidelines The Design of Work in a Job Shop Production Department 411 411 411 412 412 413 413 414 415 417 417 419 �xvi Contents Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work Characteristics of Job Shop Work The Impact of Job Shop Scheduling on Workers Design Guidelines to Reduce the Stress of Job Shop Work on Workers Hours of Work: Shift Work and Overtime Introduction and Regulations Shift Work and Employee Health and Safety Coronary Heart Disease (CHO) Psychosocial factors Sleep 8-Hour shifts Versus 12-Hour shifts Overtime Considerations Aging Considerations Shift Work Characteristics The Shift Work Design and Redesign Process Case Study: Shift Schedule Redesign Project History Alternative Work Scheduling (AWS) Process Outline Outcomes Conclusions Ergonomic Work Design Goals in the Design of Jobs The Measurement of Work Capacities Designing to Minimize Fatigue Signs of Fatigue Workload and Fatigue Static Muscle Work Mechanisms of Static Muscle Fatigue Recognizing Static Work Work Design to Reduce Static Work Dynamic Work Mechanisms of Dynamic Work Fatigue Recognizing Dynamic Work Work Design to Reduce Dynamic Work Demands Job/Task Control Physical Fitness of the Workforce Job Rotation The Design of Repetitive Work Job Risk Factors Individual Risk Factors Guidelines for the Design of Repetitive Work 419 420 421 421 421 422 422 422 423 423 424 424 425 425 427 427 428 432 433 435 435 436 436 436 437 438 438 441 441 442 442 444 446 447 447 448 449 449 452 455 ·' General Guidelines Specific Design Guidelines Hand Tool Design for Repetitive Tasks Management of MSDs in the Workplace Special Considerations: Design of Ultra-Short-Cycle Tasks Definitions and Concerns Estimating Local Muscle Fatigue on Short-Cycle and Highly Repetitive Tasks Predicting Accumulated Fatigue Responding to Short-Term, Highly Repetitive Task Demands Example: Predicting Muscle Fatigue in Short-Duration,High Volume Tasks to Determine Labor Needs or Line Speed Changes Ergonomic Design Approaches to Reduce Local Muscle Fatigue The Design of Visual Inspection Tasks Measures of Inspection Performance Individual Factors Physical and Environmental Factors Task Factors Organizational Factors Guidelines to Improve Inspection Performance Ergonomics in the Construction Industry The Need for Ergonomics in the Construction Industry Construction Job Factors and MSDs Responsibility fot Ergonomics Controlling Risk Factor Exposure Ergonomics Interventions in Construction The Participatory Process Example of Ergonomic Interventions Building a Plant Drywall Installation Bricklaying Operating Heavy Equipment (, Manuai Materials Handling ·.•· LL· Summary )'}:Y�rk Design in Laboratory and Computer Workplaces i::>. Laboratory Task Design: Pipetting Adopt a Neutral, Relaxed Posture. Control the Amount of Continuous Time on the Task xvii 455 456 457 457 458 458 459 465 466 467 469 469 470 470 473 478 481 484 485 485 486 489 490 491 491 492 492 493 493 494 495 495 496 496 496 496 �Contents Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work xviii Work Patterns in Computer Tasks Recovery Breaks Training Programs for Office Ergonomics 497 497 498 7 Manual Handling in Occupational Tasks 11 Background: Manual Handling and Musculoskeletal Injuries and Illnesses Types of Musculoskeletal Overexertion Injuries Seen in Manual Handling Tasks Muscle Overexertion Injuries Muscle Overuse Injuries Inflammatory Response to a Sustained or Repetitive Load Work-Related.Musculoskeletal Disorders Strategies to Reduce Manual Handling Risk Factors Materials Flow Analysis Unit Load Principle Mechanization Principle Standardization Principle Adaptability Principle Dead Weight Principle Gravity Principle Automation Principle Education of Handlers Types of Training Guidelines for Lifting Training Two-Person Handling Training One-on-One Lifting and Force Exertion Training Training Handlers on the Use of Handling Assist Devices Training in the Use of Back Belts and Gloves Selection Redesigning the Jobs and Workplaces Guidelines For the Design of Manual Lifting Tasks Factors That Contribute to Acceptable Weights for Lifting The Size of the Object Lifted: Container Design Tray Design Case Dimensions Location of the Lift 511 511 511 511 512 512 512 513 513 513 513 513 513 514 514 514 515 515 515 515 516 517 518 518 519 520 521 521 521 526 .· 527 i' Horizontal Distance from the Hands to the Lower Spine Horizontal Location of a Lift Vertical Height at the Beginning and End of the Lift Vertical Distance of the Lift· The Degree of Asymmetry of the Lift The Type of Grip Used Environmental Factors Stable Footing Stable Grasps Stability of the Load Guidelines for the Design of Occasional Lifts NIOSH Guidelines for the Design of Occasional Manual Lifts Percentage of Population Finding Lifts Acceptable Based on Location and Weight Han<!ling Doors into a Carousel on a Car Assembly Line Handling Items to Shelves in a Chemical Storeroom Guidelines for the Design of Frequent Lifting Tasks Metabolic Factors Contributing to Acceptable Loads Local Muscle Fatigue Determinants of Acceptable Loads Guidelines for the Design of Carrying Tasks, Shoveling, and One-Handed Lifting Tasks Carrying (Two-Handed) Shoveling One-Handed Lifting Special Considerations in Manual Lifting Task Design Manual Pallet Handling Drum Handling Carboy and Large Bottle Handling Bag Handling . . ·. , >. 6 · Large-Size Sheet or Wallboard Handling ;c;he Design of Force Exertion Tasks J1hHorizontal Forces Away from and Toward the Handler: ' Hand Cart and Truck Design Guidelines tOther Horizontal Forces: Overhead, Seated, and Kneeling - Vertical Pushing and Pulling Transverse or Lateral Forces Applied Horizontally , Hand Forces . xix 527 527 527 527 527 528 528 529 529 529 529 530 530 533 533 534 535 536 537 537 538 539 540 540 542 545 548 551 552 553 557 558 559 559 �xx Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work Contents 8 Environment Lighting and Color Visual Work Demands Basic Light Terminology Recommended Illuminance Levels Quality Issues Age of the User Glare Shadows Room Appearance Natural Sunlight Lighting Design Types of Lamps Direct and Indirect Luminaires Task or Supplementary Lighting Special Lighting Conditions Computer Workplace Lighting Inspection Workplace Lighting Darkroom Lighting Color Noise Hearing Loss Annoyance and Distraction Interference with Communication Measuring Noise Levels Instrumentation and Measurement When and Where to Make Noise Measurements How to Make Noise Measurements Performance Effects of Noise Approaches to Reducing Noise in the Workplace Special Considerations Thermal Environments Thermal Balance Heat Exchange for the Whole Body Heat Exchange for Local Skin Surface Assessment of the Thermal Conditions Environment Work Demands Clothing 565 565 565 566 566 567 567 567 569 570 571 572 572 574 574 575 575 575 576 576 578 579 579 582 584 584 585 585 586 587 588 588 589 589 591 592 592 594 594 ,, ik � f, � Qualitative Assessment Thermal Comfort Thermal Comfort Zone Factors Affecting the Feeling of Comfort Temperature Humidity Air Speed Workload Clothing Radiant Heat Warm Discomfort and Heat Stress Warm Discomfort Heat Stress General Controls Job-Specific Controls Special Cases: Hot Surfaces and Breathing Hot Air Cool Discomfort and Cold Stress Cool Discoi;µfort Cold Stress General Controls Job-Specific Controls Vibration Introduction Measurement of Vibration Accelerometers Vibration Frequency Analysis Resonance Evaluation of Human Vibration Whole-Body Vibration Exposure Guidelines Hand-Arm Vibration Guidelines Vibration Reduction and Control Source Control Path Control Receiver Control xxi 595 596 600 601 601 602 602 602 603 603 604 604 607 607 608 611 612 614 615 617 617 617 617 619 620 620 623 623 626 626 626 627 628 629 635 651 681 �Contributors Steve M. Belz, Ph.D. Eastman Kodak Company Rochester, New York Chapter 5 Thomas E. Bernard, Ph.D., CPE University of South Florida Tampa, Florida Chapter 2, Chapter 4. Chapter 6. Chapter 8 Somadeepti N. Chengalur, Ph.D., CPE Eastman Kodak Company Rochester, New York Chapter 1, Chapter 2, Chapter 3, Chapter 4, Chapter 8 Thomas M. Cook,; Ph.D. University of Iowa Iowa City, Iowa Chapter 2 Donald E. Day Consultant Chapter 1, Chapter 6 Leslie B. Herbert, Ph.D. Eastman Kodak Company Rochester, New York Chapter 5 Nancy E. Laurie, Ph.D., AEP Eastman Kodak Company Rochester, New York Chapter 2 Rob G. Radwin, Ph.D., CPE University of Wisconsin Madison, Wisconsin Chapter 8 Suzanne H. Rodgers Consultant in Ergonomics Rochester, New York Chapter 1, Chapter 2, Chapter 4, Chapter 6, Chapter 7 tjohn C. Rosecrance, Ph.D., CPE University of Iowa Iowa···City, Iowa · Chapter 6 ·· arol Stuart-Buttle, CPE Stuart-Buttle Ergonomics Philadelphia, · Pennsylvania Chapter 1, Chapter 3, Chapter 4, Chapter 6, Chapter 7 )1a N. Thompson Emb ry-Riddle Aeronautical University Daytona each, Florida �'.;hapter 5 :r xxiii �:xxiv Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work Dennis A. Vicenzi, Ph.D. Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Daytona Beach, Florida Chapter 1, Chapter 5 Robert S. Weneck, CPE Eastman Kodak Company Rochester, New York Chapter 8 Inger M. Williams, Ph.D. Cergos Rochester, New York Chapter 2, Chapter 3, Chapter 6 John A. Wise, Ph.D., CPE Honeywell, AES Phoenix, Arizona Chapter 4 Mark A. Wise, Ph.D. IBM Global Services Raleigh, North Carolina Chapter 4 Preface The application of human factors/ergono mics pri nciples to the w orkplace has been of interest to Eastman Kodak Company for many y e ars. Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volumes I and II (published in 1983 and 1986, respectively) summarized data, experience, and thoughts assem bled from the published literature, i nternal research, and ob servations by the members of the Human Factors S ection/Ergono mics Group at Eastman Kodak Company. Almost twenty y ears later, the field has evolved, much work and research has taken place both inside and outside Eastman Kodak Company, and there are many more publications in the field of industrial human factors/ergonom ics. However, we still think there is a continued need for a practical discussion ofissues such as design (workplace, e quipment, j ob, and environment), analy sis (of j obs, e quipment, and workplaces), and the link to people 's abilities. To reflect the spread and gro wth of information, Kodak and the editors have · drawn on expertise outside the company to update and revise the material in the original books. In response to a number of comments and re quests from users of the Kodak books, this edition has been condensed to one volume. However, the focus of this work has. not changed: to distill a lot of information and give fairly simple and straightforward guidelines and how-tos that can be used by people who are not professionally trained ergonomists. A basic understanding and knowledge of science, mathematics, and terminology on the part of the reader is assumed. One of the criteria for inclusion of material is that it ha s been tried in the plants, and it works ! In many instances, this . book provides alternative way s of addressing ergonomics problems in the workplace com. j:,a:red to the traditional biomechanical and modeling approaches that are •··· given in other books. · " . The goal of this book is to provide information of a practical nature that an b e used to solve problems i n the workplace. The intended audience is ractitioners, rather than researchers, and so the book is not a compendium state-of-the art human factors and ergono mics i nformatio n. The selectio n material has been guided by the typ es of problems the authors have been �ed to address in industrial settings. The guidelines and examples of · roaches to design problems are most often drawn from case studies. The _dp les have been successfully applied in the workplace to reduce the XXV �xxvi Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work potential for occupational injury, increase the �umber of p�ople �ho can perform a job, and imp rove perfor mance on the J o h, thereby mcreasmg pro ductivity and quality. It is our hope that the experience gained from problem solving in an industrial setting by a group that includes many disciplines, will be of value to ial will be others with fewer resources available to them, and that the mater industries in blems ro p useful in the solution of human factors and ergonomics in many countries. Acknowledgments We would like to thank especially all the contributors for the previous edition, without whose work we would not have this book. In particular, we would like to mention: •l: i t Stanley H. Caplan Paul C. Champney Kenneth G. Corl Brian Crist William H. Cushman " Harry L. Davis Elizabeth Eggleton Thomas S. Ely Terrence W. Faulkner Deborah Kenworthy David M. Kiser Richard M. Little Richard L. Lucas Carol McCreary Thomas J. Murphy Waldo J. Nielsen Richard E. Pugsley Suzanne H. Rodgers William Sabia John A. Stevens For this edition of the book, particular thanks go to Kay S. Marsh for working so hard behind .the scenes to make sure this book was publishable. Chris Devries from K-odak Imaging services is responsible for much of the art work, uncomplainingly accepting each change in specifications for the art work. And, of course, thanks to Chris Pergolizzi and Apat'na Sharma for scan. ning anything that could be scanned into an electronic file. To R. Hays Bell, David M. Kiser, and John O'Donoghue, thanks for their '/guidance and support throughout the long months this book was "in pro \.cess." Finally, we want to thank all of y ou who have written, telephoned or therwise let us know that an update was too long in coming. Thanks in part ·'your requests, this edition of the book has finally been put together. Somadeepti N. Chengalur :xx:vii � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Description An account of the resource Dr. Rodgers was a significant contributor of the Eastman Kodak series: Ergonomic Design for People at Work. This includes the table of contents, figures and tables in Volume 1 and 2 of the 1st Edition and the 2nd Edition. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_004 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-18 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 44 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/37633cf33a9a7588d5ecdc1574e53d3c.pdf 92de532789e3dd301083bc45793fe971 PDF Text Text A sample of pages in the layout process for Dr. Rodgers’ book, Working with Backache. �_I - --------------Workmg \1 tl" dm v r1 ~ .. .. .. I ~ .. t -t 1 ., Tim~> C'l t " >rtica 1me nE>E:dP0 +o re:::to f· Dynami,;: Work- A~P t hve Ma u J"he, ear( QO h lor ;~I to prov dE? Rd~q.Ja,f r"' ~ws1rJ at1on ic, toldt. r: a• J t) CletPrrrtne n lftl 0 • hole '1ody '1t gL e r t'1"5 tasKs So tt l. y ar (j t . C'l ~ ~ ~ t ~(' t t 1- ~ I" t + 0'- 1- t t . I t .. -o t .. ~ 1e t + . tO 1r€d to of r;r~mrrO'l t ~ I ')E'E. n j. 1- t r" ~ L/'1 ~ It t tdt + Vfl ·to~ f 8L + tl ur ot riods t'1e (l t .. ~ t t t d I tL nt.y AN A t I..Jrt the .r LR UVERY EDS + 0 t M I... c.. t '1 0 t r ~) f l c )( ul , •i.Jn of I C dOto 7 "'e::se dC't :::: in t!le ta )(J)/ I JC'1 Overy , !l' • l~.Jde .... t t ..Jctt..rec -. avoid < curr<ulat1ro f, 1 1 .ht..: c .... t VP mu& t5 _,ne ha~ t< .::onsider ot 1 loca m.J I v'10 ~ >I ,Jtent I~ of tt e job. 1e ~orrru ca l,... of tne ntensity drd dural-tor t..scle qr lJps. The pot r t.al f >r fa quE. " .... .., tirre of exe Jr and the ~ C:rcf 1t of max in •he postures It the vvc ~, q ute m1 ~..- P.xert ons exceed 6 ~t. 1 ..Jte, Ia~. ct muse e fct gu~ c;, Jr 1...n JS<;' the recovery t• ,' 1dJqt..alP fo mu •ratE.• v vy we rk 1:: f n if tt--e static wor [ "vP(flo ft:Jit.1JsJgge~· •1 ttrc tst<.l appror:natt:, e she rt c.ont r ..J" !l' scl~e contr [ t t rres followed by 3hort rocovery t1m )<: ~' '1 ~t esult II"' i"'f tHJI'd up vf SOme fat Q Je pr0ctuc ts in 1 E' rr u~ ( Who I I factor l IS/ "1 t I I • I �-- I ..I - ----- s caal Workplac t d" for P "; N +- ve IX) ... I< "" --· lo •r€! o �128 Workmg W1th 6 ck Spcc'al Wok 1St: of ;JOrtun •b d posw1 ch , p for Peopl V'i til c H r p "' • are frE'"" "'" vt fo(1t Pt.dal (.) It;. JSE: ~ ::' 'w a t:t" c.. 0 •r c.. ,...., OC" • L"' S.J R fin "o s n $ O..o.. f) t J(> If t t G 0 t Hl 'lr + -:>r 1a )"t.... Z" + (.)= mt t ... ~(. :.:: 0 >: :.J 0>(0 a._,"<t n.uco 1c--.t (/)Ur-!, en co co C(lll- u..J'~ ("') "T'" fQ<~ + ffi- "'J' 0..0 + fv€ i - -.L t h t '!e 1 s .... l lp �_l w 102 + N 1 00 •oortL ... X ... '" ~ f f ~ ~ u 0 '11 ci50.. t.:8 + '1) '>( uo ?.. n oJ'\ ...1 + ..,£\~> + + y e an dll Co .. ~ next e~fo t Man ~ F the lonLJe es1qr ..... + a :::' +- "' .. ( + o- .. 20 + t ~ './'J 0.. + + �I_ I -----------------------------------------------~~----~- 10 .. Workm With Ba ka ~ ~ ~ .. N + + ~ chuc of 00 Th l<" ....,akes it e + ""' t... a s be v 1r1<er s ~ + t • ~ t .;,! tJ + ~ ~~ (.) + ~ t- .. .. -+ ~ + ~ + t + 0 M M t ~ ~ ... l- .. + ~ + (") + ~ ~ + ~ + ~ -o + + )-.:> 2:crl t + o- ct" t ~Ul j- + t- + 8~ + a.. Clu;> '>j~ ~ t- ~ .. t .. ('< + + + + "" + (/)()to!. CD + + (/) «< a:~'- + w-"C\1 c:..- _<( (/) > ~ ....J- c coEfi: :::u~ a..o t-£: (/)'- t ~ + ~ l- LUo ==:z El~ ('< 0~ .... ... L + + ~-: + ---I~G a..~(b ...J.C-t + :ct..,£2 co ~ + + < + ~ - )( t .. L "' <Q ';jO. ~ + .. r t t --+ X ~ .. .. Anu ~ 00 ...... <; s ~ ... atwo D Design of Manual Handling T +- J Irs- ��Working With Back ch Work Locat1on H h nd D I o 1lder ev forward reach capability 38 C'll) as 1t moves fr th(' floor At 80 .nc."'le~ r I .,. than 6 mches ( cr is al&o less.~~ worke~ ras to lean forwa ::~ch capab I ty At , b ly about 1 tnlg hen iec ea""'O t •o w rd r D 98 rc lGIIOn< < rfTI r ('!' �74 Wuk ac cl'\( .. Work Locat "'1-H & ts and Distances X CD + + + t t qo 87 �W1th kac Work Lo at H dOl .· c 4'i 8 (1 1& 441 (114 xt J �Work1 g With Backache 58 ~afE.Iy . N <X) ~~-\ .......... 6twl Q..'"l.. ~wn ~ ~rn r N (J"' a. Determine the Best Lifting Techn1que <t N .. + + N 'lO ~ . "< ..... ~ ~~~ w Figure 11·14 n a'1'Jal 1ft ~ 7/ k �r WN · g W h Racka b2 work ard make lhe total work oad morE cG:.~idelines for the 110 'lt of Jorce to bE' ,p aestgn of hard ling task to permtt t'"le o 5 d m Chapters 7 R'ld 8 - + .. N .. + +- ... ... +- ~ .... + t '1 K -~ t- t X ~ co t + + + ll'l + + .. .. + N + + t ... +- ' + ~ - ... rt t t t ~ + +- "" + t t t t ... ... + ... +- t- t ... +- + + t 0 + + +- t + .j. + t t- + + ... t t +- ~ + ... ~ .. t + +- t t + ... +- :Tt: : ... .... 1" --+ -~ t t +- +- .... + -+- t ..... r ~ ... +- ...... +- ... t +- +- + t ~ +- +- j- t: .. ~ + ... t -t ! + + ~ t + ~ + + t t .. t ... + +- 1- + +- +- ~ + +0'-+-t- + + +- 1 t .. +- +- +- t + t + ('I t + t .. + ... + oJ) + + + + +- ~ t I + + + + t t ... t t t co + t + +- t . 78 + N t �Wor mg W th Backs h Avo1d low Baf'k Pain A~g 39 .. X -+ ... -t +- l- t t _. T ~ +- ~ t t -~-:-1 -:-1. :. -+ -+-- + + I + ~ t J t + j t ... + :E + t- t ... t ~ ~ l +_.. + ~ t t t ~ t ~ -<J } ~ + . + ... .. ~ + + + ... .... +ttO'-l-t- ~ + + i- ~ + + t -t M + t 0 t- M ... + .. ~ t t M t tt f ... + ~ . . + + + ........ .. t t ,... ~ + .. o.l) + t (X) .. ("0 + + + t ... �-1 T ;r~·~~lth B:cka:h• r ~ -i k j ~ : f ,-----:--:---~ -----:----:-----t ! ! [; t .:........,.__ T t : : l Avoid Low Back Pain Aggravators 35 .... ....X ;! 00 + ~ t f oL. !, _ .I..._ ........ f ~ f .. + f "' ~ ,_ . 0.. c.(/) +~ c.. c . .:..;;Q + + t ~ 4- + . -j ."' t t t r..... o- t t t + .. -t + + t .. ~ " ~ + + I t t + t (X) + t S/ �] :;. : . : 1_: I bt:: orde trf ; • ~ ~: + ~ 11 ~ ~ ~ ~ : l::·f' 1- L r: : T ~ + l + j f + ~ Secti~n II: What the Worker Can Do ~ t + + ~ + + .. + ... .. +- +- -c AN + ~ +- 0'- ... +- + .. t t- t ~ t t 1- C"'< +- U\ .. + CX) + t t +- + + ~ ~ t- N + ~ T I ORS >I ave been de~cnbea bnetly m Chapter I ana thoroughly m ·kache at Work by Dr M.L. Rowr-~ 1 9R3) The ,... croscopic �28 ::<! �� Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Layout pages of "Working with Backache" Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Description An account of the resource A sample of pages in the layout process for Dr. Rodgers’ book, Working with Backache. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_003 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-18 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Image Extent The size or duration of the resource. 17 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Table Of Contents A list of subunits of the resource. title page images Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/e41b8cab30ecbb72f6cc824051eabfff.pdf 03702786043ec2077c9b89a4f95540a3 PDF Text Text l -i WoR <ING WITH BACKACHE SUZANNE H. RODGERS, Ph.D. Consultant in Ergonomics Illustrations by Leigh Ann Smith �w ::c: 0 c( � 0 c( m -1-::c: ;: C, -z a: � 0 ;: �L_ n I I LJ �--, WORKING WITH BACKACHE by Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. n LJ Consultant in Ergonomics/Human Factors Rochester, New York Assistant Professor, Part-time, Physiology Department, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry Adjunct Associate Professor, Industrial Engineering Department, State University of New York at Buffalo n I j L-l nLJ r Illustrations by Leigh Ann Smith Li Albany, New York n foreword by Stover H. Snook, Ph.D. I 'c_J ' Project Director - Ergonomics Liberty Mutual Insurance Company Hopkinton, Massachusetts �□ D D D D n LJ D D D n LJ n D D ! ' L..., Copyright@ 1984 by Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Published July 1985 by Perinton Press All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in 'any form, by any means, electronic, magnetic, mechanical, photographic, or otherwise, including information storage and retrieval systems, without prior written permission from the publisher, except for brief quotations by a reviewer. Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 85-61915 ISBN 0-931-15701-3 Printed in the United States of America n LJ n ! ' �J 7 � 7 ! _J D n D D D D D D D D C LJ FOREWORD There is nothing new about backache. Bernardino Ramazzini, the founder of occupational medicine, was concerned about it back in 1690, and the ancient Egyptians suffered from it over 5000 years ago. The disorder appears to be as old as mankind itself probably even older, since four-legged animals are also known to suffer from back problems. Over the centuries, medicine has not progressed as far in understanding and controlling low back pain as it has with other types of disorders. Consequently, as old as low back pain is, it remains a major source of impairment, disability and compensation in today's society. Almost everyone suffers from low back pain at some time during their working career. Low back pain is generally defined as lumbosacral pain as well as buttock pain and leg pain; acute pain as well as chronic pain; and lumbago as well as lumbar insufficiency. It is generally recognized that low back pain of this nature is experienced by 80% of the population at some time during life. Low back impairment represents a decrease or loss of ability to perform various musculoskeletal activities, and is very de pendent upon the severity of low back pain. According to the National Center for Health Statistics, approximately 6 million Americans suffer from low back impairment at any one given time; a prevelance of almost 3 in every 100 people. Low back disability is defined as time lost from the job, or assignment to restricted duty. Low back disability is very de pendent upon the nature of the job. A person with low back V �vi Working With Backache impairment may not be able to perform a manual handling job, but may be able to perform a lighter job. According to studies from the Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, approximately 2% of American workers will suffer disabling low back pain every year. Finally, low back compensation is reimbursement for lost wages, and is very dependent upon the nature of the com pensation law. In the United States, compensation law varies from state to state. The same low back disability may be compensable in one state, but not in another. The important point is that low back pain may or may not involve low back impairment; low back impairment may or may not involve low back disability; and low back disability may or may not involve low back compensation. There are many people who would like to believe that we can prevent low back pain. However, the objective evidence in the technical literature does not support that belief. Although we may not be able to prevent low back pain, we can reduce low back disability and compensation by training the patient, and re designing the workplace and the job. Dr. Rodgers recognizes this fact by suggesting ways to work with low back pain. This is a very practical and humane approach to backache. It is practical because we can do it now without a major medical breakthrough. It is humane because many authorities now advocate activity and return to work as an important part of low back rehabilitation. Some day we may be able to prevent low back pain, or at least substantially. reduce it. Until the.n, our best approach is to learn how to work with backache- and this book will tell you how to do it. Stover H. Snook, Ph.D. Project Director - Ergonomics Liberty Mutual Insurance Company D ln D ll 0 D 0 n LJ 0 D D D 0 17 �J 7 I •...J J J J D D D D D D D D D D PREFACE Shortly after Dr. Rowe's important book, Backache at Work, was published in 1983, he presented a summary of his thoughts at an Occupational Safety Council meeting at the Rochester, N.Y. Chamber of Commerce. Although we had worked together at the Eastman Kodak Company for several years, I had not heard this encapsulated version of his thoughts on the low back pain problem in industry before, and I found his approach fascinating. It also fit with my own experience studying the occurrence and patterns of low back problems in the workplace associated with manual handling activities. In embracing Dr. Rowe's philosophy of the need to manage low back disability in industry, I began thinking about putting together a "how to" book relating ways to reduce job- and workplace design-related factors that might contribute to low back disability or time lost from work during low back pain episodes. Working With Backache is the result of those thoughts. This book is written primarily for medical, safety, personnel, industrial hygiene, and engineering specialists who have to make decisions regarding occupational low back pain problems or who, through their design of the workplace and job, can influence factors that may contribute to low back pain symptoms. People with low back problems, including the author, have provided much of the pragmatic information contained herein, and future studies should give more attention to their approaches to limit the severity of repeat attacks. Information from work physiology, manual handling, and biomechanics specialists has been simplified and generalized to make it fairly easy to use in evaluating existing workplaces or vii �L viii Working With Backache L_ jobs. This simplification necessarily reduces accuracy in specific applications, so the reader is encouraged to learn the concepts but not be too strict in applying them to work situations. A universal rule in ergonomics is to try out an idea before you try to sell it, even if it looks good on paper. The guidelines included in this book are generally well-tested in the workplace, but in expensive simulation of a new workplace or task design is the most effective way of "tweaking" it to assure that all factors have been considered. The most important concept in Working With Backache is that there are several ways to reduce low back disability and the symptoms of low back pain at work. The worker, management, and the designers of jobs can all contribute to an improved picture for people with low back pain. Through cooperative approaches to the problem, it should be possible to reduce time lost from work, improve productivity, and increase the comfort of people who are susceptible to repeated low back pain episodes. Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Rochester, N.Y. February, 1985 0 D D D D D D D D D D D n �I ._J D [] 0 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 11 LJ ri LJ D D 'l LJ D 0 D D 1-l LJ □' I ' I am grateful to many people for their encouragement and helpful suggestions for ways to improve this book. Special thanks go to E. Carol Stein, M.D., Assistant Professor of Preventive, Family, and Rehabilitative Medicine and Director of Occupational Health Planning, University Health Service at the University of Rochester, for her careful review of the manuscript and sug gestions for clarification of the text. Appreciation is also extended to David M. Kiser, Ph.D., Group Leader of the Ergonomics Group in Eastman Kodak's Health and Environment Laboratories, M. Laurens Rowe M.D., Consultant in Orthopaedic Surgery to Eastman Kodak Company (retired), Alice Rowe of Perinton Press, and to my father, John A. Rodgers for their critiques of the manuscript and helpful suggestions. The Foreword has been contributed by Stover Snook, Ph. D., Ergonomics Director of Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, to whom I am also grateful. For their patience and enthusiasm for this project, Jim and Alice Rowe of Perinton Press deserve special thanks, as does the book's illustrator, Leigh Ann Smith of Albany, New York. I am also indebted to Shari Revell and Leslie Norton for typing the manuscript and doing other secretarial work. For his encouragement and for educating me about low back problems prior to developing my own internal education system, I owe an additional big thank you to M. Laurens Rowe, M.D. My appreciation also goes to Robert H. Jones, M.D., Rehabilitation Consultant to Eastman Kodak Company, for teaching me about return-to-work problems and for many discussions about low back problems over the years. Thanks also to Harry L. Davis and Charles I. Miller, M.D., co-founders of the Human Factors Group ix �Working With Backache at Eastman Kodak Company, who first introduced me to Ergonomics. D D 1-1 LJ 'I LJ D D D D D n D D LJ n �CONTENTS Foreword .................................................v Preface ................................................. vii Acknowledgements ....................................... ix Table of Contents ......................................... xi List of Figures ........................................... xv List of Tables ............................................ xvi Section I: Low Back Pain at Work Chapter 1: The Management of Low Back Pain at Work ..... 3 A. Low Back Pain ...................................... 4 1. Incidence......................................... 4 2. Diagnoses ........................................ 6 3. Natural History of Degenerative Disc Disease ....... 6 8. The Industrial Low Back Problem ..................... 9 1. Relationship to Work .............................. 9 2. Cost ............................................ 10 3. Approaches to Control Low Back Pain Disability ... 11 4. Return to Work Problems ......................... 12 Section II: What the Worker Can Do n u I , Chapter 2: Avoid Low Back Pain Aggravators ............. 19 A. Standing Workplaces - Postures ..................... 20 1. Bending Over .................................... 21 2. Hyperextension of the Back ....................... 22 3. Extended Forward Reaches ....................... 23 4. Crouching or Awkward Postures .................. 28 5. Constant Standing ............................... 26 xi �xii □ nLJ Working With Backache 8. Seated Workplaces - Postures ....................... 28 1. Lack of Foot Support ............................. 28 2. Twisting - Low Supply Cupboard .................. 31 3. Extended Forward Reaches ....................... 32 4. Constant Sitting - Inadequate Support ............. 33 C. Manual Handling Tasks ............................. 34 1. Heavy Lifting .................................... 35 2. Twisting While Lifting or Pushing and Pulling ...... 36 3. Uneven Lifting or Carrying ....................... 39 4. Handling an Over-Sized Load ..... : ............... 41 5. Sustained Heavy Handling or Awkward Postures ... 43 Chapter 3: Keep Muscles Fit ............................. 45 A. Muscles That Support the Spine ..................... 45 B. Muscle Strength and Fatigue ........................ 47 C. Exercises to Keep These Muscles Fit ................. 48 1. Bent Knees Abdominal Curl ...................... 49 2. Leg Pull ......................................... 50 3. Cross-Over Stretch .............................. 50 4. Whole Body Stretch .............................. 50 5. Side Slides ...................................... 50 Chapter 4: Lift Safely .................................... A. Safe Lifting and Low Back Pain ...................... B. General Lifting Guidelines ........................... 1. Do Not Twist While Lifting ........................ 2. Plan the Lift ..................................... 3. Determine the Best Lifting Technique ............. 4. Take a Secure Grip on the Object Being Handled .. 5. Pull the Load in Close to Your Body ............... 6. Alternate Lifting Tasks With Lighter Work .......... C. Other Manual Handling Techniques .................. 1. Two-Person Lifting ............................... 2. Sliding and Pushing .............................. 53 53 54 54 56 56 59 59 60 60 61 61 Section Ill: How the Workplace Can Be Improved Chapter 5: Work Location - Heights and Distances ......... A. Location and Body Mechanics ....................... B. Working Heights and Reaches ....................... C. Orientation of the Workplace ........................ 65 66 69 75 0 D u ,-1 I I L., 0 r, I I u n LJ I I □ LJ '7 1 n LJ nu n �__J CONTENTS .__) .--1 ..___) Foreword .................................................v Preface ................................................. vii Acknowledgements ....................................... ix Table of Contents ......................................... xi List of Figures ........................................... xv List of Tables ............................................ xvi ..___) Section I: Low Back Pain at Work Chapter 1: The Management of Low Back Pain at Work ..... 3 A. Low Back Pain ...................................... 4 1. Incidence......................................... 4 2. Diagnoses ........................................ 6 3. Natural History of Degenerative Disc Disease ....... 6 B. The Industrial Low Back Problem ..................... 9 1. Relationship to Work .............................. 9 2. Cost ............................................ 10 3. Approaches to Control Low Back Pain Disability ... 11 4. Return to Work Problems ......................... 12 .__) ;, "_j Section II: What the Worker Can Do ' Chapter 2: Avoid Low Back Pain Aggravators ............. 19 A. Standing Workplaces - Postures ..................... 20 1. Bending Over .................................... 21 2. Hyperextension of the Back ....................... 22 3. Extended Forward Reaches ....................... 23 4. Crouching or Awkward Postures .................. 28 5. Constant Standing ............................... 26 xi �xii D nLJ Working With Backache B. Seated Workplaces - Postures ....................... 28 1. Lack of Foot Support ............................. 28 2. Twisting - Low Supply Cupboard .................. 3. Extended Forward Reaches ....................... 4. Constant Sitting - Inadequate Support ............. C. Manual Handling Tasks ............................. 1. Heavy Lifting .................................... 2. Twisting While Lifting or Pushing and Pulling ...... 3. Uneven Lifting or Carrying ....................... 4. Handling an Over-Sized Load ..... : ............... 5. Sustained Heavy Handling or Awkward Postures ... 31 32 33 34 35 36 39 41 43 Chapter 3: Keep Muscles Fit ............................. 45 A. Muscles That Support the Spine ..................... 45 8. Muscle Strength and Fatigue ........................ 47 C. Exercises to Keep These Muscles Fit ................. 48 1. Bent Knees Abdominal Curl ...................... 49 2. Leg Pull ......................................... 50 3. Cross-Over Stretch .............................. 50 4. Whole Body Stretch .............................. 50 5. Side Slides ...................................... 50 Chapter 4: Lift Safely .................................... A. Safe Lifting and Low Back Pain ...................... B. General Lifting Guidelines ........................... 1. Do Not Twist While Lifting ........................ 2. Plan the Lift ..................................... 3. Determine the Best Lifting Technique ............. 4. Take a Secure Grip on the Object Being Handled .. 5. Pull the Load in Close to Your Body ............... 6. Alternate Lifting Tasks With Lighter Work .......... C. Other Manual Handling Techniques .................. 1. Two-Person Lifting ............................... 2. Sliding and Pushing .............................. 53 53 54 54 56 56 59 59 60 60 61 61 17 lJ D Ir-1' nI i L, □ r1 LJ n LJ n LJ r7 IL1I n Section 111: How the Workplace Can Be Improved Chapter 5: Work Location - Heights and Distances......... A. Location and Body Mechanics ....................... 8. Working Heights and Reaches ....................... C. Orientation of the Workplace ........................ r1 65 66 69 75 LJ n I I n �I I LJ n LJ D I i LJ D ,7, LJ I D u D r�-·1 l i nlJ r1 ! I l_J 17 LJ ii L [J Contents xiii Chapter 6: Seating ...................................... A. Types of Workplaces - Standing, Sitting, and Sit/Stand ....................................... 8. Chair Design ....................................... 1. Chair Seat Height Adjustability.................... 2. Chair Seat Width ................................. 3. Chair Seat Length or Depth ....................... 4. Chair Seat Slope ................................. 5. Chair Backrest ................................... 6. Other Characteristics - Swivel, Support, Covering .. C. Footrests and Armrests ............................. 79 79 81 81 83 83 84 84 87 88 Chapter 7: Design of Manual Handling Tasks .............. 91 A. Association of Manual Handling and Low Back Pain .. 91 8. Handling Location .................................. 92 C. Lifting Guidelines to Reduce Low Back Pain Aggravation ......................... 98 1. Occasional Lifts - The NIOSH Manual Lifting Guidelines ........................ 98 2. Frequent Lifts ................................... 101 D. Force Exertion Guidelines .......................... 104 Chapter 8: Special Workplace Aids for People with Low Back Pain ................................... 109 A. Workplace Postures ................................ 109 1. To Reduce Forward Bending and Extended Reaches .............................. 109 2. To Reduce Hyperextension of the Back ........... 111 3. To Reduce Twisting ............................. 112 4. To Provide Postural Relief in Constant Sitting or Standing Jobs ......................... 113 B. Manual Materials Handling Aids .................... 114 1. Improving Body Postures During Handling Tasks .......................... 115 2. Reducing the Amount of Work in Handling Objects ............................... 118 Section IV: How the Job Can Be Improved Chapter 9: The Size and Design of Objects to Be Handled ....................... 123 �n ' I I I L ____J ivx Working With Backache r7 : I LJ A. Dimensions of the Load ................ , ........... 124 B. Configuration of the Load .......................... 127 C. Design of Handholds .............................. 129 II Chapter 10: Providing Adequate Recovery Time .......... 131 A. Muscle Fatigue and Spinal Stability ................. 131 8. Postural Relief ..................................... 133 C. Manual Handling Tasks and Recovery Needs ........ 135 D. Examples of Recovery Time Calculations............ 137 1. Static Muscle Loading ........................... 137 2. Dynamic Work - Repetitive Manual Lifting ........ 138 Chapter 11: Work Patterns and Job Design ............... 143 A. Work and Recovery Patterns in Self-Paced Work ..... 143 8. Paced Work and Work Patterns ..................... 145 C. Job Design Guidelines ............................. 146 Section V: Summary and Addenda Chapter 12: Summary .................................. 149 A. New Design ....................................... 150 8. Existing Workplaces ............................... 151 Appendix A: Surveying the Workplace ................... 155 1. Checklist to Identify Potential Low Back Pain Aggravators in the Workplace .................... 155 2. Other Factors to Evaluate in the Workplace ....... 158 Appendix B: Selecting a Chair ........................... 161 1. Chair Characteristics as Selection Criteria ........ 161 2. The Process of Chair Selection .................. 161 References ............................................. 169 Index .................................................. 175 u I I n LJ r7 I ( I I, LJ n LJ r1 I I •I n LJ I • 17 LJ n LJ r1 L.J n I I l_J 11 I I LJ n �i I i L.J C D D D 11 LJ D n I ' I ' 0 D C C C □ Contents xv LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1-1: Low Back Pain in Industry ...................... 5 Figure 1-2: The Natural History of Degenerative Disc Disease ..................... 8 Figure 11-1: Bending ..................................... 21 Figure 11-2: Hyperextension of the Back ................... 22 Figure 11-3: Extended Forward Reaches ................... 24 Figure 11-4: Awkward Postures ........................... 25 Figure 11-5: Lack of Foot Support ......................... 28 Figure 11-6: Twisting in a Seated Workplace ............... 30 Figure 11-7: Twisting While Lifting ........................ 37 Figure 11-8: Uneven Load Carriage ........................ 40 Figure 11-9: Over-Sized Load Handling .................... 42 Figure 11-10: Muscles Supporting the Lower Spine ......... 46 Figure 11-11: Static Work Intensity and Duration Relationship ................... 48 Figure 11-12: Bent-Knees Abdominal Curl ................. 49 Figure 11-13: Four Back Strengthening Exercises .......... 51 Figure 11-14: Guidelines for Lifting ..................... , .. 55 Figure 11-15: Bent Knees and Derrick Lifting Styles ........ 57 Figure 11-16: Position of the Feet in Low Lifting ............ 58 Figure 111-1: Load Location and Forward Bending Moment .................... 68 Figure 111-2: Standing Anthropometric Measurements ...... 70 Figure 111-3: Seated Anthropometric Measurements ........ 71 Figure 111-4: Standing Forward Reach Capability ........... 73 Figure 111-5: Seated Forward Reach Capability ............. 74 Figure 111-6: Workplace Orientation in a Packing Task ...... 76 Figure 111-7: Recommended Seating Design ............... 82 Figure 111-8: Work Location and Backrest Utilization in a Seated Workplace ....................... 85 Figure 111-9: Molded and Tubular Chair Design ............ 86 Figure 111-10: Good and Poor Handling Locations....•..... 93 Figure 111-11: Relative Static Pull Strength and Location - Males ...................................... 95 Figure 111-12: Relative Static Pull Strength and Location Females ................................... 96 Figure 111-13: Lifting Height Design ...••.................. 97 Figure 111-14: NIOSH Manual Lifting Guidelines............ 99 Figure 111-15: Aerobic Work Intensity and Duration Relationship ...................... fo3 �r1 l I ;_J Working With Backache xvi n I I [_j /7 i I Figure 111-16: Figure 111-17: Figure 111-18: Figure 111-19: Figure 111-20: Figure 111-21: Figure 111-22: Figure 111-23: Figure 111-24: Figure 111-25: Guidelines for Repetitive Lifting ............ 105 Examples of Force Applications ............ 107 Reach Extenders .......................... 110 Height Adjustments for the Worker ......... 111 Use of Roller Bearing and Roller Conveyor Sections to Reduce Handling Effort ......... 112 Back Support Aids for Seated Work ......... 114 Postural Relief Aids at a Standing Work'place ....................... 115 A Special Aid for Large-Size Sheet Handling ............................ 116 Aids to Support an Object's Weight During Transfer Tasks ............................ 117 A Load Levelling Aid for Manual Handling Tasks ............................ 118 Fi�ure IV-1: Effect of Object Length on Elbow Position .... 124 Figure IV-2: Object Width and Back and Shoulder Posture ........................... 125 Figure IV-3: Object Depth and One-Handed Carrying Postures .......................... 126 Figure IV-4: Load Configurations ........................ 128 Figure IV-5: Recovery Times as a Function of Work Intensity and Duration ...................... 134 Figure IV-6: Lifting Patterns for People With and Without Low Back Pain . ; ................... 144 Figure B-1: Selecting a Chair ............................ 164 LJ un 17 LJ r7 i \ u u n [] r7 l I 'r ' nLJ 11 \__j LIST OF TABLES Table 1-1: Return to Work Considerations ................. 13 Table 111-1: Maximum Force Application Recommendations ............... 106 Table IV-1: Heart Rate Elevations in Several Occupational Tasks ......................... 139 Table 8-1: Recommended Chair and Accessory Characteristics ••••..•....•........ 162 Table B-2: Chair Selection By Job Category .............. 165 17 lJ r1 u n �I / 1, ' i 0 0 0 n LJ /! L.! 11 LJ D n LJ 11 n LJ I ' LJ C C Section I: Low Back Pain at Work Chapter 1: The Management of Low Back Pain at Work �\l :_j n u n iJ n u 0 n I \ u :1 I 1 u I \ n ILJ! n u 'l \ I (j ,,.., I LJ 1 n L_J :::.J CJ ' I �___, -, '---' r-i, I' I' ..J Section I: Low Back Pain at Work I...... n � D TI CHAPTER 1: THE MANAGEMENT OF LOW BACK PAIN AT WORK 17 I n u Most industrial safety or loss control managers will acknow ledge that low back pain is the single most important factor in Workers' Compensation costs. Despite long-standing attempts to reduce the incidence of low back problems, first through lifting programs taught by safety personnel, and more recently through pre-placement strength testing, the low back problem has not significantly abated. Experts in the field are rethinking the earlier premise that low back pain can be "prevented" by teaching people how to lift properly and by using only the strongest people on heavy lifting jobs. n I : L_j [; u n lJ ti u nI I n L, ,I J i: In Backache at Work, Dr. M.L. Rowe suggests that a more appropriate approach to low back pain in industry is to accept the fact that 56% or more of the workers will report symptoms at some time during their working careers. Hence, the institution of programs to manage the disability associated with degenerative disc disease, the most common cause of low back pain, should do more to control low back compensation costs than either lifting training or selection testing have done. In this chapter low back pain is discussed, especially in relation to the natural · history of degenerative disc disease. It is viewed in the context of how low back pain affects industry and what is being done to control it. Finally, an introduction to the rest of the book reviews ways in which the worker, workplace designers, and management can help manage low back pain disability so the worker can 3 �I I :.. .J 4 Working With Backache I I �J nLJ n l.J continue to work, even with back pain. A. LOW BACK PAIN The studies by Dr. M.L. Rowe at Eastman Kodak Company have been reported in several papers and in Backache at Work. These longitudinal studies are unique in that one person was able to follow over 1500 men during a 20-year period and observe the pattern of low back pain events during that time. From data gathered in Rowe's 8 studies, an understanding of the incidence, diagnoses, and the natural history of degenerative disc disease has been developed. 1. Incidence 11l_J r, I : l u I ' I Statistics on the incidence of low back pain in industry vary widely. The number of people who actually lose time from work because of back pain will be less than the number of workers reporting back pain to a company medical department over a specific period; both will be considerably less than the number who report it on a questionnaire in which people are asked if they have ever had back pain. LJ Three of the studies reported by Rowe (1983) can be used to evaluate the incidence of low back pain in an industry with both light and heavy work (Figure 1-1). In a review of all first visits to the Medical Department in one year, 5.5% of the plant population was seen for low back pain. This represented 5.8% of the male and 4.4% of the female workers in all jobs. Of these men and women, 68% could not identify a particular event that produced the low back pain and 16% identified an event outside of the workplace. The remaining 16% ascribed the back pain to some event at work.· Only about 15% of these low back Workers' Compensation cases resulted in extended absence or in disability due to low back pain. ni \ In a review of 237 male retirees (ages 62-65) with a long work history at the company, Rowe found that 56% had had low back pain severe enough to report to the Medical Department during their working years, and half of them had lost time from work because of it. In a ten-year study of male workers in one u : I �l LJ L_o u r 1 i n u n j \ ' I '-... ""j r7 I , �i i _.,; n ! The Management of Low Back Pain at Work 5 i C Plant Workforce 17 LJ � n LJ 5.5% Report Low Back Pain in 1 Year 68�� C n nu L; n uI I un rl LJ n D u IL_, 17 u I 32% • Cause Unknown 16% � 16% • Outside of Work At Work J 85% 15% � "Injury" • Low Back Disability lr No Disability Figure 1-1: Low Back Pain in Industry. The low back disability picture shown is based on over 1600 first reports to a Medical Department during one year. The breakdown by percent of reports that were attributed to an injury either on the job or at home is shown. Workers' Compensation reports indicate that 15% of the people reporting work-related "injuries" to the back may develop some disability. �n! I '. _j 6 Working With Backache u i production division, 47% of the men in heavy jobs reported to the Medical Department with low back pain and 22% lost time from work. Thirty-five percent of the men in lighter jobs also reported low back pain and 14% lost time. Based on these studies, it appears that at least half of the employees in a plant will experience low back pain sometime in their working lives, and perhaps half of them will lose work time because of it. 2. Diagnoses Low back pain is a symptom that may result from many causes. These include functional or developmental abnormalities, degeneration of discs or spinal facet joints, injuries, and tumors of the spine. It may be a referred pa_in from abdominal or pelvic organs, such as the gastrointestinal tract and the genito-urinary organs. In his study of over 1500 male employees over a 20-year period, Rowe (1983) found the following clustering of diagnoses to account for low back pain symptoms: - 68% Disc degeneration and sequellae (including abnormal motion between the vertebrae, facet joint subluxation, reactive bony productive changes, disc protrusion, and degenerative spondylolisthesis). - 20% Inflammation (including arthritis, prostatitis, and anklylosing spondylitis). - 8% Miscellaneious Causes (including developmental spondylolisthesis and situational causes where no disease can be detected). True Injury 4% A detailed analysis of these diagnoses and their presentation in a patient with low back pain can be found in "Backache at Work." 3. Natural History of Degenerative Disc Disease Because 68% of low back pain diagnoses in the Rowe study I [] n I ! n l _ __J L__, (_ _) n I . nu I ' u n ' I r-1 L_.J n I i i ) [ ___, n �The Management of Low Back Pain at Work 7 ---1 r, , � C I [ are attributed to degenerative disc disease, it is useful to describe the natural history of this disease with the hope that activities that exacerbate low back pain symptoms can be avoided. In degenerative disc disease microscopic tears and ravelings occur in the disc casing fibers, usually in the posterior third of either the L4 or L5 disc (lumbar spine). Because the disc lacks a blood supply, it cannot repair itself. These tears accumulate and may eventually result in sufficient weakening of the disc casing to allow fluid leakage from the pressurized gel that makes up the disc. This "flattens" the disc somewhat and destablilizes the coupling between the vertebrae on either side of the disc, making it less rigid, or "sloppy." The vertebrae then can slide out of alignment and may pinch the dorsal nerve root that passes between the vertebrae (see Rowe, 1983 for illustrations and discussion of the pathomechanics of degenerative disc disease). Movements of the trunk that encourage movement in these less rigid vertebral couplings further destabilize them; so for example, twisting or leaning forward to pick up a load can further damage the disc casing. Actual disc herniation probably occurs in less than 5% of the cases of disc involvement. However, it may require surgical intervention to relieve pressure on the nerve root. The natural history of five decades of degenerative disc disease symptoms is shown in Figure 1-2. The initial attacks may occur when a person is in his or her 20's. These are usually mild and diffuse but may represent early increments of damage to the disc casing fibers. The attacks tend to be short and the symptoms usually totally disappear between them. In the 30's and 40's, there are more frequent attacks. These tend to be more severe, resulting in more lost time and some disability. The pain becomes more localized and lateralizes to one side. This is indicative of pressure on a nerve root with abnormal sensations, numbness, and pain usually following the distribution of the sciatic nerve. Residual pain is often present between acute attacks. In the 50's, the symptoms tend to settle into more of an arthritic pattern, one exacerbated by temperature and humidity changes and relieved by activity. By the time a person reaches his or her 60's, connective tissue has stabilized the vertebrae around the damaged disc and more activity may be tolerable than had been during the previous three decades. �fl L--1 Working With Backache 8 uuum nw 20's 26%Workforce 120/oLT Sudden, acute attacks Diffuse pain 3-10days Non-specific cause Return to full activity Infrequent attacks 23%Workforce 330/oLT The Natural History of Degenerative Disc Disease Lateralized pain More frequent attacks More severe radiating pain - more chronic cIa I 40's 60's 5%Workforce 4%LT Mild chronic pain or total relief More periods without pain, more flexibility ��y ,\', '\ r'. \ � \ 'I '", \\\\ 0 :7 l__jI I 0 D n I ' \.__J 0 n LJ 23%Workforce 380/oLT Sciatica Numbness, tingling in leg/foot Little symptom-free time SO's 210/oWorkforce 130/oLT More arthritic Less severe pain but still constant Better after early morning Figure 1-2: The Natural History �f Degenerative Disc Disease. For each decade between the 20's and the 60's, the symptoms of low back problems are listed. The % of the workforce in those decades and the% of lost time (%LT) from work due to low back pain is also shown. The exposure risk data are taken from the studies of Dr. Rowe (1983 ) over a 20-year period. I I L_J 11L-1 [l LJ n LJ □ n i I LJ n �' The Management of Low Back Pain at Work 9 I ......, n L,_.) I ! D B. THE INDUSTRIAL LOW BACK PROBLEM From the previous section, it is clear that many employees can be expected to experience low back pain during their working years. One may not be able to prevent the occurrence of degenerative disc disease, but it may be possible to lessen .its clinical severity and to reduce the amount of disability experi enced by 15% of the workers who account for 80% of the total compensation costs to industry (Rowe, 1983). This section addresses the relationship between low back pain incidence and job heaviness, the cost of low back pain to industry, methods used in attempting to control the problem, and some of the problems associated with returning a person with degenerative disc disease to work. 1. Relationship to Work D 17 LJ 1: u n n <-..J LJ D r7i LJ [J Rowe's analysis of one production divisions' medical records (1983) suggests that people in heavy effort jobs report more low back pain than do those in light effort jobs. Heavy effort in this example is lifting objects weighing about 40-50 lb (18-22 kg) on a fairly repetitive basis, usually 6 times per minute for 10 minutes continuously, repeated about 6 times per shift. Other occasional lifting of supplies or pushing and pulling of handcarts may also occur between the more frequent lifting activities. Forty seven percent of the male workers on the heavy effort jobs reported to the Medical Department in a 10-year period with low back pain symptoms, and 22% of them lost some time. This compared to 35% of the people in light effort jobs, 14% of whom lost time from work for low back pain. This difference in low back pain incidence between the workers in light and in heavy effort jobs is less than might have been anticipated. Rowe (1983) attributed the higher reporting and lost time for people in heavier jobs to a "need to report" back pain. This theory was supported by the observation that departments reporting more back pain also report more upper respiratory infections, gastrointestinal dis turbances and all other diagnoses than are reported by the general plant population. In a study of 100 consecutive Workers' Compensation cases for low back pain, Rowe (1983) found that 76% of the people were �10 Working With Backache □ n LJ doing their accustomed work when the back pain occurred. Twelve percent of the cases could be directly related to an injury; 8% were associated with an unguarded move, and only 4% were associated with unaccustomed work. This contradicts the argu ment that low back injuries at work are often sustained when a person is doing heavy work to which he or she is not accustomed. Although these conditions doubtless contribute to the industrial low back pain problem, they are probably not the decisive factor in its etiology. Yet, it is the heavy job to which most of the efforts to control back problems have heretofore been directed, through teaching people how to lift, setting weight lifting limits, and using strength testing to select people with enough strength to match the measured job demands. It appears that people who work in heavy effort jobs, in workplaces where postural demands are heavy, or where sus tained awkward motions are required, are less able to continue that work during an episode of low back pain. Conversely, people in more sedentary jobs who can control their postures and workloads are less likely to need relief from job demands when they have low back pain. One way to reduce lost time associated with back pain is, therefore, to provide workplace aids or designs that lessen the likelihood of aggravating the vulnerable back and that enable people to work with some backache. These "aggra vators" are discussed in Chapter 2. 2. Cost The cost of low back pain to industry is often expressed in terms of Workers' Compensation payments. This represents only a fraction of the actual cost. Low back pain is variously described as costing the industrial sector 1 to 7 billion dollars a year (White, 1983), even though the compensation costs are considerably lower than that. About one-third of the Workers' Compensation costs are related to low back pain, however, and, of those, about 15% of the people account for 80% of the cost (Rowe, 1983). These low back disability cases are often people in their 30's and 40's who are unable to return to their jobs. Because of their youth, they may be on disability for up to 35 years, representing a large and continuing cost to industry. It is obviously to the advantage of the individual with low back disability as well as to industry to D 17 L_; D n 0 D 0 n □ n □ n I , L..J L_l LJ L._.J n �....J The Management of Low Back Pain at Work 11 7 attempt to reduce the incidence and severity of the disability and to return the worker to a productive role as soon as possible. n I ! Like many other "costs" in industry, the actual cost of low back pain is more than the compensation and disability dollars and time lost from work. Personal productivity may be reduced for a worker who is experiencing an episode of low back pain or for a person who has the residual backache seen between episodes in more advanced degenerative disc disease. This can occur if the pain is distracting, requiring a worker to change posture frequently, stretch, and take recovery breaks from heavy lifting tasks or sustained postures. Additional costs incll.�de training others to fill in for a person disabled with back pain, and those of company medical, supervisory, and personnel time spent trying to determine when the person can return to work and what work restrictions will be needed. 17 Since about 75% of the people with low back pain have repetitive episodes (Rowe, 1983), the opportunities for costs to accrue are vast. The control of these costs by managing the degree of disability of a person with backache is the focus of this book. n � nJ 11 I ! LJ LJ D n LJ n LJ D n D 'L... 3. Approaches to Control Low Back Pain Disability Over the past 50 years there have been a number of approaches made to control the industrial low back pain problem. These can be grouped into four categories: the selection of workers for the heavier jobs; education on safe handling of materials; the setting of weight limits along with workplace and job design to accommodate workers with less strength; and the development of exercise and behavior modification programs ("Back Schools") to help the worker with low back pain learn to cope with any disability. Workplace modification may also be part of the last program. Recognizing that low back pain disability often cannot be linked to a particular action, some medical departments report back incidents in two ways: those where an "injury" is identified; and those where there appears to be a "physical failure," not attributable to any workplace condition or job demand. An �n I 12 Working With Backache example of physical failure of the back is when a person bends over to tie a shoe and cannot straighten up again. From Rowe's studies (1983), it is possible that about 75% of the compensable back problems can be classified as physical failures. The above strategies to control low back disability are discussed briefly in later sections of this book. Over the past ten years the emphasis has been slowly evolving from one of prevention of low back pain incidents through training, selection, and enforcement of weight limits, to that of active intervention in the low back pain case in order to prevent long-term disability; this is the fourth strategy mentioned above. \ � LJ1 D D n I I L.J 4. Return to Work Problems The factors that need to be addressed in order to reduce low back-related lost time in industry are grouped in Table 1-1 according to who can do something about them: the worker with low back pain, supervision in the department of concern and other management personnel, and the job and workplace design ers. Clearly, individuals with more severe degenerative disc disease may find it more difficult to return to work. For the worker, the following factors may influence his or her return to work after a prolonged absence associated with low back pain: • degree of disability, including postural muscle weakness resulting from the enforced inactivity during the attack • financial incentives or disincentives • alternative skills available for a job change • job satisfaction before the incident A worker who can make more money on disability than at work, who has limited alternative job skills and needs to be restricted from much of the work he or she has been doing, or who is not particularly content with his or her job represents a poor risk for prompt return to work. D n ,_J 0 D '1 l I LJ D fl I • ,_j '7 �_J r-1, I ' I The Management of Low Back Pain at Work i D n 0 Table 1-1: Return to Work Considerations Person(s) With Control Worker Degree of Disability Other Medical Problems Motivation/1 llness Behavior Alternative Skills Workplace and Job Designers Postures Required Manual Handling Required Durations of Heavy Tasks or Awkward Postures Job Pattern Control by Worker Accommodations Available LJ 17 L..J 0 n I ' ,.._, D 0 □ D Factors Administrators/ Supervisors Worker's Previous Job Performance Flexibility in Job Methods Availability of Other Jobs Production Pressures Training Programs Benefits Structure Table 1-1: Return to Work Considerations. Some factors are listed that may influence the ease with which a person with degenerative disc disease can return to work after an attack of low back pain. These are factors that determine the size of the disability problem from low back problems in industry. The workplace and job factors are discussed in more detail in this book. 13 �n lj 14 Working With Backache ,7 I .____J i The worker's supervision or other company management can affect the worker's ability to return to work. For example, by: • making available other jobs within the worker's skill-level and not requiring extensive retraining or significant salary reductions • showing flexibility in looking for job accommodations to help the worker back to his or her old job • providing auxiliary help for occasional tasks that may be difficult for the worker with back pain to perform alone • providing training to help develop the worker's alternative job skills • providing a rehabilitation exercise program if absence from work is longer than 3 weeks. A supervisor who must generate a certain amount of product per shift, day, or week may resist returning someone to work who can do only part of the job, especially if there are many people available in the outside labor force who can do the full job with a minimum of training. Returning a person with significant degen erative disc disease to a physically demanding job that takes only a few months to learn, such as loading tractor trailers with shipping cases or handling supplies in a stockroom, can be especially difficult. The job demands are more likely to aggravate the worker's symptoms, and restrictions from heavy lifting will most likely be requested by the worker's personal physician. Both the availability of alternative jobs and the ways in which the task can be altered to accommodate the worker with low back disability may also be limited. The worker who has been an excellent and valued team member before the back problem occurred will be more likely to be accommodated than one with a mediocre work record. If the low back pain victim is considered to have "caused" hi_s or her own problem by doing something careless ("didn't lift safely"), supervision may deny that worker the opportunity to return to work until the whole job can be performed. And although it is LJn D D 0 D !ILJ n 1-..i D D n LJ D □ n �lJ n D D D n The Management of Low Back Pain at Work 15 L.J LJ n 'L..l D D LJn D D D D D probably incorrect to say that the back problem was "caused" by improper lifting, this is often said in heavy jobs. The job and workplace designers can influence the cost of low back disability by modifying the following factors: • the postural demands of work - whether the worker has to maintain awkward or fatiguing postures in order to operate the machine, asemble the parts, or do the tasks required on the job • the seating available - its design and appropriateness for a person with low back problems (backrest, foot support, etc.) • provision of recovery periods after heavy work or sustained awkward postures • inclusion of workplace accommodations such as support stools, footrails, or adjustable height tables to permit the person with low back disability to get postural relief during sustained work • provision of handling aids to reduce the lifting and carrying demands of jobs • reduction of unnecessary manual handling tasks through a systems approach to materials handling that uses conveyors and automated equipment, when appropriate. All such design factors can make it easier for the person with some low back disability to return to work. The reduction of job effort demands should permit this worker to do much otthe job when the back pain is not severe. Factors that aggravate the low back pain symptoms are also reduced; hence there is a lessened need to report them. Most of this job design work is best done during initial facility layouts and job specifications. Designing jobs and workplaces to accommodate a majority of the potential work force wi II make them more suitable for people with low back pain as well. If the job and workplace are already designed, accommodations or aids may often be added at low cost, with solutions limited only by the creativity of the designer and workers in the area. �16 Working With Backache In the remainder of this book, the roles of the worker, supervision, and designers are discussed in more detail. Specific recommendations are given for workplace accommodations and job design that will help the person with low back pain remain an active member of the workforce for most of his or her career. n � LJ D □ □. n LJ 0 f�l D D D 17 il �J D D D D D D D un D D D D D D Section II: What the Worker Can Do Chapter 2: Avoid Low Back Pain Aggravators Chapter 3: Keep Muscles Fit Chapter 4: Lift Safely �D D D D ,.\-2 .. , yc..- D '< D D D D D D u I' D n �.J -7 J -7 i c_) n I Section II: What the Worker Can Do � ' IJ r1 1-7 LJ D 1LJ�1 There are actions that the worker can take to avoid aggra vating underlying degenerative disc disease. Most people with chronic back problems know intuitively what these are, although they may not be able to formally define them. These actions must be avoided both at work and at home, and examples of each are included in Chapter 2. Exercises to keep the trunk and limb muscles fit are included in Chapter 3 as another means the worker can take to reduce the frequency and severity of low back pain. Chapter 4 includes information about techniques for manual handling; these reduce the stress on the L4 and L5 discs and make overexertion incidents less likely to occur. 17 CHAPTER 2: AVOID LOW BACK PAIN AGGRAVATORS 0 The characteristic symptoms of degenerative disc disease have been described briefly in Chapter 1 and thoroughly in Backache at Work by Dr. M.L. Rowe (1983). The microscopic tears and ravelings in the L4 and L5 disc casing that can lead to fluid leakage and the "sloppy" vertebral linkages in this area may be increased by postures and manual handling activities that put high compressive or shear forces on the disc, especially on the LJ --1 I I LJ 17 LJ (I lJ D posterior one-third of the disc near the nerve roots. Once a person is in the more advanced stages of degenerative disc disease, certain motions or actions may trap the nerve root between two vertebrae, or may stretch or tear the capsule or the ligaments of the facet joints between the vertebrae. High forces on the disc may cause it to rupture and press on the nerve root. All 19 �20 Working With Backache □ r7 � I of these can result in severe pain. Some of these motions are described and illustrated in this chapter. In addition to increasing the compressive and shear forces on the disc and increasing the instabi_lity of the vertebrae in the L4 or LS area, these motions increase muscle fatigue, thereby reducing a person's ability to "protect" the back. These factors are discussed under standing and seated workplace postures and manual handling tasks. They represent actions that the worker with chronic backache should avoid. It is no doubt safer for the person without backache as well to avoid continued exposure to these activities. Although the worker has some control over the actions he or she takes when away from work, the same options may not be available in the workplace. Sections 111 and IV show how the workplace and job can be designed or altered to reduce the tasks that can aggravate low back pain symptoms. A. Standing Workplaces - Postures Although a great deal of emphasis has been placed on the role of manual materials handling activities in the etiology or aggravation of low back pain, postural factors are probably at least equally important. In a standing workplace, there are many factors to consider when looking for actions that may increase back pain symptoms. These include: • bending over, unsupported by the arms, as in work at a drafting board • hyperextending the back, as in high reaches • extended forward reaches • crouching or other awkward postures, such as leaning to one side • constant standing They are discussed in the context of how they influence the lumbar spine in a person with degenerative disc disease. � LJ [ll LJ [l u r�1 0 0 D D u1I 0 17 LJ i "1 LI n �_J -, Avoid Low Back Pain Aggravators 21 c__,J 1. Bending Over n LJ riLJ r1 LJ n LJ n i ! l__) 0 Figure 11-1 illustrates the posture of a person doing food preparation in a kitchen. Because the work involves downward forces, the counter is 36 inches (90 cm) high, although the visual demands of the work would be better satisfied with a 43-inch (11O cm) high work surface. The worker bends over to exert the necessary force and to have good visual control of the task. This statically loads the back and hip muscles. At the same time, the weight of the upper body is now acting as a load on the spine because it is no longer aligned over the feet. The back muscles have a very short lever arm (2 inches or 5 cm) and are quite heavily loaded in the bending posture (see Chapter 5 for further discussion of biomechanical stresses on the back). This static loading can fatigue the muscles that stabilize the back in response to forward flexion of the trunk. The longer this posture must be sustained, the more fatigue will accumulate. There is then more opportunity for the back to be "unprotected" by these fatigues muscles when a twisting motion, uneven weight distribu tion, or unexpected motion occurs. n LJ I I l i L., r1 LJ u r-1 D Figure 11-1: Bending. The height of the counter is low enough to require the kitchen attendant to bend over from the hips while preparing the turkey. This bending loads the hip extensors and the erector spinae muscles that extend the trunk and will fatigue them if it is sustained for a minute or more. �22 D Working With Backache 17 l_j Besides work done on a low counter, bending over may be required when a person has to work in an area with inadequate head clearance. This situation may occur fairly frequently for maintenance workers, caisson workers, coal miners, and people who load and unload shelving units that are less than 6 feet (2 meters) high. These requirements for bending are more difficult for the worker to avoid than a too-low counter Sl..!rface where, for example, thickness may be added to the surface by using sheets of plywood or other materials to build up the height for better visual access. For too-low head clearance, the worker can only avoid sustained work in the bent-over posture by taking small sitting or lying down breaks to relieve the static back muscle stress or by working from a kneeling posture, where appropriate. r·1' I l LJ I (7 I i : I LJ n LJ r·7 LJ I I n 2. Hyperextension of the Back LJ An example of an activity that produces hyperextension of the back is illustrated in Figure 11-2. Hyperextension involves moving the trunk past its normal erect position so that the upper body is oriented behind its normal resting point. As the spine extends backwards, the pelvis moves forward, and there is a un ,, u r·1 17 LJ I I u r1 I , Figure 11-2: Hyperextension of the Back. The need to reach or handle materials from locations over shoulder height usually results in arching, or hyperextension, of the back. This increases the load on the posteriorthird of the lumbar discs and may result in back pain symptoms in susceptible people. u r-1 u 1 I n �Avoid Low Back Pain Aggravators --, 23 �-) concentration of compressive force on the posterior one-third of the L4 or L5 discs. This increased pressure can aggravate an already damaged disc and may result in a pinched nerve root if the lower vertebra's articular process slides forward and partially closes off the nerve root's exit port. Even for persons with no history of degenerative disc disease, repeated hyperextension of the back, especially during manual handling tasks, is not recom mended since it may increase the rate of microscopic tear and raveling damage to the normal disc casing. c7 w n I I D Activities that cause hyperextension are primarily those involving tasks above shoulder height, i.e., about 52 inches (132 cm) above the floor. The task� include reading dials or displays located above standing eye height, about 60 inches (150 cm) above the floor. The person who is handling cases or products with the back hyperextended is putting additional stress on the lumbar discs. A person who sometimes works lying on the stomach in order to access the task, such as the case of a low seam coal miner, a maintenance worker fixing a machine, or an automobile mechanic, may also hyperextend the back when his or her head is raised. Finally, many extended reaches (discussed below) are accompanied by back hyperextension. n LJ 17 LJ nLJ n LJ (7 l I', LJ n LJ n lJ (, I : I : LJ D The worker can control the amount of hyperextension in many overhead tasks by using a step stool or platforms or by avoiding the placement of materials over shoulder height where there is a choice. Where the hyperextension is associated with work on the stomach, frequent short recovery breaks are recom mended to rest the back and abdominal muscles between exertions. 3. Extended Forward Reaches Reaches that exceed the length of a person's arm and require bending or stretching forward to accomplish a task can aggravate low back pain in several ways: forward stretches can result in hyperextension of the back to counteract the tendency to fall forward; unequal loading of the spine can occur if only one hand and arm are used in the activity; bending forward puts a mechanical stress on the lower back; and the handling of any weight or exertion of any force at full arm's extension can put �' 24 I �J Working With Backache r I I l_J high compressive and/or shear force on the lumbar intervertebral discs because of the posture and long force arm (see Figure 11-3). r-1 I Extended reaches with both arms or unequal stretching of one arm forward in a task can occur in many occupational tasks. Large-size objects may create extended reaches, as will be discussed in Chapters 7 and 9. Activation of valves, reaches across work stations to get supplies or to pull materials off of a conveyor, and reaches into the far corner of a large shipping case represent activities where extended reaches are often required. At home, reaching to the upper shelf in a cupboard, trying to remove the tire and jack from the trunk of a large car, and tree trimming often involve extended and unbalanced reaches that can aggravate low back symptoms. ' ,(7 LJr1 .n I I I I LJ un A worker can avoid some of these reaches by using handle extenders on inaccessible valves (illustrated in Chapter 8), and using aids to activate distant controls. To move an object closer one can sometimes slide it forward using a "crook" or "hook." Some reaches can be reduced by tilting the case or product container upward by 15 to 30 degrees, the far side being uphill of nLJ I I LJ r7 \ i ' I L_) n LJ n LJ Figure 11-3: Extended Forward Reach. Reaches that are more than 20 inches in front of the body or are below standing waist level will require the worker to bend at the waist and put additional pressure on the lower back. If part of the workplace or equipment makes it difficult to bend the knees, the stress on the lumbar discs is greater. ur: ;("',I ' I n �__) Avoid Low Back Pain Aggravators 25 ""7 _J 7 ' .....J I I c._,j 17 I I I ' LJ C n LJ n I ! the near side at the workplace. Because the greatest arm reach is at shoulder level, postural adjustments such as bending the knees or using a step stool to keep the reach at shoulder level comprise another strategy to reduce aggravation of low back symptoms during extended reaches. 4. Crouching or Awkward Postures Some occupational tasks require crouching, stooping, or leaning over, all of which put a load on the low back and its lumbar discs. Figure 11-4 illustrates a welder in a crouching position; this can be a fairly acceptable posture for short periods of time. Sustained work in this posture, with some shifting of the body weight to maintain stability, can put strong shear and compressive forces on the lumbar discs as the back muscles stabilize the posture during forward bending of the trunk. When a person stands up after an extended period in a crouched posture, the muscles of the back may not support the spine as well (due to fatigue), increasing the likelihood of a pinched nerve root. Postures where one hip is higher than the other, or where a load is not borne evenly across the trunk, leave room for u n LJ n L LJ n LJ r, ' I LJ r7 LJ nu Figure 11-4: Awkward Postures. Crouching to get to the proper height for a welding task is illustrated. Although this posture can be sustained for a short time without difficulty, sustained work will result in leg and back muscle fatigue and may contribute to instability in the lumbar area. Other awkward postures can result from inadequate head clearance and from working at floor or ground level. �26 :7 u Working With Backache nI )' L destabilization of the vertebral column at the place where the disc may have lost some fluid and the junction is unstable. Twisting of the trunk may increase the vulnerability of the disc to rupture or accelerate facet joint subluxation and may, again, lead to a pinched nerve root. Awkward postures often result from a designer's inadequate attention to the maintenance needs of equipment or facilities. Repair operations may have to be done under tanks or machines at sites where other equipment is in the way, so awkward postures are required to move out a motor or remove a part. In some locations head clearance has not been provided, as at the top of a production machine in a flat-roofed, low building. In warehouses, the dimensions of storage shelves are usually less than 55 inches (140 cm) high. This low head clearance is particularly awkward for the transfer of heavy items from the lowest of the shelves. Outside of work, a person may be exposed to awkward postures during car maintenance, home-improvement activities such as putting in a tile floor, and in outdoors activities including planting and weeding. The worker may not be able to avoid some awkward postures in the workplace, but he or she should be aware of the need to take frequent "postural relief" breaks. Provision of a small "dolly" or stool to enable sitting close to the ground instead of having to crouch, or the availability of either a floor covering with good cushioning properties or a pair of knee pads for kneeling in some tasks will also improve the conditions for people with a history of backache. Unequal loads across the trunk can be counteracted in some instances by providing a firm support against which the worker can pull with the arm that is not supporting a load. This can help to even out the load on the back muscles and reduces the opportunity for a twisting motion to aggravate the unstable lower lumbar disc areas. 5. Constant Standing Jobs that require sustained standing, especially where the standing is not broken up by periods of walking or sitting, can be difficult for people with chronic low back pain. If bending or extended reaches are also required, the problems may be r·1 I I I• LJ n LJ r7 LJ r, I I I I (_j r7 I I LJ nI ' u n ! I LJ n LJI I n I I l...J n : I 1'7 I I Lj r1 ! j L n �' __,I 7 Avoid Low Back Pain Aggravators 27 c....J n LJ I ' nI I LJ n LJ n LJ n I I LJ D n LJ n LJ n LJ 0 17 insurmountable for some workers. Constant standing puts an unremitting load on the lumbar discs, creates back muscle fatigue from the sustained alignment of the upper and lower body during the work activities (many of which involve forward movement of the upper body), and results in orientation of the pelvis in a posture that may increase the pressure on the posterior one-third of the lumbar discs (L4 and L5, especially). If the worker is slouched forward rather than upright (but not hyperextended) the pressure on these discs will be greater. Slumping forward in a chair results in high disc pressures. The most important workplace modifications would allow an alternation of standing and sitting during the course of the shift. Walking is also desirable for short periods. Jobs with a large amount of walking, however, may also aggravate back pain symptoms, especially if the walking includes carrying a load in only one hand. Examples of tasks where constant standing or walking may be required include those of mail carriers, guards in some institutions, kitchen cafeteria attendants, order expediters, warehouse order pickers, lathe operators, and machine control operators. Outside of work, extended periods of standing for more than one hour at a time may be needed in meal preparation and clean-up, lawn care, ironing and laundry activities, and painting, plastering, or wall-papering. For the worker to avoid constant standing, seating should be available near the workplace such that it can be used as needed. Provision of fold-away seating is desirable, such as a "jump seat" or a seat that can be stored under the table or next to a wall until needed. If it is not available, the worker with backache should take frequent breaks to the nearest area with seating in order to relieve the stressed postural muscles. For people who work in a prescribed area and stand fairly still for much of the shift, a footrail or a small footstool, from 4 to 8 inches (1 Oto 20 cm) high, can retard the development of low back pain symptoms. Putting a foot on the rail will tilt the pelvis forward and relieve the pressure on the back third of the L4 and L5 discs. Rubber mats at the work station or safety shoes with good soles that are appropriate for the work and thick enough to give a cushioning effect may also be used to reduce the strain of constant standing on the feet and back. �28 Working With Backache B. SEATED WORKPLACES - POSTURES Although many people with low back pain find relief from symptoms when they can sit down, extended sitting can in itself aggravate the symptoms. Long distance driving is an activity that can be extremely uncomfortable for a person with low back pain if the seat does not give good support to the lumbar spine. If the seat is set back, requiring full leg extension for activation of the gas, clutch, and brake pedals, back pain may result. In this section, some seated workplace characteristics are described that can aggravate low back pain symptoms by increasing the stress on the L4 and LS discs and by decreasing the stability of the spine at this level when the disc has "flattened." 1. Lack of Foot Support Persons with inadequate support for the feet in a seated workplace will relieve the pressure on the back of their thighs by twisting the legs around the chair supports (Figure 11-5) or by supporting the feet on some part of the workbench. Both of these actions can aggravate low back pain symptoms. The leg twisting also twists the trunk somewhat and can destabilize the lumbar □ □ n iuI rJ ! I LJ 17 lJ nLJ i I L_! nlJ nLJ un Figure 11-5: Lack of Foot Support. Inadequate support for the feet can occur when a person is seated at a workbench if the chair or stool is of a fixed height and there is not enough room (height) to get the upper legs under the work surface while using the chair's footrest. The lack of foot support results in increased load on the lower spine and fatigue of the back extensor muscles if the posture must be sustained for several minutes at a time. D n L,·] n �Avoid Low Back Pain Aggravators : 29 _J 7 i _J 7 J I c_J D D n LJ n LJ D D D n LJ Q D spine if it is already weak due to disc flattening. Forward extension of the legs in conjunction with leaning forward to work on the workbench is somewhat like doing a straight leg sit-up. Both of these activities put a high compressive force on the L4 and L5 discs and may result in further damage to the disc casing. There are several workplace situations where foot support can be inadequate. They include: • A workbench surface more than 26 inches (66 cm), above the floor without a footrest. This results in adjustment of a chair beyond the point where the feet can rest comfortably on the floor. • A chair with good height adjustability but a fixed ring footrest. When the chair seat is adjusted to 20 or 21 inches (51 or 53 cm) above the floor, the footrest is too low to keep the thighs parallel to the floor. • A footrest in the workbench that is fixed and recessed more than 17 inches (43 cm) from the front surface of the workbench or is more than 9 inches (23 cm) above the floor, which restricts leg clearance. Lack of an adequate footrest is seen quite frequently in offices where table or desk surfaces are 30 inches (76 cm) above the floor and chairs are adjustable from 16 to 20 inches (41 to 57 cm) above the floor. To have the person working close to elbow level on the desk, the seat would have to be at the top of its range. This brings the feet about 4-5 inches above the floor unless a footrest is available under the desk. A chair footrest is less satisfactory in office work because the worker is usually leaning forward to write or type on the desk surface. Leaning forward from the chair with one's legs near the base of the chair usually precludes use of the chair's back rest, again increasing the stress on the lower lumbar discs of the spine. The worker can overcome the lack of a footrest by fashioning one out of an old shipping case, box, telephone books, or a pile of building materials. If footrest height is fixed instead of adjustable, a 5-inch (13 cm) height is usually preferred. The worker can also make sure to adjust his or her chair to the most appropriate �30 Working With Backache height for the task being done. In general, the thighs should be parallel to the floor, not sloping downward, in order to protect the back from excessive disc pressures. Figure 11-6: Twisting in a Seated Workplace. The design of a seated workplace and the location of supplies and conveyors will affect the amount of twisting required of the worker. Supplies that are stored below the work surface can both interfere with leg clearance and cause twisting or leaning to one side when they are procured. Storage locations that are close to the work area but encourage.the seated operator to get up and change posture are preferred. Too high storage results in hyperextension of the back and should be avoided unless step stools are provided. 'l . I l.__ ..J �Avoid Low Back Pain Aggravators ' I i LJ I �..J n LJ D n □ D ri .__, C D n L_j □ 31 2. Twisting - Low Supply Cupboard Some twisting of the trunk can occur when a person has to procure or dispose of supplies from the seated posture. The design of the work station will determine how much twisting will occur. Locating the supply and disposal sites at 90 or 180 degrees away from the primary workplace assures some trunk twisting, even if a swivel chair is made available. Locating supplies or outgoing product storage areas at heights below 20 inches (51 cm) or recessed in from the front of the workplace by more than 10 inches (25 cm), results in the worker having to lean over to one side (Figure 11-6). This can differentially load the spine and may aggravate back pain symptoms in people with pre-existing lumbar instability. Similarly, high shelves and ones more than 15 inches (38 cm) to the right or left of center of the worker are also likely to increase the opportunities for a worker to twist the trunk and aggravate low back pain symptoms. Two-handed lifts or force exertions in these situations are particularly difficult to do without twisting the trunk and loading the spine unevenly. Situations where twisting of the trunk may occur while in a seated posture include the following: • At a desk, a person turning to throw something into a wastebasket behind or to the side of the chair. • A person accessing files at the side of the desk or reaching for a source book or paper work at the far corner of the desk or in a bookcase above the desk. • At a seated assembly workbench, a person with stacks of trays of incoming product on the floor next to her or him; also with a stack of outgoing product for the next work station that starts on the floor. • A person working at a seated workplace and using a pallet or skid on the floor as the source of parts or as a place to dispose of the part after this task. • A person working at a seated workbench with supplies (like empty corrugated cases and other packaging materials) over- �32 Working With Backache head in open bins. Occasional handling of these only, but they are accessed by standing up on the chair's foot ring and reaching forward and to one side. • A two-handed lift from one side of the workbench to the other, as might occur if product comes in or goes out of the station on a conveyor that is oriented at 90 degrees to the workbench. Similar twisting may occur where there is inadequate leg clear ance, as may be the case at a kitchen sink, next to some machines, or in a standing workplace where a person is using a stool. Inability to get the knees and legs under the counter or work surface is accommodated by rotating the knees to the side and twisting the upper trunk. A table that is too low to allow thigh clearance with a fixed height chair also requires this type of trunk twisting and can aggravate low back pain symptoms. The worker can reduce the trunk twisting by standing up to procure and dispose of supplies or parts instead of remaining seated. If there is frequent handling required (less than 2 minutes between lifts), the constant changes of posture may be annoying. The worker may be able to reorganize the workplace to keep the · 1ocations for procuring and disposing of product closer to workbench height and nearer to the main work area. Some ways of doing this include raising a pallet on 2 or 3 empty pallets, or using a "hook" or "crook" to pull a tray or container from one side closer to the workbench center. A swivel chair and/or chair with casters will permit easy changes in worker orientation if a workplace is U-shaped or requires 90 to 180 degree rotations from the main workplace. If such chairs are not available, the worker should stand up to change position. Where only oc casional lifts of materials from overhead or lateral shelving are required, the worker should always stand up, since this is a way to get postural relief from constant sitting. 3. Extended Forward Reaches An extended reach to the side of a seated workplace may result in twisting of the trunk or unequal loading of the spine that could increase the risk for low back pain. Forward reaches that are more than 15 inches (38 cm) in front of the body will require un nLJ n I I l.nJ 0 nlJ n LJ D □ D n u □ r-1 LJ n ! I L...J n �7 cJ D D n D D D D D D D C D D \....J Avoid Low Back Pain Aggravators 33 the worker to lean forward in the chair and thereby lose the benefit of any available back support. Occasional reaches are not likely to be a problem, but continuous work with extended reaches or frequent reaches that are well out of the comfortable working envelope (see Chapter 5) should be avoided. This forward bending with extended reaches is similar to forward slumping in that it puts a high compressive force on the lower lumbar discs. Activities that can result in extended reaches include work places where controls are located or supplies are stored on a back panel or against a wall and the workbench is at least 24 inches (61 cm) deep. The extended reach may be to a low shelf or to a pile of trays or parts at the side of the workbench, both of which unevenly load the spine and may increase any instability at the lumbar region. Reaches forward with two hands to procure a tray, product, or part from a conveyor at the rear of a work station reduce the effectiveness of a chair's lumbar support for the person with low back pain. The worker can avoid extended reaches by using aids to extend the reach in some instances, by standing up for occasional extended reaches; and by raising low supplies or products so that low extended reaches are not necessary. A hook on a 12-inch (30 cm) long handle with a T-grip, similar to a dock worker's hook, can be used to pull a tray off of a conveyor that runs at the same height as the work surface and to move it nearer to the worker. Provided that there is adequate leg room at the seated workplace, the worker can also pull him-or herself as close as possible to the front surface of the workbench in order to reduce the reach distance. In some workplaces a semi-circular cut-out in the workbench permits the worker to get closer to a conveyor without sacrificing a large amount of workspace. 4. Constant Sitting - Inadequate Support As is discussed in Chapter 6 under Seating, constant sitting can aggravate low back pain symptoms as much as can constant standing. This is particularly true where chairs are not designed to give support to the lumbar spine. A person slouched forward in a chair without backrest support will have more compressive �34 Working With Backache force on the lumbar discs than will the same person standing comfortably upright. Over time this force may increase the microinjuries to the disc casing and hence aggravate low back pain symptoms. Many assembly lines are designed to maintain the flow of materials pasta person's workbench so that he or she does not have to interrupt the assembly task by getting up to procure supplies or dispose of product. This results in a 2- to 4-hour period of uninterrupted sitting, which can be uncomfortable for a person with back pain. Work stations along conveyors typically tie the worker to one location and one type of posture, either sitting or standing. Other constant sitting activities include sewing machine use, word processing work, many in-process inspection tasks, some control console monitoring tasks, switch board operation, crane operation, and long distance driving. Seat design is as critical in the vehicular setting as it is in manufacturing and office operations. The worker can avoid aggravating back pain symptoms by adding a cushion to a chair with poor back support, purchasing a back support chair insert, or wearing an inflatable supportive vest. He or she should find opportunities to change postures frequently, and should work in the standing posture for short periods if the task does not require much bending. Upright posture is best, and slouching forward should be avoided. A brisk walk would probably be preferable to sitting down over a hot beverage during work breaks. It is also very important that the worker adjust the backrest for optimum support when possible. C. MANUAL HANDLING TASKS Low back pain and heavy lifting have often been causally linked, although it is more probable that they are linked primarily by the need to report back pain in heavy jobs (Rowe, 1983). If 56% of a workforce reports low back pain during their careers and 68% of those have degenerative disc disease, then up to 38% of the workforce may have repeated episodes of back pain. Those who are working in jobs that require frequent manual handling of materials will be more likely to lose time from work during these episodes than those who can control their workload and alter D D D D D LJr D 0 D D D 0 □ D n �.....J Avoid Low Back Pain Aggravators D D D D D D D D D D D D I ' 35 their posture. Some handling activities that can aggravate low back pain are discussed below along with suggestions for their modification. 1. Heavy Lifting The handling of a heavy load, one that weighs more than 40 lb (18 kg) for instance, will increase the compressive force on the lower lumbar discs even if it is lifted in the most optimal manner. This compressive force is determined by the horizontal distance from the center of mass of the upper body and the load in the hands to the L4 or LS spinal segment. The farther the person is bent forward or the load is held in front_of the body, the greater is this distance, and the more work the back and hip extensor muscles must do to counteract the tendency of the body to fall forward. The heavier the load, the more work these back muscles must do to stabilize the posture, even when the object is held directly next to the body (see Chapters 5 and 7). 4 There are many occupational tasks that involve heavy lifting; some are easier to modify than others. For example, many foods and chemicals are packaged in 50 or 100 lb (23 or 45 kg) bags, which must be handled on and off pallets or skids. Shipping cases weighing from SO to 75 lb (23 and 34 kg) are not unusual in industry. Seventy pounds (32 kg) is a suggested upper weight limit for some package delivery companies. Wooden pallets must be handled in some jobs, and they often weigh more than 60 lb (27 kg). In construction and maintenance tasks, a person may have to routinely lift building supplies weighing more than 50 lb (23 kg). Stock rolls or trays or bins of parts may have to be lifted into position in a machine loading task, and waste bins may have to be unloaded with similar efforts. These often weigh more than 40 lb (18 kg) each and may also be bulky. The principal response of the worker with low back pain to these lifting tasks does not have to be a job restriction, except perhaps where heavy lifting occurs for a majority of the shift and is not easy to avoid. The use of sliding rather than lifting to move heavy objects is the best way to avoid high compressive forces on the lumbar discs. For bag handling from pallets or to machine supply hoppers, for example, a forklift truck or an adjustable- �36 Working With Backache height table (levelator) can be used to bring the bag to a little above the level of the place to which it must be moved. It can then be slid off of the pallet and dropped onto the table or hopper without the full weight being lifted by the worker. In some workplaces it may be possible to provide a hoist or block and tackle to accomplish the heavier lifts; the worker with low back pain should use these. In other jobs it may not be necessary to lift the whole container if only part of its contents are needed. This would be possible in a large scale food preparation operation where only part of a bag of flour might be used to make a bread dough. Use of a scoop or smaller container to remove only the necessary material would reduce the need for lifting the heavy bag. 2. Twisting While Lifting or Pushing and Pulling Although all manual handling training programs caution against twisting while lifting or exerting forces, people still do it because it is faster or may be the only way to accomplish the task in some workp.laces. When materials have to be transferred between two locations that are oriented at 90 degrees to one another, they are often moved from one side to the other by turning the upper trunk and keeping the feetstfll-(F-igure 11-7): If the object weight and size is not very great, the distance between locations is only a few feet, and if the handling frequency is low, this is probably not an activity to be concerned about in terms of low back pain aggravation. Heavier items, more frequent lifting, and more pronounced twisting can destabilize the lumbar disc area in people with degenerative disc disease. The shear forces on the L4 and L5 discs may result in subluxation of the facet joints. This can result in narrowing of the channel through which. the dorsal nerve root passes, pinching it and causing very severe pain. In addition, when the trunk is twisted, the abdominal and chest muscles are not in their optimal orientation for exerting force, and they do not offer effective support and protection for the back. Situations that result in twisting of the trunk during manual handling tasks include: • moving an item horizontally with arms extended across a □ D D D D D D 7 LJ D D D D D 0 n �I I ' 1! L.-1 D '7 LJ Avoid Low Back Pain Aggravators workplace, as in moving a stack of materials from left to right at the far side of the workbench. • pulling a hand cart or truck through a corridor, using one hand and facing forward. • working in an area where there is inadequate foot room to use a step turn. This may happen when pallets are lined up around the end of a conveyor on a fast production line (requiring the C r L..., n L n LJ � LJ D LJ 37 Figure 11-7: Twisting While Lifting. The orientation of the workplace will affect the amount of trunk twisting done in a handling task. Removing items from a high conveyor line or shelf to a workplace located at 90 degrees to the side will often be done with a twist, especially if the frequency of lifting is high. It is preferable to design the workplace so that the lift is made totally in front of the body. �38 Working With Backache handler to lift at a frequency of 9 or more times per minute). The pallets are brought close to the conveyor in order to reduce movement time. There may not be enough space to turn the feet as product is removed to the pallets, which are usually placed at either 90 or 180 degrees to the conveyor. The handler, therefore, twists at the knees to accomplish the task. • swinging bags or cans up from a lower level to a higher one in a warehousing or trailer unloading task. By swinging instead of lifting the bag or can, a more ballistic lift can be made and less sustained effort is required. But such a movement is made across the body rather than in front of it, and the trunk is thereby usually twisted at least 90 degrees. • getting one's body behind an object to push it when it is being moved laterally around an obstruction. Construction tasks may require the worker to take a fixed and stable posture while exerting force with the upper trunk to locate a beam among other supports in a building frame. It is often not appropriate to make a step turn in this situation since the footing area may be limited. • handling tasks where the terrain is rough and footing is precarious, such as on littered floors. It may be preferable to maintain a stable posture than to risk stepping and losing one's balance. The worker with low back pain is wise to avoid trunk twisting whenever possible. The use of a step turn instead of a twist is recommended whenever stepping is appropriate. Except where it cannot be done for safety reasons, hand carts and trucks should be pushed instead of pulled through corridors in order to reduce the trunk twist associated with one-handed pulling. At conveyor palletizing stations, marks on the floor should identify the best locations for pallets so that adequate foot room for a step turn is provided. The conveyor rates should be controllable by the handler so that pace pressure doesn't make step turns too time consuming to use. One other approach to reduce the amount of twisting in a handling task is to train the worker to pull the object to the point nearest its destination instead of picking it up earlier, where it first comes into the workplace or work site. In this way J ri cJ LJ u n LJ n LJ � LJ □ ii LJ 7 I...__,I �_j Avoid Low Back Pain Aggravators �, 39 I _J 1 j 7 J J '7 I r, u i i D D I] D D D D D twisting can be minimized, and a footing halfway between the optimum position for either procuring or disposing of the product can be taken. 3. Uneven Lifting or Carrying Because a person with degenerative disc disease often has instability in the lower lumbar spine, any activity that unevenly loads the spine may aggravate low back pain symptoms. A major activity in which such uneven loading may occur is one-handed carrying, especially if the object being carried is quite heavy and bulky. The weight of the object is counteracted by bending to the contralateral side, which loads the back, abdominal, and chest muscles. The shear forces on the lower lumbar discs will increase and the potential for pinching the dorsal nerve root between the bony processes of the vertebrae is greater. A similar unbalance can occur if the object being handled is not symmetrical and has more weight on one side than the other. This requires the trunk muscles to develop differential forces to keep the body in balance. Any instability of the load, as occurs if a liquid in an open container is handled, may require the trunk muscles to alter their tension suddenly in order to counteract the motion, and this too may result in instability in the lumbar region. Occupational tasks that result in uneven loading of the spine include carrying pails of water or other liquid (Figure 11-8) and carrying a heavy suitcase or bulky item with a handle_ at the top, such as a "portable" TV set. Furniture moving exposes handlers to many unevenly balanced loads, either because the object itself is asymmetrically weighted (as in a refrigerator and most appli ances) or because the lifting and carrying task requires one hand to be higher than the other (as in taking a couch down a narrow flight of stairs with a landing). Lifting patients in a medical facility or handling pumps and other heavy equipment in a maintenance operation are other examples of uneven loading of the spine. Awkward postural requirements, such as crouching, leaning to one side, or kneeling, can also result in uneven loading of the spine as the weight is shifted from one side of the body to the other searching for a stable posture. Standing with the feet on different levels will also unevenly load the spine during a lifting task, as can two-person lifting where the handlers are not well matched in size or strength. �40 Working With Backache 17 LJ D D t�I D D nLJ [I !LI Figure 11-8: Uneven Load Carriage. The cleaner is carrying a heavy bucket of water on one side of the body that is not balanced by the mop in the other hand. To keep from being pulled to the left side, she has to stabilize her posture with the back and hip extensors and with the abdominal and buttock muscles. This uneven loading of the spine increases the risk of a nerve root pinch in people with degenerative disc disease. The person with an unstable lower back usually learns through experience that uneven loading of the s pine is often associated with sharp pain. Toa.void this he orshe usually makes certain that loads do not become concentrated on only one side. If a suitcase is carried, it is balanced by a second suitcase or bag [I [I [j .-.I LJ n �_,) 7 Avoid Low Back Pain Aggravators 41 ' 7 i _J -1 � i r-1 ,_J nLJ D 0 0 11 LJ 0 D 0 D in the other hand; this helps to load the spine more equitably. If a force has to be exerted on one side only, the handler can stabilize his or her posture by holding on to a fixed structure with the opposite arm. In two-handed carrying tasks, the handler should try to keep the hands even and to share the load as equally as is possible. Th.e use of straps, hand trucks, dollies, and other handling aids that permit an uneven load to be lifted or transported with both hands at the same height are also recommended (see Chapter 9). 4. Handling an Over-Sized Load The horizontal distance from the lumbar spine to the center of a load being held in the hands will strongly influence the lumbar disc compressive and shear forces. The heavier the load and the farther its center of mass is from the spine, the more force there will be on these discs, and the more opportunity there will be for damage to them and for aggravation of low back pain symptoms. This distance will be affected by the design of the workplace or lifting task (see Extended Reaches) and by the dimensions of the items to be lifted. Bulky objects, even if they are not very heavy, extend the lever arm and put additional demands on the back and hip extensor muscles to counteract the body's tendency to fall forward. Objects that extend more than 20 inches (51 cm) in front of the body usually produce hyper extension of the back as the handler tries to reduce the load on these muscles by bringing the load closer to the lumbar spine (Figure 11-9). Some objects that are over-sized and produce awkward lifting or handling postures include: • furniture • trays more than 20 inches (51 cm) long and wide • sheet materials more than 20 inches (51 cm) in length and width • plywood sheeting • large glass or metal plates • bales of raw materials or waste more than 20 inches (51 cm) wide and long • some wide stock rolls of paper, plastic, etc. �r L�J 42 Working With Backache 7 1 LJ r·1 LJ n , I L. :Iu n LJ i' I I L� Figure 11-9: Over-Sized Load Handling. Carrying a large-size tray (2 dimensions being more than 30 inches or 76 cm long) results in hyperextension of the back. The handler tries to reduce the stress on the erector spinae muscles by arching the back and moving the center of mass of the load and upper body closer to the spine. Grip is usually less stable as well because the arms have to be extended rather than the elbows lying next to the side. This instability increases the risk for losing control of the load. Some long products (e.g., pipe) may be held in front of the body on their long dimension while being placed on a machine or in a rack. Even moderately narrow products may be over-sized in these handling tasks. The worker with low back pain who is confronted with an oversized load often has a number of options. These include sliding the load rather then lifting it onto a transfer cart or to a pallet on a levelator in a production workplace. A rope or strap may also be used to permit the load to be grasped closer to the body if it does not have handholds. Other materials handling aids n l_J n LJ 11 :L..JI 0 □ D n �I I _) Avoid Low Back Pain Aggravators -1 ' such as a dolly or hand truck may be used instead of carrying the object manually. An overhead hoist, a transfer table, or a cart could be used to support the weight of a supply roll being loaded into a machine. When multiple separate items constitute the load, such as sheets of paper, piping, metal plates, etc., the worker should restrict each lift load to 25 lb (11 kg) in order to keep the compressive and shear forces on the lumbar spin acceptable. : _j -" I i I _; -7 I 5. Sustained Heavy Handling or Awkward Postures � Even under the best conditions for handling heavy objects, sustained effort can produce fatigue of the back, hip, abdominal, and arm muscles, resulting in less protection of the vulnerable vertebrae in a person with degenerative disc disease. In the same manner, sustained awkward postures will selectively load some muscles, and their fatigue may make the person less able to respond to a sudden change in posture or in the balance of a load. 7 � 7' I ._) '7 ..__,.) r, lJ LJ r-,' i LJ 0 n I 43 i LJ r-� LJ The unguarded move in a handling task is more likely to result in aggravation of the low back pain symptoms, as it often is accompanied by uneven loading of the spine and higher shear forces on the lumbar discs. Sustained heavy handling tasks can be found in many warehouse and shipping areas, stockrooms, chemical or bulk food packaging areas, pallet loading operations at the end of a production machine, package delivery and bulk mail handling businesses, and ditch digging operations. The people doing these jobs spend the majority of the shift doing handling tasks, and their muscles may show some fatigue. Their overall workload can be considered heavy, requiring close to the recommended upper limit of energy expenditure for a typical shift. Jobs or tasks where sustained awkward postures may be required include many low-seam coal mining operations, some tunnel or water main construction work, some maintenance and construction tasks where clearances are tight (for example, overhead duct repairs), automobile mechanic work with extended reaches and overhead work, and construction work such as pipe fitting, where frequent bent-over postures, sustained holding, and crouching may be required. �! '----· 44 Working With Backache r· , I '-- The worker whose job requires him or her to sustain heavy lifting or awkward postures for a large part of the shift is unlikely to be able to perform that work during an attack of low back pain, and job restrictions or time lost from work usually result. By taking frequent, short breaks from the heavy work or awkward postures, usually for 1 or 2 minutes every 15 minutes of work, however, the potential for aggravating the symptoms between attacks will be less. Most people will do this intuitively unless they are paced externally by a machine, peer or supervisory pressure, or a pay incentive. The worker with degenerative disc disease should be made aware that the use of these mini-breaks will actually increase productivity by reducing the back discomfort and potential for lost time due to low back pain. r L, r� L" r, I L.., r ' I L-.., [ I L, r L� un n u 11 ' I L) r·1 lJ i-l LJ , I LJ ,-) �_,I ~7 I ·, _) 7 I --' 7 Section II: What the Worker Can Do � CHAPTER 3: KEEP MUSCLES FIT __j _____, A. MUSCLES THAT SUPPORT THE SPINE -ii There are four major groups of muscles that protect the lower spine by stablizing it and by counteracting high pressures on the 4th and 5th lumbar discs. These are the back extensor muscles, or erector spinae, that lie along either side of the spine, the abdominal muscles that counteract lumbar disc pressure by creating a positive pressure in the abdomen and by stabilizing the spine during turning movements, and the hip extensors and flexors, including those of the spine, buttock, and upper leg (hamstring), that provide stability to the lower spine during motions around the hips (Figure 11-10). I .....J ' 7 \ I._.) I ; nu r7 LJ 17LJ 0 C These muscle groups act to increase the flexibility of the spine by keeping it aligned during a variety of movements such as bending forward, stretching backwards, reaching to the side, or holding an object in front of the body. The back extensors operate on very short lever arms (about 2 inches or 5 cm) and have to develop high forces to counteract the tendency of the body to fall forward when an object is lifted. The abdominal muscles are particularly important in lifting tasks because they stabilize the lower spine by fixing the trunk's posture. The increased intrabdominal pressure is in the opposite direction to the increased pressure on the L4 and L5 discs and, therefore, relieves the discs of some of the force on them. Poorly toned abdominal muscles provide less of a counteractive force and are less able to protect the spine when motions to one side are made. The hip flexors and extensors act like guy wires around the lower spine and provide stability during the full range of movements. If 45 �46 Working With Backache :--[ __ r I La n i l� L, Erector Abdominal Muscles Hip Extensors IJ I Hip Flexors Figure 11-10: Muscles Supporting the Lower Spine. The major muscle groups that help support the lumbar spine are shown. The erector spinae muscles extend the back, the hip flexor and extensor muscles are used in forward, backward, and sideways bending, and the abdominal muscles control trunk flexion, rotation, and lateral bending. the trunk is twisted to one side, these muscles are less able to protect the spine because their force is not directly transmitted to the spine. This means that more work is done by the muscles to get the same effect of protecting the spine. As a person flexes forward to lift up an object, the muscles of the hip extensors help the back extensors keep the body from falling forward. If there is a heavy weight to be carried on one side of the body or if an object n u n lJ n LJ '"""' ' I lJ n J ; u un n lJ nI ! L--1 I I �_j Keep Muscles Fit 47 I .....) is heavier on one side, the hip flexor and erector spinae muscles work together to keep the spine balanced and stable. 7 'I 7 \ 7 I .J 7 j -, ..J 7 .J 7 _j � \ ,.,.7 \ ,__J 7 J r'\ ___j ,---, LJ B. MUSCLE STRENGTH AND FATIGUE If the muscles of the back, abdomen, buttock, and upper leg are not kept fit they are less able to keep the spine stable as various motions are made. This can sometimes result in high compressive forces on the lumbar discs during a lifting task or during an awkward posture. The primary concern with less fit muscles, however, is not so much the peak forces required in certain tasks but the muscles' inability to sustain moderate workloads for extended periods. For example, a muscle with less capacity because of a lack of exercise will fatigue faster at the same workload than will a fit one. This is particularly important for tasks where the required posture is leaning forward or to one side or where an object has to be held or carried for more than a few seconds. Figure 11-11 shows the relationship between the percent of muscle strength used (% MVC) and the length of time it can be exerted continuously (in minutes). The higher the capacity (MVC, or maximum voluntary contraction strength), the lower % MVC any given task will be. Thus, if a person has a grip strength of 100 pounds (or about 45 kg), a 50-pound (23 kg) object held in that hand uses 50% of grip strength. If the grip capacity is only 75 pounds (34 kg), however, the same .object uses 67% of grip strength. The 50% MVC load can be held for 1 minute contin uously, whereas the 67% MVC load can be held for only 45 seconds before muscle fatigue occurs. Thus, the person with less capacity will have to take more frequent recovery breaks (see Chapter 10), and this may affect his or her productivity in a heavy job. A similar situation occurs for the back muscles. Their capacity for a given task will depend on the biomechanics of the posture or the lifting situation. The force exerted by the back extensor muscles, for example, will be acting on a 2-inch (5 cm) lever. That will have to counteract the object weight on a lever from the spine to the center of mass of the body and the object being lifted (see Chapter 5). The farther the body is from the upright posture and the heavier the load, the higher the percent of back extensor maximum strength required, and the sooner �r 48 Working With Backache fatigue will occur. Keeping the back muscles well-toned will reduce the risk of overexertion by increasing their strength and making each task a lower percent of that maximum value. r I L. r L I 100 > :E f r 75 l� r 50 L en � 0 r I L� 25 o---�--�------....___.... 1 2 3 4 5 Minutes r� l� r i L._� Figure 11-11: Static Work Intensity and Duration Relationship. The amount of time, in minutes, that a given percentage of muscle strength can be sustained is shown by this curve. The maximum muscle strength will depend on which muscles are active, but the relationship with time is similar across muscle groups. The longer a posture has to be sustained the more likely it is that the active muscles will reach the limits of this curve, and fatigue will result. r i L, r, L, C. EXERCISES TO KEEP THESE MUSCLES FIT r There are a number of exercises that can be used to stretch, tone, and strengthen the four groups of muscles that protect the lower back. The ones summarized below are suggested because they can be done equally well by people with healthy backs and by people who have a history of low back pain. l---1 I , r I , ! I L..J r"1 I I �! _j Keep Muscles Fit 7 49 i _J _J 7 \ _) f !\ I I I 1. Bent-Knees Abdominal Curl (Figure 11-12) - Lie on your back with your knees bent and heels flat on the floor. Clasp your hands behind your head. Slowly raise your head, shoulders, and upper trunk off of the floor on a count of 3. Then, slowly lower yourself again on a count of 3. Breathe out as you come up. Repeat 5 to 10 times initially, increasing the number to 20 times later as you become better conditioned. u nLJ n LJ C n lJ n LJ nLJ nLJ r:LJ D Figure 11-12: Bent-Knees Abdominal Curl. This exercise strengthens the abdominal muscles. �[7 so Working With Backache [ I ' I L.....1 n LJ 2. Leg Pull (Figure ll-13a) - Lie on your back with your knees bent and your heels flat on the floor. Bring one knee up to your chest and clasp it with your hands. Keep your head on the floor. Hold the knee up for 10 seconds, then return the leg to its bent knee position and repeat the stretch with the other leg. Repeat the cycle 3 times for each leg initially and increase to 5 times later. Then raise both knees to the chest at once and hold for a count of 10 before relaxing again. Repeat this 3 times. 3. Cross Over Stretch (Figure ll-13b) - Lie on your back with straight legs. Bend your right knee and cross it over your left leg. Put your left hand on your right knee and stretch your right arm to the side. Turn your head to look at your right arm, keeping your shoulder and head on the ground. Pull down on your right knee and hold it for a count of 10. Then relax and repeat it again. Change legs and do the same stretch twice on the left leg. 4. Whole Body Stretch (Figure ll-13c) - While standing, clasp your hands over your head and turn your palms upward. Your feet should be a shoulders' breadth apart. Slowly stretch your arms over your head looking straight ahead and keeping your hands together. Do not hold your breath or go up on your toes. Repeat 5 times initially and up to 10 times later on. 5. Side Slides (Figure ll-13d) - Standing with your feet a shoulders' breadth apart, press your right hand against the outside of your right thigh and slowly slide it down, leaning to the right with your trunk. Come back to an upright posture and then repeat the slide with the left arm and leg. Repeat the cycle 5 times initially and up to 1 O times later on. If these exercises are done every other day and at a moderate level, the back, buttocks, hamstring, and abdominal muscles will be toned. The suggested number of repetitions should not be exceeded, especially during the initial conditioning stages. Muscle spasm is a common outcome when a nerve root is pinched in the lower spine. The pinched nerve causes increased activity of the motor neurons which increase back muscle contraction strength, and this further increases the pain in a positive feedback loop. One has to break the cycle by stretching out the muscle or by reducing the pinch on the nerve root to stop [7 LJ 11 \ l_1 un :) LJ n LJ n u ' I LJ n LJ n LJ un n I : L_J I I �__j Keep Muscles Fit ' __, 7 ! _j a. 7 -7 I I _, -, _j b. __j 7 _; -, C. d. _; -, ! __.! i i i r, I I ; I ,7 .__J '7 L_.J r-i I LJ Figure 11-13: Four Back Strenghtening Exercises. Four exercises that help to strengthen the hip flexors ("a" and "b"), the lateral trunk muscles ("b" and "d"), and the trunk extensor muscles ("c") are illustrated. See the text for instructions. 51 �·� ) i I I ..__J 52 Working With Backache n ' I L_J the muscles from going into spasm. The best approach is to curl the legs up to your chest to take the pressure off the nerve root by opening up the space between the vertebrae. With the chin down and yqur arms down at your sides, the stretch on the back muscles should reduce the spasm as well as reduce the trigger from the pinched nerve. Lying on the floor with the lower legs on a chair seat usually gives relief if a nerve pinch/muscle spasm is caught early enough. Some recent research suggests that whole body exercises may be preferable to specific exercises for the back as a way of preventing low back pain episodes. Whole body muscle toning can improve the way in which one works at any job since there is less probability that any muscle will limit the performance of a task. If the whole body exercise program includes back exercises, then it may be preferable as long as exercises that may be difficult for a person with low back instability (such as back arching and some straight leg stretching exercises) are not required. Any exercise is better than none, but too much exercise at high intensity or of extended duration is not advisable, especially when starting or resuming an exercise program. r7 I I L_/I I uii un n LJ '1 ! I LJ ! i I I LJ n L n I I i_J r� i I I I l_J r i \ L. .-1 ,-., I : �_, ' ! ____, r-, Section II: What the Worker Can Do � CHAPTER 4: LIFT SAFELY r1 ._J n I !! ..___; '1 ! I I LJ Ii, l.....1 D 0 0 D n u 0 Manual handling tasks are associated with a high incidence of occupational low back pain reports. One corrective approach used for many years has been to train people how to lift safely so that the risk of overexertion is reduced. Defining safe lifting then becomes the challenge, since what people do in the workplace is not always consistent with what is considered the best lifting practice by safety and ergonomics specialists. A. SAFE LIFTING AND LOW BACK PAIN Despite a strong emphasis on training programs for at least 30 years, there has not been a concomitant decrease in the incidence of reports of low back pain in industry. As Rowe (1983) has suggested, the low back pain problem associated with manual handling tasks may be related more to the need to report the pain when doing heavy or repeated lifting or force exertion than to a problem with the way the object is lifted. The person with degenerative disc disease may benefit from learning safe lifting techniques, but the application of those techniques may not reduce the probability that he or she will have an episode of low back pain on the job. Safe lifting techniques can be expected to reduce overexertion injuries of the arm and shoulder muscles. A reduction in strains and sprains can be expected for a period of 3 to 6 months after a lifting training program because people are more aware of good body mechanics and how to use their muscles effectively during handling tasks. As with most training programs, however, the benefits will begin to "wear off" after six months. The major 53 �---, 1 LJ 1 I 54 Working With Backache I n ; I L-1 points will have to be reinforced at least once a year, preferably in a new format, in order to maintain the lowered incidence of reported strains and sprains. Despite the difficulty of showing that low back pain problems are significantly different before or after lifting training, information about safe lifting techniques should be provided at the workplace. Explanations of body mechanics, patterns of work that increase or decrease the potential for muscle fatigue, and special tech niques developed by people who lift for a living (such as dock workers, furniture movers, and shipping dock handlers) can help others develop appropriate methods for their handling tasks. B. GENERAL LIFTING GUIDELINES There has been considerable discussion over the past 10-15 years about the appropriate way to teach lifting. The method used for many years suggested stereotyped postures with the legs always bent, back straight, chin in, and with the legs doing the lifting. Several researchers have noted that few people when left to their own devices use this technique - except when the object to be lifted is very heavy. Many workers handle objects weighing up to 30 pounds by using a modified derrick lift; the knees are not used to do the lifting, but one leg is stretched out to counterbalance the load on the spine as the object is raised from the floor to a table. Other forms of dynamic or free-style lifting, most of which involve a combination of knee and back bending, have also been observed. Most researchers agree that the stereotyped lifting technique may not be optimal for every worker. The. guidelines given below (and in Figure 11-14) are general ones that apply across different types of lifts, whether they are done free-style or in a more stereotyped lifting posture. 1. Do Not Twist While Lifting This is perhaps the most critical factor in the design of lifting tasks and in their execution. The muscles that support the spine and keep the discs and vertebrae aligned even if there has been some loss offluid from the disc have been enumerated in Chapter 3. Twisting will reduce their effectiveness and increase the rate at which they fatigue, especially if the object being lifted is heavy. C \ I LJ ii L...J ": I u fl LJ 0 r . I G u r D 0 i I L_J �, i / �Lift Safely ---, J 7 I _J I I □ � I ( L; f7 LJ nLJ I I n LJ n I D I LJ u I I r,I LJ \ �---- � \ 6fn �rn u r-i 55 a. Plan the Lift b. Determine the Best Lifting Technique C. Get a Secure Grip d. Pull the Load In Close To Your Body e. Alternate Lifting and Light Work Tasks � �\.� ffln ��i Figure 11-14: Guidelines for Lifting. Five guidelines for performing manual lifting tasks are illustrated. See the text for further discussion. �, 56 Working With Backache I I[ I , ' I L....1 to twist as will the amount of foot clearance and the rate at which D 2. Plan the Lift LJ The orientation of the workplace will affect the person's tendency the lifts must be made. Chapter 5 discusses design factors that can influence the amount of twisting done during lifting tasks. Sizing up the load and determining how it will be lifted and where it will be placed is one way of avoiding overexertion injuries. An unplanned lift may result in the handler having to support the load longer than is necessary. This can produce local muscle fatigue that may increase as the shift proceeds and limit the worker's ability to sustain the work for a full 8 hours. The closer the weight of the object is to the capacity of the weakest muscle groups involved in the lift, the faster these muscle groups will fatigue, and the more opportunity there is for a muscle overexertion injury to occur. The relationship between duration and intensity of effort shown in Figure 11-10 illustrates the impact of extended holding times, as might occur in unplanned lifts, on available strength. One aspect of planning a lift is to determine if it is too heavy or bulky for one person to handle. By assessing the situation first instead of starting directly in on the lift, one can decide if a handling aid, a cart, or another person is needed to move the object. 3. Determine the Best Lifting Technique The size, weight, and location of the lift, the frequency at which it must be repeated, and the duration of continuous lifting are all factors that will help determine the best lifting technique. Compact objects (see Chapter 9) lend themselves to better lifting postures than do bulky objects, and heavy objects require more use of the legs for lifting then do light ones. Lifting frequency and duration should be considered when deciding on the lifting technique, because an awkward posture may become a limiting factor in extended lifting tasks. Calisthenics associated with lifting up the body every time an object is lifted may also limit a person's capacity for a lifting task if the legs are bent for each lift. However, a "derrick" (or stoop) lift (Figure 11-15} is not recom- I , ,fl LJ ufl D I' LJ D n LJ n : I LJ n I I LJ 0 n i I LJ [' , I �J Lift Safely 7 57 _J mended for frequent lifts because of the high pressure it puts on the lumbar discs. ,.., i � a. I I .....J � I i L..-1 D n ...._.; 0 [ n ,. n LJ C r1 LJ Figure 11-15: Bent Knees and Derrick Lifting Styles. Two handling styles are shown, a bent knees (or squat) lift in "a" and a derrick (or stoop) lift in "b". Bent knees lifting is recommended to reduce the stress on the lumbar disc, especially in repetitive lifting tasks. It requires more energy to lift this way, however, because the whole body is lifted with each case. Some workers may lack the leg strength needed to raise the body and load from the squat position and, therefore, may choose to use stoop lift. a In addition to choosing the best technique for lifting, one should plan how to avoid the awkward postures or calisthenics by using aids (see Chapter 8). In choosing the best lifting technique, the feet should be �' 58 Working With Backache placed in a stable posture so that slips or awkwqrd postures during the lift are not likely. Generally, this means that the feet will be about 12 to 18 inches (30 to 46 cm) apart and one foot will be somewhat behind the other one, rather than side by side (Figure 11-16). At least one foot should be flat on the floor. ' LJ n L� n l i n LJ D f7LJ Poor D L11 □ n I ��l Good Figure 11-16: Position of the Feet in Low Lifting. When the feet are spread apart and the back can be kept straight during a low lift ("Good"), the pressure on the lumbar spine is lower than it is if the feet are side by side and the back is flexed ("Poor"). l ! LJ " I I I I �J Lift Safely -7 59 7' 4. Take a Secure Grip on the Object Being Handled _J The hand is the interface between the object being lifted and the person; how secure the grip is will determine how safe the lift will be. If the object has handholds (see Chapter9), a good power grip can be used and stability is less ofa problem. Many of the objects to be lifted, however, are not equipped with handholds. Examples of these include shipping cases, bulk materials in bags, sheet materials such as plywood, and raw materials such as metals. The grip type will depend on the configuration of the load. Wherever possible, a power or ledge support grip (see Figure 11-14 "c") should be used rather than a pinch grip, which has only 25% of the strength of a power grip. 7 ! .__) -7 --i I I --' r-"\ I :......, -, J I i I I l........, n L! D r, i1.......1l n LJ If a handler's grip is not secure there are at least two potential concerns relating to back problems. The first is that the person may lose control of the load while handling it and may take an awkward posture or lose his or her stable foot position while trying to get the load back into control. This can result in a slip or trip accident which may aggravate a back problem. The second potential problem is if a pinch grip is used and the hand and arm muscles fatigue before the lift is completed. The need to readjust the load to use different muscles can resu It in overexertion of the arm or shoulder muscles or twisting of the trunk providing there is no place to set the object down first. Poor grip stability, then, can contribute to low back pain symptoms if handholds are not available and the duration of holding the object is more than a few seconds. 5. Pull the Load in Close to Your Body Lift location determines both the amount of compressive force on the lower lumbar spine and the strength available (i.e., which muscles) for making the lift. The discussion of work location in Chapter 5 explains why this factor is so important. Every lifting-technique emphasizes the need to get the load close to the body to prevent excessive stress on the back and to make the strongest muscles of the arms available to hold the load. If the load can be held close to the body, the grip is usually more stable and the shoulder muscles do not limit the duration of holding. In addition, a person can walk normally without having to hyper- ��_J 60 Working With Backache extend the back in order to counteract the forward pull of the load. Some lifting situations make it difficult to keep the object close to the body because the handler cannot bend his or her knees due to an obstruction. Objects that are handled near the floor and that are too large to fit comfortably between the legs during lifting will cause the lift to occur at a greater horizontal distance from the spine than is desirable. In some of these situations a lifting aid or a second persori may be needed to reduce the risk of overexerting the muscles or putting excessive pressures on the lumbar discs. 6. Alternate Lifting Tasks with Lighter Work Heavy lifting is not usually sustained because people recog nize thattheir muscles are fatiguing and find ways to take breaks to rest the muscles. Sustained moderately heavy lifting tasks are more common, often found at the ends of conveyor lines where materials are loaded or unloaded at a fixed rate. These can become problem tasks, especially if an awkward posture such as leaning to one side, bending forward, or twisting is incorporated in the way the lifting is done. The design of lifting tasks and the need to provide adequate recovery time in repetitive lifting jobs are discussed in Chapters 7 and 10, and some suggestions for ways to structure jobs where repetitive lifting is done for a majority of the shift are included in Chapter 11. The general guideline for job design is to provide alternate tasks that do not heavily stress the same muscles. These lighter tasks allow the active muscles to recover and are alternated with the lifting tasks throughout the shift. i I . I LJ i I LJ n I I L_j :1 j I □ r I LJ I n lJ □ n LJ C. OTHER MANUAL HANDLING TECHNIQUES Not all objects are "lifted" in the workplace; but in choosing guidelines for handling materials manually one has to assume that one person's "lower" may become another person's "lift." Lowering takes less energy to perform but the general guidelines given in "B" above are still appropriate for these tasks. Two other types of handling are discussed below: two-person lifting and sliding or pushing. " I I I I .'7 n I �i J Lift Safely 7' ....1 7 ! n 61 1. Two-Person Lifting There is a general assumption that if one person should not be making a lift, two people can do it. Although this may be appropriate for bulky loads that are not very heavy, it is not necessarily appropriate for heavy lifting. Even if a team of handlers is well-matched in terms of their body size, strengths, and work capacities, they cannot always perfectly share a load when handling it together. Thus, it is not true that two people can lift twice as much weight as one person can. Some suggestions for determining when two-person lifting is most appropriate are given below: L..i I\L; nLJ D D n u D n u D a) When an object to be handled has two dimensions that are more than 30 inches (76 cm), even if it is very light, two people can probably handle it more safely than can one. b) If a lift is being done very infrequently and the object exceeds the guidelines for one-person lifting but is not more than 50% heavier than the one person lifting weight limit, it can probably be safely handled by two people. c) If the object to be handled is very long (pipe, conduit) and is awkward for one person to balance without hyperextending the back, a two-person lift is recommended. d) If items, such as bags, are handled frequently and for extended durations (more than one hour continuously), total lifting time and local muscle fatigue can be reduced by having two people handle them together. 2. Sliding and Pushing Local muscle fatigue can become a problem when an object is handled frequently for extended periods. Inadequate time for the active muscles to recover between exertions will cause a build-up of fatigue, and the opportunity for an overexertion injury to occur will be greater. One approach to reduce this fatigue is to reduce the amount of effort for each transfer of the product by not actually lifting it. Designing the workplace so the object can be transferred using a push, pull, or slide can reduce the muscle �ii I . 62 Working With Backache work and make the total workload more acceptable as well. Guidelines for the amount of force to be exerted and for the design of handling tasks to permit the use of sliding are included in Chapters 7 and 8. D 0 D D D n LJ r u l D 0 n i LJI D n LJ n �I I I 7 c...J D D n I i LJ C [i Section Ill: How the Workplace Can Be Improved Chapter 5: Work Location Heights and Distances Chapter 6: Seating Chapter 7: Design of Manual Handling Tasks L...J D D D D □ '7 lJ Chapter 8: Special Workplace Aids for People with Low Back Pain �D D D 0 D D n u D D D D D D n ll �J J -, D D D --, J n D D D Q D LJ Section Ill: How the Workplace Can Be Improved � Even if the worker tries to minimize over-exertion on the job, workplace design factors can contribute to his or her low back pain symptoms. These include work heights and reaches that are inappropriate for sustained work, poor seating, and repetitive lifting tasks done in workplaces where unnecessary effort is built into the job. Identification of these workplace problems and suggestions of ways to overcome them by better design and worker accommodations are covered in this section. CHAPTER 5: WORK LOCATION - HEIGHTS AND DISTANCES Where the hands are located when a task is performed and how closely the body posture conforms to an upright alignment of the spine will determine the stress on the lower back. Body mechanics, or biomechanics, can be used to analyze the direct, shear, and rotation (torque) forces on the lower spine and the muscle work required to keep it aligned. The compressive, shear, and rotation forces are important contributors to small tears in the disc casing that can result in fluid loss from the disc and instability in the L4-L5 (fourth and fifth lumbar) vertebral column. The demands on the hip flexor and extensor, erector spinae, and abdominal muscles to keep the spine aligned are greater when this instability is present (see Chapter 3). The consequences of their failure to keep the spine aligned can be a very painful compressed nerve root. In this chapter some discussion of the 65 �66 n Working With Backache LJ biomechanical stresses on the back is presented, and guidelines for the design of working heights, reach distances, and workplace· orientation are given. A. LOCATION AND BODY MECHANICS The spinal column is designed to support the weight of the body and forms curves at two locations, at the cervical region (below the head) and at the lumbar region in the lower back. These curves are towards the ventral (or belly) side. When a person is standing upright the center of mass of the body is centered over the skeleton and ankles so minimal muscle effort is required. If the person reaches forward or to the side, the muscles of the trunk have to do extra work in order to counteract the tendency of the body to follow the arm in that direction. Alternatively, the person has to realign other parts of the body, such as one leg, to reverse the forward fall and to reestablish the center of mass over the skeleton. A teeter-totter analogy simplifies the mechanics. Assume that child #1 weighs 50 pounds (23 kg) and child _#2 weighs 25 pounds (11.5 kg). The length of the teeter-totter board is 20 feet (6 meters). If the board is pivoted around its center, child #2 will never be able to get child #1 off of the ground because the balance point requires an equation of force times distance on each side. At the board's midpoint: Child #1 (50 lb) (10 ft) 500 Child #2 vs VS (25 lb) (10 ft) 250 If the teeter-totter board is set so that child #1 is only 5 feet (1.5 m) from the pivot point, child #2 will be 15 feet (4.6 m) from that point and can lift and hold the heavier child off the ground. Child #1 (50 lb) (5 ft) 250 Child #2 VS vs (25 lb) (15 ft) 375 If the two children are to be equally balanced, the distance from child #1 to the pivot point should be 6.7 feet (2.0 m) and child #2 should be 13.3 feet (4.1 m) from this point. D n LJ D D D C D D D D D D 11 �LJ nLJ D D 0 0 0 D D D D 11u D □ D Work Location-Heights and Distances 67 The trunk extensor muscles, or erector spinae, are the primary muscles involved in keeping the spine upright. If one leans forward, the erector spinae are activated to pull back on the trunk. The weight of the upper body becomes the equivalent of one of the children on the teeter-totter. The work of the erector spinae muscles to counteract the upper body motion is equivalent to the other child, measured as force rather than weight. The lever arms, or distances, on which the forces work are: the distance from the spine to the body's center of mass when the person leans forward, which is the force arm (upper body mass that has to be counteracted); and the distance from the insertion of the erector spinae muscles to the same point on the spine, which is the resistance arm (muscle work to counteract the forward lean). The resistance arm is about 2 inches (5 cm) long, and is fixed by one's anatomy. Unlike the children on the teeter totter, then, the resistance lever arm can not change, so the work of the erector spinae muscles is directly. proportional to the horizontal distance from the spine to the center of mass of the body or to the center of mass of the body plus the weight of an object held in the hands or carried on the trunk. The farther that weight is from the ankles, the more work the back extensor muscles have to do and the faster they will fatigue. An example of the impact of horizontal distance on compressive forces on the spine is shown in Figure 111-1. The forward bending moment has to be counteracted by activity of the erector spinae muscles and this force is transmitted to the lower spine. The posterior third of the fourth and fifth lumbar discs (L4 and LS) are most "vulnerable" to these forces as they form the "S-shaped" curve of the lower spine. Shear and rotational forces on the lumbar discs will be created if the upper body is moved to one side, as in bending to one side or reaching across the body, or if the trunk is rotated to one side even if the body is still upright. This unequal loading of the spine puts the back and hip extensor musc_les at bio mechanical disadvantage. The forces they develop are not fully transmitted to the spine because of the altered orientation of the force arm due to the twist. This would be somewhat analogous to putting a bend at one end of the teeter-totter. Because the force is not in Iine with the pivot point, the board's stabi I ity wi11 be greatly �68 Working With Backache Forward Bending Moment= (20) (20) + (100) (8) = 1200 inch lbs. or (90) (.51) + (445) (.20) = 135 N.m --, / '\ ,, ,-J I \ \ m � -�--,FA2 -,, ,r-A, "\ nl_J 17 Forward Bending Moment= (20) (15) + (100) (6) = 900 inch lbs. or (90) (.38) + (445) (.15) = 101 N.m � D I ', I �· -�-, I \ !� � I - ;--J F2 F, and F2 both equal 20 lbm (90 Newtons) FA,= 15 inches (38 cm) FA2= 20 inches (51 cm) FA3= 6 inches (15 cm) FA4= 8 inches (20 cm) Upper body weight= 100 lbm (445 Newtons) Figure 111-1: Load Location and Forward Bending Moment. The forward bending moment is a function of the weight of an object held in front of the body and the weight of the body as the handler bends forward. The moment is the s um of these weights times their force arms or levers. FA, and FA2 are the distances from the spine to the center of the load and FA3 and FA4 are the distances from the spine to the center,of mass of the upper body. nLJ 0 D D 1JL D D nLJ n l�1 t7 LJ □ 11 ' I �I _J Work Location-Heights and Distances 69 7 I ·-7 reduced. In the case of the spine, the trunk and hip flexor muscles wil I have to work harder to apply the same force to the force arm, and they will, therefor�. be more subject to fatigue. �' When an activity requires high reaches or overhead work, the spine is arched backwards or hyperextended. This motion mechanically compresses the posterior third of the L4 and L5 discs especially, and puts the erector spinae muscles at a disadvantage because they are no longer stretched for optimal tension development. Repeated hyperextension of the back may increase the opportunities for disc flattening in persons with degenerative disc disease, thereby reducing stability in the lower spine. J I --.J nLJ n , I D B. WORKING HEIGHTS AND REACHES n LJ n LJ D nu n i \ L.J nu 17 LJ r-1 LJ Work surface height will determine the amount of stress on the back and shoulder muscles for work that is done by people of very different body sizes. The most comfortable working heights are at or around elbow height. If forces are applied, the work surface should be belpw elbow height. If fine visual attention is needed, the surface should be higher. A too low work surface results in static loading of the back extensor muscles or the legs because the worker has to lean forward, bend over, or bend the knees to get into the right posture for the work. A too high work surface requires the worker to elevate the elbows to do the task; this puts a static load on the shoulder muscles that can result in their early fatigue. Anthropometric data of the elbow heights of people standing upright (Figure 111-2) suggest that a standing work surface should be between 35 and 41 inches (89 and 104 cm) above the floor, the lower value for tasks where force exertion is needed and the upper value for visually-demanding work. For seated work the elbow height is measured relative to seat height. It assumes that the seat height can be adjusted ,o meet the work surface height needs. Elbow heights range from 7 to 12 inches above the seat. Seated work surface heights can be varied from 25 to 32 inches (64 to 81 cm) above the floor providing a footrest is available for people with shorter legs (see Figure 111-3). �! 70 ; L.J Working With Backache n u I r--1 50/50 Population Percentiles, Inches (cm) 5th 50th 95th 56.8(144) 62.1(158) 67.8(172) 48.4(125) 54.4(137) I I I r·1 ui Standing Eye Height i r-1 Shoulder Height I I LJ :7 I 38.0(96) 37.4(95) 42.0(107) 40.9(104) ':m I r1 IL_JI r Elbow Height Waist Height nLJ I I :7 ILJ, 15.3(39) 17.2(44) 19.4(49)- 17 LJ Knee(Tibial) Height n LJ :7 l_j Figure 111-2: Standing Anthropometric Measurements. Five sets of values are shown for 5th (small), 50th (average), and 95th (large) percentile heights for a mixed population (men and women). The values are given in inches and centimeters. These are useful in determining appropriate heights for the design of standing work places. ur-1 r1 LJ r~1 ' ' �' �_) Work Location-Heights and Distances r1 , u r, 50/50 Population, Percentiles, Inches (cm) I I ! I LJ ; 5th 50th 27.4 (70) 29.9 (76) 21.4 (54) 23.6 (60) 95th Eye Height, Seated (measured from seat) I LJ r1 / i LJ D n [7 LJ Midshoulder Height (measured from seat) Elbow Height (Measured from seat) 7.3 (18) 9.3 (24) 15.1 (39) 16.6 (43) i \ L_j 26.1 (66) �r 11.4 (29) Popliteal Height (Back of knee to floor) r: ' I LJ n I i L; n I I I ! L_J r~1 , I LJ r1 u t-� L,.; Figure 111-3: Seated Anthropometric Measurements. Four sets of anthropometric measurements that are useful for seated workplace design are shown. The values are for the 5th, 50th and 95th percentile hei�hts based on a mixed population of men and women. All of the heights except popliteal height are measured from the seat pan, not the floor. 71 �n , I ._ ___ _I 72 Working With Backache fl LJ r1 Standing forward reach capability is a function of arm length and of the height at which the reach is made. The range of motion of the shoulder in moving the arm up and down in front of the body is in an arc with the greatest forward reach available at shoulder level. As the arm moves above shoulder level it loses forward reach capability, falling from 22 inches to 15 inches (56 to 38 cm) as it moves from 54 to 72 inches (137 to 183 cm) above the floor. At 80 inches (203 cm) above the floor the forward reach is less than 5 inches (13 cm). Below shoulder level the forward reach is also less. Many tasks are done at these heights, and the worker has to lean forward or bend down to get the additional reach capability. At elbow height, for example, most people have only about 15 to 18 inches (38 to 46 cm) of forward reach, and at mid-thigh height (about 30 inches, or 76 cm) their forward reach has decreased to 5 inches (13 cm). If the reach is not directly in front of the body, but is done more towards one side, an additional 3 to 5 inches (8 to 13 cm) of forward reach may be lost. If two arms are needed instead of one to reach an item, forward reach is about 2 inches (5 cm) less in front of the body. It is even more severely reduced if the reach is more than 25 inches (64 cm) to one side of the center of the body. A general guideline based on the reach and height inter actions suggests that work surface heights should be kept between 35 and 41 inches (89 and 104 cm) for standing tasks whenever possible. Forward reach requirements should be kept within about 15 inches (38 cm) of the front of the body in order to reduce the need for bending to extend the reach (Figure 111-4). Lower and higher work heights are commonly found and are associated with either back or shoulder muscle fatigue in many people. Overhead assembly or repair work, as in installing duct work or working under a car in a repair shop, should recognize that more than 5 inches (13 cm) of forward reach will be difficult for smaller workers. r7 I I n LJ n LJ n i i l.J n I , I I LJ n l__J I I :7 Lj ___,; n : I I I l__; 1-l LJ r-1 u ,i For seated work the same forward reach arc applies; the farther to the side or the higher the reach is, the closer the object to be reached must be. Forward reaches of 15 inches (38 cm) at the work surface (Figure 111-5) and no more than 10 inches (25 cm) forward at 25 inches (64 cm) above the work surface are I I LJ ; i/ ! I l_J r, . I �Work Location-Heights and Distances -, r7 ,, 22 (56) ' '--' ' ,, L� I Figure 111-4: Standing Forward Reach Capability. The forward reach capability of a small person (5th percentile functional arm reach from the front of the body) in a standing workplace is shown at 35 and 50 inches (89 and 127 cm) above the floor. The guideline of keeping forward reaches within 15 inches (38 cm) of the front of the body is developed from this anthropometric data. 73 �74 n nLJ I I L __J Working With Backache n LJ n recommended. If the reaches exceed these values, the worker will have to lean forward and may lose backrest support. This could result in an aggravation of symptoms for a person with back pain who has to sit for a majority of the shift. I I l_j I I 1.J n 17 (43) LJ n I I n I u I □ n I \ u rI ~1 I LJ I I LJ r7 Figure 111-5: Seated Forward Reach Capability. Forward reach capability at heights between 25 and 40 inches above the floor in a seated workplace is shown for a small person (5th percentile functional arm reach from the front of the body). The 15 inches (38 cm) forward reach guideline for design of seated work tasks is based on this anthropometric data. n u I ' n LJ ,'7 : I �_j ' Work Location-Heights �nd Distances n Reaches below the work surface at a seated workplace are of concern because forward reach is very limited (to a few inches). The worker will often have to twist to reach an object that has to be handled or operated. Repeated movements below the work surface may also result in rubbing the trunk on the chair's backrest and can produce local skin abrasions. In general, materials, items, or equipment that have to be reached or activated frequently should be located near the work surface and within the recommended forward reach dimensions given above. Materials that have to be accessed infrequently might better be placed where the operator has to get up to obtain them. This would assure some postural adjustment in an otherwise pre dominantly seated task. ' I' ' LJ n ' I LJ n I I LJ n LJ I I n u nu nLJ nLJ C D r7 LJ D 75 C. ORIENTATION OF THE WORKPLACE The way the workplace is designed will influence how much turning or twisting a person has to do to accomplish the work. The illustration at the beginning of Section 111 illustrates two designs, one where the work is done in a 180-degree arc and other where the work is kept within a 90-degree arc. In the first example, the operator has to turn 180 degrees from the conveyor to the pallet for each cycle. This 180-degree rotation in each direction can increase the shear and rotational forces on the lower lumbar discs and will reduce the effectiveness of the abdominal and hip flexor muscles in supporting the lower spine. Orienting the workplace to keep the movement pattern within a 90-degree arc reduces the opportunities for extreme twisting and reduces the movement time as well; this makes it possible to complete more assemblies per shift if the operation is self-paced. In the example in Figure 111-6, the 90-degree arc is created by placing the packing work surface perpendicular to the supply table. The worker can reach the incoming product better and load it directly into the packing boxes, which can be at a lower level. The packed boxes can be placed on the pallet in another, separate, 90 degree turn. The supply table can be used as temporary on-line storage to relieve the time pressure of the conveyor's delivery of product. �n! I 76 Working With Backache These changes in the orientation of the workplace relative to the conveyor line and the pallet are intended to make it more difficult for the worker to twist and put shear forces on the lower spine. Other designs reduce extended reaches by making a cut out (semi-circular) in the work surface so the worker can access materials that would otherwise be outside of a comfortable reach. These designs can be used both in standing and sitting work places. This approach reduces the potential for fatigue of the extensor muscles of the back by keeping the body more upright during work. \___ J nu n LJ n ! \ LJ n LJ n LJ n LJ I I n LJ nLJ i' LJ D 11 nI LJ Figure 111-6: Workplace Orientation in a Packing Task. An example is shown of a workplace design that permits two 90 degree turns to be made in a packing cycle. The product arrives via a conveyor to a supply table, is packed at a second, lower table. The cases are then transferred to the pallet after severai have been filled. This reduces the need for twisting a full 180 degrees as could occur if the packing is done on the supply table. I c_J un n i I �Work Location-Heights and Distances I I L_j n 77 When materials, such as boxes or parts, have to be stored in and around the workplace, the guidelines for height, distance, and weight in lifting tasks (see Chapter 7) should be followed. The orientation of the supplies or parts should be such that they can be moved without twisting or hyperextending the back and are not so low that the legs interfere with lifting them. These limitations suggest that storage areas should be from 20 to 55 inches (51 to 140 cm) above the floor, whenever possible. LJ [7 I ', � D D J �·. ' n u ' wi 'L.->I ,..,, I ' I : LJ n u �J 7 _J Section 111: How the Workplace Can Be Improved I. _j 1 rn CHAPTER 6: SEATING _J n � D D D D D D D D D There is a common policy of taking people who have low back pain out of standing jobs and putting them in jobs where they can sit for the majority of the shift. This policy is probably based on the observation that if one stands all day, backache often results. However, sitting all day can be equally hard on the back, especially if the chair being used is not well designed or if there are not supplementary aids such as footrest available. In this chapter some information about chairs and how they influence the stability of the low back is presented. An approach to selecting a chair for the workplace is presented in Appendix B. A. TYPES OF WORKPLACES- STANDING, SITTING, AND SIT/STAND The decision about whether a job will be a seated or a standing one is made primarily on the basis of the type of work to be done. Although it is considered preferable to provide seating, if possible, many tasks make it necessary to keep the worker on his or her feet for a majority of the shift. Some of the job demands that make a standing workplace more suitable than a sitting one are: 1) When work has to be done over distances that exceed the comfortable arm reach envelope (about 15 inches or 38 cm on either side of the body). 2) When work is done on a moving part or conveyor and the worker has to move along with the part. 79 �80 Working With Backache 3) When the work is spread out over several parts of a machine or in a storage area. 4) When the height of the work above the floor is variable and some of it cannot be easily reached from a seated posture. 5) When heavy weights are handled or large forces must be exerted. 6) When the visual needs make a seated posture inappropriate, either because of difficulty in seeing something on the line or because one has to move around to get the best angle to view a display. In the above job conditions a standing workplace will be preferable to a seated one; but during periods when the worker is waiting for others or monitoring the equipment, a chair or support stool could be used for postural relief of the back. The opportunity to sit even for short periods should reduce the stress on the back from continuous standing and should, therefore, reduce the complaints from those with recurrent low back pain. Sitting workplaces are more often observed in light assembly tasks, inspection stations, and in other tasks done primarily with the arms and hands, including typing, data entry and retrieval on computer terminals, and other record keeping. If a person is in a job where he or she is kept sitting for the majority of the shift, the chair provided in the workplace should be carefully chosen to give good postural support to the back. These chair character istics are detailed below. Jobs that do not give a person the chance to get up and walk around fairly regularly are often found to be associated with complaints of low back pain from people who already have symptoms. Examples of these types of tasks include work where everything is delivered to the seated work place and finished product is removed by someone else or by a conveyor. The worker does not have to get up to procure new supplies or dispose of the completed work, so he or she remains seated for 2 hours continuously. Workplaces at conveyors where assemblies, inspection, or other tasks are done on a part as it comes past the worker in the seated station may also make the worker "captive" to the chair. This is especially true if the L D n LJ D nLJ D D n LJ D D D D D n �J ·7 J -7 I _J 7 7 ___J Seating 81 conveyor heights are most appropriate for seated work and the tasks are not easy to perform in a standing posture. Sit/stand workplaces have been recommended for many years by ergonomics and human factors specialists because the option for either sitting or standing provides postural relief for the back. Designing a good sit/stand workplace is not very easy, however, because a work height that is good for a standing workplace is too high for a seated workplace. Simply adjusting the chair upwards to get the worker's elbows up above the work surface is not satisfactory because it is difficult to get on and off of a chair when its seat is adjusted to more than 21inches (53 cm) above the floor. In view of this difficulty, special supports or sit-stools have been recommended. In general, these provide a seat that the worker can lean against while the legs remain in a mostly standing posture. The support provides some relief for the back; the feet can be rested, too, if there is a standby break in the work. These support stools are not as readily available as are chairs, but they have appeared in production furniture adver tisements more frequently over the past few years. Many of the designs first came from Scandinavian countries. B. CHAIR DESIGN 7 c.J D D D D D The design of chairs for use in offices or production areas should incorporate several common features (Figure 111-7). For production or office workers who are seated for a large part of the shift, well-designed chairs are necessary to avoid back pain, to provide good support for the trunk and legs, and to reduce forms of discomfort, such as result from pressure on the back of the thigh, that might contribute to reduced individual productivity. 1. Chair Seat Height Adjustability A good chair must be adjustable in height so it can optimize the working height for a person's hands. The lower limit of adjustability should be low enough so that people with short lower legs can place their feet on the floor and still keep their thighs parallel to the floor while seated. The upper height adjustment should be to at least a level where people with very long lower legs can sit without having their knees well above their hips. For this reason, chairs that adjust between 15and 22 (38and �82 Working With Backache i L r L [ [ ,-- ' a. Seat Height Adjustability From 15 to 22 inches (38 to 56 cm) b. Seat Width 17 to 19 inches (43 to 48 cm) c. Seat Depth (or Length) 17 inches (43 cm) d. Seat Slope 5-1 O degrees up (towards the front) Chair Backrest e. Size 6-9 inches (15-23 cm) high 12-14 inches (3o-36 cm) wide f. Movement Up and Down 7 to 10 inches (18-25 cm) above the seat g. Movement In and Out 12 to 17 inches (3Q-43 cm) from the front of the seat Figure 111-7: Recommended Seating Design. The recommended chair height adjustability, seat dimensions, and backrest design are summarized. See the text for discussions of the recommendations. [ D D D D D n �Seating 7 J J 7 7 J 7 i! __J -, 7 J -, ! c.....J -i i I LJ 83 56 cm) inches above the floor (seat pan to floor distance) are recommended. Higher adjustability may be useful for situations where footrests are built into the workplace and where work surface heights are fixed at greater than 30 inches (76 cm) above the floor in a seated workplace. 2. Chair Seat Width If a chair is to be used comfortably by a large proportion of the workforce, it should be wide enough to give good support to the buttocks but not so wide that sliding on and off is difficult. If the chair has arms, the inside distance betwee,n the arm rests will have to be wide enough to accommodate a large person's hip breadth plus any winter clothing worn. This would be about 19 inches (48 cm). If there are no arm rests or lateral limits of comfort (see below), then a width of 17 inches (43 cm) should be adequate. Chair design that produces an "edge" at the limits of the seat's width causes discomfort because the force per unit area on the buttocks is considerably greater on the edge than on the seat pan. This can limit lateral mobility and postural adjustments in the chair and increase back discomfort because of the restriction. Such edges are more commonly seen in molded plastic chairs than in fabric-covered seating. They should be avoided in making selections of cafeteria, conference room, or auditorium chairs whose chief virture is that they stack well. 3. Chair Seat Length or Depth Recent surveys of home and office chairs indicate that the chair seat depth (front to back of the seat) is often greater than the distance between the back and the back of the knee (buttocks to popliteal distance) of many people. If this is true, then people sitting on those chairs often have to slide forward in order to be able to put their feet on the floor. By sliding forward they may not be able to get the benefit of the backrest (discussed below), so there is a greater possibility of developing back pain symptoms during extended sitting. To accommodate the upper leg length of most people, chair seat depth should not exceed 17 inches (43 cm). If the depth is much less than this, however, people with very �84 Working With Backache long upper legs will have inadequate leg support. Thus, a seat depth of 17 inches (43 cm) is probably optimal. This dimension interacts with the height adjustment characteristics of the chair. A chair that does not adjust below 18 inches (46cm):for instance, should have a seat depth of not more than 17 inches. The drag on the back and upper leg will become excessively fatiguing and painfu I if the person with shorter legs cannot reach the floor with his or her feet and also cannot use the chair's back support. A footrest will relieve this discomfort somewhat, but seat depth should also be specified to improve seated comfort. 4. Chair Seat Slope Recent discussions of chair seat slope have provided rec ommendations to slope it 5 to 15 degrees up or to design it 45 degrees down and have the worker sit and kneel simultaneously to relieve the back. The usual recommendation is to slope the seat pan up slightly (about 5-1 O degrees) so the front of the seat is about 1 inch (2.5 cm) higher than its back. The seat height adjustability is measured from the seat's front surface. Too much upward slope of the seat restricts leg movements forward for postural relief; the edge of the chair becomes a pressure point for the underside of the upper leg. A rounded edge with padding is preferable to a plastic or metal edge. A continuation of the chair's seat beyond the turned edge assures that a sharp edge will not produce discomfort when the legs are brought back alongside the chair base during activities where the worker has to lean forward. The recent introduction of seating that angles the seat forward and provides rest points for the knees and ankles is based on the theory that tilting the pelvis forward will reduce the stress on the lower spine and provide more comfortable seating over long periods. Such seating appears to be bestin tasks where the worker does not have to lean forward to write or to do a task requiring force exertion. The weight must be evenly spread between the buttocks, knees, and ankles to avoid symptoms of "housemaid's knee" or sore ankles in extended sitting on these chairs. 5. Chair Backrest [ [ r1 L.... r I I L i L rL I L_ !- L.... [ D D n �Seating --, --, _j -, _J The backrest of a chair should be large enough to give support to the spine without interfering with sideways motions. It should be adjustable up and down and in and out, or it should be formed to provide lumbar (lower spine) and upper thoracic (below the shoulders) support. The usual recommendation for the size of an adjustable height backrest is from 6 to 9 inches (15-23 cm) high and 12 to 14 inches (30-36 cm) wide. It should be able to move from 7 to 10 inches (18-25 cm) above the seat height in order to fit most people's need for lumbar support. It should also be able to adjust in and out from 12 to 17 inches (30-43 cm) from the front of the seat. This will provide support to the back when a person is leaning forward about 5 inches (13 cm). Without such horizontal adjustability, the worker who performs a job with extended forward reaches at a seated workplace gets little benefit from a backrest (Figure 111-8). --, 7 ___J 7 -, _J 85 Figure 111-8: Work Location and Backrest Utilization in a Seated Workplace. A seated workplace job involving a wrapping task requires the worker to l ean forward. He or she loses back support because the backrest does not easily move forward. If this task is done for several minutes continuously, symptoms can occur in people with recurrent low back pain. �i 86 Working With Backache [ More recently chairs are available that are molded or covered with fabric to support the whole back, and they are adjustable as a unit (Figure 111-9). Either the back follows the worker as he or she leans forward because it is springloaded, or the worker uses a push button adjust to bring the backrest forward as needed. The design of the backrest in these chairs wi"II determine how effective they are in reducing back stress during prolonged seating. If the major support for the spine is near the shoulder blades, the pressure on the L5 (fifth lumbar) disc will not be reduced as much as it will if there is support both there and in the lumbar region. If the backrest is sloped backward about 15 degrees, the compressive force on the lumbar disc will be less than if it is upright. The backrest in a molded chair or in an "office chair" must be designed in view of the need for support at two places on the spine. Adjustability that allows the worker to benefit from the backrest when he or she is leaning forward in the chair (Figure 111-9) is also desirable. [ i L I [ C. b. [ [ rL__ r Figure 111-9: Molded and Tubular Chair Design. Examples of a molded office chair with fabric covering ("a") and of two inexpensive molded ("b") and tubular ("c") chairs that are typically used in production or assembly areas are illustrated. Selection of these types of chairs should emphasize the backrest design characteristics shown here. L ' L_ �I i D 1-7 LJ r7 � IJ D l-1 D 17 LJ 0 n [_j LJ I-�! D 1'1 C Seating 87 6. Other Characteristics - Swivel, Support, Covering Chairs that are used in workplaces where workers do not have opportunities to get up or to change posture should be stable, should move easily to the side so twisting is not required of the worker, and should be covered with a material that "breathes" so that localized sweating does not occur. Most industrial chairs have 4 or 5 legs to provide stability against tipping. The 5-legged version is recommended if the seated worker has to reach for objects that are outside of his or her comfortable reach distance (usually more than 15 inches, or 38 cm, away). As body weight is shifted to one side, upwards or downwards, the 5 legs provide a stable base and reduce the chance that the chair will tilt with the worker. Since it is likely that a person working at a seated workplace will occasionally, if not frequently, have to get supplies, parts, or tools at locations to one side of the body or the other, it is important to provide swivel capability in the workplace chair. If the chair will swivel, and if there is adequate leg clearance, then the needed items can be procured without twisting the upper body. Such twisting is a major aggravator of low back pain symptoms and should be avoided. The fabrics used to cover a workplace chair are often chosen according to aesthetic, cost, or durability considerations. Al though these factors are important, one should also consider the worker's comfort. How well the material breathes and whether prolonged sitting will result in stickiness and sweating has a significant effect on worker comfort. The choice of a molded chair with or without additional padding may be best resolved by considering how long the worker has to stay in it. Plastic, unperforated coverings, and other fabrics that do not breathe should not be used in workplaces where extended sitting is required and where seasonal temperatures may exceed the upper comfort zone level of 78 degrees F (25 degrees C). The decision about which chair should be used at a seated place is influenced by the cost, durability, appearance, and perceived importance of the chair. The design factors described above will influence how comfortable the chair is for the worker �88 Working With Backache and whether low back pain symptoms are more likely to be aggravated with extended sitting. Using the guidelines for chair selection found in Appendix B, one can try to optimize the chair for the workplace and job in order to reduce the potential for back pain problems. C. FOOTRESTS AND ARMRESTS To provide optimal comfort in a seated workplace it is advisable to provide an adjustable footrest as wel I as an adjustable chair. The footrest will give the worker more options for adjusting his or her height relative to the work surface. If the work surface is high, the chair can be adjusted to a higher part of its range so the work is near elbow height. As long as the footrest is available to support the feet of people with shorter legs, the higher workplace can be used comfortably by most workers. Footrests are available as plates that can be adjusted in height and in degree of tilt. A surface that is at least 16 by 12 inches (41 by 30 cm) in length and width should hold both feet comfortably, and it should tilt up from the horizontal surface no more than 30 degrees (see Figure 111-5). Height adjustability in 2-inch (5 cm) increments is recommended. Styrofoam packaging material, phone books, and shipping cases have been used as makeshift footrests in some places. These are better than no footrest, but they do not tilt to provide the best comfort for the ankles in the seated posture. A footrest can also be built into the workplace station, either as part of the bench structure or as part of the chair (see Figure 111-3). The main disadvantage of chair or workbench footrests is that they tend to be in fixed locations and do not offer the possibility of postural adjustments. Footrest rings on chairs are sometimes not adjustable in height, so the ring can only be used when the chair is in the low part of its height range. As the chair goes up, the footrest no longer keeps the thighs parallel to the floor, and discomfort in the low back area is more likely to result. Armrests are useful aids in jobs involving, for example, prolonged assembly or inspection tasks. The armrests may be on the chair when monitoring or light work is done while the worker i-1 , I I� 7 J l�"l �I �_j Seating '-"' ,---, ..__, I n LJ D n Lj 0 nLJ 0 0 n LJ 17 LJ 11 C 89 sits back in the chair. They should not run the full depth of the seat, however, because they may make it difficult to pull the chair up to the workplace. If the arms do not fit under the work surface when the chair is near the top of its height adjustment, the worker may not be able to get close enough to read the video display or paperwork at the workplace. Then he or she may have to lean forward, losing the chair's back support and potentially incurring back muscle fatigue and pain. Armrests that are attached to the work surface and can be adjusted in many directions have been used in some fine dexterity assembly work or in other work done primarily with the hands and fingers. These armrests reduce the static muscle loading of the shoulder and arm muscles and reduce the potential for tremor to occur in the hands. The most important attributes to look for in armrests are: 1. Adjustability- including distance, angle, and tilt. 2. Padding for comfort - using fabric or materials that breathe and don't cause heat accumulation and sweating. 3. No sharp edges - so there is no discomfort caused by high force per unit area on the skin on the inside of the forearm as it lies on the armrest. 4. Ease of adjustment - an abilit y to change the direction of the arm rest by exerting additional force on it or using a simple fastener, like a wing nut, to reset the orientation. For further information on chair, footrest, and armrest design, see Appendix B. �~l ~,_.J r· CJ C-:J CJ r--7 c::___ _J CJ l_l ;,__) L __) ! ' �I _j -, __, I 7 ! _j Section Ill: How the Workplace Can Be Improved 7 � ..J CHAPTER 7: DESIGN OF MANUAL HANDLING TASKS r7 �1 Work involving lifting, lowering, pushing, and pulling of materials is often associated with reports of low back pain in industry. Some possible reasons for that association are dis cussed in this section. Guidelines for the design of occasional and frequent lifting tasks and force exertions are also given. r7 I I I L...I r -: A. ASSOCIATION OF MANUAL HANDLING AND LOW BACK PAIN ...._) lJ r1 0 r1 lJ ,-, I I I I u n LJ Studies of the incidence of low back pain are complicated by the variety of ways in which the data are collected. A questionnaire that asks if people "have ever had" low back pain gets quite different information than a search of medical records to see if the same people "have ever reported" low back pain. If the question is further refined to "Have you ever lost time from work for low back pain?" the numbers become still lower. A similar problem occurs in trying to define the relationship between manual lifting and low back pain. One has to classify the lifting or handling requirements in a way that identifies the potential risk to the lumbar discs or to back, arm, or shoulder muscles. At extreme lift locations or heavy weights, for example, this risk is reasonably easy to define. In the center of the continuum, however, the definition is less clear, and this makes it difficult to attribute the incidence of back proplems to specific lifting conditions. Studies from Eastman Kodak Company, the University of Michigan, and Liberty Mutual have identified the following relationships between manual handling and low back pain: 91 �r i L_, 92 Working With Backache L 1) People who work in heavy jobs have more need to report low back pain symptoms than do people in lighter jobs (Rowe). r I 2) Lifting that puts high compressive forces on the L4 and L5 discs (more than 650 kg) is associated with twice the average number of low back pain reports (Chaffin and Park). r7 I , L, 3) People who perform lifting tasks requiring muscle strengths that are above the acceptable levels for 75% of the working population report three times more low back pain (Snook). r-1 On the basis of this evidence, it is advisable to examine the design of manual handling tasks and to try to design them so the disc compressive forces are not too high, the strengths required will accommodate of least 75% of the potential workforce in terms of "acceptable" lifting conditions, and the postures do not further aggravate low back problems because of twisting or uneven loading of the spine. fl L, ! I LJ LJ ' I LJ 17 B. HANDLING LOCATION The biomechanics of postures and loads on the lumbar spine have been discussed in Chapter 5. When an object is lifted, the center of mass of the body and the load is pulled forward (longer force arm) and the back extensor muscles have to do additional work to keep the body from falling forward. In the teeter-totter analogy, adding the load to one child's end means that the other child has either to increase the load on the opposite end or to lengthen the lever in order to balance the board. The back's muscle lever is fixed, so this option is not available; the only way the increased load can be counteracted is to change the amount of force exerted by the extensor muscles. This analysis assumes that body postural adjustments, such as moving one leg to help stabilize the load, cannot be done. Such a situation may exist, for example, if a load is lifted from a low position or over an obstruction (Figure 111-10). The amount of strength available to lift an object will depend on where it has to be handled from, where it is going, and how one has to get it there. Figures 111-11 and 111-12 show the relative isometric (static) pull strengths available at 12 locations above n u I I u :7 nu 0 r~-1I i I I (', i i LJ n �' __, -, Design of Manual Handling Tasks 93 __J -7 I �J -1, Good _J 7 ---1 b. Poor _j r-1 I � Poor \ j C. w r7 I i \...-I r·--i Figure 111-10: Good and Poor Handling Locations.The best handling of a load is close to the front of the body and at about waist level ("a"). Lifting to the center of a pallet ("b") or over an obstruction, such as into a water tank ("c"), results in high compressive forces on the lumbar discs and is not recommended for people with a history of low back pain. r1 ' I L_i iri'. 1-.i r·-, i ; 0 the floor and in front of the ankles for men and women. Although dynamic lifting strength is less than static pull strength, the relationships between the amount of strength that can be made available at each location should be similar. The table shows the most static pull strength at the point where the load is 13 inches (33 cm) above the floor and within 7 inches (17 cm) in front of the ankles (horizontal distance). As the tray is pulled upward at 32, 52, 72, or 74 inches (81, 132, 180, or 185 cm) above the floor, muscle strength is reduced significantly. This reduction is related to the dropping out of the leg, back, and upper arm muscles and increased reliance on the weaker forearm and shoulder muscles. At each height, there is an additional decre- �� ,_, 94 Working With Backache 1: I { L, ment in strength if the tray is located farther in front of the ankles. This is a lengthening of the force arm, increasing the load on the back. It also results in more the force being generated by shoulder instead of upper arm, trunk, and leg muscles. The loss of strength with location is greater for the females than for the males. This is probably related to the average differences in body size and, therefore, lever lengths for the extended horizontal pulls; it is also explained by the available muscle groups dropping out faster at each of the vertical distances. Average knee, waist, and shoulder heights for males and females are indicated on the drawings to the right of the relative strength tables in Figures 111-11 and 111-12. The reduction in strength as an object is handled higher or farther in front of the body means that any weight becomes a greater percentage of strength in these positions. A 20-pound (9 kg) box may represent 20% of maximum voluntary lift strength at 13 inches (33 cm) above the ground and 7 inches (18 cm) in front of the ankles. If it has to be lifted to a shelf that is 52 inches (183 cm) above the floor and can still be kept as close to the body, it can take up to 80% of the strength available at that level. The short time the load has to be held will probably make that lift acceptable, but repeated lifts at frequencies above 6 per minute could result in muscle fatigue and a further reduction in lifting capacity. Although the lower heights for lifting are where more muscles are available, the stress on the lower back at these heights is usually greater. The person with degenerative disc disease will be most comfortable lifting in a range from 32 to 50 inches (81 to 127 cm) above the floor. This is the range where the lift can be made by the upper arm muscles, aided by slightly bending the knees at the lower end and without having to hyperextend the back at the upper end. Figure 111-13 illustrates the poor and good ranges for the design of lifting tasks for the majority of the workforce. Lifts that are less than 10 inches (25 cm) or more than 50 inches (127 cm) above the floor are not recommended, especially in repetitive lifting tasks. In all circum stances, the load should be carried as close to the body as is possible, preferably within 10 inches (25 cm) of the ankles (as measured horizontally). L_i r1 L., riJ I \_ n : i u ur, r u ' ! r7 I u ·1 u n ru: r1 I I I l \ __ ...J i \ LJ ' i u n �L __J C�J c_:-J 74 52 32 13 132 81 33 35 45 20 51 45 80 14 36 85 100 7 18 20 25 25 40 35 25 [---] c-_::J CJ [_J cm inches 42" 1 18" -----T Knee C=:J [�::] L_:� Figure 111-11: Relative Static Pull Strength and Location-Males. The maximum static pull strength on a tray held at 12 different locations in front of the body is shown as a percent of the strong est point at 13 inches (33 cm) above the floor and 7 inches (17 cm) in front of the ankles. The average values for males are given. LShou Ider T 57" ---------Waist T -18-25"""1 , =a.: Average Males - 2-Handed Static Lifting Strength c_�J inches (% of Greatest Lift Strength) C:J 188 cm r:-=:J [ :_-:J 3: C0 e: s· DI ::::, C !!. :::c DI ::::, m rEJ' ::::, [ �C�7 u u [__ ] ,---] __ L c--=-_-:::J [��] c--=-:J [_=-� 15 25 15 30 20 10 c__�_J [:��] [____ .-----, J Knee l 17 " ,----T 40 " [�� 52" ---,- � Shoulder Average Females - 2-Handed Static Lifting Strength 72 25 45 inches (% of Greatest Lift Strength) 183 52 75 cm I 132 32 I :1 I 81 all tnl I inches 35 20 cm 70 14 51 100 7 36 13 18 33 ol co a, c��J [_� r··----, L__ J Figure 111-12: Relative Static Pull Strength and Location-Females. This is the same type of static strength data as is shown in Figure 111-11. The average values for females are given. [-_ �-...J 97 Design of Manual Handling Tasks -, __,i '7 ..___) Poor I ' _J r7 I .__J .-, ) I � Good r1 ' i � .., '---1 C. Poor ! f ,._..., n I , LJ Figure 111-13: Lifting Height Design. Three lifting heights are illus trated. Frequent lifts above 50 inches (127 cm) and below 1 O inches (25 cm) in "a" and "c" are not recommended for people with degenerative disc disease. Lifts around waist or elbow ("b") are best tolerated for sustained work periods. n lJ n LJ n I I r1 ! i n / ,J Location of the lift should also consider the need to avoid unequal loading of the spine and twisting. If the object to be lifted is located behind an obstruction, or if the handler has to take an awkward posture because of limited foot clearance at the workplace, twisting or uneven handling may result and increase the shear and rotational forces on the lower back. The design of large storage containers, for example, makes awkward lifts likely when trying to remove parts from the bottom. Unless a side can be broken down or a walk-in side is provided to allow easier access to the bin, the handler ends up doing a "derrick lift" to procure the lowest part. This type of lifting is particularly difficult and inappropriate for people with degenerative disc disease. �r7 I I . I l 98 Working With Backache C. LIFTING GUIDELINES TO REDUCE LOW BACK PAIN AGGRAVATION There are three major factors to consider when choosing appropriate lifting guidelines for people with a history of low back problems. Lift location is cine of these and has been discussed above. The second factor is the amount of weight that can be lifted. This will be determined by mu·scle strength and is highly influenced by lift location and the load's configuration. The weight also will influence the amount of force on the lumbar discs, so biomechanical considerations as well as strength measures are of interest. The third factor relates to workload and local muscle fatigue, both of which are influenced by the rate of lifting and the duration of continuous work. In this section guidelines for occasional and frequent lifting are presented. 1. Occasional Lifts -The NIOSH Manual Lifting Guidelines Figure 111-14 illustrates the guidelines for lifting that have been developed by a committee for the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. This graph is applicable only for lifts done less frequently than one lift every 2 to 5 minutes and where the lifting range is between 20 to 40 inches above the floor. They assume 2-handed lifts in the sagittal plane (in front of body), a compact load, good handholds, good posture, and smooth lifting in a temperate environment. The weight of the object to be lifted is shown on the vertical axis and the horizontal distance from the ankles (or spine) is given on the horizontal axis. Two curves are shown. One marks the upper limit of the zone of recommended lifting task design and is called the Action Limit (AL). The other marks the upper limit of weight considered safe for people to lift even if they have been specially trained and selected and is called the Maximum Permissible Limit (MPL). The design of lifting tasks in the Acceptable Lifting Con ditions zone wi II assure that at least 75% of the women and 99% of the men will have the strength needed to make the lifts. At the MPL, only 25% of the males and 1% of the females have the required strengths. The recommendation of the NIOSH Guideline is to train or select people for jobs including lifts in the .J n :J nJ nu (7 I I r·1 u i I n \l-1I n L...i 17 ' I I I LJ n u ' I ri LJ n I I ' I l-1 n �Design of Manual Handling Tasks (lb.) (Kg) Body Interference Limit 200 I/ 80 150 r1 I I I LJ w 60 Hazardous Lifting Conditions I- ::i 100 I- w 50 99 40 Functional Reach Limit 1 Adminis .. trat·1ve ' Maximum Controls �!Permissible · � I Limit ·� equired 20 I � ,Acceptable o- 0 0 n I ¥'A�ti�n � Lifting� . "Conditions'� 0 I 20 I I 10 40 I I -- L1m1t I 60 I I 20 80 I I 30 (cm) (in.) HORIZONTAL LOCATION OF LOAD I L_J 'u Figure 111-14: NIOSH Manual Lifting Guidelines. The weights that can be lifted at different horizontal locations in front of the ankles are shown by three zones. The Acceptable Lifting Conditions Zone is where manual handling tasks should be designed to be suitable for most people. The guidelines were developed by a committee for the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. See the text for further explanation of the use of these guidelines. �ni I t .. J 100 Working With Backache :J :7 L Administrative Controls Required Zone because many people will find the lifts difficult. The graph in Figure 111-14 can be used in several ways. If one knows the weight of the load, it is possible to estimate what percentage of the workforce may find a given lift acceptable or possible. By defining the horizontal location of the load when it is lifted and finding the intersection point between that value and the weight, a point is obtained that can be evaluated relative to the AL and MPL lines. If the point falls below the AL, then more than 75% of the women and 99% of the men are accommodated. If it falls above the MPL, less than 25% of the men and 1% of the women are accommodated. Between these two curves the point can be related to the distance it is from either extreme. The percentage of the population accommodated can then be inter polated. If the point falls halfway between the 2 curves, for instance, then 99 - (0.5) (99-25), or 62% will determine what percent of the men will be able to do the job safely. For the women the calculation is 75 - (0.5) (75-1) or 38% who can do it safely. A second way to use the guidelines is to take a given location of a lift and figure out the heaviest object that can be handled by most people (AL or below) at the workplace. The point of interest is fixed by the AL curve as it intersects the horizontal distance value. The weight is read off of the vertical axis at that point. Similarly, one can specify the object weight and use the guideline to decide when a handling aid would be advisable because of an awkward horizontal lift requirement. Since not all lifts are done at 20-40 inches above the floor, the NIOSH Manual Lifting Guide also includes formulae for calcu lating the AL and MPL weight limits for other lift locations. These are as follows: English Units: Al(lb) = 90(6/H) (1 - .01 I V-30 I ) (0.7 + 3/D) Metric Units: Al(kg) = 40(15/H) (1- .0041 V-751) (0.7 +7.5/D) r7 \L_JI I '· nl_J ri I I LJ r7 I d u i I ,---,'· I I I c __j 0 :7 LJ I I 'l I 1 r7 i \ l__j r..., I I I H is the horizontal distance factor when the load is picked up. It is in inches or centimeters. ;\ I (__j 17 I I �Design of Manual Handling Tasks ,, i' V is the vertical height factor or the height at which the load is picked up, and is also in inches or centimeters. The difference between 30 inches (76 cm) and the actual height is treated as an absolute value ("IV-30I"). This means that the sign is disregarded and 20 inches (51 cm) up is considered equivalent to 20 inches (51 cm) down as a factor influencing lifting task design. r D is the vertical lift distance from beginning to end of the lift. If it is less than 10 inches (25 cm), it is assumed equal to 10 inches. It should generally be the difference between the starting and ending V values. I '----' I L--' 101 The MPL values are obtained by multiplying the AL value by 3. L.-J The NIOSH guidelines are primarily useful for determining how to design lifting tasks and whether a specific task is difficult for a large percent of the workforce. There are situations when the weights calculated for the AL do not make sense. These most often occur when the occasional lifts do not meet the assumptions mentioned above and some other factor, such as pinch grip strength or pressure on a joint, is more limiting than the back, arm, and shoulder muscle strengths. Whenever a handling task is being evaluated, one should look carefully to see if there is a limiting muscle group or a condition that makes the task difficult to perform. With that situation in mind, one can calculate an AL and MPL, but those values should not be used for design until the task is simulated to see if they are appropriate. 2. Frequent Lifts If lifting is done more than once every 2 to 5 minutes there is potential for build-up in local muscle fatigue and for the total workload to limit the acceptable weight to be handled. Repeated exertions, even if they only last a few seconds, need recovery time to restore the energy supply of the muscles. The amount of strength required to do a task and the number of muscle groups that can be applied to the work will determine the percent of capacity used by any one muscle group. The higher that value, �;7 lJ 102 Working With Backache r-7 the longer it will take to regenerate the energy supplies for the ri u I l_jI next effort. The closer those efforts follow one another, the more opportunity there is for the energy supply to fall below its optimal level and, with time, the more potential there is for the heavily loaded muscles to fatigue. '7 ; 1 L-1 Lifting frequencies that exceed 6 per minute appear to have increased potential for local muscle fatigue to develop. Since many lifts take only 2-3 seconds to perform, the recovery time after each lift is about 7 seconds. For high strength requirement tasks, the ratio of work to recovery time should be at least 1 to 3to avoid cumulative fatigue. While 6 lifts per minute will be within this guideline for short duration lifts, higher lifting frequencies will not be. Because fatigue builds with time, frequent breaks in the lifting task to do some other, less physically-demanding, work will permit some additional recovery to occur. The duration of lifting tasks that are done more than once every 2 minutes shou Id be chosen to reduce the chances for significant fatigue to develop in the active muscles. The work of repetitive lifting puts demands on the cardio vascular system (heart and blood vessels) to deliver enough oxygen and nutrients to keep the muscles working. The longer that activity level has to be sustained, the more stress there is on the cardiovascular system. Acceptable levels of aerobic work vary according to the number of minutes or hours they have to be sustained before a lighter activity or recovery period is provided. Figure 111-15 illustrates the relationship between intensity and duration for aerobic work. By definition, maximum aerobic work capacity for the task can be sustained for 6 minutes before exhaustion sets in. One hour of continuous lifting would be the upper limit for a task that takes 50% of aerobic capacity, but it would take at least an hour to recover from the hour of work. If a repetitive lifting task is done for a full 8-hour shift, the work should take no more than one-third of the aerobic work capacity for these muscles. Figure 111-16 shows the relationship between weight handled and lifting frequency based on data from psychophysical and physiological studies. The psychophysical studies ask the workers to adjust weight to a value that would be"acceptable" to rl7 I I I L� nI I l__j ri : u \ n LJ u 7 nu f7 I I u n n I ' L.J :7 �i _j Design of Manual Handling Tasks -----i i 103 ,-, I / � I r-1 I Ii' 100 .,...______ Maximum Aerobic Capacity-------- ( i c.....J D un n ·13 ra u 0 :a 0 50 Work Capacity 0 "� LJ n ' I LJ 0 .,__...____._...____..._.....___._............_.............___._.............___.....__ 0 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Hours n I ! un n I I fl � 17 u D Figure 111-15: Aerobic Work Intensity vs Duration Relationship. The relationship is shown between the intensity of work done (percentage of oxygen usage or aerobic capacity) and the length of time (in hours) it can be sustained. lift at the frequency indicated. These studies were based on 40 minutes of lifting and extrapolated by the worker involved to an 8-hourda y. The physiological studiesare based onmeasurements of the heart rate and energy demands of the lifting tasks; they determine the guideline values for sustained work. These com bined data suggest that at frequencies from 1 to 6 lifts per minute, the total energy requirements of the job are within most people's capabilities providing the loads are kept below 40 lb (18 kg). The higher the frequency of lifting, the lower the weight should be to �n , I l_J 104 Working With Backache ,, II L_J reduce the potential for local muscle fatigue or for excessive workload in terms of energy requirements. To simplify, one can generalize as follows: a. At lifting rates below 1 per minute the psychophysical study data best describe the potential stress of the job. The NIOSH Manual Lifting Guide graph and formula can be used to calculate the AL (Action Limit) for these jobs. b. At lifting rates from 1 per minute to 6 per minute the acceptable weights are affected by the length of time the effort has to be sustained in each lift and the amount of recovery time left before the next lift. The psychophysical data shown in Figure 111-16 can generally be used to determine the acceptable lifting weights in this range. c. At lifting rates above6 per minute, total workload must also be considered. Data from studies of the metabolic and cardiovascular demands of lifting tasks can help to determine what the acceptable weights and frequencies will be. Total workload can be controlled by limiting the time of continuous lifting to 20 minutes or less, the higher frequency lifting being done for very short continuous periods. In self-paced operations these limitations are often worked into the job. In machine-paced operations, the design of the line may make it difficult to limit the periods of continuous lifting; it is those jobs where overexertion injuries are more frequently seen. d. Objects that weigh more than 33 lb (15 kg) should be handled by sliding rather than lifting at rates of 6 per minute or more. D. FORCE EXERTION GUIDELINES It has been recommended that sliding rather than lifting is preferable for repetitive handling tasks in order to reduce the potential for local muscle fatigue; The amount of force that can be exerted depends on the location of the object, how accessible it is and whether one can get behind or in front of it, and on one's posture during the push or pull. Relative muscle strengths available for pulling up on a tray at several locations in front of the nLJ I I u I I ,1 l I LJ D n u I I n . I IL_jI n I I LJ (7 ! I L_J D n u 11 • I L__J r1 ! I :..._J r1 �CJ �-·---J [----. C: ::::i � 2 ::i 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 ---i �-- _J (-- Up to One Hour Continuously CJ c==i [__ ] [=:7 (20) Not Recommended c-::-.:J 30 20 40 (15) (10) Object Weight in Pounds (Kilograms) [7 50 (25) [:-::7 60 l__=:] Figure 111-16: Guidelines for Repetitive Lifting. The maximum weight limits for lifting at different frequencies are shown. For lifts less than 1 per minute the NIOSH guidelines for occasional lifts can be used (Figure 111-14). For one hour or less of continuous lifting, frequencies above 7 per minute can be handled providing the objects are not too heavy. The Recommended Design zone will be suitable for at least 50% of the women and 75% of the men. Lifts in the Not Recommended zone are suitable for less than half of the workforce and are likely to be difficult for people with low back pain. c==:J c=J ..,\ 0 U'I UI � DI UI -I e: s· ca DI ::::, ::c C e!. DI ::::, I:: 0 ::::, - C m ii" J L__ �il u Working With Backache 106 ;7 n Maximum Force for Design Force Conditions Pounds Newtons IL.JI nu I Whole Body, Standing Forward Push, Truck Handling Initial Force Sustained for 1 Minute Emergency Stop Pull In, Waist Level Pull Up from Floor Level Pull Up from 20 Inches (51 cm) Height Kneeling 50 25 80 220 110 355 55 245 125 555 70 310 40 180 55 245 Upper Body, Standing Pull Up, Waist Height Pull Up, Shoulder Height, Arms Extended 30 135 Boost Up, Shoulder Height 60 265 Pull Down from Overhead 100 445 Push Down, Waist Level 75 335 Lateral Push Across Body 15 65 Forward Push, Waist Height Near Arms Extended 30 25 135 110 Pull Upward, Elbow Height 25 110 Pull In, Waist Height, Near 20 90 Lateral Push Overhead 10 45 Lateral or Transverse Push Across Body 20 90 Foot Pedal Activation 90 400 Seated Table 111-1: Maximum Force Application Recommendations. Data on the maximum static force levels for design of handling tasks is summarized for different muscle groups. The values shown accom modate half of the female workforce and most of the male workforce. It is assumed that these forces will be exerted for only a few seconds unless otherwise noted. I nI L_JI n LJ r7 I ! LJ I( I , LJ 0 ,7 D nI j I , l ___J 17 uI I n �Design of Manual Handling Tasks re' 107 � n body have been given in Figures 111-11 and 111-12 and are discussed in Chapter 5. Table 111-1 summarizes some data on recommended upper limits for force exertion tasks done while standing or sitting and when having the whole body strength or just a few muscles to apply to the object. I l__j I; I I n LJ n L.J n I ; L ' I 11 LJ D 1 i \._J D D Figure 111-17: Examples of Force Appllcations. Three examples of forces applied by different muscle groups are given. In "a" the foot pedal force is developed primarily by the lower leg, whereas the cart handling task in "b" involves whole body pulling where the most strength is available. In task "c" the assembler pushes the product onto the conveyor and often has to raise the load slightly at full arm's extension to get it over the conveyor's edge. Most of the work is done by the weaker muscles of grip and the shoulders. �·nI ·1 ,-1 108 Working With Backache I ' In many situations it is not possible to push or pull the load directly in front of the body. Instead it is moved across the front of the body using a lateral push. The amount of strength available for pushing an object across the body is very small, limited primarily to the weaker shoulder muscles (pectoralis, especially). Forces exceeding 15 lbs (67 Newtons) in this direction are difficult for many people to exert. This value is not the weight of the object to be moved but, rather, is the force to slide it across the work surface. Anything that can reduce the frictional resis tance of the object and the surface should make the task more acceptable. In a seated workplace it is often necessary to move a tray, a part, or the product from one side of the workplace to the other. It is generally recommended that objects weighing more than 10 lbs (4.5 kg) should be handled while standing. To improve handling efficiency, these workplaces are often designed to permit the worker to slide the object or tray on and off of a conveyor at the rear of the workplace. This sliding force should be kept below 30 lbs (134 Newtons). In the design of tasks where force exertion is used to slide objects rather than having to lift them, it is important to avoid workspace confinement (such as inadequate foot room) that might result in twisting. Lateral motions are more likely to unevenly load the spine and result in twisting than are straight forward motions. Forward pushes from a seated workplace may put some additional strain on the back if the worker leans forward in his or her chair and cannot use a footrest effectively (Figure lll-17c). Low sliding resistance and whole body forward pushes are preferable. fl LJ n I : L_/ □ 0 n I I LJ n ; I I I I I LJ i;l LJ n LJ nu n u I , n ul 1 n �I; � Section 111: How the Workplace Can Be Improved n ' rn CHAPTER 8: SPECIAL WORKPLACE AIDS FOR PEOPLE WITH LOW BACK PAIN I LJ I : I I L.J 11 Li n u C nLJ D D C D Some of the work activities and workplace design factors that may bring out back pain symptoms in people with de generative disc disease have been reviewed in Chapter 2. Some equipment and workplace design accommodations to reduce these problems are reviewed in this chapter. They are classified under either workplace postures or manual materials handling aids. A. WORKPLACE POSTURES There are workplace aids that can help relieve excessive pressures on the lumbar discs by reducing the amount of bending forward, hyperextension, extended reach, or twisting. There are also ways of obtaining postural relief when doing a job that requires constant standing or sitting all day. 1. To Reduce Forward Bending and Extended Reaches Workplace height adjustments can reduce the need for a person to bend forward over a work surface that is too low. The adjustments can be made with an adjustable table, such as a drafting table, or by using wooden platforms on the work surface to raise the work. If the latter approach is used, the platforms should be easy to remove if the next worker at the work surface prefers the fixed work height. Extended reaches can be reduced by using tool or control extenders or aids to move objects closer. Examples of these are adapters for power tools that increase the distance from the 109 �I I ._J 110 Working With Backache :7 I , L� "chuck" of the driver to the screw driver bit or socket wrench. This makes it easier for an assembler or repair operator to reach points that would require awkward and extended reaches were a standard tool used. Valves or other controls may also be difficult to access in some fluid control systems, so handle extenders have also been used on them. The handle is placed at the end of a shaft that is welded to the stem of the valve (Figure lll-18a). Another type of reach extender is like a shepherd's crook but with less bend in its neck. It can be fabricated from pipe and helps the worker slide an object closer to the body without having to reach far forward (Figure 11I-1 Bb). Use of such an aid requires that the object can slide on its storage surface. ..,._ � I LJ 1 I I ,---1 ,n LJ 1L � L, n LJ b. ;l ! I L_.f n LJ n LJ nu Figure 111-18: Reach Extenders. Valve handle extenders are shown in "a". These are welded onto the valve stem and permit the worker to open the valve without leaning over and fully extending the arm. Use of a "crook" is shown in "b". A piece of pipe or a light, rigid, tubular material is bent to permit a case to be slid forward before it is picked up. n i I � :7 I ! 'l �� I rL! ' Special Workplace Aids for People with Low Back Pain 111 ' n \__j '---J D □ un n LJ Bending forward will also occur if a person is working at too low a height. Aids that will raise the work height, such as an adjustable overhead conveyor mechanism for the part, or stools or dollies that the worker can sit on during the low work will give relief to the person with low back pain. Use of the stool or dolly depends on having leg clearance. They should not be used if hyperextension of the back or leg interference will result in more awkward postures. 2. To Reduce Hyperextension of the Back Back hyperextension is most commonly seen when a person is working at high locations, as in overhead work, or when a bulky load is being handled. The latter category will be discussed under "Manual Materials Handling Aids" below. The primary way to reduce back hyperextension caused by too-high work levels is to raise the worker above the floor using either a platform, a step stool, or a vehicle such as a platform truck (Figure 111-19). Some hyperextension is inevitable in overhead work where clearances limit how much the worker can be raised. So, regular breaks from these tasks to ones that do not require hyperextension are recommended. D D n , I D n u Figure 111-19: Height Adjustments for the Worker. A step stool ("a") and a low platform ("b") are shown as portable aids to alter working heights and reduce stress on the back from hyperextension in too high work. �112 Working With Backache 3. To Reduce Twisting A job that requires frequent twisting movements, even without objects being handled, is likely to bring out low back pain symptoms in people with degenerative disc disease. The reasons behind this are discussed in Chapter 3. A workplace that requires an operator to make 180-degree turns to pick up parts or product and then dispose of them is more likely to encourage trunk twisting than is one where supplies are stored adjacent to the .primary work area. For assembly tasks, then, provision of storage bins or holders within a comfortable arm reach (15-20 in. or 38-51 cm) for a seated or standing operator is•an approach to reduce twisting. If this is not feasible because of the nature of the task, it is important to orient the workplace so materials are as close to the main work surface as is possible. Use of roller conveyor sections to transfer parts from one area to another, especially if the parts are heavy (more than 40 pounds or 18 kgm), can also reduce the potential stress of twisting on the back (Figure 111-20). D lLJ n n L./ L..C LJ 0 n L., nLJ n � n ,� un n LJ Figure 111-20: Use of Roller Bearing and Roller Conveyor Sections to Reduce Handling Effort. Three examples are shown of the use of roller bearing ("a" and "c") or conveyor sections ("b") to reduce the work of transferring a product or case in the workplace. Although the worker in "b" is twisted, which is not recommended, his lower back is not experiencing as high loads because the weight of the case is carried by the conveyor. □ 7 �LJ D D n D D L......l 11 C C D D n L.J D n □ Special Workplace Aids for People with Low Back Pain 113 Use of a swivel chair in a seated workplace will reduce the opportunities for trunk twisting when parts are procured or disposed of. This assumes that the feet are free to move with the chair as it swivels and are not tied to a foot pedal or restricted because of a barrier below the work surface. 4. To Provide Postural Relief in Constant Sitting or Constant Standing Jobs Postural flexibility is a useful technique for reducing the potential for low back pain when standing or sitting is required during most of the shift. It is recommended that some seating be provided for people who mostly stand (see Figure 111-22 later), and that brief standing tasks be provided for people who generally sit. In addition, the seated worker should have a footrest and good lumbar support in the chair (Figure lll-21a). Footrests have been discussed in Chapter 6 as has lumbar support as a design feature of chairs. If the chair being used in the workplace does not have good lumbar support, there are a • number of products available that can be placed in.chairs or worn by the worker with back pain to provide that support. They include inflatable cushions that conform to the buttocks and back as one sits in a chair, rectangular foam cushions sculpted to fit the curve of the lower back (Figure 111-21b), and an inflatable vest that provides a cushion for the back when one sits in a high-backed chair (Figure 111-21c). Plastic supports that can be inserted in chairs and are not compressible have also been developed. The purpose of all of these aids is to support the lumbar spine and provide an alternative to a less-than-optimal chair design. Although these aids are a compromise for a well designed chair or seat, they are portable and do offer some relief for workers with back pain who have to sit for extended periods. For people who have to stand for the majority of the shift and do not alternate their standing with regular walking activities, a foot rail is recommended for postural relief (Figure 111-22). The constant load of standing often includes some leaning forward to work on a bench, conveyor, or piece of equipment. Additional compressive force is then placed on the lumbar discs and can result in symptoms especially for people with a history of back pain. The footrail allows the worker to tilt the pelvis back and up, �n I , .__J 114 □ Working With Backache D b. I I, D 0 LJ D n LJ Figure 111-21: Back Support Aids for Seated Work. Three forms of back support are shown. A standard chair with an adjustable backrest ("a") is preferable. However, addition of a wedge-shaped pillow ("b") to the existing chair or use of an inflatable vest that provides back support in a chair that lacks good support ("c") are ways for the .back pain sufferers to overcome poor seating. taking some of the pressure off the lumbar discs. An appropriate footrail for a standing workplace should be not more than 8 inches (20 cm) above the floor and should run the width of the work station. It should have a flat or curved surface that is at least 4 inches (10 cm) wide. If a box or portable foot support is used, it should follow the dimensions given in Chapter 6 for footrests. B. MANUAL MATERIALS HANDLING AIDS The lifting, holding, and carrying of objects can put high D D nLJ D Jn n :..._; I I I ! �. Special Workplace Aids for People with Low Back Pain 115 ...J D D D D D D D D D D D n D L...J Figure 111-22: Postural Relief Aids at a Standing Workplace. A footrail and a swing stool attached to the workplace are shown. These can each be used to give the worker's back some relief from constant standing. compressive and shear forces on the lumbar discs. This may increase the reporting of low back pain, especially in people with a history of degenerative disc disease. Techniques to reduce those forces by changing the way objects are handled or moved and by reducing awkward lifts are discussed below. 1. Improving Body Postures During Handling Tasks Bulky objects are usually handled in the workplace on an infrequent basis. These may be large in several dimensions, such as a roll of insulation material, or may be sheet materials where it is difficult to reach across two of the dimensions. In handling such objects, the worker often hyperextends the back to reduce the stress on his or her hand, arm and shoulder muscles. One approach to reduce this hyperextension is to provide straps or �116 Working With Backache special holders that permit the worker to support the load closer to the body and with a power grip. A sheet material handling aid uses a triangular holder with a D-type handle and two hooks about 18 inches (46 cm) apart that fit under the sheet. The handler carries the sheet using one hand to steady it and the other to pull up on the D-type hanc;lle with a power grip (Figure 111-23). □ D D D D n LJ Figure 111-23: A Special Aid for Large-Size Sheet Handling. A sheet supporter is shown with two hooks spaced about 18 inches (46 cm) apart and a single D-handle on which a power grip can be taken. This eliminates the need for extended reaches and pinch grip handling of the sheets and reduces the opportunities for fatigue of the forearm and shoulder muscles during sheet carrying. D D D D D D � !LJ n �Special Workplace Aids for People with Low Back Pain 117 -1 ,_..J -7 I _ _) 1 If an object has to be transported for more than a few seconds a hand cart or truck is preferred, especially if the item is bulky. A sheet material cart with swivel wheels and handles at each end can be used on floors to transport several sheets at a time, for instance. Carts with one, two, or three shelves are often useful for transporting smaller items between workplaces. Wheels or dollies that are strapped to larger items such as trunks, suitcases, or business equipment reduce the need for holding and carrying materials and, thus, spare the back, arm, hand, and shoulder muscles (Figure lll-24a). ---·1 ---·1 �) 7 l,_) [] r1 LJ 1LJ-1 u 17 [] 0 0 Figure 111-24: Aids to Support an Object's Weight During Transfer Tasks. A hand truck is shown in "a", and a small overhead hoist is depicted in "b." Both of these aids reduce the load on the muscles by supporting the weight of the object while it is transferred from one location to another. They are recommended especially for the handling of bulky and/or heavy items or when the transfer distance is more than a few feet. �i 118 Working With Backache __� \ r ! I� 2. Reducing the Amount of Work in Handling Objects Objects that are heavy (more than 40 lbs. or 18 kg) and have to be moved in a workplace can be a problem for people with degenerative disc disease. Handling aids such as hoists may be useful in supporting the object during transfer.so the worker only has to direct the load, not lift and hold it (Figure lll-24b). If a hoist is not available, equipment that will raise the load so it can be transferred at about waist level to the next location is recom mended: examples are levelators, lowerators, and scissors lifts. The levelators and scissors lifts have powered adjustment cap ability and can be moved by each worker to the best height for handling (Figure 111-25). They are often placed under pallets or skids and the levels are changed as the product is put on or taken off. The lowerator is spring-loaded, and the weight of objects placed on it pushes the spring down, keeping the loading level constant. Storage carts for plates in many cafeterias use this principle. Low lifts are avoided and less bending forward is needed when a levelator, scissors table, or lowerator is available. I l_� r, i L...J r�1 r- 7 LJ D n iJ r7 LJ D r-1 ,�, LJ u I Figure 111-25: A Load Levelling Aid for Manual Handling Tasks. A scissors lift table is illustrated (the guard at its base has been removed to illustrate the scissors mechanism) as it is being used in a final aseembly work station. The product is assembled, packed into a case and transferred horizontally to the pallet on the scissor lift. As the pallet is loaded, the lift table is lowered to that horizontal transfers are possible throughout the handling activity. I [] □ 1'1 �I --�I Special Workplace Aids for People with Low Back Pain 119 7 __j --, _,_J __J -7 -7 7 i c.-1 7 ! ____j L_J ,-7 I I LJ r, I i LJ 17 LJ D 1'1 LJ When highly repetitive lifting is required, adjustable height aids like levelators are also recommended because they reduce the total workload. Each time an item is lifted from a low height, as when pallets are unloaded near floor level, the body is also lifted. The work of raising the body makes up a substantial part of the job workload, and this effort is not contributing to productivity. In repetitive lifting tasks it is also recommended that ways be found to slide the object rather than lifting it. The use of a section of roller conveyor to transfer a part or product from one part of the workplace to another has already been mentioned. An air table or a roller bearing table surface can also be used to aid in sliding an item so it does not have to be lifted. These are particularly helpful for workplaces where bulky loads are moved. The air table contains compressed air in small metal jets that are mounted in the work surface. The sheet materials or cases move over the surface with little frictional resistance and can be directed to the next location. Roller bearing tables are particularly useful for case or carton handling tasks as they reduce the frictional resistance for sliding. Highly polished (waxed) maple surfaces and the additional ,of "slides" made of Teflon or other materials have also been used to aid in sliding items across work surfaces so that lifting is not required. Where it is difficult to justify the purchase of a levelator or scissors table, use of additional pallets or of a fixed platform is recommended to raise the height of a supply or outgoing pallet load of parts. Placing 2 pallets under the pallet being unloaded will raise the lower tier to at least 16 inches above the floor instead of having it 5-6 inches above the floor during lifting. This reduces compressive force on the lumbar discs during lifting and reduces leg interference during the initial procurement of the item. If the parts arrive in a large bin (more than 30 inches (76 cm) to a side), use of a fixture that can tilt the bin forward about 45 degrees reduces the horizontal location of the lifts at the far side of the bin and the extended reaches to the bin's bottom. The choice of aids or workplace modifications to reduce stress on the back for persons with low back pain will depend on the frequency of handling, duration of the tasks, and the weight and dimensions of the objects handled. The above techniques are examples of an approach intended to reduce the compressive �120 Working With Backache I L� LJ and shear forces on the lower spine and to prevent fatigue of the trunk muscles that support it. Self-paced, well-designed lifting tasks are not out of the question for a person with degenerative disc disease. r· , I n L.., r7 I LJI LJn n LJ n I I l_J lJ 17u D 17 I j LJ :7 u r1 ' I �__J -, _J 7 __.J Section IV: How the Job Can Be Improved 7 i .....J I ' ' 'i r I Chapter 9: The Size and Design of Objects to Be Handled Chapter 10: Providing Adequate Recovery Time Chapter 11: Work Patterns and Job Design nu I ' LJ n LJ LJ (7 (: i i I'--'I r1 LJ �I �-, : ._J \ 7 Section IV: How the Job Can Be Improved @ ___J -7 i _J r-1 n� n ' I D nu n LJ D D r1 LJ n LJ In addition to activities by the workers and workplace modifications, administrative and job design approaches can be used to improve the work situation for a person with low back pain. These approaches are widely .appropriate because they reduce the opportunities for muscle fatigue to develop. Included in this section is a discussion of the design of items to be handled, including load size, configuration, and handhold characteristics. The rest of the section addresses job design, providing adequate recovery time in more demanding physical or postural work, and structuring the job to allow a person with low back pain to regulate the work pattern in accordance with his or her capacity for physical effort. CHAPTER 9: THE SIZE AND DESIGN OF OBJECTS TO BE HANDLED The size of an object that has to be lifted or carried and whether it has good handholds will determine the amount of stress on the lower back. Bulky objects are more difficult to handle and often result in strong hyperextension of the back. The handler arches back to bring the load closer to the center of the body so as to enhance the postural stability. As a result, the compressive forces on the posterior third of the L5 (fifth lumbar) disc are increased, and there is an increased risk of damage to the disc. If an object does not have handholds, the handler has to find the most stable location to grip it. The strength available for gripping will depend on the dimensions over which the grip is taken and on other characteristics of the surface and object size. If a grip is not stable or fatigues quickly, there is a risk of losing 123 �7 .'._J Working With Backache 124 I control of the load and having to either shift it to other muscles or drop it. These shifts or drops may be accompanied by awkward postures, uneven loading of the spine, or sudden, unguarded movements that may aggravate back pain symptoms in people with degenerative disc disease. In this chapter some suggestions for object size and handhold design are included both for packaging and container designers to use in developing their designs and for back pain sufferers to use in determining when they should look for alternate ways of handling the object A. DIMENSIONS OF THE LOAD The dimensions of an object that has to be manually handled will determine which muscle groups are most heavily stressed and what posture is assumed. Objects that are compact, i.e., less than 10 inches (25 cm) to a side, can be held close to the body without requiring the elbows to be abducted (held away from the sides) and without overloading the shoulder muscles. When the length of an object exceeds 18 inches (46 cm), the handler's elbows will be abducted and the shoulders will be loaded, because 18 inches is wider than the usual shoulder breadth. If the object is handled across its length, the elbows cannot be kept flat against the body and must be elevated (Figure IV-1 ). �18 Inches >24 Inches (!:>46 cm} (>61 cm) • n LJ nI u ! 17 : i LJ 17 LJ 0 LJ ,'7 '7 LJ nLJ n lJ Good Poor Figure IV-1: Effect of Object Length on Elbow Position During Handling. Objects that are 18 inches (46 cm} long or less permit the handler's elbows to remain next to the body. When object length exceeds 18 inches, and especially at values above 24 inches (61 cm), the elbows are abducted and the shoulder muscles can fatigue and limit handling times. D n lJ n u n �__j The Size and Design of Objects to be Handled 125 -, __j As the widths of objects increase from 1Oto 20 inches (25-51 cm), the location of the load's center of mass is moved forward, and this puts more stress on the lower back (Figure IV-2). The biomechanics of this have been presented in Chapter 5. In addition, the wider the load, the more it has to be supported by shoulder muscles and the less effective are the stronger upper arm muscles (biceps and triceps). At an object width of 36 inches when the weight has to be supported 18 inches ( 46 cm) or more in front of the body, shoulder strength is the primary limiter of the weight that can be safely lifted. In general, it is recommended that object width be kept near 10 inches (25 cm) when there is a choice. -, i j -, , _J 7 ! _j 7 i ._l ,-7 I _J i _j D D rJ D D D 11 I ' :S; 1 O Inches >20 Inches (S.25 cm) (>51 cm) Good Poor Figure IV-2: Object Width and Back and Shoulder Posture. Compact objects that are not more than 10 inches (25 cm) wide can be held close to the body and do not put an additional postural load on the back and shoulders. Objects that are wider than this, especially at widths of more than 20 inches (51 cm), put heavy forces on the lumbar discs and often cause hyperextension of the worker's back during handling. �ni 126 �·- J Working With Backache I ' L-J The depth of an object will determine where it is carried and how stable it is as it is lifted. If it does not have good handholds and has to be lifted from the bottom;the depth of the object will strongly influence the height of the hands and the posture of the trunk during the lift. If the object has to be carried, its depth may interfere with walking and will require the carrier to hold it out farther in front of the body. This increases the pressure on the lumbar discs and cannot be sustained for very long. A depth of about 6 inches (15 cm) is optimal to avoid interference with walking and to provide stability. Since many parts and products are deeper than this, a guideline of 12 inches (30 cm) in depth or less for the design of packages may be more practical. If handholds are provided, the depth may be greater and still provide stable handling, but then interference with the legs must be evaluated in relation to handhold positions. □ n r, i LJ i D 17 LJ □ n ! I LJ a. b. Figure IV-3: Object Depth and One-Handed Carrying Postures. The arm, shoulder, and trunk postures are shown for a person carrying a compact (less than 4 inches or 10 cm deep) briefcase ("a") and for a person carrying an item with a handhold at the top that is both wide and deep ("b"). The bulky item causes shoulder fatigue and unequal loading of the spine; this can result in low back pain for people with recurrent symptoms. 0 0 □ 17 LJ D il �The Size and Design of Objects to be Handled 127 7 l ___, -, ___, 7 __;i -, __J 7 i ....J n LJ D D nLJ D D D D If the object is carried in one hand, e.g., a suitcase, its width or depth is even more important. The deeper it is, the greater is the load on the shoulder muscles to keep it away from the legs during walking (Figure IV-3). The handler also leans to the opposite side in order to reduce arm stress, and this motion unevenly loads the spine. The shoulder work results in rapid fatigue of these muscles. If the object's width is 4 inches (1 O cm) or less, the arm can support the load without shoulder abduction being required. B. CONFIGURATION OF THE LOAD If the object to be moved is within the size guidelines given above, it still may be difficult to handle because of its con figuration. If its weight is not distributed equally but is con centrated on one side (Figure IV-4a), the handler has to adjust posture to balance the load during its transfer. In some situations the balancing may be done by unequally loading the trunk, thereby reducing the stability of the spine. A person with a history of low back pain will usually avoid unequal weighting of the spine as would occur if a heavy suitcase is carried in one hand and nothing is held to counteract it in the other hand. Handling a piece of equipment with a motor in one end, for instance, may put shear forces on the lower discs that could aggravate back pain symptoms in these workers. If the object to be lifted contains liquid or powder that can shift as it is moved, additional stress is placed on the back, hand, arm, and shoulder muscles (Figure IV-4b). The unstable load may result in compensatory movements of the trunk to counteract a sudden shift in the load. These unguarded movements can be associated with increased risk of low back pain. Because poorly configured objects may still have to be handled, there are some techniques that can be used to reduce the effects mentioned above. Powders, grains, and pellets or other chemicals that can shift when handled should be placed in bags that match their volume, wherever possible, so weight shifting is less severe. Some of these substances are handled in bulk containers such as fiber drums and large boxes; these do not need to be lifted but can be rolled ("chimed") or transported by a �128 Working With Backache forklift or pallet truck to their destinations. Objects with unequal weight distribution that may not be apparent when one looks at them should be marked to indicate the heavier side. Suggested handling locations can also be marked if the items do not have built-in handholds. n n LJn 17 I I L..J :I7I i I LJ nLJ a. i7 LJ 17LJ :, lJ D n LJ Figure IV-4: Load Configurations. Three loads are shown. An object with uneven weight distribution is shown in "a", a woman carrying a kettle of liquid is shown in "b", and a person carrying a compact load is shown in "c". The uneven load puts additional stress on the back and abdominal muscles to stabilize the spine. The shifting liquid has to be held out from the body. It can cause a sudden shift of the center of mass of the upper body and the load that the back or abdominal muscles will have to counteract. D D n LJ ,--, ! I �I _J -, The Size and Design of Objects to be Handled 129 _j � I I 7 _j �7 □ D J D D D D D D D C. DESIGN OF HANDHOLDS Objects that are manually handled should have handholds to improve the stability of the interface between the handler a_nd the load. Shipping cases usually do not have handholds unless the load is very heavy or bulky (Figure IV-3c). The cost of adding extra inserts to a case to form a handhold is the primary reason why handholds are not routinely incorporated into cases. Other containers such as trays, bags, and cans may not have designed handholds, but they do have places where they can be lifted. Such grip locations may have sharp edges or inadequate clear ances for the fingers so that the grip is not very stable. If pinch grip is required to control a load, the duration of holding can become critical. Pinch grip is only 25% of power grip strength. Pinch grip control of an item weighing more than 15 pounds (7 kg) must be completed in 3-4 seconds (if at all) or fatigue can occur. General guidelines for the design of handholds on objects that have to be lifted manually are: 1) Allow the handler to use a power grip or a ledge grip with the fingers curled (see Figure ll-14c earlier). 2) Provide at least 1 inch of depth between the handle and side of the object b�ing lifted or carried. 3) Avoid sharp or narrow edges on weight-bearing surfaces of the handle. Round off edges and try to make the thickness at least 0.25 inches at the load-bearing surface. 4) Mark the handle locations on molded containers. 5) For cut-out handholds allow at least 4.5 inches of length and 2 inches of depth for the hand to clear the opening. 6) Locate the handhold just above the center of mass of the object being lifted. Handholds influence low back pain symptoms indirectly by increasing the stability of handling a load and, thus, reducing the potential for the handler to make a sudden, unguarded move to �130 Working With Backache t 1 respond to an uncontrolled lift. They also influence back muscle fatigue in repetitive lifting tasks by bringing the object closer to waist level if it is lifted off of a pallet on the floor, for example. If a case or object can be lifted with handholds at a location that is about two thirds of the way up its height (or depth), then less upper body weight will be lifted· with each case. The back muscles will not be likely to fatigue as rapidly during extended lifting tasks if low lifts are thus avoided. 7 D n D n D D D D D □ D □ n �J Section IV: How the Job Can Be Improved 7__J J 7 I I D D D D D 0 D TI® CHAPTER 10: PROVIDING ADEQUATE RECOVERY TIME Earlier chapters have discussed the relationship between the intensity of muscle work and the time it can be sustained before some recovery time must be provided. More intense, or harder, muscle work results in some build-up of lactic acid and temporary depletion of the muscle energy supplies. These have to be "paid back" between muscle efforts. Thus, the distribution of lighter effort tasks within a job that includes heavy effort tasks can influence the build-up of fatigue and the ability of the worker to continue the work for a full shift. In this chapter, the implications of fatigue in the muscles that stabilize the spine and the need for postural relief and proper design of manual handling tasks is discussed. A. MUSCLE FATIGUE AND SPINAL STABILITY The importance of fitness of the back was described in Chapter 3. The more fit these muscles are, the higher their strength capacity, and the lower the percentage of strength a given task will take. Lower %MVC (maximum voluntary con traction of muscle) activities can be sustained for longer times before fatigue occurs (see Figure 11-11 in Chapter 3)·. As a muscle fatigues, the same amount of load will become a greater part of its capacity. This continues until the load and the capacity are identical and the effort can only be sustained for a few seconds more. Good job design tries to reduce the probability that muscles will fatigue to this point by giving the most heavily loaded muscles in a task some relaxation time in order to restore 131 �132 Working With Backache L_ their energy supplies. Intermittent work is the alternation of heavy and light work (or rest) in such a way as to limit the build-up of lactic acid over time. The muscles that support and align the lower spine are active in maintaining upright posture and in performing manual handling tasks. An awkward posture, such as bending forward to work on a too-low surface or leaning to one side to make an extended reach with one hand, will require work of the back, hip, and abdominal muscles. The longer the posture has to be maintained, the more chance there is for these muscle groups to fatigue. When they are fatigued, they are less able to stabilize the spine in a subsequent task, e.g., in handling product or exerting forces on one side of the body. To assess the stress on the back in a job, therefore, one has to look at not only the required lifts and postures but also at the length of time when a non-optimal posture is taken before making a lift or taking a more extreme posture. This possible fatigue of the important spine stabilizers during a job may help to explain why some jobs with only moderately heavy handling tasks show higher low back pain incidence reporting than jobs with heavier loads. ' If tr"'=!, -..r.cor spinae and hip extensor muscles are fatigued from constant bending, a twist of the trunk or high compressive forces on the lower lumbar discs produced by a heavy lift may result in misalignment of the spine. The person with degenerative disc disease who already has some instability in his or her lower spine due to fluid loss from the L4 or L5 disc will be particularly vulnerable to fatigue of these muscles. The misalignment may trap the nerve root between the vertebral processes and cause irritation and pain. Irritation of the nerve root may set up a reflex increase in the strength of contraction of the back muscles and can create a muscle spasm that is very painful. To relieve the spasm, the person has to stretch out the muscle right away by curling the trunk forward and trying to mechanically realign the vertebrae to take the pressure off of the nerve root. Ice packs and, later, hot packs are sometimes used to temporarily relieve the spasm. The less fit the back muscles are, or the more fatigued they are from an awkward posture or inadequate recovery time between exertions, the greater the opportunity for improper alignment of the spine and a subsequent nerve root pinch. 7 i L_ n � D ,-, ! i LJ nLJ nLJ nLJ n �Providing Adequate Recovery Time J 133 B. POSTURAL RELIEF 7 ! Extended periods of work in one posture can result in static muscle fatigue even when heavy work is not required. The muscle loading would have to be less than 15% of maximum strength to avoid fatigue after 5 minutes of continuous work (see Chapter 3, Figure 11-11). Even in jobs where one's posture is relatively restricted, as in long-distance truck driving, there is a natural adjustment of posture every few minutes. This movement relieves the static load from some muscles and brings in other muscles to do the task. _j 7 ! 7 ! _J -i -· 1 _j 7 _J -, I _J 7 ._j C D 1Lj7 I � LJ D The importance of chair and seat design to allow a person to adjust posture laterally as well as vertically and horizontally has been discussed in Chapter 6. Provision of an adjustable backrest that will move in as the worker leans forward on the work surface, for instance, is a recommended chair design feature for jobs requiring continuous sitting. Footrest availability, especially a portable design, is also recommended as it gives the worker more options for height adjustment in the workplace. For a continuous standing job, provision of a footrail or a support stool has been recommended to offer some relief for the leg, buttock, and back muscles. If options for changing posture are provided, most people will not require additional recovery time in constant standing or constant sitting jobs. When awkward postures such as leaning to one side, bending forward, squatting, crouching, or twisting the trunk are required, however, additional recovery time is needed to prevent loss of strength in the trunk and buttock muscles over time. Figure IV-5 illustrates the recovery time needed (vertical axis) after muscle exertions of different intensities (curves) for several durations (horizontal axis) of continuous work. A person working in a bent-over posture that loads the erector spinae muscles to 40% of their maximum capacity, therefore, will need more recovery time the longer he or she remains in that posture (i.e., 5 minutes of recovery time after 1 minute of bending) in order to avoid fatigue of those muscles. Bending for more than 1 minute at a time at this work intensity will fatigue the muscles and may require up to 45 minutes of recovery time if the muscles are exhausted. �134 Working With Backache ' L.... 6.0 90% 70% 50% 40% r I 30%MVC 5.0 i L .. .. ... 'ti 'ti [ z E j:: [ IC 0 ... r- i C :ii r L, r, LJ 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 Minutes of Sustained Work Figure IV-5: Recovery Times as a Function of Work Intensity and Duration. The amount of recovery time, in minutes on the vertical axis, that is needed to recover from a muscle effort of a given duration, in minutes on the horizontal axis, is shown for different muscle work intensitites (% of maximum voluntary contraction strength) by a series of curves. Use of these curves is illustrated in the text later in this chapter. Light muscle effort is represented by the 20% and 30% curves, moderate effort by the 40% and 50% curves, and heavy effort by the 70% and 90% curves. D D D D rr c_j !l �_J Providing Adequate Recovery Time 135 7 I _) --, In methods analyses of job demands it has been common to award a 10-15% fatigue factor for people who are required to work in awkward postures. This provides about one hour of recovery time per shift and should be adequate in a self-paced job where the work and recovery pattern can be regulated by the worker. It is probably a less satisfactory approach in externally paced operations. There the worker has less control over work and recovery patterns and may get the fatigue factor time allowance in 10-15 minute blocks at the end of about an hour of continuous work in the awkward posture. Short work periods broken up by short recovery periods or by work that uses the muscles less heavily are preferable to intensive, long-duration work and long recovery breaks as a way of reducing the opportunity for muscles to fatigue over the shift. I _) --, I _) --7 _J 7 I _J ··1 C. MANUAL HANDLING TASKS AND RECOVERY NEEDS ____J 7 I .___) 7 I ____J -1 I _j 7 _j c·I I ! �...J n s__...) u ,· 1 □ When determining adequate recovery times for a manual handling task, one has to identify the frequency of lifting or applying force, the intensity of the work either in terms of the weight lifted or the force exerted, and the maximum duration of continuous work before a recovery break is needed. Chapter 7 includes a discussion of the interactions of these factors in the design of handling tasks. When determining how much recovery time is needed and how the work should be structured to avoid accumulating fatigue in the active muscles, one has to consider both local muscle and whole body fatigue potentials of the job. The former can be estimated from a calculation of the intensity and duration of effort of the involved muscle groups. The potential for fatigue will be related to the time of exertion and the percent of maximum muscle strength used in the postures. If the work is quite dynamic but the lifting or force exertions exceed 6 per minute, local muscle fatigue can occur unless the recovery times are adequate for moderately heavy work. Even if the static work curve (Figure 11-11) suggests that the task is appropriate, the short continous muscle contraction times followed by short recovery times can still result in the build-up of some fatigue products in the muscles. Whole body fatigue can become the limiting factor in �136 Working With Backache l_. repetitive lifting tasks, and it is associated with demands on the heart and blood vessels (the cardiovascular system). To deliver enough oxygen to the muscles to allow them to form the energy compounds needed for muscle work, the heart rate is increased and the heart muscle has to work harder. The acceptability of working at elevated heart rates is related to the percent of maximum aerobic work capacity a person must use and the duration of the work. Figure 111-15 in Chapter 7 illustrates the relationship between the percent of aerobic capacity used and time. The aerobic capacity value is specific to the type of work being done. If the work uses the whole body, as would be true in a repetitive lifting job that is done from floor to waist level, then whole body aerobic capacity as measured on a treadmill can be used to determine the individual's maximum aerobic capacity for the work. If the job involves standing quite stationary and using primarily arm, shoulder, and upper trunk muscles, then an arm capacity test, such as lifting or cranking, would be needed to assess the person's maximum aerobic capacity. To determine the appropriate recovery periods for repetitive lifting tasks that may result in whole body fatigue, it is necessary to measure the heart rates of people during work. Enough light activities or recovery can be inserted to assure that the heart rate elevation averages no more than 33% of heart rate range (predicted maximum heart rate minus resting heart rate) for an 8-hour shift. Predicted maximum heart rates are determined by subtracting age from 220 beats per minute. With this admittedly rough estimate of aerobic work intensity, one can also look at peak work loads and be sure that they meet the guidelines for duration that Figure 111-15 recommends. To bring the over-all job demands down, light activities or recovery time must be made available during the repetitive handling tasks. If oxygen usage is measured, a maximum workload of 12 ml of oxygen per minute per kilogram of body weight averaged over the 8-hour shift is recommended. These recommendations for provision of adequate recovery time relate to low back pain in the workplace in several ways. If the posture during work is such that the back muscles are loaded not only by the weight of the object being lifted but also by the way it has to be handled, their rate of fatigue will be greater. Then r-·L r1 L ,1 L r- i ! L r- i L i L_ r L, ,-1 i i i nLi LJ n : I �_J Providing Adequate Recovery Time 137 -7 iI ___J they may not be able to keep the spine aligned during a postural change or a sudden movement because they may not have the strength needed. As a result, there is more potential for the vertebrae to slide on one another and to pinch the nerve root during a lift or postural change, producing low back pain symptoms. If the work is very demanding and whole body fatigue occurs, the worker may be less attentive to postural changes and may slip or put an excessive load on one part of the spine. Whole body fatigue will show up as reduced endurance for work, and the worker wil I need longer recovery times as the shift progresses. It is better to incorporate the recovery periods into the work periods and reduce the over-all load throughout the shift than to try to make up for the heavy work with extended break times. -7 __j 7 i _J -7 i _J 7 _J D. EXAMPLES OF RECOVERY TIME CALCULATIONS -7 I ' ' --1 Two examples of ways to calculate recovery time needs for static work and for dynamic handling tasks are given below. ..., I I _J 1. Static Muscle Loading --,' __J _) 7 _J I i -.J 7_J n ' L-.J r1 i LJ If a person is doing a task that requires bending forward while working on a bench, the back muscles are likely to be loaded to about 40-50% of their capacity in order to keep the upper body from falling forward. Taking the 50% MVC value, one can find from figure 11-11 that this effort can be sustained for one minute continuously. The muscle is then fatigued. If the task takes 15 seconds to complete in the bending posture, there will be slight back muscle fatigue. A recovery time of an additional 15 seconds should restore the energy supplies of the back muscles. If the static muscle load is greater, for example, 75% of maximum force, the recovery time will have to be lengthened in proportion to the work time. Fifteen seconds of bending work at 75% of the maximum strength of the back extensors will need 150 seconds of recovery time. Figure IV-5 illustrates the relationship between workload intensity, duration, and the needed recovery period to prevent accumulating fatigue. To find the proportionate recovery time after a static effort, one finds the intersection between the intensity of that effort (percent of maximum voluntary muscle strength) and the duration (or holding time in minutes). The �138 Working With Backache L.- rL vertical axis value at this point indicates the percent recovery time needed to restore the muscles. r~ L_ 2. Dynamic Work - Repetitive Manual Lifting There are both local muscle and whole body fatigue reasons to provide adequate recovery time in these tasks. So, the first consideration is to identify the intensity and duration of the lifts and to determine the necessary recovery time using Figure IV-5, as discussed above. If the lifts are more than 6 times per minute and the object being lifted weighs more than 20 lbs (9 kg), one can calculate the additional need for recovery time by determining what the appropriate work/recovery cycle shou Id be. For example, a 40 lb (18 kg) case may represent 75% of strength for less strong workers. The lift may only take 3 seconds, so at a steady 6 per minute lift rate, every 3 seconds of lifting is followed by 7 seconds of recovery, giving a work/recovery ratio of 1 :2.5. The suggested recovery time for this task would be about 8 seconds, one more th,an is available at this lifting rate. An additional one second of recovery time per lift would be recommended to prevent ac cumulated muscle fatigue. At higher lifting frequencies additional recovery time at the end of the task would have to be given to make up for the inadequate recovery time between lifts. To keep the total workload within acceptable levels, it is also necessary to estimate the cardiovascular load of the work. As a general guideline, one can assume a heart rate range of 100 (between resting and predicted maximum values). A heart rate elevation of 33 beats per minute above resting levels averaged over the shift is the maximum recommended workload. The heavier the handling task (more weight, higher frequency), the more light work recovery time is needed in order to reduce the total load. From a list of the energy expenditure and heart rate elevations of job activities (Table IV-1), one can determine the average and peak workloads and assure that they stay within the guidelines in Figure 111-15 (Chapter 7) by adding light work as needed. For example, if a job requires a worker to lift heavy boxes at 6 per minute for 4 hours a shift, and the average heart rate elevation is 50 beats per minute, that represents a 50/100 or 50% of aerobic capacity (represented by % of heart rate range) workload. To reduce the total workload to 33% of maximum for r \ L ,L r L r -L_ r~ L : L. i L_ L i_, r....., L� n r7 : I �J Providing Adequate Recovery Time r 139 LJ C I I n u D n LJ r, I I LJ LJ LJ n LJ n I ! Table IV-1: Heart Rate Elevations in Several Occupational Tasks Effort Level Light Moderate Heavy HR Elevation Whole Body 10-20 21 -45 46-75 >75 Upper Body 10-15 16- 30 31 -50 >50 Typing, Data Entry (U) Packing, Small (U) Industrial Cleaning Landscaping Record Keeping (U) Punch Press Operation Carpentry Loading Coal Small Parts Assembly (U) Metal Working (U) Plastering Handling Cases, >25Ibm > 4/min. Drill Press Operation (U) Painting Sweeping/ Mopping Floors Cement Mixing Sitting, Reading Driving a Truck/Car Gardening Stone Masonry Monitoring Sewing (U) Packing, Large (U) Smelting Work Standing Ironing (U) Sheet Metal Work Agricultural Work Drafting Washing Windows Laundry Operations (U) Bench Work Truck and Auto Repair Sorting Scrap Road Paving Walking Metal Casting Tasks Inspecting Very Heavy Crane Operation (U) Cafeteria Work (U) Machine Tending ILJ: n LJ n, I 11 LJ Table IV-1: Heart Rate Elevations In Several Occupatlonal Tasks. Estimates of heart rate elevations (beats/min above the resting value) for work tasks are given in four effort categories from light to very heavy work. These can be used to design jobs so that the total workload does not exceed the aerobic capacity guidelines presented in Figure 111-15 (Chapter 7). For upper body work (U), local muscle fatigue should also be evaluated for moderately heavy or heavier tasks. �u I Working With Backache 140 I LJ ' I the whole shift, the 50% would have to be balanced by a very low workload. That value can be calculated by solving the following equation: (50) (240 min.)+ (x) (240) = 12,000 + 240x = 240x = X= (33) ( 480) 15840 3840 16.0 A 16% of aerobic capacity workload is not much more than light assembly or paper work. This suggests that if the heavy lifting is done for the first four hours of the shift, the workers can only do light work during the second half. This example illustrates why short duration intensive effort is preferable to long duration effort with added rest break time. If the above task were to be broken up into 10 minute segments with 5 minutes of lighter activity alternating for the full 8 hours, the lifting frequency could be reduced from 6 per minute to 4.5 per minute, the heart rate elevation would be reduced from 50 to about 38 beats per minute (a 25% drop in workload), and the light activity could be about 23% of maximum aerobic capacity in order to average out at 33% for the shift. The calculation is as follows: 38(320) + x(160) = 33(480) 12160+ 160X = 15840 160 X= 3680 x = 23% moderate activity level A number of moderately demanding jobs can be done using 23% of aerobic work capacity, including wrapping and packing tasks, some cleaning operations, moderate effort assemblies, and many inspection and monitoring tasks. By altering the pattern of work in this example, one also reduces the stress on local muscle groups by giving more recovery time between lifts. Total output per shift is not reduced, although it is taking more of the shift to complete the work. There may be jobs where this abi I ity to restructure the pattern of work is not possible. Those jobs will also probably require some "natural 17 LJ n I I [7 LJ r7 LJ rLii r7 1. I u I I D n u ' I : I L.1 1\u ,-,I ! r7 I I �Providing Adequate Recovery Time 17� n G D n LJ n LJ LJ[7 D nLJ nI .LJ 0 n LJ u['i 17 LJ 141 selection" of workers because they will be too difficult for people with lower work capacity to perform. When a second worker is available, the heavier work can often be shared. Thus, more recovery time is provided by cutting the lifting frequency in half for each worker. �C:::] L. _.> c:::_J l__ .../ :! , I ~-- ~J ,......... r ' r i CJ LJ -__J L:.J CJ ·. ._,_} �.__J nLJ ' I u n LJ I , D n LJ n I t LJ n lJ D n LJ n LJ 0 r LJ r7 I ! LJ Section IV: How the Job Can Be Improved TITI CHAPTER 11: WORK PATTERNS AND JOB DESIGN The previous chapter discussed ways of alternating light and strenuous tasks to reduce the local muscle stress and the whole body demands of repetitive tasks and awkward postures. In this chapter the implications of self-paced and externally-paced jobs for the person with low back pain are discussed. In addition, some guidelines are included for the choice of job activities and the design of jobs to reduce the opportunities for muscle or whole body fatigue. A. WORK AND RECOVERY PATTERNS IN SELF PACED WORK Determination of the job effort level that is acceptable to most workers will depend on the strengths and postures required, the total energy required over the shift, the environmental stressors present, and the amount of control the worker has over the way the work is done. Physiological and psychological "behaviors" modify the way a job is done, sometimes greatly different from its initial design. For example, if a person (not a machine) is pacing a handling job, he or she may cluster the lifting into a short, intensive period and then do lighter and less strenuous tasks for longer periods between the lifting tasks. This strategy is in lieu of doing fewer lifts over a longer time period. If the person has low back pain, however, it may be more suitable to intersperse the lighter activities more frequently within the lifting periods. Figure IV-6 illustrates some of these potential work patterns. The person with backache is responding to the ac cumulating fatigue in the back muscles caused by the repetitive lifting; he or she is protecting the back by reducing the continuous 143 �i� 144 l........J Working With Backache IL_J�7 I lifting time to a level where fatigue is not significant. The person with no backache is lifting to "get it over with" and to have a longer period to do other tasks or relax before the next lifting period occurs. Well-designed jobs will permit the work to be accomplished during the shift by any one of a number of job patterns. The appropriateness of an intensive lifting period will be determined by the nature of the materials being handled and by the fitness of the handler. Such a work pattern should not be required since many people of less strength or less endurance capacity will not be able to follow such a pattern without fatigue. 4 5 6 7 15 Minutes 4 5 !7 i I LJn 1:1:1: 1:1�1:l=ffl=I 3 I I II L_j Lifts/Minute 2 L1I _,., I b. With Low Back Pain 1 nu I, 1:1:1:1=1=1=1=1=1 3 nu L.J Lifts/Minute 2 I I I I n! a. No Back Pain 1 n L._J 6 7 15 :l I I (___J Minutes Figure IV-6: Lifting Patterns for People With and Without Low Back Pain. Examples are shown of possible self-paced lifting patterns for workers without ("a") and with ("b") low back pain on a job where frequent moderately heavy lifting is required. The theoretical job requirement is unloading 24 cases weighing 20 pounds (9 kg) each from a pallet every 15 minutes throughout the shift. nL-1I I fl u u r·7 r1 I ' �I 1 L._J I Work Patterns and Job Design ! I i LJ n I I 11 u 0 C n LJ LJ [/ n LJ D D C [l D 145 Even if a handling task is not required or is well within most people's capabilities, postural requirements may put the person with back pain at a disadvantage in some jobs. If the job is self-paced, he or she can usually find a way to get postural relief by alternating activities frequently. A repair bench worker, for instance, can work for several minutes while seated on a stool at the bench. He or she can get up and procure a new product or dispose of the old one, do paper work, or do another test in the standing posture at a higher work bench in order to get postural relief. Conversations with fellow workers, a search for a better tool, trips to the drinking fountain or restrooms, and other legitimate activities also serve as breaks from the primary task. If the job has been structured to make it unnecessary for the worker to leave his or her workbench or station, these secondary work activities and arbitrary work breaks often increase in order to provide the postural adjustments that most people need. B. PACED WORK AND WORK PATTERNS There are many types of paced work. Some of these are paced by the worker and include a desire to meet a particular goal, conscientiousness, and a desire to excel or "be the best." Some are paced by supervision and relate to production goals, incentive pay, deadlines, and standards of performance. Others are a function of the workplace and job characteristics, such as conveyor pacing, emergency responses, service needs, and rapid response computer systems. Work that is paced by the worker, by supervision, or by the job goals (such as rapid service) can be structured to fit the capabilities of many workers unless the time constraints are unreasonably tight. Work that is machine paced or that requires emergency responses cannot be organized as well by the worker. The way such work is designed will determine how many people will be able to do it. Chapter 10 includes a discussion of the importance of providing adequate recovery time in a job where moderately heavy or heavy effort tasks are done or where awkward postures are required. In an externally-paced task the recovery time is fixed; if it is not adequate, the worker has to find ways to get away from the machine in order to recover fully. Some of the arbitrary and secondary work breaks mentioned above, such as getting a �ni 146 ' j Working With Backache drink of water, going to the restroom, or getting a new tool are used to get away from the pace pressure. Since no piece of machinery is routinely 100% efficient, occasional breakdowns in the line will also provide work breaks from the pace pressure. If the work is on a reasonably short line (6-12 people on a work team), the line may be stopped infrequently by the lead operator in order to give the worker a break while some maintenance or a new set-up is done. Occasionally a line is stopped just to allow people to "catch up." A person with chronic low back pain is at a disadvantage in externally-paced operations because there are fewer options for organizing the work pattern to reduce back stress. If the product is moving in and out of the workplace at a fixed rate, it is harder to take frequent short breaks, to readjust posture, or to rest the muscles involved in a lifting task. Because the worker cannot control these factors as well in machine-paced operations, it is important to include a variety of activities and postures in the tasks done at each station. One should also consider the option of moving people between stations in order to spread out the heavier tasks and to make the jobs suitable for more people. C. JOB DESIGN GUIDELINES The guidelines for job design given below focus on two primary needs of the person with backache, providing postural relief and permitting the person to vary his or her work pattern in physically demanding jobs. 1. Do not confine a worker to one location for the full shift, but provide alternatives for moving to other places in order to get supplies, do record keeping tasks, or do quality checks, for example. 2. Provide for postural adjustments during the work. Have some type of seating available for predominantly standing activities and include some activities that require standing or walking in a job that is done at a seated workplace. 3. For self-paced jobs with frequent moderately heavy to heavy lifting tasks (see Chapter 7), provide ways to break the lifting tasks into 5- to 15-minute periods with less demanding nlJ LJI I un r1 I , l_j n i I D nLJ n; I l__J ii LJ :7 u n I I r-1 :L_;I il �J � �LJ C n I l LJ C nu n LJ D n D 0 D 0 0 D D LJ Work Patterns and Job Design 147 tasks alternating for equal lengths of time. Ideally, the structuring of these tasks should be loose enough to allow each person to develop his or her own best work pattern. The job designer has to define some light work activities that are integral to the job and can be used as recovery periods between the heavier tasks. 4. For externally-paced jobs such as conveyor assembly lines, decisions about the time needed to do the task and which activities go into each job should consider the need for adequate recovery time in moderately heavy or heavy handling tasks (see Chapter 10). Line balancing should consider both the time to accomplish the task and the time needed to recover before the next task is done. Enough light activities to provide adequate recovery time should be scheduled in the heavier jobs. 5. In machine-paced operations where materials are coming in and out of a workplace by conveyor, the worker should be able to work in places other than directly at his or her work station. It should be possible to work down the line a little in order to permit more variability in performance when parts do not fit properly or when distractions, such as visitors, are present. When a supplying activity is scheduled to occur and the worker needs to get a little ahead on the line, he or she should be able to work up the line, too. 6. If an object weighs more than 40 lbs (18 kg), find a way to slide it rather than requiring it to be lifted. This is especially true if the handling is done more than once a minute for much of the shift. �": I u �nLJ D n '--' n \ I i-...J D D C D n LJ n L_j 0 0 n D Section V: Summary and Addenda TI� CHAPTER 12: SUMMARY In looking at the low back pain problem in industry, one should recognize that there are ways that the lost time and disability can be reduced through actions of the worker, the workplace and job design engineers, and supervision. The worker who has repeated low back pain episodes can learn good body mechanics, avoid actions that may trigger the attacks ("aggravators"), follow safe work practices in lifting and handling materials, and do regular exercises to keep the body muscles toned, especially those of the back, hips and abdomen. The design engineers can help the person with low back pain by assuring that reaches are within most people's capabilities without having to stretch or twist, that working heights do not result in static loading of the back, that handling requirements are resonable, and that postural flexibility is provided. Supervision can improve the low back problem in industry by supporting improvements in workplaces or jobs where static loading or twisting of the back may aggravate symptoms in people with degenerative disc disease. They can also learn to recognize job and environmental pressures that make it more necessary for a worker to report low back pain episodes. These include externally paced operations and tight time lines, jobs where the worker has little control over the way the work is done, and situations where postural relief is difficult to obtain. In addition, managers can encourage the establishment of worker fitness programs, es pecially for people who work in jobs that require moderately heavy to heavy effort or awkward p�stures. 149 �150 Working With Backache A. NEW DESIGN nLJ n D A long-term approach to reducing low back pain disability is to design the workplace so there is less opportunity for the "aggravators" of symptoms to occur. A summary of design guidelines that should make it less necessary to report low back pain symptoms is given below. LJ 1. Keep working heights around elbow height for most people. For standing work this is in a height range from about 35 to 41 inches (89 to 104 cm) above the floor. For seated work it is from 7 to 11 inches (18to 28cm) above the seat pan of the chair or stool. LJ 2. Keep forward reaches within 15 inches (38cm) of the front of the body and between elbow and head height, roughly from 38 to 55 inches ( 97 to 140 cm) above the floor when standing. Higher and lower forward reaches are not recommended, especially on a repetitive basis. If they occur, forward reaches of more than 10 inches require bending and stretching and increase the dis comfort for people with low back pain. 3. Avoid lifting items above 50 inches (127 cm) or below 20 inches when standing, where possible. Use sliding for low lifts or use levelators to raise the load above 20 inches for handling tasks. 4. Design force exertion tasks so they can be approached directly in front of the body and at 40 to 50 inches (102 to 127 cm) above the floor. 5. If a compact object weighs more than 40 lb (18 kg), look for ways to handle it other than lifting. Use conveyors or sliding surfaces, for example. 6. Provide workplace aids for postural relief, such as foot supports, chairs or support stools, armrests, and backrest cus hions, as appropriate to the work. Design jobs so the seated operator can get up and walk and the standing operator can sit down occasionally. 7. Design packaging so the dimensions do not exceed the I I D L, � nLJ D D D 0 D nu '7 i I �LJ D D n D D ...___..; n LJ D D D D D D D D Summary 151 reach and grip capabilities of most people and so the package does not interfere with the legs during walking and carrying. Objects that have more than two dimensions that exceed 20 inches (57 cm), even if they weigh less than 25 lbs (11 kg), may be difficult for less strong workers to handle repetitively. 8. Orient the workplace so that twisting of the upper body is not likely to occur. Keep the work within a 90-degree movement pattern where possible. Store supplies so they can be accessed without the worker having to take awkward postures, preferably between 20 and 55 inches (51 and 140 cm) above the floor in a standing workplace. Storage at or up to 25 inches (64 cm) above the work surface in a seated workplace is also preferred. Supplies that are only occasionally needed can be placed far enough to one side to require the worker to stand up and get some postural relief. 9. Select a chair according to the type of work being done and the time of continuous sitting. The longer a person has to remain seated before he or she can get up to walk or stand for a while, the more important it is to have a chair with good back and foot support and with adjustability to improve the workplace "fit" for the individual worker. 10. Provide aids for handling materials that are not compact or are heavier than 40 lbs (18 kg). Small hoists, straps, carts, and transfer tables with roller bearings are examples of such aids. 11. Include height adjustability in standing workplace work surfaces, where feasible. B. EXISTING WORKPLACES Workplace problems can often be identified by looking at accident and medical reports for low back pain incidents. Jobs that involve· heavy lifting, awkward postures, or high time pressure demands that make work organization difficult for the individual worker may show higher low back pain reporting than do lighter, more sedentary jobs. The need for a person to report symptoms when a low back pain episode occurs is much greater if the job activities put fairly high pressures on the lumbar discs or contribute to fatigue of the spinal musculature. �nI : 152 L.J Working With Backache nLJ It may sometimes be difficult to alter the workplace to fit the recommended guidelines for working heights, reaches, orienta tion, etc. Accommodation of individuals according to their back problems may be a more feasible approach in some instances to help get a person back to work or to reduce the potential for aggravating his or her symptoms on the job. Most of these accommodations will be usefu I for people without back problems, too, as they reduce static loading of muscles that can limit self paced productivity levels. Some accommodations are described below. D D D D D 1. Use a scissors lift, levelator, platform, or 2 or 3 extra pallets to raise items to about 20 inches (51 cm) above the floor in frequent handling tasks. 2. Use tool or reach extenders to reduce the need to stretch or twist in long reaches. 3. Provide chair inserts or inflatable cushions for additional lumbar support at a seated workplace if the chair is not designed according to ergonomic guidelines. 4. Use an adjustable footrest, or use a block of wood, styrofoam, or a telephone book as a footrest for standing or sitting workplaces to give postural relief: 5. Use small light platforms on a too-low work surface to raise the work height enough to reduce bending for the taller worker. 6. Use sections of roller conveyor, ball bearings mounted on the work surface, or slides to permit heavy items to be moved across the work surface without having to be lifted. 7. Include lighter activities as part of the job requirements and allow the workers to structure the way the job is performed, alternating light and heavier activities according to their best work pattern. 8. Release the person on a conveyor-paced job from the pace pressure by moving materials on and off of the conveyor line to another work surface. He or she can then keep some n LJ D D D D D D n I I �I I LJ D D D D D D D D D D D D D D Summary 153 control and work at an appropriate rate for the back discomfort. 9. Provide hand carts or hoists to support the weight of objects that are difficult to handle either because of their weight or their confi-guration. Since about two-thirds of the workforce might experience low back pain at some point in their working careers, it is wise to take the long term approach of designing or redesigning the workplace and job so most people can work without aggravating their low back. Accommodations are appropriate as short term "fixes" and do improve the job for many people. However, integrating the ergonomic principles into the whole job will have greater benefits than simply those related to low back problems. Well-designed jobs and workplaces can improve productivity by reducing fatigue from awkward postures or too-heavy work, by providing more management flexibility in placing people in jobs and covering changing production demands, and by better using the talents and capabilities of the workers. �ll I I Lj u" I I D n J D 'l I I �__J 7 j �l J ,:�,i APPENDIX A: SURVEYING THE WORKPLACE LJ D IJ D D D IJ 1-1 lJ r7 LJ 0 D Low back pain symptoms in the workplace may not be easily prevented because of the recurrent nature of the disease. However, workplace and job situations may exacerbate symptoms by requiring the worker to use postures or handle materials that aggravate the back. This Appendix includes a checklist that can be used to help identify changes to facilitate the low back pain patient's return to the workplace. If the conditi_ons indicated in the checklist are avoided in workplace and job design, the opportunities for extended lost time from low back pain should be reduced significantly. Other factors relating to supervisory style and conditions that may increase the risk of slip and trip accidents are also discussed. I. Checklist to Identify Potential Low Back Pain Aggravators in the Workplace In surveying the workplace, one should place a check by the appropriate descriptions of low back pain �ggravators. ___ 1. Constant standing with little opportunity to sit down. ___ 2. Constant sitting with little opportunity to stand up or move around. ___ 3. Low working heights requiring the worker to bend over frequently. ___ 4. Extended reaches requiring the worker to bend forward to perform a task for at least a minute continuously. 155 �u 11 I 156 Working With Backache ___ 5. Activities that require the worker to take an awkward posture, such as crouching, while doing a task lasting longer than one minute. ___ 6. Repeated and sustained work over shoulder level (about 50 inches above the floor). ___ 7. Activities that require the worker to twist the upper trunk in order to reach or see something. ___ 8. Activities that result in uneven distribution of body weight on the feet, especially where one foot is lower then the other and manual force exertion or lifting and lowering is being done. ___ 9. Inadequate clearances for moving the feet while doing a task that will result either in uneven balance or twisting of the trunk. ___ 10. Seating that has inadequate support for the back (no adjustable lumbar support). ___ 11. Lack of an appropriate footrest at a seated work place (unless working height is about 26 inches above the floor or lower). ___ 12. A fixed workplace where it is not possible to adjust the location or heights of equipment being used, therefore possibly resulting in awkward postures for some workers (e.g., a visual display terminal that is too high or too low for some workers and cannot be tilted). ___ 13. Occasional lifting or lowering of objects weighing more than 40 pounds at heights below 35 and above 45 inches. ___ 14. Frequent lifting (1 per minute or more) or lowering of objects weighing more than 25 pounds. ___ 15. Handling of large-size loads (more than 20 inches in any dimension for boxes or cases). I D '7 LJ D D [I 0 D D [I r7 I I LJ I ' i I LJ . LJ1·-1 !i �·1 _J Appendix A-Surveying the Workplace 157 7 _J ___ 16. Handling of sheet materials without straps, special holders, or a second person. 17. Handling of awkward loads that can shift suddenly . (such as liquids in cans or bags of loose material) when they weigh more than 25 pounds. 7 _j ___ 18. Handling of materials where the load is not shared equally between the hands, so that the load on the spine is imbalanced. J J ___ 19. Sustained (more than 30 seconds) pushing or pulling of heavy loads in trucks or across flat surfaces. Forces exceeding 40 pounds (or 180 Newtons). ___ 20. Activities that require lateral force exertion, as in pulling or pushing an object across the front of the body, where more than 15 pounds of force (70 Newtons) is required. 7 __J ___ 21. Lifting or lowering any objects when the hands are less than 10 inches above the floor, unless the knees are bent and the load is compact. r7 I I r·1 ' I II I LJ 11 I LJ 0 n l i __j rLJi r·1 , I LJ ___ 22. Externally-paced jobs where the worker cannot go "off-line" easily to take a recovery break. Examples are conveyors or production machines where the worker must keep pace or shut down the line. This is especially of concern for handling tasks. ___ 23. Manual handling tasks that require the worker to bend to one side to exert a force or lift an object, resulting in a trunk twist or uneven loading of the spine. ___ 24. Moderately heavy workloads that are sustained for more than 1 hour continuously, especially if a sustained awkward posture or if frequent moderately heavy to heavy lifting is required in the job. ___ 25. Work in a cold environment (such as a food storage warehouse) where repetitive lifting or awkward postures are required. �f7 ' 158 Working With Backache ' ' '._j '' ' '' I LJ 2. Other Factors to Evaluate in the Workplace In addition to the workplace and job factors indicated in the checklist, the work environment should be evaluated in terms of supervisory style and the potential for slip and trip accidents. The "style" factor can influence the reporting of low back pain symptoms and the ease with which a person gets back to work after an episode of low back pain. Slip and trip accidents are associated with development of or exacerbation of low back pain and may be related to either workplace or job factors. To survey an area for its supervisory style, one has to interview the workers and supervisors and be sensitive to factors that can influence the worker's time pressure or job control. The less control or the more external pacing present, the more potential there is for a person with back problems to run into difficulties in performing the job during low back pain episodes. The difficulties arise when the person is less able to organize his or her work pattern in order to reduce back discomfort, as when he or she is constrained from taking frequent short work breaks, changing postures, using aids, or altering the methods used to accomplish the task. If a supervisor exerts close control over the way the work is done and does not tolerate work pattern adjustments, and if the person with low back pain is unable to do the work in the usual manner, then he or she will have to report the back problem and get a medical restriction. Some questions that can be used to elicit information about supervisory style are: n LJ r·7 LJ 7 LJ r7 LJ r7 lJ n lJ r1 lJ I i u n ! I a. Are there any jobs in your area that might be difficult for a person with a back problem to perform? LJ b. How do you handle a person with a medical restriction for moderately heavy lifting (or continuous standing) in your area? n c. Are there aids available in the workplace to help in manual handling activities? Are they used? d. Are there periods of increased production pressure when it is difficult to meet your schedule? LJ I ! LJ r--1 ; I u !7 �_j Appendix A-Surveying the Workplace 7 ' e. What is the scheduled break time on the jobs in your area? If a person completes the work early, can he or she go on break for longer periods? I An evaluation of the workplace for potential slip/trip ac cidents would include looking for housekeeping problems. This includes such things as: parts, liquids, or oils on the floors; crowded aisles; equipment left in walkways; and other hazards that might contribute to a tripping or slipping accident. Job factors that result in hurrying, such as too tight a timeline in a paced operation or high production pressure, are also more likely to result in slip/trip accidents. Workplaces where there is a change in the walking or standing surface height, whether it is a small flight of stairs, a stair ladder, a step stool, or a platform may also increase the risk of a slip or loss of balance because of a misstep. _J 'l ! 17 I I LJ 17 lJ nLJ This section has addressed the identification of workplace, job, and environmental factors that may contribute to low back pain problems on the job. Guidelines for designing workplaces and jobs to reduce the opportunities for aggravating backache symptoms are given in Chapters 5 through 11. r·1 r7 I I nI l__) n LJ n LJ I I 159 I ' LJ f' "7! LJ �[::.__] c::, o C) ! C 0 0 0 0 _) ---, [__ � ...A. I r · -----1 L____J 8 � I §J � Lru,] � � � �_j ' _J I I r-7 i \ u r7 u \ APPENDIX B: SELECTING A CHAIR I ' \ I u LJ , The choice of a chair for a workplace will determine how comfortable the worker is and, indirectly, how productively he or she works. This Appendix gives general guidelines for chair selection that are based on population size. It also includes information for deciding which type of chair is best as a function of the type of work being done. I n LJ r7 ' I LJ r1 LJ r7 LJ 1) LJ 11 I ' \.._.) r-, I. :I 1. Chair Characteristics as Selection Criteria Table B-1 summarizes the height, width, and depth of a chair's seat, characterisitics of its back rest, and suggested dimensions for the footrest and armrests. These guidelines for selection are based on anthropometric (body size) data of the U.S. population and are intended to make it possible for the greater part of the workforce to be comfortably accommodated by the chair design. If a chair is being chosen for a personalized work station at home, the purchaser shou Id choose one that best satisfies his or her body size. If the height and depth recommendations for the seat are not met by available chairs, an adjustable footrest should be pur chased with the chair that comes closest to the guidelines. The footrest will reduce discomfort in the back that may be caused by inadequate foot support or by an inability to use the backrest and still keep one's feet on the floor. 2. The Process of Chair Selection The recommendations given above for selecting a chair can be used for any applications. Other decisions must be made 161 �' I ' ' I LJ 162 Working With Backache Table B-1: Recommeded Chair and Accessory Characteristics Characteristic Measurement or Feature 1. Seat Height Adjustability From 15 to 22 inches (38 to 56 cm) 17 to 19 inches (43 to 48 cm) 17 inches (43 cm) 5-10 degrees up (towards the front) Lumbar and Thoracic Support 6-9 inches (15-23 cm) high 12-14 inches (30-36 cm) wide 7 to 1 O inches (18-25 cm) above· the seat 12 to 17 inches (30-43 cm) from the front of the seat 5-legged; castered, if needed At least 180 degrees of swivel, if needed A "breathing" fabric that does not trap heat and cause stickiness. Easy to adjust without tools; pneumatic cylinder adjustment where possible. Portable and adjustable 16 inches (41 cm) iong, 12 inches (30 cm) wide Easy to adjust in 2-inch (5-cm) increments Adjustable with seat height 2. Seat Width 3. Seat Depth (or Length) 4. Seat Slope 5. Chair Back Rest Size Movement Up and Down Movement In and Out 6. Support 7. Swivel 8. Fabric or Chair Covering 9. Adjustability 10. Footrests Size Adjustability Chair Footrests 11. Armrests Size Adjustability 12 inches (30 cm) long, 3 inches (9 cm) wide on chairs so chair can fit urider work surface Up and down about 5 inches (13 cm) on chairs. Wider motion capability if armrests are on a work bench Table B-1: Recommended Chair and Accessory Characteristics. Recommended dimensions and characteristics of chairs, footrests, and armrests are given in inches and centimeters. Few chairs will be found that possess all of the characteristics recommended; the ones that come closest are preferred. r, I I n LJ I : un If I : I I L_j r, , I I I u : n L-1, I rI I J ! L--' r7 I ! n I ! L..J nLJ 1'1 ! i n �_,; Appendix B-Selecting a Chair -, 163 _,J -, about the type of chair and the kind of work that is done in the seated posture, however. Figure B-1 summarizes some of the decisions that should be made before the final chair is selected. Following this process should lead one to a chair that is best suited to the job and that takes account of the usual job postures as well as the population's physical size range. __, �7 __J Table B-2 indicates important selection features for chairs and accessories to be used in workplaces where assembly, word processing, inspection tasks, and intermittent seated jobs are done. These tasks are described below. Each job will have its unique combination of tasks, so the chair selection process suggested in this table should be used only as a guide to how to analyze the needs. --1 '� '7 n I : Assembly tasks often require the worker to lean forward on the work surface in order to hold or put pressure on a part, use a tool, or attach a part to the main assembly. The operations cannot be performed while sitting back in the chair, so the backrest must be able to move forward with the worker as the work is done. Provision of workplace armrests to help steady the hands may also be desirable. L.) u {7 I ' A word processing job may involve sitting back in the chair and entering text on the keyboard. There is little need to lean forward during text entry, but the word processor operator may have to go to another location to pick up the printed output. Chair height adjustability is important especially if the video display unit's keyboard is not separate from the screen. Sustained awkward head and neck postures can bring out low back pain complaints. n i ( u n i '1 LJ An inspector may remove product from the manufacturing process at some point and test it, then either return it to the line or dispose of it in a waste bin. In any case, the inspector may have to move objects around the workplace; this can include a need for 1:1 I 1 nLJ frequent extended reaches, twisting of the trunk, and reaches up, down, and to the side of the primary work area.. In addition, the worker may lean forward to be able to see the defects for which the inspection is being done. �,1 ' I Working With Backache 164 ! I \ \ LJ l-1 Seated or Sit/Stand Workplace? � .____I -♦ � 4-8 Hours or Less Than 4 Hours ! . Most Important Features Most Important Features Good Back Support Easy to Adjust Height and Depth of Seat "Breathing" Fabrics Good Padding I + • Seat Needs to Adjust up to 25 inches (102 cm) • Must Have Footrest • Look at Stools or Other Props Seat Height Less than 23 Inches (58 cm) - Ease of Getting On and Off l • Need Backrest to Move Forward at Least 5 Inches (12 cm) + Leans Forward to Write or Assemble on Work Surface • Need Good Back Support • Provide Good Foot Support Either Through Portable or Built-In Footrest I I i ; c_J n u I I I ' ! i u n LJ 'l i i LJ What Does the Worker Do? Extended Reaches - Forward n l Reaches to Side or Up and Down • Need to Limit Size of Backrest to Reduce Abrasions • Need Swivel Capability • Stable Base (5 Legs) 1 Operates Foot Pedal • Need Good Backrest • Movable Foot Pedal Desirable • Adjustability in Height Figure 8-1: Selecting a Chair. A decision tree is shown for selecting a chair according to the activities required by the job. The most important chair characteristics are indicated according to the reaches and work locations, especially. u I ' r1 I I lI __,i i . u I I r1 n I I u I I n I i LJ n /LJi '"7 : / �Appendix B-Selecting a Chair --, 165 .J 7 � Table B-2: Chair Selection by Job Category Most Important Characteristics (marked by an "X") D nLJ 0 C r1 LJ n u 0 Job Type Chair and Accessory Characteristics Assembly Word Processing Inspection Seated TasksIntermittent Seat Height X X X X Seat Depth X X X X Seat Width X X 5-Legged Support X X X X Backrest Size Backrest Adjustment Up and Down X In and Out X X X X X X X X X Fabric Covering X X X Footrest X X X Armrest X Padding X n LJ D nLJ nLJ Table B-2: Chair Selection by Job Category. Chair and accessory characteristics are shown in column one. Four job types are indicated across the top of the table. The most important character istics in chair or accessory selection are marked with an "X" under each job type. �f7 l�J ! 166 Working With Backache ' 1 I c_J These three tasks are often done for more than 4 hours a shift \II u and are often sustained for two hours continuously without a . break. Other jobs may provide seating for people who are doing certain tasks such as paperwork, record keeping, repair work, or some testing. These intermittent seated tasks are evaluated in the last column of Table B-2. fl LJ D n LJ D LJ n lJ (7 n lJ n LJ un n I ! I I L.-J n �......J '~_) (' I \.......) IL_] r; , ......, 1 ! \._) \----' �!:---) i I i_j n 0 LJ un n uI I n u n u il u I I n I I u D n ! u I n u n u n �J nLJ D REFERENCES nI ! LJ D D D Caillet, R. 1981. Low Back Pain Syndrome. Edition 3. Phila delphia: F.A. Davis Company, 230 pages. I I Rowe, M.L. 1965. Disc surgery and chronic low back pain. Journal of Occupational Medicine 7: 196-202. n D n D D L.J nu r1 LJ Chapter 1: Kapandji, I.A.1974. ThePhysiology of theJoints. Volume 3: The Trunk and Vertebral Column. Translated by L.H. Honore. New York. Churchill Livingstone, 251 pages. Rowe, M.L. 1969. Low back pain in industry.Journal of Occupa tional Medicine 11: 161-169. Rowe, M.L. 1971. Low back disability in industry. Updated position.Journal of Occupational Medicine 13: 476-478. Rowe, M.L. 1983. Backache at Work. Fairport, N.Y.: Perinton Press, 122 pages. White, A.H. 1983. Back Structure, Incidence and Causative Factors of Back Injuries and Pain (Psychological, Biomechanical, and Psychophysical). Paper presented at the National Safety Council's Back Injury Prevention and Rehabilitation Satellite Video Teleconference, May 18, 1983. Chicago: National Safety Council, pages 7-11 of syllabus. 169 �r1I I L..J 170 Working With Backache Chapter 2: Chaffin, D.B. and K.S. Park. 1973. A longitudinal study of low back pain as associated with occupational weight lifting factors. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal 34: 513-525. Kodak Human Factors. 1983. Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volume 1. Belmont, Calif.: Lifetime Learning, 406 pages. Nachemson, A. 1975. Towards a better understanding of low back pain: A review of the mechanics of the lumbar disc. Rheumatology and Rehabilitation 14: 129-143. Tichauer, E.R. 1978. The Biomechanical Basis of Ergonomics: Anatomy Applied to the Design of Work Situations. New York: Wiley lnterscience, 99 pages. Chapter 3: Imrie, D. with C. Dimson. 1983. Goodbye Backache. New York: Arco Publishing, Inc., 159 pages. Pfeiffer, G.J. 1983. Self Starter. A Self Help Guide to Back Care. Rochester, N.Y.: Xerox Corporation, 25 pages. Rohmert, W. 1960. Zur Theorie der Erholungspausen bei dyna mischer Arbeit. Internationale Zeitschrift fur Angewandte Physio logie 18: 191-212. Scherrer, J. and H. Monod. 1960. Le Travail musculaire et la fatigue chez l'homme. Journal de Physiologie (Paris) 52: 419-501. Chapter 4: Brown, J.R. 1975. Factors contributing to the development of back pain in industrial workers. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal 36: 26-31. Himbury, S. 1967. Kinetic Methods of Manual Handling in Industry. I.LO.: Occupational Safety and Health Series No. 10. Geneva, Switzerland: International Labour Office, 38 pages. D D I I LJ un n LJ II D n LJ n D D D LJ n LJ n �C □ □ References 171 Chapter 5: Chaffin, D.B. and G.B. Andersson. 1984. Occupational Bio mechanics. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 454 pages. Frankel, V.H. and M. Nordin. 1980. Basic Biomechanics of the Skeletal System. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger, 303 pages. Kapandji, I.A. 1974, op. cit. (Chapter 1). D D 0 D ii I i LJ D C n Kodak Human Factors. 1983, op. cit. (Chapter 2). NASA. 1978. Anthropometric Source Book. Volume II: A Hand book of Anthropometric Data. Yellow Springs, Ohio: NASA Scientific and Technical Information Office, 424 pages. Chapter 6 and Appendix B: Grandjean, E. 1980. Fitting the Task to the Man: An Ergonomic Approach. 3rd Edition. London: Taylor &. Francis, Ltd., 50-62. Grandjean, E., W. Hunting, G. Wotzka, and R. Schaerer.1973. An ergonomic investigation of multipurpose chairs. Human Factors 15: 247-255. Kodak Human Factors. 1983, op. cit. (Chapter 2). Konz, S. 1979. Work Design. Columbus, Ohio: Grid Publishing Company, 592 pages. Mandal, A.C. 1981. The seated man (Homo Sedens), .the seated work position -Theory and practice. Applied Ergonomics 12(1): 19-26. Roebuck, J.A. Jr., K.H.E. Kroemer, and W.G. Thomson. 1975. Engineering Anthropometry Methods. New York: John Wiley & . Sons, 459 pages. LJ LJ f7 ILJ: Chapter 1: Astrand, P.-O. and K. Rodah I. 1977. Textbook of Work Physiology, Second Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc., 681 pages. �'7 : I 172 Working With Backache ,.., uI I I I Ciriello, V. 1984. Paper presented on lifting frequency and acceptable work load at the 1984 Brouha Work Physiology Symposium in Rochester, N.Y., September, 1984. Damon, A., H.W. Stoudt, and A.A. McFarland. 1966. The Human Body in Equipment Design. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univer sity Press, 360 pages. Drury, C., Editor. 1978. Safety in Manual Materials Handling. DHEW/NIOSH Publication No. 78-185. Cincinnati, Ohio: De partment of Health, Education and Welfare/National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, 209 pages. Keyserling, W.M., G. Herrin, D.S. Chaffin, T.J. Armstrong, and M.L. Foss. 1980. Establishing an industrial strength testing program. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal41: 730-736. Kroemer, K.H.E. 1970. Horizontal Static Forces Exerted by Men Standing in Common Working Postures on Surfaces with Various Tractions. AMRL-TR-70-114. Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio: Aerospace Medical Research L,aboratory, 36 pages. NIOSH. 1981. Work Practices Guide for Manual Lifting. DHHS/NIOSH (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health) Publication No. 81-122. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 183 pages. Petrofsky, J.S. and A.A. Lind. 1978a. Comparison of metabolic, circulatory and ventilatory responses of man to various lifting tasks and to bicycle ergometry. Journal ofApplied Physiology (REEP) 45(1 ): 60-63. Petrofsky, J.S. and A.A. Lind. 1978b. Metabolic, cardiovascular and respiratory factors in the development of fatigue in lifting tasks. Journal ofApplied Physlology (REEP)'45(1): 64:..68. Rehmert, W. and J. Rutenfranz. 1983. PraktischeArbeitsphysiol ogie, 3rd Edition. New York: Thieme Publishers, 440 pages. "I lJ I □ 17 LJ □ u '7 D 0 □ !l D ri ! I :7 ,r, ) I �References 173 ) i ! '.··, . ) I 7 J D 7 J .. Rowe, M.L. 1983. op. cit. (Chapter 1). Snook, S.H. 1978. The design of manual handling tasks. Ergon omics 21(12): 963-985. Snook, S.H., R.A. Campanelli, and J.W. Hart. 1978. A study of three preventive approaches to low back injury. Journal of Occupational Medicine 20: 478-481. Yates, J.W. 1984. Paper on research of handling frequency and workload presented at the Brouha Work Physiology Symposium in Rochester, N.Y. in September, 1984. Paper su�mitted to Ergonomics, November 1984: Karwowski, W. and J.W. Yates. Reliability of the psychophysical approach to manual lifting of liquids by females. Yates, J.W., E. Kamon, S.H. Rodgers, and P.C. Champney. 1980. Static lifting strength and maximum isometric voluntary con tractions of back, arm, and shoulder muscles. Ergonomics 23(1 ): 37-47. D Himbury, S. 1967, op. cit. (Chapter 4). '7 Chapter 9: lJ D D D n D LJ Chapter 8: Jacobsen, C. and L. Sperling. 1976. Classification of hand grip. A preliminary study. Journal of Occupational Medicine 18(6): 395-398. Napier, S. 1956. The prehensile movements of the human hand. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 388: 902-913. Rigby, L.V. 1973. Why do people drop things? Quality Progress 6(9): 16-19. Tichauer, E.R. 1978, op. cit. (Chapter 2). �Lind, A.R. and J.S. Petrofsky. 1978. Cardiovascular and Res piratory Limitations on Muscular Fatigue During Lifting Tasks. In Drury, 1978, op. cit. (Chapter 7), pages 57-62. D D D D Rodgers, S.H. 1978. Metabolic Indices in Manual Materials Handling Tasks. In Drury, 1978, op. cit. (Chapter?), pages 52-56. u 174 Working With Backache Chapter 10: Astrand and Rodahl. 1977, op. cit. (Chapter 7). Rehmert, W. 1973a. Problems in determining rest allowances. Part 1: Use of modern methods to evaluate stress and strain in static muscle work. Applied Ergonomics 4(2): 91-95. Rohmert, W. 1973b. Problems in determining rest allowances. Part 2: Determining rest allowances in different human tasks. Applied Ergonomics 4(2): 158-162. Rohmert and Rutenfranz. 1983, op. cit. (Chapter 7). Scherrer, J., H. Monod, A. Wisner, P. Andlauer, A. Baisset, S. Bouisset, H. Desoille, J.M. Faverge, A. Dubois-Poulsen, E. Grandjean, B. Metz, P. Montastruc, S. Pascaud, M. Pottier, and D. Rohr. 1967. Physiologie du Travail (Ergonomie). Travail Physique Energetique. Volume 1. Paris: Masson Cie., 387 pages. Simonson, E., Compiler and Editor. 1971. Physiology of Work Capacity and Fatigue. Springfield, 111.,: C.C. Thomas, 571 pages. Chapter 11: Salvendy, G. and M.J. Smith, Editors. 1981. Machine Pacing and Occupational Stress. London: Taylor & Francis Ltd., 374 pages. r: I n.J D nL n LJ I � I Ii LJ D LJn n ' I LJ l�i �_,j ' .J INDEX D D D D 0 D C D D D D A Action Limit (AL}, NIOSH Lifting Guidelines, 98 Adjustability, Workplace Height, 118,150 Aggravators, of Low Back Pain (LBP}, 15,19,149,155 Aids, to Reduce LBP, Capacity, Muscle, 47,92,131 Carrying, Uneven Loading, 39,126 Carts, for Materials Handling, 117 Chairs Adjustability, 81,162 Back Supports, 33,84,162 Covering, 87,162 118,150 Design of, 81,151,162 Anthropometric Measurements Lack of Foot Support, 28 Seated, 71 Seat Dimensions, 83,162 Standing, 70 Seat Slope, 84,162 Armrests, 88,162 Selection Criteria, 151,161 Assembly Tasks, and Chair Swivel, 31,162 Selection, 161 Checklist, for Workplace Survey, 155 B Cost, of Low Back Pain, 10 ·sack Supports, 33,84. 113,162 D Backache at Work, by M.L. Rowe, 3,6, 19, vii Degenerative Disc Disease, 3,149 Bending Over, 21,66,133 and Age, 8 Biomechanical Stress, on Back, Natural History of, 8 21,23,66,92 Depth, of Object Handled, 126 Body Mechanics, 66, 92 Dimensions, of Object Handled, C Capacity, Aerobic Work, 101,135 124,150 Disability, Management of in LBP, 11,153 175 �176 Working With Backache Disc (L5), Compressive Forces on, 19, 65, 92 Dynamic Work, Lifting,138 E Effort Levels, Heart Rate Elevations,139 Exercises,for Back and Trunk Muscles,48 F Fatigue, Muscle,20,69,131 Fitness,Back and Trunk Muscles,48 Footrail,for Back Relief,113 Footrests,28,88,162 Foot Room, Inadequate,37 Forces, Exerted, Maximum Static Pull,95 on L5 Disc,19,65,95 Maximum Push and Pull, 106 Frequency,Lifting,105 n LJ I Inspection Tasks, and Chair Selection, 163 Intensity-Duration Relationship, Aerobic Work,101,138 MuscleWork,48,131,138 J Job Design, Guidelines, 143,146 L Length,of Object Handled,124 Lifting, Guidelines,54,98 and Low Back Pain,53,91 Patterns to Reduce Fatigue, 143 Repetitive or Sustained, 43,101,135,143 Tasks,34,123,135,143,152 Techniques,54,118 Training and LBP,3,14 Two-Person,61 Lifts,and Levelators for G Grip,59,129 Handling,118 Load, H Oversized,42,124 Handholds,Design of,129 Size and Configuration, Handling Aids, 124,127 15,33,41,114,117 Location,of Work,65,92,151 Heart Rate Elevation, and Backrest Use,85 and Work,139 Low Back Pain, Heavy Lifting {see Lifting) Aggravators,15,19,149,155 Heavy Work,and LBP,9 Diagnoses,6 Hoists,for Materials Handling, and Effort Level,9 117 Incidence,4,153 Industrial Studies,4 Hyperextension of Back, and Lifting Patterns,53,143 22,41,115,125 D D D D D D D ri, LJ D D 0 r1 �J 7 J J D D D D D D D D D D D 177 Index Management of,11,149 Need to Report,9,151 M Manual Handling Tasks (see Lifting),34,43,92, 118,123,135,143 Muscles,for Spinal Support, 45,65,131 Secondary Work, Breaks,143 from Static Work,134 References,169 Restrictions,Job,44 Return to Work Considerations,12 s Seated Work, N Constant,33,113 Nerve Root Pinch,7,25, Postures,28 52,131,137 Twisting,30 Seating,79,161 NIOSH Occasional Lift Guidelines,98 Sheet Materials, Handling Aids,116 Sliding, p Instead of Lifting, Paced Work, 42,60,112 and Recovery Time, Surfaces,Air Table, 133,143,152 Roller Bearings,112,11 E andSlip/TripAccidents,159 Pallets,for Height Adjustments, Slip and Trip Accidents, Evaluation,159 119 Spasm,Muscle,50,132 Patterns,of Lifting,143 Spine, Instability, %MVC (Maximum Voluntary 6,25,39,131 Contraction),47,131,137 Standing Work, Platforms,to Adjust Constant,26,113 Working Height,111 Postures,20, Postures, Static Muscle Loading, Awkward,25,39,43 21,92,131,137 Flexibility,27,113,133,146 Strength, Relative Static Push and Pull Forces,95,106 Pull,95 Push and Pull,106 R Reach Extenders, 109, 152 Reaches, Seated,32,74,150 Standing,23,73,150 Recovery Time, Calculations of,137 Supervisory Style, Evaluation of,158 Survey of Workplaces,155 Twisting, T �Working With Backache 178 Seated,30 While Handling Materials, 36,76,97,112 w Width,of Object Handled,124 Word Processing,and Chair Selection,163 Work-Recovery Cycles, Workload Adjustment, 43,60,133,135,143 Workers' Cc;>mpensation, and LBP,3,9,10 Workplace Design, Aecom modations, 15,65,109 Heights,21,69,92,111,150 Orientation,30,75,112,151 Seated,28,80,150,161 Sit/Stand,79 Standing,15,79 [ LJ D D D D D D D D D D D D n �n ; I ! ;..__./ n ) I , ' u [l u r ! ,.... I r r I '...... r ; r l L I L i L. �[ WORKING WITH BACKACHE. [ [ [ SUZANNE H. RODGERS, Ph. D. Dr. Rodgers is an internationally known consultant in occupational ergonomics involved in research, problem solving, and training of others to understand and find solutions for job and workplace prob lems. She combines academic strength in physiology with 13 years of industrial field experience and with a curiosity and interest in learning from the people who best understand job and workplace problems, the workers themselves. In Working With Backache, she brings ergonomic and phys iological theory together with workplace observations to-help clarify how workers, engineers, health and safety specialists, and management can work together to reduce low back disability on the job. The pragmatic and readable style of Working With Backache makes it a useful resource for people with chronic back problems by showing them what types of motions and postures to avoid and how they can reduce the opportunities for discomfort through work pattern adjustments and work design both at home and on the job. PERINTON PRESS r Rf.� f.� � • . , POST OFICE BOX 1105 FAIRPORT, NEW YORK 14450 U.S.A. ISBN 0-931157-01-3 [ [ [ [ [ [ D D D n �WORKING WITH BACKACHE SUZANNE H. RODGERS, Ph. D. Dr. Rodgers is an internationally known consultant in occupational ergonomics involved in research, problem solving, and training of others to understand and find solutions for job and workplace prob lems. She combines academic strength in physiology with 13 years of industrial field experience and with a curiosity and interest in learning from the people who best understand job and workplace problems, the workers themselves. In Working With Backache, she brings ergonomic and phys iological theory together with workplace observations to help clarify how workers, engineers, health and safety specialists, and management can work together to reduce low back disability on the job. The pragmatic and readable style of Working With Backache makes it a useful resource for people with chronic back problems by showing them what types of motions and postures to avoid and how they can reduce the opportunities for discomfort through work patterri-adjustments and work design both at home arid on the job. PERINTON PRESS POST OFICE BOX 1105 FAIRPORT, NEWYORK 14450 U.S.A. ISBN 0-931157-01-3 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Working With Backache Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Description An account of the resource A book written by Dr. Rodgers that provides a practical approach to employee training, workplace design and job design to reduce low back pain. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1905-06-06 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_002 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-18 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 200 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/59ddbe569d5ab95729ebdce1952deb1f.pdf bcd997385e449b123b2a36282b9f268c PDF Text Text Dr. Rodgers provided trainings internationally. The following pages are a compilation of cover pages, syllabi, and schedules for several trainings she provided from 1984 to 2005 which are listed below. o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o January 1984: Repetitive Motions, Total Work Load and Temperature Stress. Training Seminar in Occupational Ergonomics for the United States Post Office August 20-22, 1984: 3-Day Training Program in Ergonomics/Human Factors. Rochester Products Engineers. August 1984: Ergonomics Training Course for Rochester Products, GMC. September 20, 1984: 2-Hour Ergonomics Awareness Course. Central Engineering, Mobil Chemical Films Division. September 27, 1984: 4-Hour Awareness Course in Human Factors/Ergonomics. Oldsmobile Engine Plant, Lansing, Michigan September 28, 1984: 8-Hour Engineers’ Course in Human Factors/Ergonomics. Oldsmobile Engine Plant. September 1984: 3-Day Training Program for In-Plant Ergonomics/Human Factors Team at General Motors Assembly Plants October 9-11, 1984: 3-Day Human Factors Training Course for Fairfax Assembly Plant, GMC November 27-29, 1984: Human Factors Engineering at General Motors Corporation, BuickOldsmobile-Cadillac Group February 4-6, 1985: 3-Day Human Factors Training Course for the Chevrolet Engine Assembly Plant, GMC. May 28-30, 1985: 3-Day Human Factors Training Course. General Motors Corporation, Oklahoma City Assembly Plant. July 1985: Ergonomics Training Course. Ergonomics Committee, Delco Moraine July 8-9, 1985: 2-Day Ergonomics Training Program. Delco Moraine Ergonomics Committee July/August 1985: Ergonomics Training Course. Designers, Engineers, Tooling, Materials, Delco Moraine July/August 1985:1-Day Ergonomics Awareness Program. Delco Moraine First-Line Supervisors, Health, Safety, and Placement. October 9-11, 1985: The Ergonomics of Manufacturing Systems Design Ergonomics Training Course. B-O-C Industrial Engineering October 23-25, 1985: 3-Day Ergonomics Training Program. General Motors Corporation, C-P-C Pontiac Assembly Plant. November 12, 1985: Bausch and Lomb Ergonomics Awareness Seminar February 4-6, 1986: 3-Day Ergonomics/Human Factors Engineering Training Program. General Motors Lordstown Fabrication Plant. October 1-2, 1986: Ergonomic Principles in New Design. BOC Lake Orion Assembly Plant, GMC. October 3, 1986: Ergonomics Awareness Course. B.O.C. Orion Assembly Plant, GMC. October 29-31, 1986: 3-Day Ergonomics Training Course. C.P.C Van Nuys Assembly Plant November 1986: Meeting and Presentation Skills- 2 Day Training Program. GM/UAW Joint Training Committee. December 1986: Ergonomics, A Five Day Training Program. GM/UAW Training Committee C.P.C. Van Nuys Assembly Plant. �o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o January and February 1987: 3-Day Ergonomics Training Course. B O C Lansing Operations Project on Disability Management and Workers’ Compensation Cost Control April 23-24, 1987: Reducing Work Injuries and Illness Through Ergonomics, 2-Day Ergonomics Course. University of Iowa Physical Therapy Programs and College of Nursing. August 4-6, 1987: Ergonomics Training Course. St. Mary’s Goodyear August 4-6, 1987: 3-Day Ergonomics Training Program. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company, St. Mary’s, Ohio. November 16-18, 1987: 3-Day Ergonomics Training Course. B O C Lansing Operations Project on Disability Management and Workers’ Compensation Cost Control. December 4, 1987: Ergonomics Awareness and Problem Solving Course for Northeast Packaging, Plastics Packaging Division, Mobil Chemical Co. January to March 1988: Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company Ergonomics Training General Products and Textile Divisions March 11, 1988: AIIE Chapter Meeting June 21, 1988: Ergonomics- Practical Approaches for Reducing Occupational Illness, Injury and Disability While Improving Quality Performance. July 18-21, 1988: Ergonomics Training Course. The Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company, Asia/Pacific Regions. Singapore. September 22-25, 1988: Industrial Medicine – An Introductory Course for Therapists. Meeting Planners, Inc. September 26-29, 1988: 4-Day Ergonomics Training Course. Delco Products Rochester Division General Motors Corporation October 11, 1988: 1-Day Ergonomics Awareness and Problem Solving Course. Mobil Macedon Design Products. October 21, 1988: Postural Demands, Workplace and Equipment Design. Work Re-Entry Program, University of Rochester. October 27, 1988: Ergonomic Job Analysis Techniques, a 4-Hour Training Course for Members of the St. Mary’s Medical Center Workers’ Evaluation & Rehabilitation Center Staff. October 27, 1988: Ergonomics in the Workplace “Higher Productivity Through Job Design”. A RAMAC/SMMC Seminar for St. Mary’s Medical Center. August 3, 1988: Ergonomic Guidelines for Manual Handling Tasks Seminar and Problem Solving Workshop. November 8-10, 1988: 3-Day Ergonomics Training Course. Health and Environment Laboratories, Eastman Kodak Company. November 21, 1988: Ergonomics-Prevention of Occupational Overexertion Injuries. Center for Occupational Rehabilitation and Ergonomics, University of Rochester Medical Center. November 22, 1988: Ergonomics in Dietary Jobs. Dietetics Department, University of Rochester Medical Center. December 1988: Ergonomics Awareness Course. Eastman Kodak Company, Colorado Division. December 14-15, 1988: 2-Day Ergonomics Training Course for Central Engineering Based on the Pigment Weigh Room and Banbury Loading Area Designs for the Napanee Plant. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company. December 27, 1988: Occupational Rehabilitation and Ergonomics Clinic Seminars, Total Work Load and Aerobic Capacity Evaluations. University of Rochester Medical Center. �o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o January 5, 1989: Problem Solving with Job Examples for Total Job Demands. Seminar for Occupational Rehabilitation and Ergonomics Team, University of Rochester Medicine. January 10-12, 1989: 3-Day Ergonomics Training Course. Eastman Chemicals Division. January 30-February 1, 1989: 3-Day Ergonomics Training Course. General Electric Bridgeport. February 9, 1989: Applied Ergonomics from the Industrial Perspective. Presentation to the Organization Resources Counselors Meeting. March 9, 1989: Ergonomics Awareness Course. International Paper Company. March 30, 1989: Ergonomics Awareness Course: Amoco Corporation. April 3-7 and 26-28, 1989: Ergonomic Training, Work Smarter Not Harder, an 8-Day Ergonomics Training Program. BOC General Motors Plant. April 17-20, 1989: 4-Day Ergonomics Training Course. Eastman Kodak Company. June 1, 1989: 4-Hour Ergonomics Awareness Seminar. Supervisory, Support, and Manufacturing Engineers at GE’s Erie Transportation Systems. June 14-15, 1989: Ergonomics Training Course for Engineering Staff. International Paper Corporate Engineering. July 25-25, 1989: Ergonomics Update and Awareness Training. Lansing Body Plant of General Motors Corporation. September 16, 1989: Overexertion Injury Risk Factors September 30, 1989: Basic Schedule for 2-Day Ergonomics Course October 4-6, 1989: 3-Day Ergonomics Training Course. Goodyear Hose and Belt Plant. November 14, 1989: One-Day Ergonomics Awareness Course for Engineers. DuPont Fibers Plants. November 20-21, 1989: 1.5 Day Ergonomics Training Course. Xerox Corporation. January 1990: Ergonomic Awareness Training. 911 Emergency Communications Center Employees January 11-12, 1990: 2-Day Ergonomics Training Course. General Electric Medical Systems Engineers. February 13-15, 1990: 3-Day Ergonomics Training Based on Topeka’s Earthmover Band Building Operation. Central Engineering and Topeka Plant Personnel, The Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company. March 7, 1990: 4-Hour Ergonomics Awareness and Problem Solving Session. GE Transportation Systems Supervisory and Production Personnel March 8, 1990: Ergonomics Design Guidelines and Their Applications, a 4-Hour Seminar. GE Transportation Systems. March 26-29, 1990: 4-Day Ergonomics Training Course. Amoco Foam Plants. April 8-9, 1990: Ergonomics and Occupational Health, a 1.5 Day Training Course. General Electric Occupational Health Nurses and Human Relations Managers. April 9-11, 1990: 1990 General Electric Occupational Nurse Education Seminar. May 22-25 and September 25-28, 1990: 4-Day Ergonomic Training Course. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company Plants. June 11-13, 1990: 1990 General Electric Occupational Nurse Education Seminar June 13-15, 1990: 3-Day Ergonomics Training Program. General Electric Aircraft Engine. June 18-22, 1990: 4-Day Ergonomics Training Course Based on New Design Problems. Central Engineering Personnel. June 22, 1990: Ergonomics Awareness. Goodyear Luxembourg Plant Personnel. July 10-13, 1990: Ergonomics Training Course. John Deere Waterloo Works. �o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o July 23, 1990: Ergonomics Awareness. Rohm and Haas. July 20, 1990: 1-Hour Ergonomics Awareness Presentation. Midwest Electronics Products Staff. September 10-11, 1990: Ergonomics and Occupational Health, a 1.5 Day Training Course. General Electric Occupational Health Nurses and Human Relations Managers. October 15-17, 1990: Ergonomics Awareness Course for Supervisors and Engineers. John Deer Harvester Works. October 18-19, 1990: Ergonomics Training Course for Trainers. John Deere Harvester Works. November 6-9, 1990: 4-Day Ergonomics Training Program. General Electric Motors Plants. November 15, 1990: Ergonomic Approaches to Managing Cumulative Trauma Injuries in the Workplace. Owens Corning Fiberglass Safety Managers. January 11, 1991: 4-Hour Ergonomics Awareness Course. GE Aerospace. January 11, 1991: 1.5 Day Ergonomics Training Course January 22-25, 1991: 1.5 Day Ergonomics Course. John Deere Waterloo Works. January 25, 1991: Ergonomic/Human Factors Design of Controls and Displays, 2-Hour Awareness Course. John Deer Engineers. March 26-28, 1991: 3-Day Ergonomics Course. GE Appliances Louisville. April 4-5, 1991: Problem Solving: Using Ergonomics and Physiology for Lifting Tasks April 16-19, 1991: 3.5 Day Ergonomics Training Course. Amoco Foam Products. April 22-24, 1991: 2-Day Ergonomics Course. GE Aerospace April 29 – 30, May 1 – 2, 1991: 2 Day Ergonomics Training Course. General Electric Medical Systems. May 6, 1991: Occupational Medicine Seminar for Supervisors/Managers. City of Rochester Bureau of Employee Relations/Employee Safety. May 7-8, 1991: 2-Day Ergonomics Training Course. Photochemicals, Polymer, and Recovery Departments May 30, 1991: Ergonomics Awareness Training. Astro-Valcour Inc. July 1, 1991: 1.5 Hour Ergonomics Awareness Course for Teams. GE Hooksett Aircraft Engine Plant. July 9, 1991: Ergonomics Coordinating Committee Training. GE Aircraft Engine Plants. July 9-12, 1991: Ergonomics Awareness for Supervisors. GE Aircraft Engine Plants. September 3-6, 1991: Ergonomics Training Program. General Electric Aircraft Engine Plants. September 10-12, 1991: 3-Day Ergonomics Training Course for GE Appliances, Louisville. September 3-6, 1991: 3.5 Day Ergonomics Training Program. General Electric Aircraft Engine Plants. September 17-20, 1991: 3.5 Day Ergonomics Training Course. Amoco Chemical Plants October 3-6, 1991: Applied Ergonomics: Controlling Overexertion Injuries at Work October 28-30, 30-November 1, 1991: 2-Day Ergonomics Course for Engineers. Bloomington, Indiana General Electric Appliance Plant. November 5-8, 1991: 4-Day Ergonomics Training Course. Eastman Kodak Company. November 25, 1991: 1 Day Ergonomics Seminar for Managers and Engineers. Sara Lee Meatcutting Plants. December 3, 1991: Ergonomics Awareness Seminar. Vermont Employers and VOSHA January 27-28, 1992: 3-Hour Ergonomic Awareness Session for People on the Ham Bone Lines. February 10-13, 1992: 3.5 Day Ergonomics Training Course. GE Appliances Dishwasher Plant. March 1, 1992: Regulatory Agencies: Standards that Impact Industry and Healthcare. Polinsky Advantage. �o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o March 1, 1992: Job Analysis and Placement – The Ergonomics Viewpoint Lecture/Problem Solving. Polinsky Advantage. March 12, 1992: Ergonomic Job Analyses and Design Guidelines. Astro Valcour. March 31, 1992 April 6-8, 1992: 2-Hour Ergonomic Awareness Session for Supervisors, Planners and Engineers. General Electric’s Dishwasher Plant. April 7, 1992: 4-Hour Ergonomics Training for Departmental Teams. GE Appliances. April 8-9, 1992: 6-Hour Ergonomics Course for Engineers. General Electric Appliances. April 14-16, 1992: 3-Day Ergonomics Training Course. Amoco of Canada Fabrics and Fibers Plants. April 20-21, 1992: Resource Manual for the Ergonomics Core Team. General Electric Aircraft Engine Plants. May 4-7, 1992: 4-Day Ergonomics Training Course for General Electric Aircraft Engine Plants June 1-4, 1992: 4-Day Ergonomics Training Program. GE Appliances Plant. June 10, 1992: 1-Day Seminar on Applied Ergonomics. Clients of The Therapy Source. September 30, 1992: 1-Day Ergonomics Seminar. VA Medical Center. October 1992 – proposed schedule for March November 23-24, 1992: Ergonomics – 2-Day Seminar on Practical and Cost-Effective Approaches to Improve Health, Safety and Performance at Work. December 11, 1992: Ergonomics and the ADA. Riccardi and Burton Physical Therapy, P.C. January 19-21, 1993: 3-Day Ergonomics Courses for Engineers and Plant Production Specialists. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company. March 4, 1993: Ergonomics and Safety. Harris Corporation Safety Committee. Winter 1993: Ergonomic Approaches to Improve Working Comfort in OEC. April 5, 1993: Ergonomic Workplace Analysis. Seminar for Rochester Council on May 10-11, 1993: 2-Day Ergonomics Team Training Course. Optics Center of Bausch and Lomb. June 1993: 2-Day Ergonomics Training Course. GE Plastics Mt Vernon Plant August 2, 1993: Ergonomics Awareness. Mack Molding Company. August 26-27, 1993: Ergonomics Problem Solving. GE Transportation Teams. September 20-22, 1993: Designing for People, 2.5 Day Engineers’ Training Course in Ergonomics. Amoco Foam Products Technical Center. November 18-19, 1993: Ergonomic Workplace Analysis, Ergonomic Refresher Course. Amoco Fabrics and Fibers. January 4-7, 1994: 3.5 Day Ergonomics Training Course. GE Aircraft Engine Plant. March 24-26, 1994: Ergonomics Problem Solving Course. SmithKline Beecham, Cidra, Puerto Rico. April 6, 1994: Office Ergonomics Training Session. ARCO Chemical Beaver Valley Plant. May 3, 1994: Office Ergonomics Training Session. City of Rochester. May 4, 1993: 1-Day Ergonomics Course for Engineers. SmithKline Beecham Clinical Laboratories. July 19-21, 1994: Ergonomics Course. SmithKline Beecham Clinical Labs. October 18-21, 1994: Ergonomics Training Course. General Electric Aircraft Engines. October 24-26, 1994: 2.5 Day Engineers’ Training Course in Ergonomics. Amoco Foam Products Technical Center. October 27, 1994: Ergonomics Team Training and Problem Solving. Amoco Foam Products. November 15-17, 1994: Ergonomic Training. SmithKline Beecham Clinical Labs. November 29-30: 2-Day Ergonomics Training Course. Amoco Fabrics and Fibers Ergonomics Team. �o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o December 9, 1994: Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique Review Fatigue Model Training. Xerox Ergonomics Team Members and Engineers. March 13, 1995: Office Ergonomics Training Session. Rochester Police Department. May 10-11, 1995: 2.5 Day Ergonomics Training. GE Aircraft Engines. May 24-26, 1995: 3 Day Ergonomics Team Training Course. SmithKline Beecham Clinical Lab. June 12, 13, 15, 1995: Ergonomics Training Course. Thomson Professional Publishing Ergonomics Teams. November 3, 1995: Ergonomics and the Computer Workplace. Amoco Corporation Personnel. December 7-8, 1995: Ergonomic Principles for Design, a 2-Day Course. Engineers at Bausch and Lomb Contact Lens Division. June 1997: Ergonomics Training and Awareness Courses. July 28-August 1, 1997: Entrenamiento En Ergonomia. SmithKline Beecham Argentina. August 19, 1997: Ergonomics Training for New Employees. Office of Emergency Communications. September 1997: Applied Ergonomics: An Evidence Based Approach. Professional Training Seminars. September 30, 1997: A Guide to the Understanding of Work-Related Musculoskeletal Discomfort, Illness, and Injury in Repetitive Work. General Electric Aircraft Engines. December 1997: Ergonomics Training for New Employees. Office of Emergency Communications. June 18, 1998: Ergonomics Training for New Employees. Office of Emergency Communications. July 1998: Ergonomic Job Analysis and Problem Solving Review Course. July 20-23, 1998: Ergonomics Team Training. General Electric Aircraft Engines. February 9 and 16, April 20 and 27, 1999: Reducing Accidents Through Ergonomics. City of Rochester. March 18-19, 1999: 2-Day Ergonomics Training Course for Engineers. USCS, IBS, Cabledata. May 4-6, 1999: Ergonomics Problem Solving Course. Cal/OSHA. May 18 and 25, 1999: Reducing Accidents Through Ergonomics. City of Rochester Training Program. November 1999: Treinamento de Ergonomia para. GE Celme e GE Varig. April 13, 2000: Department Wellness Program. City of Rochester Parks Department. June 6-9, 2000: Ergonomics Team Training Course. GE Superabrasives. October 9-13, 2000: Ergonomics Team Training Course. GEAE Evendale. October 13, 2000: Office Ergonomics – Evaluating Workplaces. GEAE Evendale. February 1-2, 2001: 2-Day Ergonomics Team Training Course. GEES Miami Power Systems. March 2001: Ergonomics Job Analysis and Applications in the Field – A Course for Loss Control Specialists and Others. California State Compensation Insurance Fund. February 19, 2003: Ergonomics Seminar on Muscular Fatigue Evaluation and Problem Solving to Develop Strategies to Decrease Risk of Occupational MSDs. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. September 16-17, 2003: Ergonomics Training Course for Health and Safety Consultants. University of Alabama at Tuscaloosa College of Continuing Studies. February 18 and March 10, 2005: Ergonomics Awareness Course. City of Rochester. May 17, 2005: Follow-Up Ergonomics Training and Awareness. B.G. Sulzle. September 26, 2005: Ergonomics Awareness for Ne Emergency Communications Specialists. Emergency Communications Department. �Repetitive Motions, Total Work Load, and Temperature Stress Training Seminar in Occupational Ergonomics for the United States Post Office January, 198'4 Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Dept. of Industrial Engineering State Univ. of N.Y. at Buffalo Table of Contents Pages \ 2-7 I. Repetitive Motions Grip Type and Strength Static Load and Endurance Grip Span and Wrist Angle Effects Gloves Effect 3-5 6-7 7 II. Total Work Load work Load and Endurance Demands of Occupational Tasks 8-13 8-12 13 III. Temperature Stress Heat Balance Thermal Comfort Windchill 14-18 15 16-17 18 2 �/~ ) 3-Day Training Program in Ergonomics/Human Factors For Rochester Products Engineers - August 20-22, 1984 Outline DAY 1: Industrial Ergonomics - General Background Material 7:30 - 9:00 AM 9:00 - ('\, 9:30 AM Slide Talk: Overview of Ergonomics - Scope, Value Discussion: How does ergonomics relate to other company units and service groups? When should you "plug in" ergonomics in the design of a new facility? What sources of information are available in an existing plant to help identify potential ergonomics problems? 10:00 - 11:00 AM Slide Talk and Discussion: 11:00 - 11:30 AM Case Studies on Who to Design For 12:30 - 1:45 PM ~-) Who Do We Design For? Slide Talk and Demonstrations: People's Behaviors Psychological and Physiological 1:45 - 2:45 PM Discussion: What are the implications of these behaviors for the design of jobs and workplaces? What are the implications of these behaviors on productivity? 3:15 - 4:30 PM Slide Talk and Demonstrations: Techniques for for Studying Jobs or Surveying Workplaces Homework Assignment: Spend at least one hour observing someone at work. Analyze the job demands, postures, patterns of work; interview {if possible) the person to learn the subjective difficulty of specific tasks. DAY 2: Workplace and Equipment Design 7:30 - 9:00 AM Slide Talk and Problem Solving: Clearances, and Layout Heights, Reaches, �9:00 - 9:30 AM Discussion: How does workplace and equipment design influence productivity? 10:00 - 10:30 AM Seating; Visual Slide Talk and Demonstration: Comfort 10:30 - 11:30 noon Illustrated Lecture: Environmental Factors Noise, Vibration, Lighting, Temperature 12:30 - 2:00 PM Slide Talk: Information Transfer, Person-toPerson (Signs, Displays), Person-to-Machine (Controls, Keyboards), Product-to-Person (Inspection) 2:00 - 2:30 PM Discussion: What workplace factors increase the potential for human error or information overload to occur? 3:00 - 3:45 PM Slide Talk and Demonstration: Design and Selection of Hand Tools - Grasp, Wrist Motions 3:45 - 4:30 PM Problem Solving Session: Use of Anthropometric and Strength Data in the Design or Evaluation of Industrial Workplaces or Equipment. DAY 3: Job Design 7:30 - 9:00 AM Slide Talk: Evaluation 9:00 - 9:30 AM Discussion: Is there a relationship between low back pain and the weight and size of an object being handled? 10:00 - 10:30 AM Case Studies: Guidelines 10:30 - 11:30 noon 12:30 - 1:30 PM 1:30 - 2:00 PM 2:00 - 2:30 PM Manual Handling Task Design and Using the NIOSH Manual Lifting Slide Talk and Demonstration: Motions Tasks Slide Talk and Demonstration: Pressure Illustrated Lecture: Repetitive Paced Work/Time Shift Work and Overtime Discussion: What factors determine acceptable workloads on overtime or late night shift schedules? 3' �"/:t \ 3:00 - 3:30 PM Review of GM Resource People and Materials Available to Engineers 3:30 - 4:30 PM Discussion: How do you cost justify plant ergo- arnica studies or initiate involvement in workplace, equipment, or job design? ; 6/16/84 SHR ~nitial �ERGONOMICS TRAINING COURSE FOR ROCHESTER PRODUCTS, GMC Course Outline and Syllabus August, 1984 The material in this syllabus is for use within Rochester Products, GMC. Rights of reproduction of unpublished material must be obtained from Dr. Rodgers. The other sources are indicated at the end of the syllabus. Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS I ---./ (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y.14622 �Oldsmobile Engine Plant, Lansing, Michigan 4-Hour Awareness Course in Human Factors/Ergonomics September 27, 1984 Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544·3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 The material on pages 2 and 5-8 is reproduced courtesy of Eastman Kodak Company from Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volume 1. Rights to reproduce the unpublished material in this handout must be obtained from Dr. Rodgers. '> �Oldsmobile Engine Plant, Lansing, Michigan 8-Hour Engineers' Course in Human Factors/Ergonomics September 28, 1984 Syllabus / Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 The material on pages 7, 9-13, 43-44, and 50-51 is reproduced courtesy of Eastman Kodak Company from Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volume 1. The material on pages 6, 32-35, and 45-46 has been reproduced from Ergonomics: An Approach to Productivity and Effectiveness prepared by the GM Asembly Division Centra! Office Industrial Engineering Department in 1983. Rights to reproduce other unpublished material in this syllabus must be obtained from Dr. Rodgers. __./ \, �3-Day Training Program for In-Plant Ergonomics/Human Factors Team at General Motors Assembly Plants Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D., Consultant in Ergonomics/Human Factors Outline DAY 1: General Background Material, Hand Tools, Repetitive t-1otions 7:00 - 7:30 AM Slide Talk: Overview of Ergonomics - Scope, Value 7:30 - 8:30 AM Slide Talk and Discussion: 8:45- 9:30 AM Problems on Who Do We Design For? 9:30 - 10:15 AM Who Do We Design For? Slide Talk and Demonstrations: People's Behaviors - Psychological and Physiological 10:30 - 11:00 AM Slide Talk: Person Information Transfer- Person-to- 11:00 - 11:45 AM Lunch 11:45 - 12:45 PM Repetitive Motions Problems 1:00 - 2:00 PM Hand Tool Design 2:15 - 3:45 PM Problems in Hand Tool Design Homework Assignment: Spend at least one hour ,observing someone at work. Analyze the job demands, postures, patterns of work; interview (if possible) the person to learn the subjective difficulty of specific tasks. DAY 2: Workplace and Equipment Design, Environment, Inspection 7:00 - 8:30AM Slide Talk and Problem Solving: Clearances, and Layout Heights, Reaches J. �8:45 - 9:15 AM 9:15 - 10:00 AM Slide Talk and Demonstration: Patterns of work Static Loading and Equipment Design- Controls and Displays, CRT workplaces 10:15 - 11:00 AM Workplace and Equipment Design Evaluations 11:00 - 11:45 AM Lunch 11:45 - 12:15 PM Problem Identification 12:15 - 1:45 PM Problem Discussion 2:00 - 2:30 PM Environment -Lighting, Noise, Temperature 2:30 - 3:00 PM Inspection 3:15 - 3:45 PM Problems in workplace Design DAY 3: Job Design 7:00 - 7:45 AM Slide Talk: Low Back Pain - What It Is, What It Means In the Workplace 8:00 -9:15AM Slide Talk: Evaluation 9:30- 11:00 AM Case Studies: Guidelines 11:00 - 11:45 AM Manual Handling Task Design and Using the NIOSH Manual Lifting Lunch 11:45 - 12:45 PM Slide Talk and Demonstration: Pressure Paced Work/Time 1:00 - 2:15 PM Illustrated Lecture: Total Work Load- How Much Is Too Much? Includes Shift Work and Overtime. 2:30 - 3:15PM Survey Techniques 3:15 -3:45PM Review of GM Resource People and Materials Available to Trainees 9/29/84 s:HR 3, �3-Day Ergonomics/Human Factors Training Course Table of Contents Page Topic Table of Contents Course Outline Course Purpose and Goals 1 2 4 Day 1 Overview of Ergonomics/Human Factors Who Do We Design For? People's Behaviors - Psychological and Physiological Information Transfer - Signs, Codes, Structure Repetitive Motions Problems Hand Tool Design Problem in Hand Tool Design Homework Assignment - Observing a Person at Work 5 8 17 24 34 42 46 49 Day 2 Heights, Reaches, Clearances, and Layout Static Loading and Patterns of work Equipment Design - Controls and Displays Problem Identification Environment Inspection Problems in Workplace Design Anthropometric Data 51 56 60 66 69 74 75 80 Day 3 Low Back Pain Manual Materials Handling NIOSH Manual Lifting Guidelines - Case Studies Paced Work/Time Pressure Total Work Load, Shift Work, Overtime 84 91 101 108 113 Resources Survey Techniques Checklist for Ergonomics Input to New Design Partial List of GM Resource Materials Bibliography Topics in Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volume 1 9/29/84 121 135 140 141 148 SHR Jr �3-DAY HUMAN FACTORS TRAINING COURSE FOR FAIRFAX ASSEMBLY PLANT, GMC Course Outline and Syllabus October 9-11, 1984 Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS ''HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14S22 The material on pages 11, 19, 20, 26, 54, 61, 62, 80-83, 118 and 126-131 of this syllabus is reproduced courtesy of Eastman Kodak Company from Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volume 1. The material on pages 10, 41, 43-45, 59, 73, 94, 95, and 144 has been taken from Ergonomics: An Approach to Productivity and Effectiveness, published by · the GM Assembly Division's IE Central Office. Rights to reproduce the other unpublished materials in this syllabus must be obtained from Dr. Rodgers. \ . \ 'J . �3-Day Ergonomics/Human Factors Training Course Table of Contents Page Topic Table of Contents Course Outline Course Purpose and Goals 1 2 4 Day 1 Overview of Ergonomics/Human Factors Who Do We Design For? People's Behaviors - Psychological and Physiological Information Transfer - Signs, Codes, Structure Repetitive Motions Problems Hand Tool Design Problem in Hand Tool Design Homework Assignment - Observing a Person at Work 5 8 17 24 34 42 46 49 Day 2 Heights, Reaches, Clearances, and Layout Static Loading and Patterns of Work Equipment Design - Controls and Displays Problem Identification Environment Inspection Problems in Workplace Design Anthropometric Data 51 56 60 66 69 74 75 80 Day 3 Low Back Pain Manual Materials Handling NIOSH Manual Lifting Guidelines - Case Studies Paced Work/Time Pressure Total Work Load, Shift Work, Overtime 84 91 101 108 113 Resources Survey Techniques Checklist for Ergonomics Input to New Design Partial List of GM Resource Materials Bibliography Topics in Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volume 1 ~ 9/29/84 121 135 140 141 148 SHR / r �~ ~ [!J . ·- Gene('al Motors Corporatign . Bui~·Otd•motlile·Cadlllt~ Qroup - HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING Suzanne H. Rodgers, PhD. November 27-29, 1984 �3-Day Ergonomics/Human Factors Training Course Table of Contents Page Topic Table of Contents Course Outline Course Purpose and Goals 1 2 4 Day 1 Overview of Ergonomics/Human Factors Who Do We Design For? People's Behaviors- Psychological and Physiological Information Transfer - Signs, Codes, Structure Repetitive Motions Problems Hand Tool Design Problem in Hand Tool Design Observing a Person at Work 5 8 17 24 34 42 46 49 Day 2 Heights, Reaches, Clearances, and Layout Static Loading and Pat.terns of Work Equipment Design - Controls and Displays Problem Identification Environment Inspection Problems in Workplace Design Anthropometric Data 51 56 60 66 69 74 75 80 Day 3 Low Back Pain Manual Materials Handling NIOSH Manual Lifting Guidelines - Case Studies Paced Work Total. Work Load 84 91 101 108 113 Resources Survey Techniques Checklist for Ergonomics Input. to New Design Partial List of GM Resource Materials Bibliography Topics in Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volume 1 9/29/84 SHR 121 135 140 141 148 �i\ 3-DAY HUMAN FACTORS TRAINING COURSE FOR THE CHEVROLET ENGINE ASSEMBLY PLANT, GMC Course Outline and Syllabus February 4-6, 1985 /------\ . \.__) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN J. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 The material on pages 11, 19, 20, 26, 54, 61, 62, 80-83, 118 and 126-131 of this syllabus is reproduced courtesy of Eastman Kodak Company from Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volume 1. The material on pages 10, 41, 43-45, 59, 73, 94, 95, and 144 has been taken from Ergonomics: An Approach to Productivity and Effectiveness, published by the GM Assembly Division's IE Central Office. Rights to reproduce the other unpublished materials in this syllabus must be obtained from Dr. Rodgers. �~ J 3-DAY HUMAN FACTORS TRAINING COURSE GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION, OKLAHOMA CITY ASSEMBLY PLANT Course Outline and Syllabus May 28-30, 1985 () '._/ Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D , CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 rhe material on pages 11, 19, 20, 26, 54, 61, 62, 80-81, 118 and 126-131 of this syllabus is reproduced courtesy of Eastman Kodak Company from Ergonomic Design for People at ~ork, Volume 1. The material on pages 10, 41, 43-45, 59, 73, 94, 95, and 144 has been taken from Ergonomics: An Approach to Productivity and Effectiveness, published by the GM Assembly Division's IE Central Office. Riqhts to reproduce the other unpublished materials in this syllabus must be obtained from Dr. Rodgers. �2-Day Ergonomics Training Course Ergonomics Committee, Delco Moraine July, 1985 Schedule Day 1: 8:00AM 8:45 9:15 9:30 10:15 11:00 11:15 12:00 1:00 PM 2:00 2:30 2:45 3:45 4:00 4:30 5:00 Overview of Ergonomics Who Do We Design For? Break Exercise in the Use of Anthropometric Data Physiological and Psychological Behaviors Break Reducing Unnecessary Effort - Static Muscle Work Lunch Workplace Design Problem Solving Reach and Height Interaction Break Reducing Unnecessary Effort - Manual Lifting Break Information Display Lighting End of Session - Evaluation of Day 1 Day 2: 8:00 AM 9:15 9:30 10:30 11:00 11:15 12:00 1:00 PM 2:00 2:30 2:45 3:15 4:00 4:15 4:45 5:00 7/1/85 Providing Control Over the Job - Pace Pressure and Patterns of Work Break Job.Analyses Using Ergonomics Principles Repetitive Motions Disorders Break Tool and Job Design and Repetitive Motions Disorders Lunch Learning and Pace Pressure Exercise Low Back Pain and Work Break Return to Work and Placement of People With Low Back Pain or Repetitive Motions Disorders Job Analyses Using Ergonomics Principles Break Cost-Benefit Approaches to Making Ergonomics Changes in Existing Workplaces Resources and the Organization of Ergonomics Programs in Industry End of Course - Evaluation of Day 2 SHR , J.... �2-Day Ergonomics Training Course - Delco Moraine Ergonomics Committee Table of Contents Syllabus Page Overview of Ergonomics Who Do We Design For? Anthropometric and Strength Data Guidelines for Using Anthropometric Data Problem Solving - Anthropometric Data Psychological and Physiological Behaviors 2 EDFPAW Page 3 8 4 5 285, 294 6 8 311 289., 342 9 90, 107, 179 Static Loading and Patterns of Work Problem Solving - Workplace Design Heights, Reaches, Clearances Height and Reach Interaction Recommended Chair and Accessory Characteristics 11 14 15 17 342 14 24 18 57 Manual Handling Task Design Strength and Location Pull Strength and Strength/Endurance NIOSH Manual Lifting Guidelines NIOSH Lifting Formula Repetitive Lifting Guidelines Maximum Force Applications 19 22 23 24 27 28 29 Information Transfer - Dispatcher 30 90, 93, 101, 112, 168, 175 Environment - Lighting Paced Work/Time Pressure 33 36 225' 234 Repetitive Motions Problems Grip Strength and Factors That Affect It Workplace Interventions - Repetitive Motions Problems Hand Tool Selection and Design 40 43 44 Low Back Pain Low Back Pain and Manual Lifting 46 48 Survey Techniques Equipment for Ergonomics Work 51 53 Cost-Benefit Analysis of Ergonomic Problem Solutions Ergonomics Programs in Industry 55 59 41 140 313 320, 333 5 '· �2-DAY ERGONOMICS TRAINING PROGRAM - DELCO MORAINE ERGONOMICS COMMITTEE JULY 8-9, 1985 Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 Permission to reproduce unpublished material in this syllabus must be obtained from s. H. Rodgers. �----··· \.... 2-DAY ERGONOMICS TRAINING PROGRAM - DELCO MORAINE DESIGNERS, ENGINEERS, TOOLING, MATERIALS JULY AND AUGUST, 1985 Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.o· CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 5<'4·3587 • 189 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 1-1622 Permission to reproduce unpublished material in this syllabus must be obtained from s. H. Rodgers. �?.-Day Ergonomics Training Course Designers, Engineers, Tooling, Materials Delco Moraine, July/August, 1985 Schedule Day 1: 8:00 AM 8:45 9:15 9:30 10:15 10:45 11:00 11:45 12:00 1:00 PM 2:00 2:30 2:45 3:15 4:00 4:15 5:00 Overview of Ergonomics Job Analysis - Current Approach Break Who Do We Design For? Exercise in Using Anthropometric Data Break Eliminating Unnecessary Work - Static Muscle Work Height and Reach Interaction Lunch Job Analysis - Ergonomic Approach Repetitive Motions Disorders Break Tool Design and Repetitive Motions Disorders Low Back Pain and Workplace Design Break Job Analyses - Working Heights End of Session - Evaluation Day 1 Day 2: 8:00 AM 9:00 9:45 10:00 10:45 11:00 12:00 1:00 PM 2:30 2:45 3:30 4:00 4:15 5:00 7/1/85 SHR Factors Affecting Quality - Information Transfer and Reducing Errors Lighting and Environmental Factors Break Giving Person Control Over the Job - Pace Pressure and Patterns of Work Break Manual Handling and Workload Lunch Job Analyses - Manual Handling Tasks Break Techniques to Survey the Workplace and Guidelines for New Design Cost-Benefit Analyses for Implementation of Ergonomic Designs Break Problem Solving - Selling an Ergonomic Solution to a Workplace Problem End of Course - Evaluation Day 2 �2-Day Ergonomics Training Course - Delco Moraine Designers Course Table of Contents Syllabus Page Overview of Ergonomics 2 Workplace Design Problem Who Do We Design For? Anthropometric and Strength Data Guidelines for Using Anthropometric Data Problem Solving - Anthropometric Data 4 EDFPAW Page 3 5 8 6 285, 7 9 311 289, 342 Static Loading and Patterns of work Heights, Reaches, Clearances Height and Reach Interaction Recommended Chair and Accessory Characteristics 10 13 15 14 24 16 57 Repetitive Motions Problems Grip Strength and Factors That Affect It Workplace Interventions - Repetitive Motions Problems Hand Tool Selection and Design 17 20 21 Low Back Pain Low Back Pain and Manual Lifting Problem Solving - Workplace Design 23 25 27 Information Control - Dispatcher 28 Environment - Lighting Paced Work/Time Pressure 31 34 Manual Handling Task Design Strength and Location Pull Strength and Strength/Endurance Static Work Recovery Curves NIOSH Manual Lifting Guidelines NIOSH Lifting Formula Repetitive Lifting Guidelines Maximum Force Applications Problem Solving ~ Job Design 38 41 42 43 46 49 50 51 52 Survey Techniques Ergonomics Checklist for New Design Cost-Benefit Analysis of Ergonomic Problem Solutions 53 55 294 18 60 140 90, 93, 101, 112, 168, 175 225, 234 313 �;ff) ERGONOMICS AWARENESS PROGRAM DELCO MORAINE FIRST-LINE SUPERVISORS, HEALTH, SAFETY, AND PLACEMENT JULY AND AUGUST; 1985 Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS ·SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PROOUCT OESIGN 3. HEALTH ANO SAfETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 1>4622 Permission to reproduce unpublished materi~l in this syllabus must be obtained from S. H. Rodgers. �1-Day Ergonomics Awareness Course First Line Supervisors, Health and Safety People, Placement People Delco Moraine, Summer/Fall, 1985 Schedule What i~ Ergonomics? Why Do It? People's Size- Anthropometries Workplace Design Using Body Size Information Break People's Strength and Endurance Job Design Using Muscle Strength Information Break People's Performance Capabilities- Seeing, Understanding Equipment and Lighting Design Using Performance Capability Information Lunch Working Under Pace Pressure - Simulated Job Influence of Workplace and Equipment Design on Performance Under Pace Pressure Break Repetitive Motions Disorders and Tool Design Break Low Back Pain, Manual Lifting, and Job Placement Cost Justifying Ergonomics Changes in the workplace End of Course - Evaluation 8:00 AM 8:30 9:00 9:30 9:45 10:15 10:45 11:00 11:30 12:00 1:00 PM 2:00 2:30 2:45 3:45 4:00 4:45 5:00 7/l/85 SHR �·~. \ J I THE ERGONOMICS OF MANUFACTURING SYSTEMS DESIGN ERGONOMICS TRAINING COURSE B-0-C INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING OCTOBER 9 - 11, 1985 PURPOSE: TO DEVELOP BASIC HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING SKILLS AT CENTRAL OFFICE THAT WILL HELP ENSURE PROJECTS DEVELOPED HERE ARE ERGONOMICALLY SOUND. TO· INCREASE AWARENESS. AND RECOGNITION OF RESOURC~ P.EOPLE. AND MATERIALS AVAILABLE TO ASSIST IN ERGONOMIC ASSESSMENT OF C.O. PROJECIS. . ' TO EMPHASIZE THE CRITICAL ROLE OF HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING IN NEW TECHNOLOGY AND ROBOTIC SYSTEMS, TO INCREASE AWARENESS OF OFFICE ERGONOMICS AND ITS ROLE IN PRODUCTIVITY. Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" ,. 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �3-DAY ERGONOMICS TRAINING PROGRAM GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION, C-P-C PONTIAC ASSEMBLY PLANT OCTOBER 23 - 25, 1985 SYLLABUS Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 -.....__/ �3-Day Ergonomics Training Program for General Motors Assembly Plants- Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D., Consultant in Ergonomics/Human Factors Schedule Day 1: Background Material, Human Variability, Repetitive Motions, and Tool Design 7:30 - 8:00 AM Introductions, Review of Course Content, Goals 8:00 - 8:30 Overview of Ergonomics/Human Factors Engineering 8:30 - 9:15 Who Do We Design For? 9:15 - 9:30 Anthropometric Data Break 9:30 - 10:15 Problem Solving Using Anthropometric Data 10:15 - 10:45 Who Do We Design For? Capacities. 10:45 - 11:15 Information Transfer - Person-to-Person 12:00 Lunch 11:15 Strength and Other 12:00 - 12:30 PM People's Behaviors - Psychological and , Physiological 12:30 - 1:15 1:15 - 1:45 - 2:00 Break 2:00 2:30 Hand Tool Design and Repetitive Motions Problems 2:30 - 3:15 Problem Solving: Tools and Workplace Design 3:15 - 3:45 Discussion of Tool Problems, Repetitive Motions Problems Management Day 2: I Repetitive Motions Problems - Tendonitis, Carpal Tunnel Syndrome 1:45 3:45 - 4:00 '--_..-/ Grip Strength and Factors Affecting It Reveiw of P+inciples, Evaluations workplace and Equipment Design, Environment, Inspection 7:30 - 8:00 AM Static Loading and Patterns of Work J t. �i, 8:00 - 8:45 Heights, Reaches, and Clearances 8:45 - 9:00 Break 9:00 - 10:00 Problem Solving: Workplace Design 10:00 - 10:30 Environmental Factors - Lighting and Inspection 10:30 - 11:00 VDT Workplaces, Equipment Design and Human/Robot Interactions 11:15 - 12:00 Lunch 12:00 - 1:00 PM Identification of Ergonomics Problems in the Plant 1:00 - 2:00 Discussion of Problems Identified 2:00 - 2:15 Break 2:15 - 3:30 Discussion of Problems Identified 3:30 - 4:00 Review of Principles, Evaluations Day 3: Job Design 7:30 - 8:15 AM Low Back Pain 8:15 - 9:15 Manual Materials Handling 9:15 - 9:30 Break 9:30 - 10:00 Using the NIOSH Manual Lifting Guidelines 10:00 - 11:15 Problem Solving: Manual Materials Handling 11:15 - 12:00 Lunch 12:00 - 1:00 PM Paced Work - Exercise on Factors Affecting Quality Performance 1:00 - 1:45 Techniques to Identify Ergonomics Problems 2:00 Break 1:45 ., 2:00 - 3:00 Problem Solving: Job, Environment and Workplace Design 3:00 - 3:30 Cost/Benefi~ - 4:00 10/15/85 SHR 3:30 Analyses of Ergonomics Problem Solutions GM Resources, Evaluations, Summary LL �' \ BAUSCH AND LOMB ERGONOMICS AWARENESS SEMINAR NOVEMBER 12, 1985 Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PROOUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 The material on pages 9-12, 25, 32, and 38-39 in this syllabus is taken from Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volume 1 by the Eastman Kodak Human Factors Section. Other materials have been developed by Dr. Rodgers; permission t9 reproduce that material must be obtained from her. �Table of Contents Section Page Table of Contents 1 A. Overview of Ergonomics 2 B. Problem Solving - Workplace Design 4 c. 6 8 Who Do We Design For? 1. Anthropometric Distributions Anthropometric Data 3. Strength Data 4. Strength vs Location 5. Static Strength vs Duration 2 0 9 13 14 15 D. Exercise Using Anthropometric Data 16 E. Posture and Productivity 1. Static Work 2. Static Work Recovery Curves 3. Workplace Design - Heights and Reaches 4~ Interaction of Height and Reach 5. Seated Workplace Design 6. Characteristics of Chairs and Accessories 17 18 20 23 25 26 F. Environmental Factors 1. General 2. Lighting 28 29 32 G. Factors Affecting Quality Performance 1. Information Transfer 2. Man vs Machine 3. Displays and Controls 4. Time Pressure 5. Fatigue - Total Workload 35 38 39 40 43 H. Problem Solving: Machine Design and Paced Work 47 I. Occupational Injury and Illness Prevention 1. Low Back Pain 2. Manual Materials Handling 3. Relationship Between Low. Back Pain and Weight Handled 4. NIOSH Lifting Guidelines 5. Tool Design and Repetitive Motions Problems 6. Factors Affecting Grip Strength 7. Jobs Where Repetitive Motions Problems May Be Seen 48 27 34 49 51 53 55 59 61 63 �J. Resources 1. Costs of Poor Design 2. Engineer's Checklist 3. Bibliography 11/4/85 SHR 64 65 70 �\ 3-DAY ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING TRAINING PROGRAM LORDSTOWN FABRICATION PLANT, GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION FEBRUARY 4 - 6, 1986 SYLLABUS Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 \ ·~ �Ergonomic Principles in New Design soc Lake Orion Assembly Plant GMC, October 1 & 2, 1986 ~--......._,, \ ) \ Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D., Consultant in Ergonomics Topics Overview of Ergonomics, Goals of Course Page Locat1ons Syllabus EDFPAWI EDFPAWII 3~ 5-6, 3-11 2-16 73 8-10 285-312 Who Do We Design For? 7-9 ' 12-15 Height and Reach Interaction in Workplace Design 10-11 20,24,25 Posture and Productivity Static Work 16-20 52-87, 140 Static Work/Recovery Curves 21-24 Stat1c Work Problems 25-27 Information Transfer and Displays 28-37 Problem Solving: Maintenance Dispatch Job 38 Environmental Factors: Lighting, " 39-42 Noise, Heat I 13-14 24-29 217-219 218-219 50-52, 90-106, 107-133, 162-178 209-281 220-222 179-197 222-229 Inspection Tasks 43 Job Design and Overexertion Injuries 44-51 135-151 203-213 266, 338-347. Design Limit for Forces 52 384 Use of Lifting Gu1de11nes to Reduce 53-62 the Risk for Low Back Pain 337-445 4Q, �Manual Handling Problem Solving 63 551-554 Repetitive Task Design and Tool Design to Reduce Carpal Tunnel and Tendonitis Symptoms 64-68 244-259 545-547 Risk Factors for Repetitive Motions Problems 69 247-252 Hand Tool Design 70-72 ~, \ ) 140-159 Work Pace and Quality Performance 74-78 Survey Techniques and Checklist 79-85 Cost/Benefit Analyses of Ergonomic Prob 1em Solutions 86-93 Evaluations, Resources 94-97 256 230-243 313-319 98-121 365, 388 559-590 9/23/86 SHR Yb. �Ergonomics Awareness Course B.O.C. Orion Assembly Plant. GMC October 3, 1986 =-:'11 ·-= -- IlL: - ~ ~= ---:: =Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN'' 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY i'RCGAAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • Fi'OCHESTER, N.Y. 14li22 �Ergonom1cs Awareness Program - B.O.C. Or1on Assembly Plant, GMC, October 3, 1986 7:00 -8:00AM Why Ergonomics? Concepts and Potential Benefits 8:00 -8:30AM Minimizing Fatiguing Postures- Static Muscle Effort 8:30 - 8:45 AM Break 8:45- 9:15AM Static Work/Recovery Curves- Use in Job Analysis 9:15- 9:45AM Factors Associated With Static Work and Techniques To Reduce Them 9:45 - 10:30 AM Problem Solving- Postural Fatigue I 0:30- II :00 AM Keep It Simple- Information Transfer 11:00- 11:45 AM Lunch 11:45- 12:30 PM Problem Solving: Maintenance Dispatch Job 12:30 - 1:00 PM Use Big Muscles for Handling Jobs I :00 - 1:30 PM Low Back Pain and L1fting 1:30- 2:00PM Repetitive Work 2:00 - 2: 15 PM Break 2:15- 2:45 PM Give People Control of Their Work Patterns 2:45- 3:30 PM Cost Justifying Ergonomic Changes ------------, '--_/ 9/23/86 SHR �3-Day Ergonomics Training Course C.P.C Van Nuys Assembly Plant October 29-31 , 1986 CJ Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 The material in this syllabus is meant to supplement the 2-volume sourcebook in industrial ergonomics by the Eastman Kodak Human Factors and Ergonomics Sections~ Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published by van Nostrand Reinhold. The illustrations on pages 16 1 37 1 and 38 are from these volumes with permission of Kodak. The material on pages 71 and 28-31 is from Working With Backache by S.H. Rodgers and published by Perinton Press. The table on page 18 was developed by Dr. Inger Williams. Permission to reproduce other material in this syllabus must be obtained from Dr. Rodgers. �MEETING & PRESENT AT ION SKILLS A Two Day Training Program Developed for the GM/UAW JOINT TRAINING COMMITTEE Van Nuys by the lnstttute of Industrial Relations UCLA November 1986 f-- ~--- 'I \, _ _/ �ERGONOMICS A Five-Day Training Program () Developed tor the GM/UAW Training Committee C.P.C. Van Nuys Assembly Plant by Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Consultant in Ergonomics December, 1986 Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �ERGONOMICS A Five-Day Training Program Developed for the GM/UAW Training Committee C.P.C. Van Nuys Assembly Plant by Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Consultant in Ergonomics December, 1986 &:: . ~·=~ =~·-== --= - -- -= Suzanne, H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN W.ORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 'FOALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS 1587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �( 8 0 C Lansing Operations Project on Disability Management and Workers' Compensation Cost Control 3-Day Ergonomics Training Course January and February, 1987 Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Inger M. Williams, Ph.D. =:fla-= Db: ·= = == - ~=-:; Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544·3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �_, ...~t.;""'-~·---.\ I Schedule for Ergonomics Training- January 27-29, 1987 Day 1: 7:30AM 8:00 8:45 9:00 10:30 11:30 ,~, Introductions/Goals of Course Workers' Compensation Costs at BOC Lansing Operations - A Statement of the Concern Sally Carlson Break A Review of Low Back Pain and Repetitive Motions Injuries - How They Develop and What Approaches Can Be Used to Manage Them. Class Discussion About "Managing" Overexertion Injuries Lunch ;!}''-...___....-·.,_) 12:30 PM 1:15 2:15 2:30 3:15 4:00 Day 2: 7:30AM 8:30AM 9:15AM 9:30AM 10:30 AM 11:30 AM Exercise on What is Ergonomics? Identifying Stressors in the Return-to-Work Process- Inger Williams Break Factors That Increase Stress at Work - Physical Factors, Communication Failures, Lack of Control Problem Solving: Identifying Ways to Reduce Stress on a Job End Physical Job Stressors - Postures and Static Work, Height and Reach Interaction Work/Recovery Needs of Muscles Break Problem Solving: Evaluating Jobs With Postural Stress Review of Problems and Possible Solutions Lunch �12:30 PM 1:45PM 2:45PM 3:00PM 4:00PM Day 3: 7:30AM 8:30 9:30 9:45 10:45 11:30 12:30 PM 1:15 1:45 2:15 2:30 3:30 3:45 4:00 1/12/87 SHR Manual Handling Tasks- How to Evaluate Them Problem Solving: Techniques to Reduce Stress During Manual Handling Tasks Break Environmental Factors That Add to Job Stress and Ways to Modify Them End. Job Control and Job Stress - Puzzle Assembly Task Demonstration Factors Influencing Job Control - Work Pacing, Skills Level, Accountability, Automation, Complexity, Flexibility in Job Patterns Break Techniques to Provide More Control Over Work Class Exercise Communications and Job Stress - Feedback, Instructions, Understanding Overexertion Injuries and Illness, Peer Pressure, Supervisory Style, Company Policies Lunch Problem Solving: Communications and Job Control Using Accident and Illness Data to Identify Ergonomics Problems Cost Justifying Job Design, Workplace or Tooling Changes in Existing Jobs Break Problem Solving: Return-to-Work Evaluations and Job AcCommodations or Redesign Summary of Course Highlights Evaluation of Course End of Course. �.. · ··- '· '· .... i Unjversity of Iowa Physical Therapy Programs and College of Nursing 2 - Day Ergonomics -Course, April 23-24, 1987 Reducing Work lqjuries and Illness Through Ergonomics Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. lngerM. Williams, Ph.D. Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS· "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON. USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT ANO ·P!\OOUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH ·AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 54'4-3587 • 169 HUN;TINGTON HilLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. •14622 (716) 381-4983 Inger M. Williams, Ph.D. CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS 214 WOODlAND ROAD PtnsFoRo, NEw vdRk 14534 �Ergonomics Training Course - St. Mary's Goodyear August 4 - 6, 1987 7:30 AM - 4:00 PM Table of Contents Starting Page Location S)lllabus EDFPAW 1 Topic i-ii Schedule Table of Contents 1 Acknowledgements 3 Introduction and Course Goals 4 Overview of Ergonomics 5 Ergonomics Goals 8 3 Capacities for Work 9 11 Factors That Increase Stress " r The Variability of People Exercise- Designing for People Using Anthropometric Data Postural Demands and Job Performance Static Work- Postural Effort Static Work Recovery Time Needs Height and Reach Interactions Posture and Vision and Productivity 14 16 17 19 20 8,285,290 8 285 . 52 112' 140 '150 EDFPAW2 2 210,446,496 237 13,446 13 4,142,217 24,217 22 27 20,30 217 218,255 29 17,30,50 223,282 What is Wrong With This Job? Ergonomic Job Analysis 31 34 Ergonomics and Quality Puzzle Exercise Total Work Load, Shift Work, Overtime Environmental Factors Lighting and Visibility VDT Workplaces Chair Characteristics VDTs and Visual Discomfort Paced Work/Time Pressure 36 38 39 45 48 49 52 53 54 210,276 21 0,242,320 172,225,234,241 28,101 '179 57 28,101,179 223 142 230 1. �Information Transfer Displays and Controls Population Stereotypes Quiz Job Control and Task Complexity Ergonomic Job Analysis Low Back Pain and Repetitive Motions Injuries Risk Factors for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Factors Affecting Grip Strength Techniques to Reduce Risk Factors Ergonomics Problem Solving Hand Tool Selection and Design Ergonomic Job Analysis Low Back Pain Risk Factors for Low Back Pain Manual Materials Handling Biomechanical Analysis of Lifts Strength and Location Maximum Force Applications Kodak Lifting Guidelines General Guidelines/Lifting/ Repetitive Work Ergonomic Job Analysis Ergonomics and Return to Work Communications and Job Stress CosVBenefit Analyses The Costs of Poor Design Problem Solving - Cost Justifying Changes How to Do An Ergonomics Survey Ergonomics Checklist Ergonomics Equipment. Bibliography 7187 SHR 57 61 62 162,181 90,107 107 237 64 66 162,181 237 68 135,340 71 151,244 74 151 75 77 79 83 254 " 140 85 90 92 96 97 98 99 15,122,151 135,340 135,340 360 135 135,338 384,446 403 101 102 106 112 113 117 9 119 122 124 130 132 313 313 320 365 98 161,497 534 2. �Acknowledgements The illustrations on pages 27, 28, 99, and 100 are used with permission from Eastman Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volumes 1 and 2 . The tables and illustrations on pages 52, 86 to 89, and 96 to 98 are from Working With Backache by S. H. Rodgers. Material on pages 11 to 13, 29 to 30, 48 to 51, 53, and 108 to 112 has been developed in conjunction with Dr. Inger Williams. All other material in this syllabus is by Dr. S.H. Rodgers. Permission to reproduce material from this syllabus must be obtained from her. 3. �Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company, StMary's, Ohio 3-Day Ergonomics Training Program, August 4-6, 1987 Syllabus Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Consultant in Ergonomics 169Huntington Hills Rochester, New York 14622 (716) 544-3587 �Ergonomics Training Course- St. Mary's Goodyear August 4 • 6, 1987 7:30AM· 4:00PM Schedule Tuesday. August 4th: Ergonomics and Productivity 7:30 - 8:00 AM 9:30-9:45 Introductions, Review of Course Goals, Content Overview of Ergonomics Work Capacities and Stress Sensitizers Human Variability - Who Do We Design For? Break 9:45-10:15 10:15-11:00 11 :00 - 11 :30 11:30- 12:00 Posture and Productivity Static Muscle Work and Recovery Needs Height and Reach Interaction Posture, Vision, and Productivity 12:00- 1:00PM Lunch 1:00- 2:30 2:30-2:45 What Is Wrong With This Job? Problem Analysis Break 2:45- 3:15 3:15-4:00 Workplace Design Guidelines Review Videotaped Jobs from St Mary's 8:00-8:30 8:30-9:00 9:00-9:30 ---""., " -__ j Wednesday. August 5th: Ergonomics and Quality Performance. Repetitive Motions Injuries 7:30-8:00 AM 8:00-9:00 9:00-9:30 9:30-9:45 Ergonomics and Quality Performance Puzzle Exercise Total Workload and Hours of Work Break 9:45-10:15 10:15-10:30 Environmental Factors Visibility and Quality Performance ·"·'· �i. ·.\ I I 10:30 - 11 :00 11:00- 12:00 12:00 - 1:00 PM VDT Workplace Design Displays and Controls- Information Transfer Lunch 1:45-2:15 2:15-2:30 Problem Solving: Factors Affecting Quality Overexertion Injuries - Repetitive Work Break 2:30-3:00 3:00-4:00 Hand Tool Selection and Design Problem Solving - Repetitive Jobs 1:00- 1:45 Thursday, August 6th: Ergonomics and Injury/Illness Reduction, Low Back Pain and Manual Handling. Cost/ Benefit Analyses 7:30 - 8:15 AM 8:15- 9:30 9:30-9:45 Low Back Pain Manual Lifting and Handling Guidelines Break 9:45- !0:15 !0:15- 12:00 12:00-1:00 PM Repetitive Lifting Problem Solving - Manual Handling Lunch 1:00- 1:45 Factors Affecting Return-to-Work After Injury or Illness Cost/Benefit Analyses Break 1:45-2:15 2:15-2:30 2:30- 3:15 3:15-3:30 3:30-4:00 Problem Solving Using Cost/Benefit Analysis Techniques Surveys and Checklists Summary of Main Points, Resources in Ergonomics, Evaluations 7/28/87 SHR ii. �i B 0 C Lansing Operations Project on Disability Management and Workers' Compensation Cost Control 3-Day Ergonomics Training Course November 16 - 18, 1987 Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544·3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER. N.Y. 14622 �Ergonomics Awareness and Problem Solving Course for Northeast Packaging, Plastics Packaging Division, Mobil Chemical Co., Thursday, December 4, 1987 Syllabus* 10:00-10:35 AM Overview- What Is Ergonomics?- Work Capacities, Who Do We Design For ? 10:35-11:15 Posture and Productivity - Static Work, Work and Recovery Times, Reaches, Work Heights 11 :15 - 12:00 Job Design and Overexertion Injuries- Low Back Pain and Manual Handling, Repetitive Motions Problems 12:00 - 1 :00 PM Lunch !:00- 2:00 * Problem Solving - L 138/139 "Hand Wrap" Packer 1:00- 2:30 Problem Solving - L 138/139 "Rotary Stretch Film" Packer 2:30-3:00 Selling Ergonomics Changes - Cost!Benefit Permission to reproduce unpublished materials should be obtained from Dr. Rodgers. Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company Ergonomics Training General Products and Textile Divisions January to March, 1988 Schedule Monday: 8:30- 9:00AM 9:00-10:00 10:00-10:15 10:15-11:15 11 :15 - 11 :45 11:45- 12:30 Introductions and Course Goals Overview of Ergonomics - The Costs of Poor Design Break Who Do We Design For ? - Work Capacities Problem Solving: Who Do We Design For? Lunch 12:30-1:30 PM Problem Solving: Designing a Standing Workplace 1:30- 2:15 Posture and Productivity: Static Work, Height and Reach Interaction 2:15- 2:30 Break 2:30- 3:00 Posture and Visibility 3:00- 4:00 Problem Solving: Workplace Design 0 Tuesday: 8:30- 9:00AM 9:00- 10:00 10:00-10:15 10:15-10:45 10:45- 11 :45 11 :45- 12:30 12:30-1:30 PM 1:30- 2:15 2:15- 2:30 2:30- 3:00 3:00- 3:30 ( \ ~ 3:30- 4:00 Repetitive Motions Problems- Tendonitis, Carpal Tunnel Syndrome, Tennis Elbow, etc. Factors Affecting Hand Grip Strength Break The Selection and Design of Tools Problem Solving: Repetitive Motions Problems Lunch Factors Affecting Quality Performance - Puzzle Techniques to Reduce Complexity Break Paced Work- Techniques to Retain Control Environmental Factors - Lighting, Noise, Temperature, Humidity Summary -Job Stress Sensitizers �Wednesday: 8:30- 9:00AM 9:00- 10:00 10:00-10:15 10:15-11:00 11 :00 - 11 :45 11 :45 - 12:30 12:30-1:30 PM 1:30- 2:30 2:30- 2:45 2:45- 3:30 3:30- 4:00 Low Back Pain Workplace and Job Factors Associated with Low Back Pain Break Manual Handling Guidelines - Push/Pull, Lift/Lower, Repetitive Lifting Problem Solving: Manual Handling Lunch Discussion: implementing an Ergonomics Program Cost-Benefit Analyses of Ergonomics Problem Solutions Break Problem Solving: Cost-Benefit Justification of Change Hours of Work , ~-,\ \_j Thursday: 8:30 - 9:30 AM 9:30- 10:30 10:30- 10:45 10:45-11:45 11 :45 - 12:30 Problem Solving: Workplace Modifications Problem Solving: New Workplace Design Break Problem Solving: Repetitive Tasks Lunch 12:30 -1:30PM 1:30- 2:30 Problem Solving: Job Design Ergonomics Resources/Audits, Course Evaluations 1/10/88 SHR ' , ___ _/ / �I • ...• ~ Goodyear l / ) .. ' Divisions des produits generaux/textiles Cours de formation en ergonomie '\ Akron (Ohio) Du 18 au 21 janvier 1988 Du 22 au 25 fevrier 1988 Du 21 au 24 mars 1988 Programme S H R Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D Experte-conseil en ergonomie/facteurs humains "Productivite accrue par une meilleure conception du travail" 1. SEMINAIRES DE SENSIBILISATION 2. FORMATION RELATIVE A L'UTILISATION DES FACTEURS HUMAINS LORS DE LA CONCEPTION DES STATIONS DE TRAVAIL, DE L'EQUIPEMENT ET DES PRODUITS 3. PROGRAMMES DE SANTE ET DE SECURITE AU TRAVAIL (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �\ ,Goodyear - Formation en ergonomie Divisions des produits generaux et des textiles ~ De janvier a mars 1988 ,. Horaire '' Lundi De De 8 h 30 a 9 h 00 9 h 00 a 10 h 00 De 10 h 00 a 10 h 15 De 10) h 15 a 11 h 15 De 11 h 15 a··11 h 45 De 11 h 45 a 12 h 30 De 12 h 30 a 13 h 30 De 13 h 30 a 14 h 15 De 14 h 15 a 14 h 30 De 14 h 30 a 15 h 00 De 15 h 00 a 16 h 00 Presentations et objectifs du cours Survol de l'ergonomie - Les couts d'une conception inappropriee Pause Pour qui se fait la conception ? - Capacite de travail Resolution de problemes : Pour qui se fait la conception ? Rep as Resolution de problemes : Conception d'une station de travail debout Position et productivite : Travail statique, interaction de la hauteur et de la portee Pause Position et visibilite Resolution de problemes Conception d'une station de travail Mardi De 8 h 30 a 9 h 00 De 9 h 00 a 10 h 00 De 10 h 00 a 10 h 15 De 10 h 15 a 10 h 45 De 10 h 45 a 11 h 45 De 11 h 45 a 12 h 30 De 12 h 30 a 13 h 30 De 13 h 30 a 14 h 15 De 14 h 15 a 14 h 30 De 14 h 30 a 15 h 00 De 15 h 00 a 15 h 30 De 15 h 30 a 16 h 00 Problemes des gestes repetitifs - Tendinite, syndrome du canal carpien, synovite du coude, etc. Facteurs affectant la force de prehension de la main Pause Le choix et la conception des outils Resolution de problemes : Problemes des gestes repetitifs Rep as Facteurs affectant la qualite du rendement Casse-tete Techniques de facilitation Pause Travail cadence - Techniques pour garder le controle Facteurs environnementaux'- Eclairage, bruit, temperature, humidite Resume - Agents de sensibilisation a la tension au travail I �Mercredi De De 8 h 30 a 9 h 00 9 h oo a 10 h 00 De 10 h 00 a 10 h 15 De 10 h 15 a 11 h 00 De 11 h 00 a 11 h 45 De 11 h 45 a 12 h 30 De 12 h 30 a 13 h 30 De 13 h 30 a 14 h 30 De 14 h 30 a 14 h 45 De 14 h 45 a 15 h 30 a 16 h 00 De 8 h 30 a 9 h 30 De 9 h 30 a 10 h 30 De 15 h 30 Douleurs dans le bas du dos Station de travail et autres facteurs associes aux douleurs dans le bas du dos Pause Lignes directrices relatives a la manutention manuelle - Pousser/tirer, soulever/abaisser, soulevement repetitif Resolution de problemes : Manutention manuelle Rep as Discussion : Implantation d'un programme d'ergonomie Analyses des couts et des avantages pour les solutions ergonomiques aux problemes Pause Resolution de problemes : Couts et avantages justifiant des changements Heures de travail Jeudi De 10 h 30 a 10 h 45 De 10 h 45 a 11 h 45 De 11 h 45 a 12 h 30 De 12 h 30 a 13 h 30 De 13 h 30 a 14 h 30 Resolution station de Resolution station de Pause Resolution Rep as de problemes travail de problemes travail Modifications de la de problemes Taches repetitives Conception d'une nouvelle Resolution de problemes : Conception du travail Ressources ergonomiques/verification, evaluation du cours 1/10/88 SHR II �Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company - General Products/ Textiles Divisions - 4-Day Ergonomics Training Courses January- March, 1988, 8:30 AM - 4:00 PM, Tallmadge Training Center Table of Contents Starting Page Location Topic Schedule Table of Contents Acknowledgements Introduction and Course Goals Ergonomics Goals - Overview The Costs of Poor Design Capacities for Work () j iii v 1 2 6 8 EOFPAW 1 3 EDFE8W2 2 9 210,446,496 The Variability of People 10 Using Anthropometries Data 12 Exercises -Who Do We Design For? 14 8,285,290 285 8 13,446 Static Work - Postural Effort Static Work Recovery Time Needs Height and Reach Interactions Posture and Vision and Productivity Design to Minimize Stress Ergonomic Problem Solving 112,140,150 24,217 Repetitive Work and CTS Risk Factors for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Factors Affecting Grip Strength Evaluating Hand Tools Ergonomic Job Analysis - Priority 39 Effort Scale ' ( S~llabus Puzzle Exercise Ergonomics and Quality Displays and Controls Population Stereotypes 17 21 26 27 28 29 20,30 17,30,50 52 31 223,282 135,151 ,244 254 151 140 42 43 44 46 217 218,255 135 32 35 37 13 90,107 �--~~-, Paced Work/Time Pressure Other Environmental Factors Factors That Increase Stress 47 50 51 Low Back Pain Risk Factors for Low Back Pain Manual Materials Handling Maximum Force Applications Strength and Location Kodak Lifting Guidelines Ergonomic Job Analysis 52 57 59 61 62 63 65 Ergonomics Survey 67 CosVBenefit Analyses 69 Problem Solving: Cost Justifying 74 Ergonomics Checklist 77 Problem Solving Forms Course Evaluation Form 1/11/88 SHR ( 83 88 230 210,242,320 237 15,122,151 313 313 135 135,340 338 384,446 135,338 360,403 98 �Acknowledgements The illustrations on pages 26, 63, and 64 are used with permission from Eastman Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volumes 1 and 2. The tables and illustrations on pages 53 to 56, 61, and 62 are from Working With Backache by S. H. Rodgers. Material on pages 27, 39 to 42, and 51 has been developed in conjunction with Dr. Inger Williams. All other material in this syllabus is by Dr. S.H. Rodgers. Permission to reproduce material from this syllabus must be obtained from her. "· �The Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company General Products/ Textile Division Ergonomics Training Course Akron, Ohio January 18 - 21 , 1988 February 22 - 25, 1988 March 21 - 24, 1988 (~) Syllabus Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE. EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS ·~ (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �~I :1 t I, AilE Chapter Meeting, Pontiac, Michigan- March 11, 1988 Outline of Sue Rodgers' Presentations Morning: (2 hours) Posture and Productivity Static Work and Recovery Time Needs Reach and Height Interaction Problem Solving Example Afternoon: (2 hours) Reducing Overexertion Injuries Work Capacities Factors Affecting% of Capacity Used on the Job Repetition Rate- How Much Is Too Much ? Duration of Work Technique for Prioritizing the Need for Change and for Identifying the Most Effective Changes in Jobs Where Overexertion Injuries Are Seen 2/12/88 SHR I I �AilE Chapter Meeting, Pontiac, Michigan- March 11, 1988 Outline of Sue Rodgers' Presentations Morning: (2 hours) Posture and Productivity Static Work and Recovery Time Needs Reach and Height Interaction Problem Solving Example Afternoon: (2 hours) Reducing Overexertion Injuries Work Capacities Factors Affecting % of Capacity Used on the Job Repetition Rate- How Much Is Too Much? Duration of Work Technique for Prioritizing the Need for Change and for Identifying the Most Effective Changes in Jobs Where Overexertion Injuries Are Seen 2/12/88 SHR �Ergonomics- Practical Approaches for Reducing Occupational Illness, Injury and Disability While Improving Quality Performance 1-Day Seminar- Pendleton, Oregon, June 21, 1988 Outline 8:30 - 9:30 AM Work Capacity- Definition, Measurement, and Use in Job Design and the Evaluation of Job Demands 9:30- 10:30 Posture and Productivity- Fatiguing Postures and Ways to Reduce Them 10:30 - 10:45 Break 10:45- 11:30 Case Studies: Seated and Standing Workplaces 11 :30- 12:00 Highly Repetitive Tasks, Tendonitis, and Carpal Tunnel Syndrome 12:00 - 1:00 PM Lunch 1:00-2:00 Case Studies: Repetitive Tasks 2:00-3:00 Manual Materials Handling and Low Back Pain 3:00-3:15 Break 3:15-4:30 Case Studies: Manual Handling Tasks 4:30-5:00 Summary and Guidelines for Ergonomic Job Design 5/6/88 S.H. Rodgers Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544·3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �The Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company Asia/Pacific Regions Ergonomics Training Course Singapore July 18-21, 1988 Syllabus Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DES.IGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �INDUSTRIAL MEDICINE AN INTRODUCTORY COURSE FOR THERAPISTS FACULTY: GREGORY W. BRICK, M.D. ROWLAND G. HAZARD, M.D. Z. ANNETTE IGLARSH, P.T., PH.D., M.B.A. W. MONROE KEYSERLING, PH.D. JERRY LAMPE, P.T., PH.D. LEONARD N. MATHESON, PH.D. MARGARETA NORDIN, MED. DR. SCI. ROBERT RADWIN, PH.D. JAN RICHARDSON, P.T., PH.D. SUZANNE H. RODGERS, PH.D. JON TALSNESS, M.D. KATHLEEN VIOLA, P.T. COURSE CHAIRMAN: STEVE VANCE, P.T. September 22-25, 1988 Boston, Massachusetts SPONSORED BY MEETING PLANNERS, INC. I �Delco Products Rochester Division General Motors Corporation 4-Day Ergonomics Training C_ourse September 26-29, 1988 Syllabus Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �Delco Products Rochester Division Ergonomics Training September 26-29, 1988 0 \ I Schedule Monday: 8:008:309:009:45- 8:30AM 9:00 9:45 10:00 10:00 - 11 :00 11 :00 - 11 :30 11 :30 - 12:30 Introductions and Course Goals Overview of Ergonomics - The Costs of Poor Design Who Do We Design For ? - Work Capacities Break Problem Solving: Who Do We-Design For? Reach and Height Interactions -Workplace Design Lunch 12:30 -1:30PM Problem Solving: Designing a Standing Workplace 1:30- 2:15 Posture and Productivity: Static Work and Recovery Time Needs Break 2:15- 2:30 2:30- 3:00 3:00- 4:00 Posture and Visibility, Chairs Problem Solving: VDT Workplace Design Tuesday: 8:00- 8:30AM 8:309:009:30- 9:00 9:30 9:45 Repetitive Motions Problems - Tendonitis, Carpal Tunnel Syndrome, Tennis Elbow, etc. Factors Affecting Hand Grip Strength The Selection and Design of Tools Break 9:45- 11:30 11 :30 - 12:30 Problem Solving: Repetitive Motions Problems Lunch 12:30 - 1:00 PM 1:00- 1:30 Low Back Pain Workplace and Job Factors Associated with Low Back Pain Design of Manual Handling Tasks Break 1:30- 2:00 2:00- 2:15 2:15- 2:45 2:45- 4:00 Manual Handling Guidelines - Push/Pull, Lift/Lower, Repetitive Lifting Problem Solving: Manual Handling �2. Wednesday: 8:00 - 9:00 PM 9:00- 9:45 9:45- 10:00 10:00 -10:30 10 :30 -11 :30 11:30- 12:30 12:30-1:30 PM 1:30- 2:30 2:30- 2:45 2:45- 3:30 3:30- 4:00 Factors Affecting Quality Performance- Puzzle Techniques to Reduce Complexity- Information Transfer, Controls/Displays, Stress Sensitizers Break Paced Work- Techniques to Retain Control Environmental Factors- Lighting, Noise, Temperature, Humidity Lunch Discussion: Implementing an Ergonomics Program, Surveys, Checklists, Guidelines Cost-Benefit Analyses of Ergonomics Problem Solutions Break Problem Solving: Cost-Benefit Justification of Change Review of Thursday's Problem Presentation Goals Thursday: 8:00- 3:00 Class Problem Presentations (with usual breaks) 3:00- 3:30 Ergonomics Resources, Course Evaluations 9/17/88 SHR I It ; �Mobil Macedon Design Products 1-Day Ergonomics Awareness and Problem Solving Course October 11, 1988, 8:30 AM to 4:30 PM at The Farm Restaurant Syllabus Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" ' 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �Work Re-Entry Program, University of Rochester Ergonomics Seminar# 2- October 21, 1988 Postural Demands, Workplace and Equipment Design A. Static Muscle Effort 1. 2. 3. 4. Postures of Concern Techniques to Reduce Static Load Recovery Needs in Static Postural Work Problem Solving Example B. Using Anthropometric Data in Workplace and Equipment Design 1. 2. 3. 4. Available Data Use in Determining Clearances Use in Determining Heights and Reaches Use in Evaluating Visual Needs of Worker C. Workplace and Equipment Design - Layout 1. Orientation of Supplies or Out-Going Product to Line 2. Materials Flow D. Office Ergonomics- Seated Workplace Design 1. Layout 2. Factors Affecting Posture a. Clearances b. Keying Height c. Visual Considerations 3. Job Design 4. Self-Help Diagnosis of VDT Workplace Discomfort Contributors 10/21/88 S.H. Rodgers �"i , Ergonomic Job Analysis Techniques A 4-Hour Training Course for Members of the St. Mary's Medical Center Workers' Evaluation & Rehabilitation Center Staff Given by Dr. Sue Rodgers, Ergonomics Consultant from Rochester, New York October 27, 1988, 8 AM to Noon Outline I. Evaluating Job Physical Effort Requirements A. Evaluation of Effort Levels B. Muscle Fatigue and Recovery Time Needs C. Ergonomic Job Analysis for Repetitive Work D. Using Force and Manual Handling Guidelines E. Total Workload II. Other Job and Workplace Factors A. Visual Work B. Environmental Conditions C. Pacing D. Communications ill. Design Considerations A. Heights and Reaches B. Location of Lifts C. Size of Objects Handled D. Orientation of Workplace Elements E. Pattern of Heavy and Light Effort Task Alternation IV. Problem Solving Examples for Job Analysis A. Light Assembly Work B. Building Cleaning C. Trash Collection D. Office Work V. Selling Job/Workplace/Equipment Changes A. Costs of Poor Design B. Information Sources- Surveys C. Where Industry Is Coming From Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 Permission to reproduce material in this handout should be obtained from Dr. Rodgers or the cited reference. �tj'r>.~, ·. -~t -~ \ ·. f ' i \: r !Ergonomics in the Workplace f'Higher Productivity Through Job Design" A RAMAC/SMMC Seminar Given by Dr. Sue Rodgers, Consultant in Ergonomics from Rochester, New York October 27, 1988, 1-3 PM St. Mary's Medical Center, Racine, Wisconsin Outline I. Review of Overexertion Injuries A. Low Back Pain Risk Factors B. Repetitive Work Risk Factors C. Techniques to Manage Disability Associated With Overexertion Injuries II. Concepts for Ergonomic Design of Jobs and Workplaces A. People at Work Should Be Comfortable 1. Upright or Neutral Posture 2. Work Close to Elbow Level 3. Good Task Visibility 4. Comfortable Working Environment B. Avoid Excessive Forces or Loads 1. Design for Majority of Potential Workforce 2. Lifting Near Waist Height 3. Slide Rather Than Lift C. Give Worker Control of Work Pattern 1. Pacing Should Permit Variability 2. Timeliness of Feedback and Feedforward Information Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 Permission to reproduce material in this syllabus should be sought from Dr. Rodgers or the referenced sources. �. Ergonomic Guidelines for Manual Handling Tasks Delco Products- Rochester, N.Y. August 3, 1988 Seminar and Problem Solving Workshop Led by Sue Rodgers, Consultant in Ergonomics Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �3-Day Ergonomics Training Course Health and Environment Laboratories Eastman Kodak Company November 8-10, 1988 Syllabus ,!: Sue Rodgers, Ergonomics Consultant Mark Johnson, Ergonomics Dick Little, Ergonomics Carol McCreary, Ergonomics Bob Weneck, Ergonomics Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE. EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �·-! Eastman Kodak Company 3-Day Ergonomics Training Course November 8th through 10th, 1988, B-952 Tuesday, November 8th: Overview, Posture and Productivity 8:00 - 8:30 AM 8:30- 9:00 9:00- 10:00 10:00 - 10:15 Introductions and Overview Work Capacity Who Do We Design For ? Break 10:15- 10:45 Posture and Productivity - Static Work, Reach/Height Interactions Work/RecOvery Curves Problem Solving: Standing Workplace Design Lunch 10:45 - 11 :15 11:15-12:00 12:00- 1:00PM /----\ __/I _ 1:00- 2:00 2:00- 3:00 3:00- 3:15 Problem Solving: Seated Workplace Design Office Ergonomics Break 3:15- 4:45 4:45-5:00 Problem Solving: Design of a New Workplace Summary of Workplace Design Guidelines -* .JII. Wednesday, November 9th- Preventing Overexertion Injuries: 8:00 - 8:30 AM 8:30- 9:15 9:15- 10:00 10:00-10:15 Repetitive Motions Disorders Risk Factors for Tendonitis, Carpal Tunnel, etc. Ergonomic Job Analysis Form Break 10:15-10:45 10:45- 12:00 12:00- 1:00PM Tool Design {DiCk Problem Solving: Repetitive Tasks Lunch 1:00- 1:30 1:30- 2:00 2:00- 2:30 2:30- 2:45 uttl;) JJf- Low Back Pain and Job Risk Factors Managing Upper Extremity and Low Back ~ Disability in the Workplace Manual Handling Guidelines Break + �2:45-4:15 4:15-4:45 4:45-5:00 Problem Solving: Manual Handling ~ Frequent Lifting/ Total Workload Work Pace Thursday, November 10th: Ergonomics and Quality Performance 8:00 - 8:30 AM 8:30- 9:00 9:00- 9:30 9:30 -10:00 10:00-10:15 Environment- Lighting- ob Weneck Environment- Temperature/Humidity Reducing Job Complexity- Information Break 10:15-11:00 11:00 -12:00 12:00- 1:00 Controls/Displays/Automation Human Error and Reliability €(k JohnSQD) Lunch 1:00 - 2:00 PM 2:00-3:00 3:00-3:15 Problem Solving - Equipment and Environmental .;Design Cost-Benefit Analyses of Solutions Break 3:15-4:15 4:15-4:45 4:45-5:00 Problem Solving Using Cost-Benefit Approach Surveys/Checklists/Resources k" Course Evaluations *" Homework Suggestions: 1 Week Before Course: Videotape of Jobs to Ergonomics, B-320 Night Before Course: Review Syllabus Contents, Volume 1, Ch 2, App. Tuesday Night: Review Volume 2, Work Patterns, Manual Handling sections, esp. Wednesday Night: Review Volume 1, Chs 3,4,5 10/10/88 SHR �Ergonomics- Prevention of Occupational Overexertion Injuries Seminar for the Center for Occupational Rehabilitation and Ergonomics, U of R Med. Center, November 21, 1988, 3:30-5:30 PM I. Ergonomics and Work Capacity II. Repetitive Work and Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Ill. Manual Handling Tasks and Low Back Pain IV. Problem Solving Form and Job Effort Analysis Technique V. Ergonomics and Work Restrictions Industrial Ergonomics Resource Material Written or Edited by S.H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Eastman Kodak Company Human Factors and Ergonomics Groups, Ergonomic Design for People at Work. Volume 1 (ISBN #534-97962-9) Workplace, Equipment, Information Handling and Environment Design, 1983, about $50; Volume 2 (ISBN #442-22103-7) Job Design, Methods to Measure Job Demands, Human Capacities, Work Patterns, Shift Work, and Manual Materials Handling, 1986, about $75. Available from van Nostrand Reinhold, Mail Order Service, 7625 Empire Drive, Florence, Kentucky 41042. Customer service number is (606) 525-6600. For multiple purchases contact Rachel Grabowsky at (212) 254-3232. There should be a 2-volume set reduced price of about $100. as of January, 1987. Rodgers, S.H. Working With Backache (ISBN #931157-01-3), 1985, published by Perinton Press. $18.95 plus handling. Review of occupational low back pain problems and techniques to manage and prevent disability from them using ergonomics approaches. Sections on what the worker can do, what workplace and equipment designers can do, and what management can do to reduce low back pain problems at work. Available through S.H. Rodgers, Ph.D., P.O. Box 23446, Rochester, N.Y. 14692. Phone= (716) 544-3587. Rodgers, S.H. (Editor). Repetitive Motions Injuries, March, 1987 issue of Seminars in Occupational Medicine. published by Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc., Suite 1501,381 Park Avenue South, New York, N.Y. 10016. Phone= (212) 683-5088 (Shari Carpenter). Rodgers, S.H. "Job Evaluation in Worker Fitness Determination", a chapter in Comprehensive Approaches in Worker Fitness Evaluations edited by Jay Himmelstein, MD and Glenn Pransky, MD, Occupational Medicine: State of the Art Reviews, March, 1988, published by Hanley and Belfus, Inc., 210 S. 13th Street, Philadelphia, PA 19107, (215) 546-4995. Rodgers, S.H. "Matching Worker and Work Site -Ergonomic Principles", a chapter in Work Injury. Management and Prevention by Susan J. Isemhagen, PT, published in 1988 by Aspen Publishers, Inc., 1600 Research Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20850, (301) 251-8500. Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS 171Rl ""'·3.'iB7 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER. N.Y. 14622 �'• Ergonomics in Dietary Jobs Lecture for the Dietetics Department, University of Rochester Medical Center, November 22, 1988 Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D., Consultant in Ergonomics I. What Is Ergonomics? Applications in Dietetics. II. Case Study : Hospital Tray Assembly A. B. C. D. E. F. Job Characteristics Health and Safety Concerns Quality Concerns Information Transfer- Menu Design Seating Work Pace Ill. General Ergonomics Guidelines for Job Design Assignment in Preparation for Class: You have already observed the tray assembly operation for at least 30 minutes during lunch or dinner (or breakfast). We will discuss the working postures, pace, errors made, and environmental factors (lighting, temperature, noise) in this session. General Ergonomic Guidelines 1. Avoid sustained, awkward postures. Provide for postural variability. 2. Keep the wrists straight whenever possible. 3. Slide instead of lifting objects. 4. Give the worker control over the job pattern. Design flexibility into the job. 5. Reduce unnecessary environmental distractors. 6. Structure information to reduce complexity and increase legibility. 11 /21/88 SHR �Ergon~mics Awareness Course Eastman Kodak Company - Colorado Division Windsor, Colorado December, 1988 Outline A. Overview of Ergonomics and Its Benefits B. Posture and Productivity 1. Static Muscle Work 2. Height and Reach Guidelines 3. Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique C. Preventing Overexertion Injuries 1. Highly Repetitive Work- Risk Factors and How To Reduce Them 2. Manual Materials Handling - Lifting, Lowering, Pushing, and Pulling Guidelines ·i.-·1· ' ; D. Ergonomics and Quality Performance 1. Reducing Complexity 2. Inspection and Visual Capabilities 3. Determining Appropriate Pacing ofOperations Need for Control Over Work Pattern Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �2-Day Ergonomics Training Course for Central Engineering Based on the Pigment Weigh Room and Banbury Loading Area Designs for the Napanee Plant Syllabus Goodyear Hall, December 14 -15, 1988 The Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company, Akron, OH Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN'' 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �·-~\( 2-Day Ergonomics Training Course for Central Engineering Based on the Pigment Weigh Room and Banbury Loading Area Designs for the Napanee Plant Goodyear Hall, December 14 -15, 1988 The Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company, Akron, OH Schedule I. Weds., Dec.14th Ergonomics Overview and Review of Questions About Banbury and Weigh Room Jobs 8:15 8:30 9:25 9:35 10:30 10:35 11:30 -------....._,_ / 12:15 1:10 1:15 2:10 2:25 3:20 3:30 ' 4:30 ll. 1:15 2:10 2:25 3:15 r--\ _________A ·~ ' Review Pigment Room Video Break Review Banbury Loading Video Break Questions for Compounder Break Review First Designs of Pigment Room and Banbury Loading Area Homework: Pigment Weigh Room Design Thurs, Dec 15th, Application of Ergonomics Principles to the Design of the Pigment Weigh Room and the Banbury Loading Area 8:15 9:00 9:50 10:00 . Introduction Ergonomic Workplace Design Guidelines Break Ergonomic Guidelines for Manual Handling Tasks and Total Workload Break Ergonomics Guidelines for Equipment and Environmental Design Lunch Review of Pigment Weigh Room Design Further Work on Pigment Weigh Room Design Break Work on Banbury Loading Area Design and Lunch Review Banbury Loading Area Design Break Wrap-Up on Designs and Ergonomics Approach End, Evaluations, Resources �Occupational Rehabilitation and Ergonomics Clinic Seminars Total Work Load and Aerobic Capacity Evaluations December 27, 1988, 3:00PM Anderson Room University of Rochester Medical Center I. Aerobic Capacity Determinations 2. Energy Expenditure on Jobs 3. Heart Rate Measurements of Job Demands 4. Hours of Work and Shiftwork Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �Seminar for the Occupational Rehabilitation and Ergonomics Team on Problem Solving with Job Examples for Total Job Demands, January 5, 1989, U of R Med I. Low Back Pain Patient for Work Re-Entry Job Information from the Patient Job Information from the Employer Videotape of Job Questions to Ask Patient Questions to Ask Employer Relevant Data to Collect Capacities to Measure Appropriate Exercise/Work Hardening Protocol II. Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Patient for Work Re-Entry same as above Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS ''HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544·3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �Eastman Chemicals Division 3-Day Ergonomics Training Course January 1Oth through 12th, 1989, Kingsport, TN Tuesday, January 10th: Overview, Posture and Productivity 8:00 - 8:30 AM 8:30- 9:00 9:00- 9:15 9:15-10:00 10:00-10:15 Introductions and Overview Work Capacity Who Do We Design For ? Exercise- Using Anthropometric Data Break 10:15-10:45 Posture and Productivity- Static Work, Reach/Height Interactions Work/Recovery Curves Problem Solving: Standing Workplace Design Lunch 10:45-11:15 11 :15 - 12:00 12:00 - 1:00 PM 1:00- 2:15 2:15- 3:00 3:00- 3:15 TEC Videotape Review - Postures Problem Solving: Seated Workplace Design Break 3:15-4:45 4:45-5:00 Problem Solving: Design of a New Workplace Summary of Workplace Design Guidelines Wednesday, January 11th- Preventing Overexertion Injuries and Enhancing Human Reliability 8:00- 8:30AM 8:30- 9:15 9:15- 9:45 9:45- 10:00 Repetitive Motions Disorders Risk Factors for Tendonitis, Carpal Tunnel, etc. Ergonomic Job Analysis Form Break 10:00- 10:30 10:30 - 11 :30 11 :30 - 12:00 12:00- 1:00PM Tooling Guidelines- Dick Little Problem Solving: Repetitive Tasks Human Error and Reliability - Rodgers, Little Lunch 1:001:302:302:45- Reducing Job Complexity- Information Problem Solving: Controls/Displays/Automation Environment - Lighting Break 1:30 2:30 2:45 3:00 3:00- 3:45 3:45- 4:45 Temperature/Humidity and Job Demands Shiftwork - Dick Little �Thursday, Jan. 12th: Manual Handling and Cost/Benefit Analyses 9:00- 9:30 9:30- 9:45 Low Back Pain and Job Risk Factors Managing Upper Extremity and Low Back Disability in the Workplace Manual Handling Guidelines Break 9:45- 10:30 10:30 -11 :00 11 :00 -11 :45 11:45-12:00 12:00 -1:00PM Problem Solving: Manual Handling Frequent Lifting/ Total Workload Problem Solving: Total Workload Work Pace Lunch 1:00- 1:45 1:45 -2:00 Cost-Benefit Analyses of Solutions Break 2:00-3:00 3:00-3:15 3:15-3:30 Problem Solving Using Cost-Benefit ,Approach Surveys/Checklists/Resources Course Evaluations 8:00- 8:30 8:30- 9:00 Homework Suggestions: 1 Week Before Course: Complete Videotapes of Jobs/ Descriptions Night Before Course: Review Syllabus Contents, Volume 1, Ch 2, App. Tuesday Night: Review Volume 2, Work Patterns, Manual Handling sections, esp. Wednesday Night: Review Volume 1, Chs 3,4,5 12/2/88 SHR �3-Day Ergonomics Course for the Bridgeport Plant General Electric Company January 30 - February 1, 1989 Syllabus Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS ''HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544·3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �..-/~'\ \ General Electric Bridgeport, 3-Day Ergonomics Training Course January 30th through February 1st, 1989 / Monday, January 30th: Overview, Posture and Productivity I \ 8:00 - 8:30 AM 8:30- 9:00 9:00- 10:00 10:00-10:15 Introductions and Overview Work Capacity Who Do We Design For ? Break 10:15-10:45 10:45 - 11 :15 11 :15- 12:00 12:00 - 12:45 PM Posture and Productivity- Static Work, Reach/Height Interactions Work/Recovery Curves Problem Solving: Standing Workplace Design Lunch 12:451:151:302:30- The Design of Seated Workplaces Office Ergonomics Problem Solving: Seated Workplace Design Break 1:15 1 :30 2:30 2:45 c ...___ / 2:45 -·3:45 3:45-4:00 Problem Solving: Design of a New Workplace Summary of Workplace Design Guidelines Tuesday, January 31st- Preventing Overexertion Injuries and Enhancing Human Reliability 8:00- 8:30AM 8:30- 9:15 9:15- 10:00 10:00-10:15 Repetitive Motions Disorders Risk Factors for Tendonitis, Carpal Tunnel, etc. Ergonomic Job Analysis Form Break 10:15 - 11 :15 11:15-12:00 12:00 - 12:45 PM Problem Solving: Repetitive Tasks Human Error and Reliability Lunch 12:45- 1:15 1:15- 1:45 1:45- 2:15 2:15- 2:30 Reducing Job Complexity- Information, Pacing Controls/Displays/Automation Environment- Lighting Break 2:30- 3:00 3:00- 4:00 Environment- Temperature/Humidity Problem Solving: Information and Environment ·~cj I. �Wednesday, Feb 1st: Manual Handling and Cost/Benefit Analyses 9:00- 9:30 9:30- 9:45 Low Back Pain and Job Risk Factors Managing Upper Extremity and Low Back Disability in the Workplace Manual Handling Guidelines Break 9:45- 11:00 11 :00 -11 :45 11:45-12:15 12:15-1:00 Problem Solving: Manual Handling Frequent Lifting/ Total Workload Hours of Work and Shiftwork Lunch 1:00-2:00 2:00-3:00 3:00-3:15 3:15-3:45 3:45-4:00 Cost-Benefit Analyses of Solutions Problem Solving Using Cost-Benefit Approach Break SuNeys/Checklists/Resources Course Evaluations 8:00- 8:30 8:30- 9:00 Homework Suggestions: Night Before Course: Review Volume 1, Ch 2, Appendix, Syllabus Monday Night: Review Volume 1, Chs 3,4,5, Volume 2, Work Patterns Tuesday Night: Review Volume 2, Manual Handling 1/17/89 SHR �Ergonomics Training Course- General Electric Bridgeport, CT Plant, January 30th to February 1st, 1989 /-~\ j Table of Contents J Topic Schedule Table of Contents Acknowledgements Introduction and Course Goals Ergonomics Goals Capacities for Work Factors That Increase Stress The Variability of People Using Anthropometric Data ---/ Starting Page Location EDFPAW 1 S;x:llabus 1 3 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 3 8,285,290 285 2 210,446,496 237 13,446 4, 142,217 24,217 218,255 223,282 Postural Demands/Performance Static Muscle Work Height and Reach Interactions Posture, Vision, Productivity Design to Minimize Effort Static Work Recovery Needs Problem Analysis: Standing Work Problem Analysis: Seated Work Finding Best Solution to Problem Chair Characteristics Visual Aspects of VDT Work Self-Help in VDT Workplace Comfort 15 16 19 21 22 23 28 29 31 32 35 37 Risk Factors for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Factors Affecting Grip Strength Techniques to Reduce Risk Job Analysis Form - Repetitive Tasks Effort Estimation Scale Evaluating Hand Tools Problem Analysis: Repetitive Work 38 151' 244 41 42 43 151' 254 151 Human Reliability/Inspection 52 112,140,150 20,24,30 17,30,50 52 EDFPAW 2 217 23,50 18,28,50 57 28,101,179 46 47 49 338 140 52 181 142 142 3 f �~~~) Ergonomics and Quality Puzzle Exercise Job Control and Task Complexity Information Transfer - Controls and Displays Environmental Factors Problem Solving Form 53 55 56 58 62 66 Risk Factors for Low Back Pain Strength and Location Maximum Force Applications ~Kodak Lifting Guidelines Problem Analysis: Manual Handling General Guidelines/Lifting/ Repetitive Work Total Workload Paced Work/Time Pressure 69 75 76 77 79 Summary - Applied Ergonomics 92 Cost/Benefit Analyses The Costs of Poor Design Problem Solving Form Ergonomics in Old/New Design How to Do An Ergonomics Survey Ergonomics Checklist 10 Ergonomics Guidelines Resources 93 97 99 102 103 105 111 112 Course Evaluation Form end 1/17/89 SHR 90,107,162 210,242,320 15,122,151 82 83 89 135,340 135,338 384,446 360,403 206,276,480 230 9 313 313 98 365 534 �Acknowledgements The illustrations on pages 19, 20, 52, 77 and 78 are used with permission from Eastman Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volumes 1 and 2. The tables and illustrations on pages 33, 34, 75 and 76 are from Working With Backache by S. H. Rodgers. Material on pages 10, 32, 36, and 37 has been developed in conjunction with Dr. Inger Williams. All other material in this syllabus is by Dr. S.H. Rodgers. Permission to reproduce material from this syllabus must be obtained from her. 10/17/88 SHR �Suzanne H. Rodgers, PhD. Consultant In Ergonomics/Human Factors 169 Huntington Hills ROCHESTER, NEW YORK 14622 Presentation to the Organization Resources Counselors Meeting on February 9, 1989 at the L'Enfant Plaza Hotel, Washimgton, D.C. Applied Ergonomics From the Industrial Perspective I. National Trends and Ergonomics Applications II. Ergonomics Interventions to Reduce Overexertion Injuries A. ReJ?etitive Motions Injuries - Carpal Tunnel Syndrome and Tendonitis 1. R1sk Factors in the Workplace 2. Job Design to Reduce the Risk B. Low Back Pain 1. Risk Factors in the Workplace 2. Reducing Uncomfortable Working Postures 3. Manual Handling Task Design to Reduce the Risk III. Disability Management and Ergonomics Handout Table of Contents National Trends in Ergonomics Carpal Tunnel Risk Factors Recovery Time Needs Ergonomic Job Analysis Low Back Risk Factors Height and Reach Capabilities Manual Lifting Guidelines References - SHR 1 2 4 12 15 17 18 20 (716) 544·3587 / �Ergonomics Awareness Course International Paper Company Cincinnati, Ohio March 9, 1989 Outline A. Ergonomics Overview 1. Benefits 2. Work Capacities and Job Demands B. Posture and Productivity 1. Static Muscle Work 2. Work/Recovery Time Needs 3. Height and Reach Guidelines 4. Problem Solving: Loading and Unloading Machines C. Repetitive Work 1. Risk Factors for Repetitive Motions Injuries/Illness 2. Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique 3. Techniques to Reduce the Risk for Injuries/Illness 4. Problem Solving: Unloading Folding/Printing Machines Inspecting Boxes and Packing Them Using Air Hammer to Break Out Boxes D. Manual Handling and Low Back Pain 1. Risk Factors for Low Back Pain 2. Lifting and Force Exertion Guidelines 3. Techniques to Reduce the Risk for Low Back Pain 4. Problem Solving: Loading Machines, Palletizing Cases Pushing Master Rolls E. Cost/Benefit for Ergonomics Problem Solutions Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS �Ergonomics Awareness Course, International Paper Company Cincinnati, Ohio, March 9, 1989 Table of Contents A. Ergonomics Overview 1. Benefits 2. Work Capacities and Job Demands B. Posture and Productivity 1. Static Muscle Work 2. Work/Recovery Time Needs 3. Height and Reach Guidelines 4. Problem Solving: Loading and Unloading Machines C. Repetitive Work 1. Risk Factors for Repetitive Motions Injuries/Illness 2. Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique 3. Techniques to Reduce the Risk for Injuries/Illness 4. Problem Solving: Unloading Folding/Printing Machines Inspecting Boxes and Packing Them Using Air Hammer to Break Out Boxes D. Manual Handling and Low Back Pain 1. Risk Factors for Low Back Pain 2. Lifting and Force Exertion Guidelines 3. Techniques to Reduce the Risk for Low Back Pain 4. Problem Solving: Loading Machines, Palletizing Cases Pushing Master Rolls Page 1 2 5 10 17 18 22,28 25 23 30 · 32 30 E. Cost/Benefit for Ergonomics Problem Solutions 36 F. G. H. I. 43 45 46 47 Ergonomics Surveys 10 Ergonomics Guidelines Ergonomics Reference Material- Rodgers Extra Problem Solving Forms Acknowledgements The material in this syllabus belongs to Dr. Rodgers and may not be reproduced without acknowledgement and peimission. Permission to use the material on pages 5-9 from the Polinsky Rehabilitation Institute, on pages 10-15 from Thieme Publishers, and on pages 17 and 34-35 from Eastman Kodak Company should be obtained directly from them. �r-'") \.__ v I Ergonomics Awareness Course \ } Amoco Corporation Chicago, Illinois March 30, 1989 Outline/Schedule 8:30 A. Introductions and Overview of Awareness Course 9:00 B. Ergonomics and Worker Comfort 1. Static Muscie Work 2. Height and Reach Guidelines 3. Seated Workplace Design - VDT Workplaces a. Postural Concerns b. Visual Concerns c. Job Design 11:00 c. Preventing Overexertion Injuries t. Highly Repetitive Work a. Risk Factors b. Techniques to Reduce the Risk c. Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique 2. Manual Materials Handling a. Risk Factors for Low Back Pain b. Techniques to Reduce the Risk c. Lifting, Lowering, Pushing, and Pulling Guidelines c. Ergonomics Problem Solving - Videotaped Examples 1. Packing Containers 2. Others Brought by Attendees ~"---.._. ( \ \ ) r.-~, .,.,,.., .., ..... 1:30 2:30 Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE. EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. ~4022 �Ergonomics Awareness Course- Amoco Corporation March 30, 1989 Chicago, Illinois Syllabus Table of Contents Starting Page Subject 1 Capacity and Workload Determinants Sensitizers to Stress 3 Static Work - Postural Effort 4 Ergonomic Approaches to Reduce Work-Related lnj. 5 Recovery Time Needs for Repetitive Work 7 Recovery Time Graphs 14 15 Ratings of Perceived Exertion Standing Reach and Height Guidelines 18 Designing Jobs to Minimize Unnecessary Effort 19 VDT Workplace Design 20 Sitting Reach Capability 21 Chair Characteristics 22 Posture, Vision, and Productivity 24 Improving Worker Comfort .. Computer Workplaces 25 Office Ergonomics - Self-Help 28 Finding the Best Solution to an Ergonomics Problem 29 Risk Factors for Repetitive Motions Disorders 30 Ergonomic Job Analysis Form 33 Evaluating Hand Tools 35 Repetitive Job Characteristics for Work Re-Entry 37 Risk Factors for Low Back Pain 38 Low Back Pain Prevention 40 Pull Force and Location 45 Force Exertion Limits 46 Kodak Guidelines for Lifting 47 Ergonomics Problem Solving Form 49 The Costs of Poor Design 51 How to Do an Ergonomics Survey 53 10 Ergonomics Guidelines 55 Additional Analysis Forms 56 Publications By or Edited By S.H.Rodgers 59 ; f"\__/ The graphs on pages 18, 21, 47 and 48 are from Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volumes 1 and 2 by Eastman Kodak's Human Factors Section. The material on pages 5, 6, and 15-17 is from Polinsky Rehabilitation's FCA Network Newsletter, that on pages 7-13 is from Seminars in Occupational Medicine. and the article on pages 25-27 is from Modern Job Safety and Health. The material on pages 22,23 and 40-46 is from Working With Backache by SH Rodgers and the job analysis form on page 33 has been published in Occupational Medicine - State of the Art Reviews. See the publications list for further details. All other material belongs to SH Rodgers and should not be reproduced without her permission. �April 3-7, 1989 April 26-28, 1989 :1 "'1Cli'IH~fl H. ~e.J,,~!lt, fP h9J �An 8-D~ Ergonomics Training Program for the B.O.C. General Motors Plant at Wentzville, Mo, April3-7 and 26-28, 1989 /~ \ ) Schedule Monday, April3, 1989: Overview, Work Capacities, Human Variability, Who Do We Design For ?, Posture and ProductiVIty 6:30 - 7:00 Overview of Ergonomics and Benefits of Using It 7:00 - 7:30 Worlc Ca:Qacities and Human Variability 7:30- 8:30 Exercise: Who Do We Design For? 8:30 - 8:45 Break 8:45- 9:30 9:30- 10:00 10:00 - 10:30 10:30-11:15 Static Muscle Work- Postures To Avoid Work/Recovery Curves for Static Worlc Problem Solvmg: Postural Worlc Lunch 11:15 - 11:45 Working Height and Muscles Available, Wrist Postures 11:45 - 1:00 Problem Solvmg - Sub-Assembly Task Height 1:00- 1:15 Break 1:15- 2:30 Problem Solving- Line Height Impact in Assembly Tasks ' Tuesday , April 4th: Workplace and Equipment Design, ·. Environmental Factors, Office Ergonomics, Visual Demands 6:30 - 7:00 Review of Design Guidelines from Day 1 7:00- 8:00 Computer Wo*Place Design 8:00- 8:30 Visual DemandS of Work 8:30 - 8:45 Break 8:45- 10:30 Problem Solving- Postural Worlc 10:30-11:15 Lunch 11:15 -12:00 General Workplace Layout 12:00 - 12:30 Lighting 12:30 - 1:00 Temperature, Humidity, Air Flow 1:00 - 1:15 Break 1:15- 1:45 Work Pace 1:45 - 2:30 Problem Solving: Environmental Factors ) '-----./ . Wednesday, April 5th: Repetitive Work, Tooling Design 6:30 - 7:00 Repetitive Motions Injuries and illnesses 7:00 - 7:30 RiSk Factors for Repetitive Motions Problems 7:30- 8:15 Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique 8:15- 8:30 Break I .A �/ ,/ 8:30- 9:30 Problem Solving: Repetitive Work . 9:30 - 10:30 Design and Selection of Hand and Power Tools 10:30- 11:15 Lunch 11:15 - 12:15 Ergonomic Evaluation of Workplace Tools 12:15- 1:00 Problem Solving: Tool Use 1:00- 1:15 Break 1:15- 2:30 Problem Solving: Repetitive Tasks, Paced Work, Tools Thursday, April 6th: Quality Performance and Error Reduction 6:30- 7:15 Work Factors Affecting Human Reliability 7:15- 8:15 Information Display and Transfer 8:15- 8:30 ·Break · 8:30 - 9:00 9:00 - 10:00 10:00 - 10:30 10:30- 11:15 Controls and Displays - Control Panels Automation - Humans vs Machines, Complexity Inspection Tasks Lunch 11:15-12:15 Puzzle Assembly Task 12:15- 1:15 In-Plant Identification of Error-Likely Situations, Unnecessary Complexity, etc. 1:15- 1:30 Break 1:30 - 2:30 Discussion of Plant Obsetvations Friday, April 7th: Manual Materials Handling, Low Back Pain, Cost /Benefit Analyses of Ergonomic Problem Solutions 6:30 - 7:00 Low Back Pain 7:00- 7:30 Risk Factors .for Low Back Pain- Postural, Handling 7:30 - 8:00 Force Exertion Guidelines 8:00 - 8:15 Break 8:15 - 9:15 Occasional Lifting Guidelines 9:15- 10:30 Repetitive Lifting, Total Workload, Hours of Work 10:30- 11:15 Lunch 11:15- 12:15 Problem Solving: Lifting Tasks 12:15 - 1:00 Cost /Benefit Arialyses - Data Available to Detennine the Cost of Not Makfug a Change . 1:00 - 2:00 Problem Solving: Cost/Benefit Approach 2:00- 2:30 Summary of Week and Discussion of Next 3 Days' Focus Wednesday, April 26th: Group Presentations of Ergonomics Problems, Analyses, and Cost Justified Solutions 6:30 - 2:30 Presentations and Critiques ) I I I f �Thursday, AJ!ril27th: Ergonomics in New Design, Survey Techn1q_ues, Worker Fitness, Return to Work 6:30 - 7:00 Building Ergonomics Into New Designs 7:00- 8:30 Problem Solving: New Job/Workplace Designs 8:30 - 8:45 Break r /~ ) 8:45 - 10:30 Swvey Techniques, Return to Work, Job Placement, Fitness 10:30- 11:15 Lunch 11:15- 2:30 Plant Tour and Problem Solving Based on Participants Needs Friday, April 28th: Presentations by Ergonomics Representatives of 4 Examples (Each) of Ergonomics Problems for Use in General Awareness Training 6:30- 10:30 Posture and Repetitive Work Examples 10:30- 11:15 Lunch · 11:15 - 2:00 Human Error and Manual Handling Examples 2:00- 2:30 Summary, Resources, Course Evaluation 3/18/89 SHRodgers /''··\ ) ',"" ____/-1 .J \ t I !,.l.-lt �ERGONOMICS TRAINING S. H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Apri 1 3-7, 1989 April 26-28, 1989 Attendance_List Work Phone No. Name: Dept: Kay Gifford Gary T. Bagsby Phyllis Freetly Linda Henry .Jim Sherard .Jim DeFriese Mary Heitert .Jeredean Styers Jim Loftus Bill Duncan Tom Sullivan Rich Joellenbeck Robert Stowers Zane Scott Ted Kram Ty Dwellingham Jack B. Carpenter Marilyn Rubin FAD-2001 (I.E.) 83-08 Ergonomics 83-08 Ergono:mics 83-08 Ergonomics 80 Safety 81 Medical 81 Medical 81 Medical 40 Central Engrg. 40 Central Engrg. 30 Tooling 83-08 Ergonomics 83-08 Ergonomics 83 U.A.W. 40 Central Engrg. 40 Central Engrg. 40 Central Engrg. 81 Medical (P.T.) Suzanne H. Rpd.gers/ Frank Mc Atee Robert Boatwright Ergonomics Consultant 40 Central Engrg. 83 U.A.W H&S Rep. Wentzville outside number (314)327-xxxx Kay Gifford outside number (313)236-8101 8-446-8101 8-568-2132 8-568-2132 8-568-2132 8-568-2132 8-568-2155 8-568-2155 8-568-2155 • 8-568-2530 8-568-2542 8-568-2293 8-568-2132 8-568-2132 8-568-2318 8-568-2534 8-568-2215 8-568-2528 8-568-2928 716-544-3587 8-568-2541 8-568-2132 �Ergonomics Training Course 7 ' / � i '-._/ Table of Contents Topic Schedule Table of Contents Starting Page Location Syllabus EDFPAWl i -iv -- Acknowledgements Introduction and Course Goals Ergonomics Goals/Overview Capacities for Work Factors That Increase Stress The Variability of People Height and Reach Interactions Using Anthropoqietric Data Who Do We Design For? 1 2 3 7 9 10 12b 13 15 Static Muscle Work Recovery Time/Static Work Effort Estimation Scales Design to Minimize Effort 16 20 28 32 Problem Analysis: Standing Work Finding Best Solution to Problem Ergonomics Problem Solving 33 34 35 Seated Work - VDT Seated Arm Reach Chair Characteristics Visual Work, Lighting, Posture 39 42 43 45 Self-Help in VDT Workplace Comfort Problem Solving Form 48 49 Environmental Factors Paced Work/l'ime Pressure Problem Solving Form 52 56 59 Risk Factors for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Factors Affecting Grip Strength 62 Job Analysis Form - Repetitive Tasks Evaluating Hand Tools Problem Analysis: Repetitive Work 66 --- 69 71 -- Human Reliability Ergonomics and Quality Information Transfer - Controls and Displays Job Control and Task Complexity Puzzle Exercise Reliability Problems Form 65 76 77 79 86 88 89 -3 -- --· - 8,285,290 20,24,30 285 112,140,150 -338 52 23, 50 -18, 28,50 20 57 17,30,50 28,101,179 EDFPAW2 ---- 2 210,446,496 237 13,446 218,255 --- 24,217 217 -- --- -- 142 -- 142 223,282 -- -- 210, 242, 320 -- -- 230 151,244 151,254 140 181 -- 90,107,162 --1v, �_,,7 C 135,340 Risk Factors for Low Back Pain Natural History Degenerative Disc Manual Materials Handling Strength and Location Maximum Force Applications Kodak Lifting Guidelines Guidelines to Reduce Back Risk 91 93 94 98 99 100 101 Total Workload Repetitive Lifting Guidelines General Guidelines/Lifting/ Repetitive Work Problem Analysis: Manl Handling 105 111 112 Cost/Benefit Analyses The Costs of Poor Design Ergonomics in Old/New Design Problem Solving Form 117 121 123 124 Ergonomics Problem Instruct. Problem Solving Forms 127 128 10 Ergonomics Guidelines Ergonomics Checklist Ergonomics Design Form How to - Ergonomics Survey Ergonomics/Return to Work Low Back/Repet Motions Rehab 137 138 147 148 150 152 313 Ergonomics Awareness Examples Equipment Resources Videotape Guidelines Course Evaluation Form 154 159 161 165 end 320 365 3/18/8 9 SHR 15,122,151 338 135,338 384,446 360,403 135, 340 206, 276,48 0 403 113 -- 9 -- 313 ---- -- 98 -- --- 446 534 -- �� 1 _! Acknowledgements The illustrations on pages 12b, 42, 100, and 111 are used with permission from Eastman Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volumes 1 and 2. The tables, text and illustrations on pages 43, 44, 98, 99 and 101 to 104 are from Working With Backache by S. H. Rodgers. The article on pages 20-26 was published by Thieme Publishers in Seminars in Occupational Medicine in March 1987. The article on Perceived Exertion is from the Polinsky Rehabilitation Center's FCA (Functional Capacities Assessment) Newsletter, and information in there and on pages 45 to 48 has been developed in conjunction with Dr. Inger Williams. All other material in this syllabus is by Dr. S.H. Rodgers and permission to reproduce it must be obtained from her. 12/13/88 SHR / \ \__j �, ., IPl■ 4-Day Ergonomics Training Course Eastman Kodak Company, Rochester April 17th to 20th, 1989 I l Syllabus Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT ANO PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �}-- �- 4-Hour Ergonomics Awareness Seminar for Supervisory, Support, and Manufacturing Engineers at GE's Erie Transportation Sy$tems, June 1, 1989 Outline What Is Ergonomics - Why Do It ? Review of an Ergonomics Program in Coil Winding - Bill Fatiguing Work and Risk Factors for Injury on the Job Techniques to Reduce the Risk for Injury Videotape Review and Problem Solving Discussion and Questions Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS ..HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EOUIPMENT ANO PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEAL.TH ANO SAFETY PROGRAMS (711) 5oM-3lll7 • 1911 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 1� �Topic: Ergonomics Goals I. Designing Jobs Within the Capacities of Most People II. Designing Jobs to Maximize Human Performance Capabilities Without Adding Unnecessary Stress 111. Decreasing the Opportunity for Human Error By Reducing Unnecessary Complexity IV. Optimizing the Interaction of the Worker with the Workplace, Environment and Equipment/Tools to avoid Unnecessary Effort and Accidents or Illness V. Providing Flexibility in the Way the Job is Done in Order to Accommodate Individual Differences in Capacities 111�8.7 SHA ., �NTERNATIONAL@PAPER Ergonomics Training Course for Engineering Staff International Paper Corporate Engineering Mobile, AL, June 14-15, 1989, 8:00 to 4:00 PM Table of Contents Wednesday: Overview of Ergonomics Concepts, Scope Presentation of First Design Project Discussion of Ergonomics Implications Presentation of Second Design Project Discussion of Ergonomics :Implications Presentation of Third Design Project Discussion of Ergonomics Implications Who Do We Design For? Population Work Capacities Guidelines for Reaches, Work Heights, Visual Access Repetitive Work Guidelines Thursday: Design to Reduce the Risk of Overexertion Injuries Manual Handling Guidelines Design to Reduce Environmental Stressors -Temperature, Humidity, Noise, Lighting, Work Pace Design to Reduce Human Error Potential Review of Projects Using Ergonomics Guidelines Cost/Benefit Analyses of Ergonomics Problem Solutions Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS �-j_ 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �1.5-Day Ergonomics Training Course for Xerox Corporation November 20-21, 1989, Schlegel Road School Schedule Monday, November 20th 12:30- 1:00 PM 1:00- 2:00 2:00- 2:15 2:15 - 3:00 3:00- 4:00 4:00- 5:00 Introductions and Overview Work Capacities and Ergonomics Design Goals Break Quantifying Fatigue at Work -Work/Reeovery Problem Solving-Posture and Productivity Overexertion Injuries-Overview Tuesday, November 21st 8:00- 9:00 Risk Factors for Repetitive Motions Disorders, Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique Problem Solving: Repetitive Tasks 9:00-10:00 Break 10:00-10:15 10:15-11:00 Manual Handling Guidelines-Lifting, Force Exertion Problem Solving: Manual Handling 11:00-12:00 Lunch 12:00- 1:00 PM 1:002:002:453:00 4:00- 2:00 2:45 3:00 -4:00 5:00 Human Reliability and Quality Performance Cost/Benefit Analyses of Ergonomics Solutions Break Problem Solving: Cost Justifying Change Surveys, Resources, Summary, Evaluations Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D ( \ CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS ""HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" .. \ ,\, {''-/_/. ✓, 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �Ergonomics Update and Awareness Training - Lansing Body Plant - General Motors Corporation - July 24-25, 1989 Ergonomics Handout Monday. Julv 24th PM: Posture and Productivitv - Work Capacitv Over Time: Benefits of Ergonomics Design Muscle WorkJR.ecovery Needs to Avoid Fatigue and Overexertion Comfortable Reaches and Work Heights Videotape Review of Jobs Where Postural Problems Have Been Seen; Before/After Examples of Ergonomics Improvements - Ergo Reps Ergonomics and Quality Performance - Work Pace, Environment Tuesdav, Julv 25th: Reducing Overexertion Injuries and Illness - Repetitive Motions .Problems and Low Back Pain .,. Repetitive Motions Problems/Carpal Tunnel Syndrome - Why Now? Factors Affecting Grip Strength and Other Risk Factors Approaches to Reduce Risk Factors for Repetitive Work Problems Videotape Review of Repetitive Tasks; Before/After Examples of Ergonomics Improvements - Ergo Reps Low Back Pain - What Is It ? How Can We Manage the Problem ? Lifting, Pushing, Pulling Guidelines General Guidelines for Ergonomic Job, Workplace, Equipment, and Environmental Design Proactive and Reactive Ergonomics - The Future k Ergonomics Teamwor in the Lansing Body Plant - Ergo Reps Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. _TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER. N.Y. 14622 �Ergonomics Awareness Course 1.l Table of Contents Topic Starting Page Location Course Content - Ergonomics Table of Contents Acknowledgements Ergonomics Goals/Overview The Costs of Poor Design Capacities for Work Factors That Increase Stress Anthropometric Data Height and Reach Interactions Problem Analysis: Standing Work Syllabus cover i 1 2 3 5 7 8 9 10 11 19 20 Recovery Time/Static Work Design to Minimize Effort Job Analysis Form - Repetitive Tasks Problem Solving Form 23 Ergonomics and Quality Job Control and Task Complexity Reliability Problems Form 25 27 29 Risk Factors for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Factors Affecting Grip Strength Risk Factors for Low Back Pain Strength and Location Maximum Force Applications Kodak Lifting Guidelines Repetitive Lifting Guidelines 30 33 34 36 37 38 39 Cost/Benefit Analyses Cost Benefit - New/Existing Design Cost/Benefit Problem Solving Form 40 44 45 Additional Problem Solving Forms · Resources - Bibliography 48 54 EDFPAWl 3 8,285,290 20,24,30 23, 50 112,140,150 52 EDFPAW2 2 210,446,496 237 13,446 218,255 24,217 181 151, 244 143,298 15,122,151 365 466,503 135,340 135,338 384,446 360, 403 403 559 7/22/89 SHR i £, �Acknowledgements The illustrations on pages 8, 9, 38, and 39 are used with permission from Eastman Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volumes 1 and 2. The tables, text and illustrations on pages 36 and 37 are from Working With Backache by S. H. Rodgers. The article on pages 11-17 was published by Thieme Publishers in Seminars in Occupational Medicine in March 1987. All other material in this syllabus is by Dr. S.H. Rodgers and permission to reproduce it must be obtained from her. 7/22/89 SHR �ERGONOMICS TRAINING LANSING B.0.C. BODY ASSEMBLY PLANT July 24, 25t 1989 II AGENDA II <MONDAY JULY 24th) 7:00 A.M. Introductions / Goals of Course Dr. Suzanne Rodgers 7: 3(J A.M. Disability Management Brenda Wibert 7:45 A.M. Workplace Engineering Bruce Vanden Berg 8:00 A.M. Workers Comp. Cost Henry Miller 8:15 A.M. Placement Activity Annie Baker Denny Cox 8:30 A.M. BREAK 8:45 A.M. Comp. Injuries, <Body Plant>, Avg. Corp. Cost Ergonomics Representatives f/� 9: 00 A.M. Relationship of Ergo to Safety, Use of P.C. to track recordable inj. Ergonomics Representatives k1 \..X� 9:30 A. ,-1. Review of operations Before / After <slides) Ergonomics Representatives 16:00 A.M. 1{:15 5"'1d.Y BREAK A.M. Dr. Suzanne Rodgers 11: 15 A.M. LUNCH 12:00 P.M. Sue, please fill in the remainder of Monday and for Tuesday per your schedule. Each of the days will begin at 7:00 A.M and end at 3:30 P.M • • �Acknowledgements The illustrations on pages 13, 42, 95, and 106 are used with permission from Eastman Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volumes 1 and 2 published by van Nostrand Reinhold. The tables, text and illustrations on pages 20, 43, 44, 93, 94 and 96 to 99 are from Working With Backache by S. H. Rodgers. The article on pages 21-26 was published by Thieme Publishers in Seminars in Occupational Medicine in March 1987. The article on Perceived Exertion is from the Polinsky Rehabilitation Center's FCA (Functional Capacities Assessment) Newsletter, and information in there and on pages 45-48 has been developed in conjunction with Dr. Inger Williams. All other material in this syllabus is by Dr. S.H. Rodgers and permission to reproduce it must be obtained from her. 9/89 SHR \" �Basic Schedule for 2-Day Ergonomics Course Day 1: Posture and Productivity; Repetitive Work 8:00- 8:30 AM 8:30- 9:00 9:00- 9:45 9:45- 10:00 10:00- 10:30 10:45- 11:15 11:15- 12:00 12:00- 1:00 PM 1:001:452:152:303:004:00- 1:45 2:15 2:30 3:00 4:00 4:30 Introductions Work Capacity; Who Do We Design For ? Posture and Productivity- Static Work, Reach/Height Interactions; Visual Needs Break Work/Recovery Curves Problem Solving: Static Work Problem Solving: Standing Workplace Design Lunch Repetitive Motions Disorders Risk Factors for Tendonitis, Carpal Tunnel, etc; Tool Design Break Ergonomic Job Analysis Form Problem Solving: Repetitive Tasks Summary of Workplace Design and Repetitive Work Guidelines Day 2: Manual Handling and Cost/Benefit Analyses 8:00- 8:30 8:30- 9:00 9:00- 9:30 9:30- 9:45 9:45- 10:45 10:45-11:30 11:30-12:00 12:00- 1:00 PM 1:00- 1:30 1:30- 2:30 2:30- 2:45 2:45 - 3:30 3:30- 4:15 4:15 - 4:30 9/30/89 SHR Low Back Pain and Job Risk Factors Managing Upper Extremity and Low Back Disability at Work Manual Handling Guidelines Break Problem Solving: Manual Handling Frequent Lifting/ Total Workload/Hours of Work Job Review: Handling Tasks Lunch Cost-Benefit Analyses of Solutions Problem Solving Using Cost-Benefit Approach Break Problem Solving: Cost Benefit Approach Surveys/Checklists/Resources Course Evaluations �GOODjfYEAR 3-Day Ergonomics Training Course for the Goodyear Hose and Belt Plant in Lincoln, NE on October 4-6, 1989 Syllabus Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE. EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH ANO SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER. N.Y. 14622 �Basic Schedule for 3-Day Ergonomics Course Day 1: Ergonomics Oyerview, Posture and Productivity 8:00- 8:30 AM 8:30- 9:00 9:00- 9:45 9:45- 10:00 10:00- 10:45 10:45- 11:15 11:15- 12:00 12:00 - 1:00 PM 1:001:452:152:303:004:00- 1:45 2:15 2:30 3:00 4:00 4:30 Introductions and Overview Work Capacity Who Do We Design For? Break Posture and Productivity- Static Work, Reach/Height Interactions Work/Recovery Curves Problem Solving: Static Work Lunch Problem Solving: Standing Workplace Design Seated Workplace Design and Visual Work Break Problem Solving: Seated Workplace Design Job Review- Postures Summary of Workplace Design Guidelines Day 2: Preventing Overexertion Injuries and Enhancing Human Reliability 8:00 - 8:30 AM 8:30 - 9:15 9:15 - 10:00 10:00- 10:15 10:15- 10:30 10:30- 11:30 11:30- 12:00 12:00- 1:00PM 1:001:452:152:453:30- 1:45 2:15 2:45 3:00 4:30. Repetitive Motions Disorders Risk Factors for Tendonitis, Carpal Tunnel, etc. Ergonomic Job Analysis Form Break Tool Design and Selection Problem Solving: Repetitive Tasks Job Review- Repetitive Tasks Lunch Reducing Job Complexity- Information, Pacing Human Reliability- Controls/Displays and Automation Environmental Factors Influencing Performance Break Problem Solving: Information and Environment Day 3: Manual Handling and Cost/Benefit Analyses 8:00- 8:30 8:30- 9:00 9:00- 9:30 9:30- 9:45 9:45- 10:45 10:45-11:30 11:30-12:00 12:00- 1:00 PM 1:00- 1:30 1:30- 2:30 2:30- 2:45 2:45- 3:30 3:30- 4:15 4:15- 4:30 Low Back Pain and Job Risk Factors Managing Upper Extremity and Low Back Disability at Work Manual Handling Guidelines Break Problem Solving: Manual Handling Frequent Lifting/ Total Workload/Hours of Work Job Review: Handling Tasks Lunch Cost-Benefit Analyses of Solutions Problem Solving Using Cost-Benefit Approach Break Problem Solving: Cost Benefit Approach Surveys/Checklists/Resources Course Evaluations 9/4/89 SHR I L �.( r ·. . . . ... , Nit. ,. < l · -t . ·. ·01t.1·e-D�y Ergonomics Awareness Course for ;� '-ic \ !Engineers at the DuPont Fibers Plants, ·_cape Fear, NC, November 14, 1989 Table of Contents Topic· A. Capacity and Workload Determinants B. Who Do We Design For? -Anthropometrics C. 11 Ergonomics Guidelines for Design 1. Height and Reach Interaction 2. General Anthropometrics Guidelines 3. Recovery Time Needs for Repetitive Work D. Problem Solving: Posture and Repetitive Work E. 11 Ergonomics Guidelines for Design (contd) 1. Static Strength and Position 2. Maximum Forces for Design 3. Occasional Lifting Guidelines 4. Factors Affecting Quality Performance 5. What Men and Machines Do Best F. Questions To Ask in the Field G. Checklist for Ergonomics Input to New Design H.. Bibliographies Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 Page 1 2 6 8 10 12 19 21 22 23 24 26 27 29 35 �I 1.5-Day Ergonomics Training Course for Xerox Corporation November20-21, 1989, Schlegel Road School Schedule Monday, November 20th 12:30- 1:00 PM 1:00- 2:00 2:00- 2:15 2:15 - 3:00 3:00- 4:00 4:00 - 5:00 Tuesday, November 21st 8:00- 9:00 9:00-10:00 10:00-10:15 10:15-11:00 11:00-12:00 12:00- 1 :00 PM 1:002:002:45 3:00 4:00 - 2:00 2:45 3:00 4:00 5:00 Introductions and Overview Work Capacities and Ergonomics Design Goals Break Quantifying Fatigue at Work-Work/Recovery Problem Solving - Posture and Productivity Overexertion Injuries-Overview Risk Factors for Repetitive Motions Disorders, Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique Problem Solving: Repetitive Tasks Break Manual Handling Guidelines-Lifting, Force Exertion Problem Solving: Manual Handling Lunch Human Reliability and Quality Performance Cost/Benefit Analyses of Ergonomics Solutions Break Problem Solving: Cost Justifying Change Surveys, Resources, Summary, Evaluations Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICSiHUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" ;�'�ti( 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �2-Day Ergonomics Training Course for General Electric Medical Systems Engineers, Waukesha, WI, January 11-12, 1990 Syllabus Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �General Electric Medical Systems - Milwaukee, WI 2-Day Ergonomics Training Course for Engineering Staff January 11-12, 1990 -C�J Schedule January 11th: Ergonomics Principles and Guidelines - Problem Identification 8:00-8:30 AM 8:30-9:30 11:00-12:00 12:00-1:00 PM 1:00-1:45 1:45-2:45 2:45-3:00 3:00-4:00 4:00-5:00 Introductions, Review Course Goals Ergonomics in the Design Process - What Information is Available? Why Do It? When Does It Come In? Break Who Do We Design For? Reaches, Heights, Clearances, Forces, Weights, Lighting, Pace, Complexity of Information Problem Solving - Who Do We Design For? Lunch Problem Solving - Analyzing an Existing Design Risk Factors for Repetitive Motions and Back Problems Break Designing to Reduce Complexity/Design for Assembly Review of Ergonomic Design Guidelines January 12th: Ergonomics Problem Analysis and Applications 9:30-9:45 9:45-11:00 8:00-8:30 AM 8:30-9:00 9:00-10:00 Presentation of a Layout Design Problem Questions to Develop Needed Design Information Problem Solving in Small Groups Using Ergonomics Guidelines 10:00-10:15 Break 10: 15-11:15 Presentation by Groups of Suggested Design with Justifications and Discussion 11:15-12:00 Presentation of Additional Design Problems (3-4) 12:00-1:00 PM Lunch 1:00-2:30 Problem Solving in Groups by Product Area 2:30-2:45 Break 2:45-4:15 Pres�ntation by Groups of New Designs 4:15-4:45 Building Ergonomics Into the Design Process/Available Resources 4:45 - 5:00 Course Evaluations 12/28/89 SHR/bl I. �Ergonomics Training Course for GE Medical Systems Engineers .o () <_) Table of Contents Topic Schedule Table of Contents Acknowledgements Starting Page Location EDFPAW 1 Syllabus EDFPAW 2 2 3 Introduction and Course Goals Ergonomics Goals/National Trends 4 5 Who Do We Design For? The Variability of People, Anthropometric Data Height and Reach Interactions Using Anthropometric Data 7 12 14 Recovery Time/Static Muscle Work Quality Factors - Vision, Lighting, Pace VDT Workplace Comfort Design to Minimize Effort 16 23 25 29 Problem Solving - Who Do We Design For? Finding the Best Solution to a Problem Ergonomics Problem Solving Extra Problem Solving Form 30 31 32 34 Risk Factors for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome and Low Back Pain Strength and Location Maximum Force Applications Kodak Lifting Guidelines Summary of Guidelines to Reduce Injury 36 42 43 44 45 Human Reliability - Man vs Machine Reliability Problem, Analysis Form Information Transfer - Controls & Displays Job Control and Task Complexity 46 47 48 52 12 Ergonomics Guidelines Ergonomics Checklist How To - Ergonomics Survey, Questions 54 56 62 Cost/Benefit Analyses The Costs of Poor Design Problem Solving Form - Cost/Benefit Ergonomics in Old/New Design Extra Problem Solving Forms 65 70 72 75 76 New Design ProblemAnalysis Forms 82 Resources - Bibliographies Course Evaluation Form 85 end 3 8,285,290 20,24,30 285 112,140,150,338 17,30,50 28,101,179 52 2 13,446 218,255 24,217 223,282 135,151,244,254,340 15,122,151 135,338 384,446 360, 403 181 90,107,162 313 313 98 9 365 559 1/5/90 SHR 2. �0 Acknowledgements The illustrations on pages 9-13, and 44 are used with permission from Eastman Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volumes 1 and 2 published by Van Nostrand Reinhold in 1983 and 1986. The tables, text and illustrations on pages 27, 42, and 43 are from Working With Backache by S. H. Rodgers (1985). The table on page 46 is from Human Perfoprmance in Industry by H. Murrell, published by Van Nostrand Reinhold in 1965. The article on pages 16-22 was published by Thieme Publishers in Seminars in Occupational Medicine in March 1987. Information on pages 25, 26, and 28 has been developed in conjunction with Dr. Inger Williams. All other material in this syllabus is by Dr. S.H. Rodgers and permission to reproduce it must be obtained from her. 9/89 SHR �() Introductions and Course Goals I. Introductions of Class Members and Instructor II. Course Goals A. Become Familiar With the Field of Ergonomics and Some Resource Books 1. Overview of the Field 2. Ergonomics in Manufacturing 3. Resource Materials - Review Contents of the Kodak Books B. Be Able to Identify and Analyze Ergonomics Problems in the Plant 0 1. Develop "eyes" for ergonomics problems 2. Learn how to ask questions and look further to determine the underlying problems C. Be Able to Generate Multiple Approaches for Solving the Problems 1. Participate with the workers, other engineers, plant maintenance, and supervision in solving problems. 2. Generate at least 3 solutions for every problem identified. D. Understand How to Go About Incorporating Ergonomic Principles Into New Designs (\___/} 1. Understand the differences between new design and redesign in applying ergonomics principles. 2. Be able to justify the time and potential extra cost of designing using ergonomics principles by using data from existing jobs. 3. Identify processes for incorporating ergonomics into new design on a routine basis. 1/6/90 SHR �'' 7 7 _J 3-Day Ergonomics Training Based on Topeka's Earthmover Band Building Operation* Central Engineering and Topeka Plant Personnel, The Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company, Akron, Ohio, February 13-15, 1990 Syllabus Suzanne :H:. '.RofLJers,. Ph.fl. Consultant i,n '.Er9onomi,cs 16 9 :H:unttn9ton :H:UJs '.Rochester, New yor� 14622 l__j (716) 544-3587 L, ,_., * Based on a concept by Ron Beahn, Safety and Ergonomics Liason, Central Engineering �3-Day Ergonomics Training Course for Goodyear Central Engineering and Topeka Plant Personnel, Akron, Ohio, February 13-15, 1990 Table of Contents Topic � Schedule Table of Contents Ergonomic Goals/Trends Course Goals EarthmoverBandBuilding Incidents Blueprints ofBand Building Area- Topeka 5 Questions Form Ergonomic Opportunities- Band Building Ergonomic Principles for Layout/Flow Anthropometric Data Recovery Time Needs for Repetitive Work Height/Reach Interaction- Standing Work Determining theBest Height for a Standing Workplace Paced Work, Job Complexity, Environment- Puzzle Factors Affecting Quality Performance Factors Affecting Human Reliability Finding Best Solutions to Ergonomics Problems Problem Solving Form Risk Factors for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Ergonomic Job Analysis Form Summary of EarthmoverBandBuilding Design Job Control and Task Complexity Checklist for Ergonomics Input to New Design Risk Factors for LowBack Pain Strength and Location Maximum Permissible Forces for Design Guidelines for Occasional Lifts Overexertion Risk Factors Summary General Design Guidelines for Manual Handling and and Repetitive Tasks Cost-Benefit Analyses of Ergonomic Problem Solutions Costs of Poor Design Cost Justifying Problem Solving Form Summary of EarthmoverBandBuilding Design Extra Problem Solving Forms SHR References Evaluation Form 1 3 4 6 7 9 14 15 16 18 22 29 30 32 33 35 37 38 41 43 46 48 50 56 58a 58b 59 60 61 62 66 68 71 73 80 end EDFPAW Location Volume1 Volume1 Volume 1 Volume2 Volume·l Volume1 Volumes 1 &2 Volumes 1 &2 Volume1 Volumes1 &2 Volume2 Volumes1 &2 Volumes1 &2 Volume2 Volume2 Volume2 Volume2 Volume2 Volume2 Volumes1 &2 Acknowledgments The illustrations and information on pages19-21,29, and59 are used with permission from Eastman Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volumes 1 and 2 published by Van Nostrand Reinhold. The illustration and table on pages 58a & b are from Working With Backa.che by S. H. Rodgers. The article on pages 22-27 was published by Thieme Publishers in Seminars in Occupational Medicine in March 1987. The blueprints and incident data are from Goodyear Central Engineering and the Topeka plant. All other material in this syllabus is by Dr. S.H. Rodgers and permission to reproduce it must be obtained from her. 3, �4-Hour Ergonomics Awareness and Problem Solving Session for GE Transportation Systems Supervisory and Production Personnel Erie, PA, March 7, 1990 Table of Contents National Trends in Ergonomics How To Do An Ergonomics Survey Identifying Ergonomics Problems Ergonomic Job Analysis Manual Lifting Guidelines Finding the Best Solution to an Ergonomics Problem Problem Solving Form Ergonomics Design Guidelines Extra Problem Solving Forms 1 2 4 10 13 14 15 18 23 Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �,<J Ergonomics Design Guidelines and Their Applications A 4-Hour Seminar for GE Transportation Systems Erie, PA, March 8th, 1990 Table of Contents · .. ,� - � Topic Ergonomics Goals Design Guidelines Anthropometric Data Height/Reach Interaction Work/Recovery Needs for Muscular Work Problem Solving: Designing for Comfort Pacing Stress Maximum Force Exertion Guidelines Lifting Guidelines Problem Solving: Designing to Reduce Overexertion Injuries Engineer's Checklist for New Design Cost-Benefit Analyses Problem Solving: New Designs Resources Starting Page 1 2 7 10 12 19 22 25 26 27 30 36 43 44 Acknowledgments The illustrations and information on pages 7 to l1 and 26 are used with permission from Eastman Kodak's Ergonomic Designing for People at Work, Volumes 1 and 2 published by Van Nostrand Reinhold. The table on page 25 is from Working With Backache by S. H. Rodgers. The article on pages 12-17 was published by Thieme Publishers in Seminars in Occupational Medicine in March 1987. All other material in this syllabus is by Dr. S.H. Rodgers and permission to reproduce it must be obtained from her. I/ \ ,'-{ Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �4-Day Ergonomics Training Course for Amoco Foam Plants Chippewa Falls, WI, March 26-29, 1990 Syllabus Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �4-Day Ergonomics c,eurse Training for Amoco Foam Plants ... .-------, \ \ i Monday: Ergonomics Overview, Posture and Productivity 8:00- 8:30 AM 8:30 - 9:00 9:00- 9:45 9:45 -10:00 Introductions and Overview Work Capacity Who Do We Design For ? Break 10:00-10:45 10:45-11 :15 11:15-12:00 12:00-12:45 PM Posture and Productivity-Static Work, Reach/Height Interactions Work/Recovery Curves Problem Solving: Static Work Lunch 12:45- 1:45 1:45- 2:15 2:15- 2:30 Problem Solving: Standing Workplace Design Seated Workplace Design and Yisual Work Break 2:30- 3:00 3:00- 3:45 3:45- 4:00 Problem Solving: Seated Workplace Design Videotape Review-Postures Summary of Workplace Design Guidelines Tuesday: - Preventing Overexertion Injuries and Enhancing Human Reliability 8:00- 8:30 AM 8:30- 9:15 9:15- 10:00 10:00-10:15 10:15-10:30 10:30-11:30 11:30-12:00 12:00-12:45 PM Repetitive Motions Disorders Risk Factors for Tendonitis, Carpal Tunnel, etc. Ergonomic Job Analysis Form Break Tool Design and Selection Problem Solving: Repetitive Tasks Videotape Review - Repetitive Tasks Lunch 12:45-1:30 1:30- 2:15 Reducing Job Complexity -Information, Pacing Human Reliability-Controls/Displays and Automation Environmental Factors Influencing Performance Break Problem Solving: Information and Environment 2:15- 2:45 2:45- 3:00 3:00- 4:00 �Wednesday: Manual Handling and Cost/Benefit Analyses ./� t •. ·. j 8:00 - 8:30 8:30 - 9:00 9:00 - 9:30 9:30 - 9:45 Low Back Pain and Job Risk Factors Managing Upper Extremity and Low Back Disability in the Workplace Manual Handling Guidelines Break 9:45- 10:45 10:45-11 :30 11:30 -12:00 12:00 -12:45 Problem Solving: Manual Handling Frequent Lifting/ Total Workload/Hours of Work Videotape Review: Handling Tasks Lunch 12:45- 1:15 1:15- 2:30 2:30 - 2:45 Cost-Benefit Analyses of Solutions Problem Solving Using Cost-Benefit Approach ,Break 2:45- 3:30 Problem Solving: Cost Benefit Approach 3:30 - 3:45 3:45- 4:00 Surveys/Checklists/Resources Instructions for Presentations· Thursday: Problem Solving and Presentations by Class Members 8:00 - 9:15 9:15- 10:00 10:00 - 10:15 Work on Presentations (with Oversight) Case Study #1 Break 10:15-10:45 10:45- 11:15 11:15- 11:45 11:45- 12:30 Case Study #2 Case Study # 3 Case Study # 4 Lunch Break 12:30 - 2:00 2:00 - 2:30 2:30 - 2:45 2:45 - 3:15 3:15- 3:30 Discussion: Starting an Ergonomics Program Case Study # 5 Break Action Plan Discussion Course Evaluations 3/12/90 SHR �r LL. �Ergonomics and Occupational Health A 1.5 Day Training Course for General Electric Occupational Health Nurses and Human Relations Managers Nashville, TN on April 8-9, 1990 Cincinnati, OH on June 11-12, 1990 Philadelphia, PA on September 10-11, 1990 Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �1990 GENERAL ELEC'IRIC OCCUPATIONAL NURSE EDUCATION SEMINAR OPRYLAND HOTEL NASHVILLE, TN APRIL 9-11 �4-Day Ergonomics Training Course for Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company Plants May 22-25 and September 25-28, 1990, Akron, Ohio Syllabus Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER. N.Y. 14622 �1990 GENERAL ELEC1RIC OCCUPATIONAL NURSE EDUCATION SEMINAR WESTIN HOTEL CINCINNATI, OH JUNE 11-13 �Ergonomics and Occupational Health A 1.5 Day Training Course for General Electric Occupational Health Nurses and Human Relations Managers Nashville, TN on April 8-9, 1990 Cincinnati, OH on June 11-12, 1990 Philadelphia, PA on September 10-11, 1990 Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �3-Day Ergonomics Training Program for General Electric Aircraft Engine Evandale, Ohio, June 13-15, 1990 Syllabus \ Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS 1716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER. N.Y. 14622 �3-Day Ergonomics Training Course for GE Aircraft Engine, Evandale Wednesday, June 13, 1990: Ergonomics Overview, Posture and Productivity 8:00- 8:30 AM 8:30- 9:00 9:00- 9:45 9:45 - 10:00 10:00- 10:45 10:45 - 11:15 11:15 - 12:00 12:00- 1:00 PM 1:001:45 2:15 2:303:004:00- 1:45 2:15 2:30 3:00 4:00 4:30 Introductions and Overview Work Capacity Who Do We Design For? Break Posture and Productivity- Static Work, Reach/Height Interactions Work/Recovery Curves Problem Solving: Layout and Workplace Design Lunch Problem Solving: S.tanding Workplace Design Seated Workplace :Oesign and Visual Work Break Problem Solving: Seated Workplace Design Job Review- Postures Summary of W?rkplace Design Guidelines Thursday, June 14, 1990: Preventing Overexertion Injuries and Enhancing Human Reliability 8:00 - 8:30 AM 8:30 - 9:15 9:15 - 10:00 10:00- 10:15 10:15 - 10:30 10:30- 11:30 11:30- 12:00 12:00- 1:00 PM 1:001:45 2:15 2:45 3:30- 1:45 2:15 2:45 3:00 4:30 Repetitive Motions Disorders Risk Factors for Tendonitis, Carpal Tunnel, etc. Ergonomic Job Analysis Form Break Tool Design and Selection Problem Solving': Repetitive Tasks Job Review- Repetitive Tasks Lunch Reducing Job Complexity- Information, Pacing Human Reliability- Controls/Displays and Automation Environmental Factors Influencing Performance Break Problem Solving: Information and Environment Friday, June 15, 1990: Manual Handling and Cost/Benefit Analyses ·,-� I 8:00- 8:30 8:30- 9:00 9:00- 9:30 9:30- 9:45 9:45 - 10:45 10:45 -11:30 11:30-12:00 12:00- 1:00 PM 1:00- 1:30 1:30- 2:30 2:30- 2:45 2:45 - 3:30 3:30 - 4:15 4:15 - 4:30 6/7/90 SHR Low Back Pain and Job Risk Factors Managing Upper Extremity and Low Back Disability at Work Manual Handling Guidelines Break Problem Solving: Manual Handling Frequent Lifting/ Total Workload/Hours of Work Job Review: Handling Tasks Lunch Cost-Benefit Analyses of Solutions Problem Solving Using Cost-Benefit Approach Break Problem Solving: Cost Benefit Approach Surveys/Checklists/Resources Course Evaluations , L �,--�, Schedule for a 4�Day Ergonomics Training Course Based on New Design Problems for Central Engineering Personnel, Luxembourg, Monday, June 18,1990: Specification, Layout and Workplace Design 8:00- 8:30 AM 8:30- 9:00 9:00- 9:45 Introductions and Review of .Course Goals Videotape Review of New Design Task Development of 5 Questions to ask the Experts about the JobSmall Groups 11 :45 - 12:45 PM Break Presentation of Questions and Expert Responses Review of the Ergonomic Design Opportunities- Automation or Ergonomics Lunch 12:45 - 1:00 1:00- 2:00 2:00- 2:15 Design to Minimize Repetitive Handling/Rehandling Group Problem Solving: Layout and Workplace Design Break 2:15- 3:00 2:45 - 3:30 3:30- 4:00 Presentation of Layout Designs and Discussion Who Do We Design For? Using Anthropometric Data Height and Reach Interactions, Visual Needs 9:45 - 10:00 10:00- 11:00 11:00- 11:45 Tuesday, June 19, 1990: Work Heights and Reaches, Machine Pacin�, Environmental Factors, Human Reliability, and Repetitive Motions Risk Reduction 8:00 - 9:00 AM Group Problem Solv.ing: Working Heights 9:00- 9:45 Discussion of Results of Height Assessment Exercise Break 9:45 - 10:00 10:00- 11:00 11:00- 11:45 11 :45 - 12:45 PM 12:45 - 1:45 1:45- 2:45 2:45 - 3:00 3:00- 3:45 3:45 - 4:00 Pacing, Environment, and Reliability Factors in Equipment and Workplace Design- Puzzle Exercise Group Problem Solving: Designing for Quality PerformanceMachine/Operator Interfaces, Lighting, Precision Requirements, etc. Lunch Presentation and Discussion of Design Approaches to Improve Operator/Machine Interfaces and Enhance Quality Performance Repetitive Motions Disorders and Risk Factor Reduction Break Group Problem Solving: Reducing the Opportunities for Repetitive Motions Disorders Summary of the Design to Date �Wednesday, June 20, 1990: Information Processing, Manual Handling, Force Exertion, Cost Justifying Ergonomic Designs 8:45 AM 8:45 - 9:15 9:15 - 9:45 9:45 -10:00 8:00 - 10:00 -11:00 11:00 -11:45 11:45 -12:45 PM 12:45 - 1:15 1:15 - 2:15 Review of Designs to Minimize Repetitive Motions Disorders Controls/Displays and Information Handling Requirements Applications of Human Factors Principles in New Design Break Manual Handling and Force Exertion Guidelines Group Problem Solving: Assessing the Existing Design's Handling Requirements, Defining Reasonable Ranges for Handling and-Force Exertion Tasks Lunch 2:15 - 2:30 Cost Justifying Ergonomic Design Group Problem Solving: Cost Justifying The New Operation Break 2:30 - 3:00 3:00 - 3:30 3:30 - 4:00 Discussion - Cost Justifications Evaluating Impacts of Non-Ergonomic Design Problem Selection for Thursday's Session Thursday, June 21, 1990 : Problem Presentations by Attendees r.O 8:00 -10:00 10:00 -10:15 10:15 -11:45 11:45 -12:45 Work in Teams on Problems Break 2 Presentations by Groups Lunch 12:45 - 1:30 General Discussion: Ergonomics, Design, and Production How Can We Improve the Interfaces ? 2 Presentations by Groups Evaluations, Resources 1:30 - 2:45 2:45 - 3:00 6/7/90SHR '·· .. ' ; /-.--.,. \.. '( � �\ ·-." ��•;r _i.'l· .& Occupational Ergonomics Ergonomics Awareness for Goodyear Luxembourg Plant Personnel Colmar-Berg, Luxembourg Friday, June 22 1990 ... ·� ··.,'f." } "'ri ,, _____,, Outline A. The Scope of Ergonomics - What ?, Why ?, How ? B. Work Capacity and Job Perfonnance C. Overexertion lnjuries 1. Repetitive Motions Disorders a. Tendonitis and Carpal Tunnel Syndrome b. Risk Factors - Force; Duration, Frequency, Susceptibility c. Techniques to Reduce the Risk 2. Low Back Pain a. Degenerative Disc Disease b. Risk Factors - Postures, Manual Handling c. Techniques to Reduce the Risk D. Ergonomic Problem Analysis Techniques a. Problem Solving - Repetitive Work b. Problem Solving - Manual Handling E. Ergonomics and Quality Perfonnance a. Complexity Factors in Job Design b. Pacing/Automation, Environment F. Cost-Benefit of Ergonomics Problem Solutions Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE. EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HE�LTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS �-.� .I Ergonomics Training Course for John Deere Waterloo Works Waterloo, IA, July 10-13, 1990 Syllabus Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS. 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEAL TH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �·-J;rl ', ) Occupet ione 1. Ergonomics . . Ergonomics Awareness for Rohm .& Haas Louisville Plant Personnel, July 23,1990 : :- . ·- , _. .. .;_� � . .I . Outline A. The Scope of Ergonomics - What ?, Why ?, How ? B. Work Capacity and Job Performance C. Overexertion Injuries 1. Repetitive Motions Disorders . . ··. . . a. Tendonitis and Carpal Tunnel Syndrome . · . b. Risk Factors - Force, Duration, Frequency, Susceptibility . c. Techniques to Reduce the Risk 2. Low Back Pain a. Degenerative Disc Disease b. Risk Factors - Postures, Manual Handling c. Techniques to Reduce the Risk D. Ergonomic -Problem Analysis Techniques a. Problem Solving - Repetitive Work b. Problem Solving - Manual Handling E. Ergonomics and Quality Performance a. Complexity Factors in Job Design b. Pacing/Automation, Environment F. Cost-Benefit of Ergonomics Problem Solutions I Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.Q / \ CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUG/.i JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS �_ 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN. WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER·, N.Y. 14622. �j ) ""iduJfAt ELECTRIC PRODUCTS, INC. � QUALITY WEATiiERPROOF .._ ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT Ergonomics Training and Problem Solving for the Midwest Electric Ergonomics Committee Mankato, MN, July 20, 1990 Syllabus Course Content A. Overview of Ergonomics and Its Value To The Plant B. Preventing Fatigue 1. Work Capacities 2. Work/Recovery Needs 3. Designing Reaches 4. Improving Comfort in Office VDT Workplaces 5. Ergonomics Problem Solving C. Repetitive Motions Problems and Approaches to Reduce Them 1. Description of Repetitive Motions Problems 2. Risk Factors . 3. Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique 4. Interventions D. Manual Handling and Low Back Pain Risk Reduction 1. Low Back Pain Risk Factors 2. Guidelines for Manual Lifting 3. Interventions E. Cost/Benefit Analyses of Ergonomic Solutions Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D >-! CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" ' .... 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT ANO PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS .!' .:.. ) (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �Midu.,t,l ELECTRIC PRODUCTS, INC. � QUALITY WEAlHERPROOF .._ ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT 1-Hour Ergonomics Awareness Presentation to Midwest Electric Products Staff . Mankato, MN, July 20, 1990 Table of Contents Topic National Trends in Ergonomics The Costs of Poor Design Capacity and Workload Determinants/Stressors Work/Recovery Time Graphs Working Heights and Reach Capabilities Designing Jobs to Minimize Unnecessary Effort Ergono1TI1cs Problem Solving Risk Factors for Repetitive Motions Problems Factors Affecting Grip Strength Guidelines for· Occas10nal Lifts - Kodak Overexertion Injury Risk Factors Cost Benefit Analyses of Ergonomic Solutions References - SH Rodgers Pa�e# 1 2 4 7 8 10 11 13 14 15 16 17 22 Acknowledgement The illustrations on pages 8, 9, and 15 are used with permission from Eastman Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volumes I and 2 published by Van Nostrand Reinhold. All other material in this syllabus is by Dr. S.H. Rodgers and permission to reproduce it must be obtained from her. Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS ----- 0.1 V 4AC.?? �National Trends in Ergonomics Industrial Ergonomics Trends: 1. Focus on illness and injury reduction- reduce health care costs through ergonomic interventions- upper extremity and back disorders. Workers' Comp costs increasing 40 to 60% per year in some plants. Actual cost is about 6 to 7 times more. Ergonomic problems account for 60-65% of Workers' Comp costs (strain, sprain, overexertion, esp.). 2. Citation activity by OSHA re Morrell, Iowa Beef, and Kroger for upper extremity disorders has attracted interest of industry in general � carpal tunnel syndrome. Lifting guidelines pressure for standard setting. 3. More training of IEs and the medical community, and more general public awareness about overexertion injuries and ergonomics interventions. 4. Changing characteristics of the workforce re women and older workers in the next 10 to 15 years; probable competition between employers for workers could lead to increased attention to job and workplace design. 5. Information handling concerns as more data are collected and displayed in process control, production machinery, and computer systems. Software human factors needs are being identified and complexity issues addressed. 6. Interactions of ergonomics and quality/excellence goals; and value of ergonomics used at business team level to improve communications and effect needed change. 7. Recognition of importance of people in manufacturing- GM's pioneering experience with automation. Other Applications: 1. Hospital/medical ergonomics- cost containment. 2. Complexity reduction and performance improvement in military systems. 12n/88 S.H. Rodgers �The Costs of Poor Design A. Accident Data 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Workers' Compensation costs Time lost from work - replacement cost Injury recurrence costs Accident investigation time - supervisory, Safety Medical Department time B. Medical Data 1. Overexertion illnesses a. Low back pain b. Repetitive motions disorders 2. Stress-related illness a. Headaches b. Gastrointestinal disorders c. Behavior problems d. Drug and alcohol abuse 3. Medical restrictions a. How many? b. How long? c. Success in return to work? d. Repeat injuries or illness? C. Absenteeism 1. By job title - days lost for all reasons 2. Patterns in relation to production schedules D. Turnover 1. Usual length of service on the job 2. Number of people on the job in a 5- or 10-year period 3. Reasons for leaving job �E. Training Time 1 . Time to reach productivity goal 2. Time to be fully trained for job or jobs in department F. EEO Picture 1. Experience in getting women or older workers on the job 2. Characteristics of people on the job - how typical of workforce pool? G. Quality Control 1. Amount of waste 2. Amount of repair work 3. Missed defects - audit 4. Consumer complaints 5. Amount of good product rejected 1/8/86 SHA 3 �Ergonomics and Occupational Health A 1.5 Day Training Course for General Electric Occupational Health Nurses and Human Relations Managers Nashville, TN on April 8-9, 1990 Cincinnati, OH on June 11-12, 1990 Philadelphia, PA on September 10-11, 1990 Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �Ergonomics Awareness Course for Supervisors and Engineers · John Deere Harvester Works, East Moline, IL October 1_5, 16, 17, 1990 Table of Contents* ·,v-----,\ I · Work Capacity and Job Design Stress Sensitizers Identifying Ergonomic Problems Ergonomics Problem Solving Form Risk Factors for Carpal Tunnel Factors Affecting Grip, Strength Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique Ergonomic Problem Solving Form 12 Ergonomics _Guidelines Cost/Benefit Analyses The Costs of Poor Design Problem Solving: Cost Justifying References - S.H. Rodgers Page 1 3 4 10 12 14 15 19 21 26 :30 32 35 • The material in this syllabus has been developed by Dr. S.H. Rodgers, and permission to reproduce it must be obtained from her. Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS .. HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN"" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS Z. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE. EOUIPMENT AND PRODUCT OESIGIII 3. HEAL.TH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS ,,.., ....__, o 1a WUNTlllff.TtiM WILLA.• RCICHl!STl!R. N.Y: ,_ �.,, Capacity and Workload Determinants Yh 1//////////,, Maximum � YY//h � 7777/77/ Work -'r)��t,})�]))�:,S,,sjJ})�;%½½½½ Capacity Usu a 1 ----------------------------- 75% - 35 min I so;.� 1 hour 40% - 2.5 hrs 33% - 8 hrs 25% - > 12 hrs Basel �Ergonomics Training Course for Trainers John Deere Harvester Works, October 18-19, 1990 Outline A. Review of Ergonomic Concepts 1. Posture - Reach/Height futeraction, Static Holding Fatigue 2. Office Ergonomics - VDT Workplaces 3. Repetitive Motions Problems - Grip Strength, Tools, Ergonomic Job Analysis 4. Manual Handlin� Tasks 5. Paced Work/Envrronment - Puzzle Exercise 6. Human Reliability/Quality Performance/Automation fl' B. Use of Problem Solving Forms, Guidelines, Checklists, The John Deere Ergonomics Handbook 1. Problem Solving Forms 2. Checklists and Survey Techniques 3. Guidelines for New Design C. Resources 1. References 2. Videota_pes 3. Profess10nal Meetings/Courses 4. Universities/Colleges 5. Other Companies Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D �. 1f ) '--_/ CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILL$ • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �Ergonomics Job Sati sf action Productivity Quality Safety ... ...� 4-Day Erg.onomics Training Program for General Electric Motors Plants November 6-9, 1990, DeKalb, IL Syllabus Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 0 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �4-Day Ergonomics Training Course for General Electric Motors Plants, DeKalb, IL, November 6-9, 1990 Tuesday: Ergonomics Overview, Posture and Productivity 0 8:00- 8:30 AM 8:30- 9:00 9:00- 9:45 9:45 -10:00 Introductions and Overview Work Capacity Who Do We Design For ? Break 10:00-10:45 10:45-11:15 11:15-12:00 12:00-12:45 PM Posture and Productivity-Static Work, Reach/Height Interactions Work/Recovery Curves Problem Solving: Static Work Lunch 12:45- 1 :45 1:45- 2:15 2:15- 2:30 Problem Solving: Standing Workplace Design Seated Workplace Design and Visual Work Break 2:30- 3:00 3:00- 3:45 3:45- 4:00 Problem Solving: Seated Workplace Design Videotape Review-Postures Summary of Workplace Design Guidelines Wednesday: - Preventing Overexertion Injuries and Enhancing Human Reliability 9:15- 9:45 9:45- 10:00 10:00-11:00 11:00-12:00 12:00-12:45 PM Reducing Job Complexity- Information, Pacing Human Reliability-Controls/Displays and Automation Environmental Factors Influencing Performance Break Problem Solving: Information and Environment Repetitive Motions Disorders Lunch 12:45 - 1:30 1:30- 2:15 2:15- 2:45 2:45- 3:00 3:00- 3:15 3:15- 4:00 Risk Factors for Tendonitis, Carpal Tunnel, etc. Problem Identification-Videotape Review Ergonomic Job Analysis Form Break Tool Design and Selection Problem Solving: Repetitive Tasks 8:00- 8:45 AM 8:30- 9:15 �Thursday: Manual Handling and Cost/Benefit Analyses \(--,1 ' "•-a•/ ) 8:00 - 8:30 8:30 - 9:00 9:00 - 9:30 9:30 - 9:45 0 Low Back Pain and Job Risk Factors Managing Upper Extremity and Low Back Disability in the Workplace Manual Handling Guidelines Break 9:45-10:45 10:45-11:30 11 :30 -12:00 12:00 -12:45 Problem Solving: Manual Handling Frequent Lifting/ Total Workload/Hours of Work Videotape Review: Handling Tasks Lunch 12:45- 1:15 1:15- 2:30 2:30 - 2:45 Cost-Benefit Analyses of Solutions Problem Solving Using Cost-Benefit Approach Break 2:45- 3:30 Problem Solving: Cost Benefit Approach 3:30 - 3:45 3:45- 4:00 Surveys/Checklists/Resources Instructions for Presentations Friday: Problem Solving and Presentations by Class Members 8:00 - 9:15 9:15- 10:00 10:00 - 10:15 Work on Presentations (with Oversight) Case Study #1 Break 10:15- 10:45 10:45 - 11:15 11:15- 11:45 11:45- 12:30 Case Study #2 Case Study # 3 Case Study # 4 Lunch Break 12:30 - 2:00 2:00 - 2:30 2:30 - 2:45 Discussion: Starting an Ergonomics Program Case Study # 5 Break 2:45 - 3:15 3:15- 3:30 Action Plan Discussion Course Evaluations 10/90 SHR t f Lt.. �'\ .' Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EOUiPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 Ergonomic Approaches to Managing Cumulative Trauma Injuries in the Workplace Talk to Owens Corning Fiberglas Safety Managers, San Antonio, TX November 15, 1990 Outline of Talk Ergonomics and Cumulative Trauma Injuries - OSHA Activity Risk Factors for Repetitive Motions/Overexertion Injuries Analytical Techniques to Identify Fatigue Potential of Tasks Problem Solving Examples Examples of Approaches to Reduce the Risk of Overexertion Table of Contents Pa2:e# Outline and Table of Contents 1 2 Risk Factors for Carpal Tunnel Work/Recovery Curves 5 Ergonomic Job Analysis 6 Examples of Muscle Effort Levels 9 Finding the Best Solutions to Ergonomic Problems 10 Problem Solving Form 11 References - SHR.odgers 14 �4-Hour Ergonomics Awareness Course GE Aerospace, Pittsfield, MA, January 11,1991 A. B. C. D. E. F. G. Outline Overview of Ergonomics and Health and Safety Goals Preventing Fatigue - Work Capacity, Work Patterns Preventing Repetitive Motions Injuries - Risk Factors, Approaches Designing Safe Lifting Tasks - Defining the Demands Reducing the Opportunity for Human Error Cost Benefit Analyses ofErgonomics Problem Solutions General Guidelines, Resources Tonk Table of Contents OSHA Ergonomics Guidelines Outline -Draft Capacity and Workload Determinants Identifying Ergonomics Problems Work/Recovery Curves, Height and Reach Interaction Risk Factors for Repetitive Motions Problems Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique Ergonomics Problem Solving Form Risk Factors for Low Back Pain Manual Lifting Guidelines Overexertion Injury Risk Factors - Summary Factors Affecting Quality Performance Job Conttol and Task Complexity The Costs of Non-Ergonomic Design Cost-Benefit Analyses of Ergonomic Problem Solutions Cost-Benefit Problem Solving Form 12 Ergonomics Guidelines - Equipment and Workplace Design References - SH Rodgers / ( \ / IJ_;;..-"\_1. -� .r .....~••--,,; , ... ,.. \, Page# 1 2 3 9 10 12 16 18 19 20 21 23 25 26 28 31 36 Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS �,) ' 1.5-Day Ergonomics Training Course Schedule Schedule / Day 1: Overview, Fatigue, Reducing Overexertion Injuries 7:30 - 8:00 8:00 - 8:45 8:45- 9:15 9:15-10:00 Introductions, Goals Overview of Ergonomics, Update on Ergonomics Activities at the Waterloo Works Work Capacity and Fatigue Break 11 :30 -12:15 Reducing Postural Fatigue, Work/Recovery Needs Problem Solving: Postural Fatigue and Workplace Design Lunch 12:15- 1 :00 1:00 - 1 :30 1:30 - 2:15 2:15- 2:30 Overexertion Injury Prevention: Repetitive Work Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique Problem Solving: Repetitive Tasks Break 10:00 -10:45 10:45-11 :30 2:30 -3:30 . Low Back Pain and Manual Handling Day 2: Cost-Benefit Analyses and Problem Solving 7:30 8:15 8:45 9:15 - 8:15 8:45 9:15 9:30 9:30 -10:45 10:45-11:30 Problem Solving: Manual Handling Cost-Benefit Analyses Cost-Benefit Problem Solving Approach Break Problem Solving: Cost-Benefit Analyses Where From Here ? Summary of Ergonomic Guidelines for Design 1/11/91 SHR \ ,. L- �(J '\ ', \ ) 0 0 0 1.5 Day Ergonomics Course for John Deere Waterloo Works, Waterloo, Iowa, January 22-25, 1991 -0 '£-' V._ :_ \ Syllabus A. The Scope of Ergonomics - What ? Why ? How ? B. Work Capacity and Fatigue C. Preventing Overexertion Injuries 1. Repetitive Tasks - Tendonitis, Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Risk Factors, Techniques to Reduce the Risk 2. Manual Handling Tasks, Postures - Low Back Pain Risk Factors, Techniques to Reduce the Risk D. Ergonomic Problem Analysis and Solving Techniques E. Cost-Benefit of Ergonomic Problem Solutions F. Problem Solving Forms Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE. EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (71fn �.d.-�i::.A7 • 1FiQ 1-11 INTIN�TnM 1-111 IC:: • onrucc::TJ:::C P..J V 1A#:.,., �1.5-Day Ergonomics Training Course Schedule Schedule Day 1 : Overview, Fatigue, Reducing Overexertion Injuries 7:30 - 8:00 8:00 - 8:45 8:45- 9:15 9:15-10:00 Introductions, Goals Overview of Ergonomics, Update on Ergonomics Activities at the Waterloo Works Work Capacity and Fatigue Break 11:30 -12:15 Reducing Postural Fatigue, Work/Recovery Needs Problem Solving: Postural Fatigue and Workplace Design Lunch 12:15 - 1:00 1:00 - 1 :30 1 :30 - 2:15 2:15- 2:30 Overexertion Injury Prevention: Repetitive Work Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique Problem Solving: Repetitive Tasks Break 10:00 -10:45 10:45-11:30 2:30 -3:30 Low Back Pain and Manual Handling Day 2: Cost-Benefit Analyses and Problem Solving 7:30 - 8:15 8:15- 8:45 8:45- 9:15 9:15- 9:30 Problem Solving: Manual Handling Cost-Benefit Analyses Cost-Benefit Problem Solving Approach Break 9:30 -10:45 10:45-11 :30 Problem Solving: Cost-Benefit Analyses Where From Here ? Summary of Ergonomic Guidelines for Design 1/11/91 SHR / ( i �Ergonomic/Human Factors Design of Controls and Displays A 2-Hour Awareness Course for John Deere Engineers, Waterloo, IA, January 25, 1991 Syllabus Table of Contents 1'.w2k ,c�, /�'.\ Human Reliability Performance Shaping Factors Human-Machine Interface Issues Human Reliability Problem Solving Form General Layout and Flow Guidelines Human Size and Reach Data Information Transfer Job Control and Task Complexity Controls and Displays Control Panel Design Problem Design of Visual Displays Design of Auditory Displays Design of Controls Information Processing/Decision Making Control/Display Relationships Maintainability Design of VDT Workstations Factors Affecting Quality Performance Paced Work/ Time Pressure References - SHR References - General Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D ' \ f�\ CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 Pa2e # 1 3 6 10 11 13 15 19 21 24 30 37 39 45 48 48b 51 55 57 61 62 �Team\rlork Quality Job Satisfaction Productivity Health Safety 3-Day Ergonomics Course GE Appliances Louisville March 26-28, 1991 0 Syllabus Suzanne H. �odgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �3-Day Ergonomics Training Course for GE Applianmces, Louisville Tuesday, March 26, 1991: Ergonomics Overview, Posture and Productivity, Repetitive Motions Disorders 7:15 7:458:158:30- 7:45 AM 8:15 8:30 9:15 9:15- 9:30 Introductions and Overview Work Capacity Who Do We Design For? Posture and Productivity- Static Work, Reach/Height Interactions Break 9:30- 10:00 10:00- 10:30 10:30- 11:30 11:30- 12:00 Work/Recovery Curves Layout and Workplace Design Problem Solving:. Postures and Workplace Design Lunch 12:00 12:451:152:00- Problem Solving: Standing Workplace Design Seated Workplace Design and Visual Work Repetitive Motions Disorders- Risk Factors Break 12:45 PM 1:15 2:00 2:15 2:15- 2:45 2:45- 3:15 Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique Problem Solving: Repetitive Tasks Wednesday, March 27, 1991: Preventing Overexertion Injuries and Enhancing Human Reliability; Cost-Benefit Analyses 0 7:15 7:45 8:15 8:45 9:15 - 7:45 AM 8:15 8:45 9:15 9:30 Tool Design and Selection Human Reliability- Preventing Human Error Controls and Displays- Information Transfer Problem Solving: Accident Investigation Break 9:30 - · 10:30 10:30- 11:30 11:30- 12:00 Manual Materials Handling - Lifting and Force Guidelines Problem Solving: Manual Handling Tasks Lunch 12:001:002:002:152:45- Puzzle Exercise - Pacing, Environment Cost-Benefit Analyses of Solutions Break Problem Solving: Cost-Benefit Analysis Problem Selection for Presentations on Thursday 1:00 2:00 2:15 2:45 3:15 Thursday, March 27, 1991: Problem Analyses and Presentations l) 7:15 - 8:00 PM 8:00- 11:30 11:30- 12:00 Ergonomics Program Suggestions - Where From Here ? Work on Problem Analyses with Supervision Lunch 12:00- 1:00 PM 1:00 - 3:00 3:00 - 3:15 Practice Presentations Presentations to Managers Course Evaluations, Resources 3/11/91 SHR �. . .Ergonomics Training Course Table of Contents (� \, . . j Topic Schedule Table of Contents Acknowledgements Starting Page Location EDFPAWl Sl'.llabus i Introduction and Course Goals Plant Ergonomics Programs and Organization The Costs of Poor Design Capacities for Work Factors That Increase Stress 0 (J V EDFPAW 2 -- 1 2 -- 6 8 10 ---- 3 13 9 2 10,446,496 237 98 Identifying Ergonomics Problems S Questions Form Human Reliability - Man vs Machine Ergonomic Opportunities Ergonomic Principles for Layout/Flow Who Do We Design For? The Variability of People Anthropometric Data Height and Reach Interactions Using Anthropometric Data Recovery Time/Static Muscle Work Effort Estimation Scales Design to Minimize Effort 11 13 14 15 16 18 14 3,8, 285, 290 342 2, 13,446 19 23 24 26 33 36 285 20,24,30 285, 3 11 11 2,140,150,338 3 38 52 448 218,255 Problem Analysis: Standing Work Finding Best Solution to Problem Ergonomics Problem Solving Extra Problem Solving Forms 37 39 40 42 Seated Work - VDT Seated Arm Reach Chair Characteristics Visual Work,Lighting,Posture 44 45 46 47 Self-Help in VDT Workplace Comfort 50 Risk Factors for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Factors Affecting Grip Strength Ergonomic Job Analysis Form Table 1: Examples of Muscle Effort Levels Evaluating Hand Tools Problem Analysis: Repetitive Work 51 Human Reliability Puzzle Exercise Ergonomics and Quality Information Transfer - Controls and Displays Job Control and Task Complexity Reliability Problems Form 53 54 56b 57 59 62 63 64 66 71 73 18 1 24,217 23,50 -- -·- -- 18,28,50 20 57 17,30,50 28,101;179 14 2 142 2 23,282 --·- 151, 244 -- 151, 254 --- --256 -- 18 1 -- 140 -- 90,107,162 10,222,23 2 -- 232 -- . . ' lll. �=> � Environmental Factors Paced Work/fime Pressure Problem Solving Form 74 77 80 Risk Factors for Low Back Pain Natural History Degenerative Disc Disease Strength and Location Maximum Force Applications Kodak Lifting Guidelines Summary of Overexertion Risk Factors Guidelines to Reduce Risk for Injuries 83 85 86 87 88 90 91 Cost/Benefit Analyses Problem Solving Form - Cost/Benefit Ergonomics in Old/New Design Extra Problem Solving Forms New Design Problem Analysis Forms Design Summary Form 92 96 99 100 103 104 How To - Ergonomics Survey Examples of Questions 12 Ergonomics Guidelines Ergonomics Checklist 106 108 110 112 Ergonomics Programs and Processes General Ergonomics Guidelines - OSHA First Job Characteristics Ergonomic Case Study Form Videotaping Suggestions Resources - Bibliographies Problem Solving Forms Course Evaluation Form 117b 117e 118a 118b 119 120 126 end 210, 242, 320 230 135,340 15,122,151 135,338 384,446 360, 403 135, 340 -313 98 313 -- 365 559 -·- 11/90 SHR {V �... Problem Solving: Using Ergonomics and Physiology for Lifting Tasks Lifting and Low Back Pain Seminar, Richland, WA, A�ril 4-5, 1991 Outline A. Occasional Lifts -Two-Handed B. Frequent Lifts -Two-Handed C. One-Handed Lifts D. Carrying E. Postural Factors Contributing to Low Back Pain Sixth Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D Annual CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" Medicine 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS in the (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 . t. t. � ,, • • OCCUPATIONA.L- ttgAL,TH NO�THWf:ST Workplace Sen1inar �Occupati anal Ergonomics 3.5 Day Ergonomics Training Course for Amoco Foam Products, Greensboro, NC April 16 - 19, 1991 Syllabus Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �3.5-Day Ergonomics Training Course Day 1: Ergonomics Overview, Reducing Fatigue at Work, Workplace and Equipment Design 8:00- 8:30AM 8:30- 9:00 9:00- 9:45 9:45- 10:00 Introductions and Overview Work Capacities- Who Do We Design For? Preventing Fatigue: Work/Recovery Curves Break 10:00- 10:45 10:45 - 11:15 11:15- 12:00 12:00 - 12:45 PM Problem Solving: Postural Fatigue Using Body Size Data- Heights and Reaches, Visual Needs Problem Solving: Standing Workplace Heights Lunch 12:45- 2:00 2:00- 2:30 2:30- 2:45 Workplace Layout: Design to Reduce Extra Effort Seated Workplace Design Break 2:45- 3:30 3:30- 4:00 0 Problem Solving: Seated Workplace Design Videotape Review - Postures, s-ummary of Workplace Design Guidelines Day 2: Preventing Overexertion Injuries and Reducing Error "'--_) 8:00- 8:45AM 8:30- 9:00 9:15 - 9:45 9:45- 10:00 Risk Factors for Tendonitis, CafJ?al Tunnel Syndrome, and Other Overexert.Ion Injuries Ergonomic Job Analysis Form Factors Affecting Grip Strength, Level of Effort Break 10:00- 11:15 11:15- 11:45 11:45- 12:30 PM Problem Solving: Repetitive Tasks Tool Design and Selection Lunch 12:30- 1:15 1:15- 1:45 1:45- 2:15 2:15- 2:30 Ergonomics and Quality Performance - Puzzle Improving Human Reliability - Reducing Job Complexity and Providing Operator Control Controls/Displays and Automation Break 2:30- 3:15 3:15- 4:00 Problem Solving: Information and Complexity Environmental Factors Influencing Performance Day 3: Manual Handling and Cost/Benefit Analyses \ __) 8:008:309:009:30- 8:30 9:00 9:30 9:45 Low Back Pain - Job Risk Factors Designing Manual Handling Tasks Manual Lifting Guidelines Break • (, �9:45 -10:45 10:45 -11:15 11:15-11:45 11:45 -12:30 Problem Solving: Manual Handling Total Workload/Hours of Work Cost-Benefit Analyses of Ergonomic Problems Lunch 12:30- 1:30 1:30- 2:15 2:15- 2:30 Problem Solving Using Cost-Benefit Approach Surveys/Checklists/Resources Break 2:30- 3:15 3:15- 4:00 Ergonomics Programs: Where From Here ? Problem Selection for Day 4, Instructions for Presentations, Initial Analyses Day 4: Problem Solving and Presentations by Class Members ~--"~ ~I 8:00- 9:00 9:00- 9:30 9:30- 10:00 10:00- 10:15 Work on Presentations (with Oversight) Case Study #1 Case Study #2 Break 10:15- 10:45 10:45- 11:15 11:15-11:45 11:45 - 12:15 Case Study# 3 Case Study# 4 Case Study # 5 Action Plan Discussion, Course Evaluations 3/91 SHR ' (,\.f �0 0 0 2-Day Ergonomics Course for GE Aerospace Moorestown, NJ, April 22-24, 1991 Syllabus A. The Scope of Ergonomics- What? Why? How? B. Work Capacity and Fatigue C. Preventing Overexertion Injuries 1. Repetitive Tasks- Tendonitis, Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Risk Factors, Techniques to Reduce the Risk 2. Manual Handling Tasks, Postures - Low Back Pain Risk Factors, Techniques to Reduce the Risk D. Ergonomic Problem Analysis and Solving Techniques E. Cost-Benefit of Ergonomic Pro~lem Solutions F. Problem Solving Forms Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �Ergonomics Job Satisfaction Productivity Quality Safety 2-Day Ergonomics Training Course for General Electric Medical Systems Waukesha, WI, April 29-30, May 1-2, 1991 Capacity Data and Problem Solving Forms (Supplement to the GE Ergonomics Process Manual) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �2-Day Ergonomics Training Course .. ~\ 1 Day 1: Ergonomics Overview, Reducing Fatigue, Workplace and Equipment Design, Repetitive Tasks 8:00 - 9:00 AM 9:00- 9:45 9:45- 10:00 Introductions and Overview of Ergonomics Process Preventing Fatigue: Work/Recovery Curves Break 10:00- 10:45 10:45 - 11:30 Problem Solving: Postural Fatigue Using Body Size Data- Heights and Reaches, Visual Needs Seated Workplace Design Lunch 11:30- 12:00 12:00 - 12:45 PM 2:30- 2:45 Problem Solving: Standin~ Workplace Heights Risk Factors for Tendonitis, CafJ?al Tunnel Syndrome, and Other OverexertiOn Injuries Break 2:45- 3:15 3:15- 4:00 Ergonomic Job Analysis Form Problem Solving: Repetitive Tasks 12:45- 1:30 1:30- 2:30 Day 2: Manual Handling Task Design, Reducing Error, Cost/Benefit, Problem Solving 8:00 - 9:00AM 9:00- 9:45 9:45- 10:00 10:00- 11:15 Lifting and Low Back Pain - Risk Factors and Guidelines for Safe Lifting and Force Application Problem Solving: Manual Handling Tasks Break 11:15- 11:45 11:45- 12:30 PM Human Reliability - Ergonomics in Accident Investigation Cost Benefit Analyses of Ergonomic Problems Lunch 12:30- 1:15 1:15- 2:00 2:00- 2:15 Problem Solving: Cost/Benefit Analyses Discussion: Bmlding Ergonomics Into Other Processes Break 2:15- 3:45 3:45- 4:00 Problem Solving Projects Course Evaluations; Final Thoughts 4/91 SHR l \ \...~/ r( �Table of Contents ,----~ ' /~\ u Topic Page# 1 2 3 Schedule Table of Contents Costs of Poor Design Work/Recovery Time Graphs Evaluating Static Work Recovery Time Needs Finding the Best Solution to Ergonomics Problems Ergonomics Problem Solving 6 10 11 5 Questions About Workplace and Job Design Ergonomic Principles for Layout/Materials Flow Anthropometric Data Height and Reach Interaction VDT Workplace Design Kit 13 14 16 17 18 Risk Factors for Repetitive Motions Problems Ergonomic Job Analysis- Rating Form 27 28 Strength as a Function of Location Maximum Forces for Design Kodak Lifting Guidelines 30 31 32 Problem Solving Form Human Reliability Problem Solving Form Cost Justifying Change Form Ergonomic Case Study Form 34 37 39 42 References - SH Rodgers 43 4/91 5 �The Costs of Poor Design A. Accident Data 1. Workers' Compensation costs 2. Time lost from work - replacement cost 3. Injury recurrence costs 4. Accident investigation time - supervisory, Safety 5. Medical Department time B. Medical Data 1. Overexertion illnesses a. Low back pain b. Repetitive motions disorders 2. Stress-related illness a. Headaches b. Gastrointestinal disorders c. Behavior problems d. Drug and alcohol abuse 3. Medical restrictions a. Howmany? b. How long? c. Success in return to work? d. Repeat injuries or illness? C. Absenteeism 1. By job title - days lost for all reasons 2. Patterns in relation to production schedules D. Turnover 1. Usual length of service on the job 2. Number of people on the job in a 5- or 10-year period 3. Reasons for leaving job �E. Training Time 1. Time to reach productivity goal 2. Time to be fully trarned for job or jobs in department F. EEO Picture 1. Experience in getting women or older workers on the job 2. Characteristics of people on the job- how typical of workforce pool? G. Quality Control 1. Amount of waste 2. Amount of repair work 3. Missed defects- audit 4. Consumer complaints 5. Amount of good p~oduct rejected 1/8/86 SHR �Occupational Medicine Seminar for Supervisors/Managers City of Rochester Bureau of Employee Relations/Employee Safety . May 6, 1991, Water Bureau Training Facility Ergonomic Approaches to Repetitive Motions Problems Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D., Consultant in Ergonomics, Rochester, NY 4. Evaluating the Workplace to Identify Risk Factors A. Risk Factors for Hand and Wrist Repetitive Motions Problems B. Preventing Fatigue on the Job - Work/Recovery Needs C. Defining Heavy Effort Levels D. Defining Work Patterns and Overall Workload 5. How to Respond to RMI From an Ergonomic View A. Techniques to Reduce Effort Levels B. Techniques to Reduce Continuous Duration of Muscle Effort C. Techniques to Reduce Repetition Rate and Total Time of Effort D. Techniques to Reduce Other Stresses on the Job Table of Contents Page# Risk Factors for Carpal Tunnel Work/Recovery Curves Tables 2 and 3: Effort Levels Examples of Work Patterns from Heart Rate Curves Techniques to Reduce the Risk Risk Factor Analysis Form VDT Workplace Design- Self Help Chair Characteristics References - SHRodgers Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 ·-.-· 1 3 8 10 11 12 13 15 16 �... 2-Day Ergonomics Training Course For The Photochemicals, Polymer, and Recovery Departments in Buildings 18/48,317, and 351/352, Kodak Park Division, Eastman Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, May 7-8,1991 Syllabus Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �2-Day Ergonomics Training Course Schedule Schedule Day 1: Overview, Fatigue, Reducing Overexertion Injuries 8:008:459:009:30- 8:45 9:00 9:30 9:45 9:45-10:30 10:30 - 11:30 Introductions, Goals, Overview of Ergonomics Work Capacity and Fatigue Reducing Postural Fatigue, Work/Recovery Needs Break 11:30- 12:15j Identifying Fatiguing Work Activities Problem Solving: Postural Fatigue and Workplace Design - 2 Jobs Lunch 12:15- 12:45 12:45- 1:30 1:30- 2:00 2:00- 2:15 Overexertion lnjury.Prevention: Repetitive Work Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique Problem Solving: Repetitive Tasks - 2 Jobs Break 2:15- 2:45 2:45- 3:30 3:30- 4:00 Reports on Repetitive Tasks Problem Solving Low Back Pain and Manual Handling; Lifting Guidelines Problem Solving: Manual Handling Tasks Day 2: Human Reliability, Cost/Benefit Analyses, and Problem Solving Projects 8:00- 8:30 8:30- 9:30 9:30- 9:45 9:45 -10:00 10:00 - 10:30 10:30 - 11 :30 11:30- 12:15 12:15- 2:15 Reports on Manual Handling Tasks Problem Solving Human Reliability: Accident Investigation and Ergonomic Problem Analyses Cost/Benefit Analyses Break Cost/Benefit Problem Solving Approach Review of Videotaped Jobs for Risk Factors and Problem Solution Approaches; Choice of Jobs for Projects Lunch 2:15- 2:30 Work on Projects Using Techniques Presented in Course Break 2:30- 3:45 3:45- 4:00 Project Presentations Course Evaluations, Resources 5/6/91 SHR r L �Ergonomics Awareness Training for Astro-Valc,our Inc., Glens Falls, NY, May 30, 1991 Outline Factors Associated with Fatigue- Work/Recovery Curves Risk Factors for Hand, Wrist, Arm, and Shoulder Overexertion Injuries Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique for Identifying Cost Effective Solutions to Overexertion Problems Problem Solving Example Risk Factors for Low Back Pain Guidelines for Reducing Overexertion Risk in Manual Handling Tasks Problem Solving - Manual Handling Problems Cost/Benefit Analyses of Ergonomic Problem Solutions Developing an Ergonomics Process - Why ? Who ? What ? How ? Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544·3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �:¥.~:ao~us_ ......... P,.;lutin!y::"t:::: ··~·~:.:-:·i···s~ety :::::j:Q~··; ···+···· 1.5 Hour Ergonomics Awareness Course forTeams at the GE Hooksett Aircraft Engine Plant, July 1, 1991 Syllabus Table of Contents Topic Proposed General Industry Ergonomics Guideline July, 1990 Identifying Ergonomic Problems Work/Recovery Curves Designing Jobs to Minimize Effort Findmg the Best Solution to an Ergonomic Problem Ergonomic Problem Solving Risk Factors for Repetitive Work Techniques to Reduce the Risk for Injury and Illness Ergonomic Job Analysis for Repetitive Work Table 2: Muscle Effort Levels Definitions of Heavy Effort in MMH Risk Factor Analysis Form Risk Factors for Low Back Pain and Ways to Reduce Them Strength and Location Maximum Forces for Design Manual Handling Guidelines Overexertion Injury Risk Factors Cost/Benefit Analyses Cost of Poor Design Cost/Benefit Problem Solving Form 12 Guidelines for Ergonomic Design Plant Ergonomics Programs and Organization Thoughts on Ergonomics Programs Recommended Videotapes on Ergonomics Topics References - SHR Extra Forms Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 Page# 1 2 8 15 16 17 19 21 22a 23 24 25 26 28 29 30 32 33 37 39 42 47 51 54 55 56ff. �"Ergo:a.o-.i.cs ········· Pn:lutfnty ···~····· ::&·;n:..·'·r;··sdety ::::rQ···;:•1·i~··· ...::~::::: . . . . : : : Ergonomics Coordinating Committee Training for the GE Aircraft Engine Plants in Rutland, VT, July 9, 1991 Syllabus Schedule 7:30- 8:30AM Identifying Fatiguing Activities·- Techniques to Reduce the Risk for Fatigue at Work 8:30- 9:15 Ergonomic Problem Solving 9:15- 9:30 Break 9:30- 10:30 Identifying and Reducing the Risk Factors for Repetitive Motions Disorders 10:30- 11:00 Manual Handling Risk Factors and Their Resolution 11:00- 11:30 Selling Ergonomic Changes Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN"' 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544·3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �Table of Contents Topic Pa2e Table of Contents I Acknowledgements Identifying Ergonomics Problems Work/Recovery Graphs Height and Reach Interactions Finding the Best Solutions Ergonomics Problem Solving Form 1 2 8 13 14 15 Risk Factors for C~al Tunnel Syndrome Factors Affecting Gnp Strength Risk Factor Analysis Form Ergonomic Job Anallsis Technique Table 2: Examples o Muscle Effort Levels Table 3: Definitions of Heavy Effort in MMH Tasks 25 26 Risk Factors for Low Back Pain Analyzing Jobs for Low Back Risk Factors Force and Location Relationship - Static Pull Maximum Forces for Design Kodak Guidelines for Occasional Lifts Kodak Guidelines for Repetitive Lifting 27 29 31 32 33 34 Cost/Benefit Analyses of Ergonomic Solutions The Costs of Poor Design Cost/Benefit Problem Solving Form 12 Ergonomics Design Guidelines 35 39 41 44 OSHA Proposed General Industry Guidelines Plant Ergonomics Programs and Organization Thoughts on Ergonomics Programs and Processes How To Do An Ergonomics Survey First Job Charactenstics Ergonomics Case Study Problem Solving Form Recommended Videotapes on Ergonomics References - SHR 49 50 54 57 59 60 61 62 Overexertion Injury Risk Factors Extra Problem Solving Forms 63 64ff 18 20 21 22 Acknowledgements The illustrations on pages13, 33, and 34 are used with permission from Eastman Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volumes 1 & 2 published by Van Nostrand Reinhold in 1983 and 1986. The table and illustration on pages 31 and 32 are from Working With Backache by S. H. Rodgers. The table on l?age 20 was published by Thieme Publishers in Seminars in Occupational Medicme in March 1987. The analytical technique on pages 22 and 65 has been published by Hanley anc Belfuss in a 1988 Occupational Medicine: State of the Art Review edition on Worker Fitness Evaluations. All other material in this syllabus is by Dr. S.H. Rodgers and permission to reproduce it must be obtained from her. �Ergonomics Awareness for Supervisors at the GE Aircraft Engine Plants in Rutland, VT, July 9-12, 199i -=~··~ ~n~~ Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE. EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (n6) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �Ergonomics Training Program for the General Electric Aircraft Engine Plants in Rutland,VT. Team Training, September 3-6, 1991 Syllabus- e--~\~4.M& Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �Teamwork Quality Job Satisfaction Productivity Health Safety 3-Day Ergonomics Course GE Appliances Louisville September 10-12, 1991 Syllabus Suzanne H. ~odgers; Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" } 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING 'ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (n6) 544-3S87 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER. N.Y. 14622 �3-Day Ergonomics Training Course for GE Applianmces, Louisville i Tuesday, September 10, 1991: Ergonomics Overview, Posture and Productivity, Repetitive Motions Disorders 7:157:458:158:30- 7:45AM 8:15 8:30 9:15 9:15- 9:30 Introductions and Overview Work Capacity Who Do We Design For ? Posture and Productivity- Static Work, Reach/Height Interactions Break 9:30- 10:00 10:00 - 10:30 10:30 - 11:30 11:30- 12:00 Work/Recovery Curves Layout and Workplace Design Problem Solving: Postures and Workplace Design Lunch 12:00 - 12:45 PM 12:45- 1:15 1:15- 2:00 2:00- 2:15 Problem Solving: Standing Workplace Design Seated Workplace Design and Visual Work Repetitive Motions Disord~rs- Risk Factors . Break 2:152:45- 2:45 3:15 Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique Problem Solving: Repetitive Tasks Wednesday, September 11, 1991: Preventing Overexertion Injuries and Enhancing Human Reliability; Cost-Benefit Analyses 7:15 7:45 8:15 8:45 9:15 - 7:45AM 8:15 8:45 9:15 9:30 Tool Design and Selection Human Reliability - Preventing Human Error Controls and Displays - Information Transfer Problem Solving: Accident Investigation Break 9:30 - 10:30 10:30 - 11:30 11:30- 12:00 Manual Materials Handling - Lifting and Force Guidelines Problem Solving: Manual Handling Tasks Lunch 12:001:002:002:152:45- Puzzle Exercise - Pacing, Environment Cost-Benefit Analyses of Solutions Break Problem Solving: Cost-Benefit Analysis Problem Selection for Presentations on Thursday 1:00 2:00 2:15 2:45 3:15 Thursday, September 12, 1991: Problem Analyses and Presentations 7:15- 8:00PM 8:00- 11:30 11:30- 12:00 Ergonomics Program Suggestions - Where From Here ? Work on Problem Analyses with Supervision Lunch 12:00 - 1:00 PM 1:00 - 3:00 3:00 - 3:15 Practice Presentations Presentations to Managers Course Evaluations, Resources 3/11/91 SHR �;~ ) 0 3.5-Day Ergonomics Training Program for the General Electric Aircraft Engine Plants in Rutland, VT Team Training, September 3-6, 1991 Syllabus Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �3.5-Day Ergonomics Training Course .·~ ( ) Day 1: Ergonomics Overview, Reducing Fatigue at Work, Workplace and Equipment Design 7:308:008:309:15- 8:00AM 8:30 9:15 9:45 9:45- 10:30 10:30- 11:00 Introductions and Overview Work Capacities -Who Do We Design For ? Preventing Fatigue: Work/Recovery Curves Break 11:00- 11:30 11:30- 12:15 PM Problem Solving: Postural Fatigue Using Body Size Data - Heights and Reaches, Visual Needs Problem Solving: Standing Workplace Heights Lunch 12:15 - 12:45 12:45- 1:30 1:30- 2:15 2:15- 2:30 Problem Solving (Complete Earlier Problem) Workplace Layout: Design to Reduce Extra Effort Seated Workplace Design Break 2:30- 3:30 Problem Solving: Seated Workplace Design ) Day 2: Preventing Overexertion Injuries and Reducing Error 7:30- 8:15AM 8:15- 9:00 9:00- 9:30 9:30- 9:45 Risk Factors for Tendonitis, CafJ?al Tunnel Syndrome, and Other OverexertiOn Injuries Ergonomic Job Analysis Form Factors Affecting Grip Strength, Level of Effort Break 9:45- 10:45 10:45 - 11:30 11:30- 12:15 PM Problem Solving: Repetitive Tasks Tool Design and Selection Lunch · 12:15- 1:00 1:00- 1:30 1:30- 2:00 2:00- 2:15 Ergonomics and Quality Performance - Puzzle Improving Human Reliability - Reducing Job Complexity and Providing Operator Control Controls/Displays and Automation Break 2:15- 2:45 2:45- 3:30 Environmental Factors Influencing Performance Problem Solving: Information and Complexity Day 3: Manual Handling and Cost/Benefit Analyses 7:308:008:309:15- 8:00 8:30 9:15 9:30 Low Back Pain- Job Risk Factors Designing Manual Handling Tasks Manual Lifting Guidelines Break I' L �9:30-10:15 10:15 -10:45 10:45 -11:30 11:30-12:15 Problem Solving: Manual Handling Total Workload/Hours of Work Cost-Benefit Analyses of Ergonomic Problems Lunch 12:15- 1:15 1:15- 1:30 1:30- 2:15 2:15- 2:30 Problem Solving Using Cost-Benefit Approach Surveys/Checklists/Resources Ergonomics Programs: Where From Here ? Break 2:30- 3:30 Problem Selection for Day 4, Instructions for Presentations, Initial Analyses Day 4: Problem Solving and Presentations by Class Members c 7:30- 9:30 9:30- 9:45 Work on Presentations (with Oversight) Break 9:45- 10:00 10:00- 10:15 10:15- 10:30 10:30- 10:45 10:45 - 11:00 11:00- 11:30 Case Study # 1 Case Study #2 Case Study # 3 Case Study # 4 Case Study # 5 Action Plan Discussion, Course Evaluations 7/91 SHR t f L(.... �3 . 5-Day Ergonomics Training Course for Amoco Chemical Plants Joliet, IL , September 17 • 20, 1991 Syllabus __! , r L_, "' ... £ 4 l_j 4 { ' Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACro~ "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOS 0ESIGN~ 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE _QF HUMAN FACTORs IN WORKPLACE, EOUIPI\iENT AND PRODUCT DES 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS IGN (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCu cESTER ., y •"· ·146<2 �I i " 3.5-Day Ergonomics Training Course I : ll l _j ll Day 1: Ergonomics Overview, Reducing Fatigue,, Workplace and Equipment Design, Repetitive Tasks 8:00 - 8:30 AM 8:30- 9:00 9:00- 10:00 10:00-10:15 Introductions, Course Goals Ergonomics Overview Designing Jobs to Reduce Fatigue Break 10:15-11:15 11 :15 - 11 :45 11:45-12:30 Problem Solving: Fatigue Reduction/Posture Heights and Reaches Lunch Break 12:30-1:30 PM 1:30- 2:30 2:30- 2:45 Problem Solving: Working Heights Design Guidelines for Comfortable Working Postures Break 2:45- 3:30 3:30- 4:00 Risk Factors for Repetitive Motions Problems Techniques to Reduce Repetitive Motions Injuries and Illnesses 'L Ji r1 I L_j ~l L_j ! l i' :' LJ lJ 'l u ll I I LJ u u u ' 1 IL_J Day 2: Ergonomic Job Analysis, Layout, Manual Materials Handling 8:00- 9:00AM 9:00- 10:00 10:00-10:15 Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique Problem Solving: Ergonomic Job Analysis Break 10:15-10:45 10:45-11:15 11 :15 - 11 :45 11:45-12:30 PM Workplace Layout - Materials Flow Problem Solving: Layout Risk Factors for Low Back Pain Lunch Break 12:301:00 1:45 2:15 - Guidelines for Manual Ha~dling Tasks Problem Solving: Lifting and Lowering Guidelines for Pushing and Pulling Break 1:00 1:45 2:15 2:30 2:30 - 3:00 3:00 - 4:00 Frequent Lifting and Overall Workload Guidelines Hours of Work and Shiftwork f I' ' J..., �; \ r-, iI 2. , l J II I i i I i \ ~ n l J :l Day 3: Human Reliability/Error, Ergonomics and Quality Performance, Environmental Factors, Cost/Benefit Analyses 8:00 - 8:30 AM 8:30- 9:00 9:00- 10:00 10:00-10:15 Model of Human Reliability Contributors to Human Error at Work Problem Solving: Ergonomics and Accident Analysis Break I i LJ Ergonomics and Quality - Puzzle Exercise Environmental Factors- Noise, Vibration, Heat, Cold, ' Lighting 11 :45 - 12:30 PM Lunch Break ll 12:30-1:30 : l 1:30- 2:15 2:15- 2:30 Discussion: Starting an Ergonomics Program in Your Plant Cost Benefit Analyses of Ergonomic Problem Solutions Break 2:30- 3:30 3:30- 4:00 Problem Solving: Cost-Benefit Analyses Selection of Project for Day 4-:Presentation I Lj ll 10:15-11:00 11 :00 - 11 :45 lJ LJ I! u ll I ; LJ lJ [J u li u ( : u L r ! IL__, Day 4: Project, Presentations, Program Discussion, Resources 8:00- 10:00 10:00-10:15 Work on Projects, Prepare Presentations Break 10:15 - 11 :30 11:30-12:00 Project Presentations Resources, Program De~elopment, Evaluations 8/31/91 SHR �i -, 3.5-Day Ergonomics Training Course ! Table of Contents ! : I --~ ! Topic Schedule Table of Contents Acknowledgements Starting Page Location EDFPAWl S~llabus i iii v OSHA General Ergonomics Program General Ergonomics Goals Introduction and Course Goals . Plant Ergonomics Programs and Organization The Costs of Poor Design Capacities for Work Factors That Increase Stress 1' 2 3 4 3 8 10 12 EDFPAW2 4 9 210,446,496 237 . j Static Work- Fatigue Identifying Ergonomics Problems Low Back Risk Factors Recovery Time/Static Muscle Work Design to Minimize Effort Risk Factor Analysis Fo11Il Summary of Overexertion Risk Factors Finding Best Solution to Problem 13 15 21 22 27 28 29 30 Who Do We Design For? Human Variability Anthropometric Data Height and Reach Interactions Distributions and Design 5 Questions Form Problem Analysis: Standing Work 31 32 37 40 41 42 Risk Factors for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Risk Analysis Form Ergonomic Job Analysis Form Factors Mfecting Grip Strength Table 2: Examples of Muscle Effort Levels Table 3: Heavy Effoit- Manual Handling Effort Estimation Scales ijtra Fo!m - Ergo Job Analysis Evaluating Hand Tools VDT Workplace Design Posture, Vision, Productivity 44 46 47 50 51 52 53 56 57 61 70 lJ Self-Help in VDT Workplace Comfort Assist Devices for VDTs 71 72 l~ Ergonomic Principles for Layout/Flow Ergonomic Opportuities - Auto/Human 74 76 Risk Factors for Low Back Pain Natural History Degenerative Disc Disease Design Guidelines to Reduce Back Pain Manual Handling Task Design 78 79 80 84 ·-l _j -~ i _ _j rl J ll LJ u r: J ,, lJ l~ r -, L~ 112 313 112,140,150,338. 52 217 98 135,340 24,217 -3,8,285,290 285,311 20,24,30 2, 13,446 448 218,255 23,50 151,244 151,254 338 140 18,28,50 17,30,50 28,101,179 256 142 223,282 -14 342 --- 135,340 135,340 135,340 .. L ~ It �Strength and Location Maximum Force Applications NIOSH Lifting Guidelines - 1981 Kodak Lifting Guidelines - Occasional Kodak Lifting Guidelines - Frequent Handling Risk Factors Extra Forms Total Workload, Shift Work, Overtime l 86 87 88 92 94 95 97 99 Human Reliability Factors Mfecting Quality Performance Puzzle Exercise Information Transfer - Controls/Displays Paced Work{fime Pressure Environmental Factors Job Control and Task Complexity Human Reliability - Man vs Machine 104 106 108 109 115 118 121 123 Ergonomics Programs and Processes First Job Characteristics Ergonomic Case Study Form Cost/Benefit Analyses Problem Solving Form- Cost/Benefit 124 127 128 129 135 12 Ergonomics Guidelines Ergonomics Checklist How To- Ergonomics Survey Examples of Questions Equipment for Ergonomics Work Ergonomics Videotapes - Commercial Videotaping Suggestions Ergonomics Problem Presentations Extra Problem Solving Forms Course Evaluation Form 138 143 149 151 153 155 156 157 158 ff end 15,122,151 135,338 384,446 398 360,403 408 -210, 288, 332, 473 181 10,222,232 90,107,162 230 210, 242, 320 232 181 '! j -j -l ) _j -- 313 313 320 -98 162 -- -- 9/91 SHR -l t • �Acknowledgements The illustrations on pages 34-37, 92, and 94, are used with permission from Eastman Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volumes 1 and 2 published by Van Nostrand Reinhold. The tables and illustrations on pages 33, 79-82, 86, and 87 are from Working With Backache by S. H. Rodgers. The articles on pages 13-14 and 53-54 were published by the Polinsky Institute's Functional Capacities Network. Information on pages 12, 47, and 61-73 has been developed in conjunction with Dr. Inger Williams. The analytical technique on pages 47 and 56 has been published by Hanley and Belfuss in a 1988 Occupational Medicine: State of the Art Review edition on Worker Fitness Evaluations. All other material in this syllabus, unless it has a specific reference, is by Dr. S.H. Rodgers and permission to reproduce it must be obtained from her. __) r l I ~_) -l I I 6/90 SHR r - I I L-> v, �APPLIED ERGONOMICS: Controlling Overexertion Injuries at Work October 3-6, 1991 * Philadelphia, Pennsylvania FACULTY ALAN R. BROWN, P.T. Granite Hill Physical Therapy Brunswick, Maine THOMAS COOK, P.T., PH.D. Associate Professor of Physical Therapy University of Iowa Iowa City, Iowa DONALD E. DAY, M.S. Consultant in Ergonomics Longmont, Colorado DIANNE M. PARROTTE, M.D. Chief, Occupational Medicine Bath Iron Works '· '<;:':~, J3;;~;pl!:j~}:~:~f,f.$.~J:41e · •· · ,f~t:~Ja:: ·Jiw~;:Yc>rk···· · ,~~--~1\f)J.Y~ ,_,~lliiii~~*;~~u · ·. ~,~~:~:~}~G11~f:~e·:•. ·~±;~:r~:w!~:~tf· ··~;&; �Tltursday, October 3, 1991 8:30 ~9:00AM- S. Rodgers OSHA, Industry, E\rgoJlomics, Medicine- Where Are 'Ve? A. OSHA and Ergonomics Legislation 1. 2. 3. 4. Red Meat Cutters Guidelines General Industry Guidelines- Proposed July, 1990 ANSI Z-365 Standard on Repetitive Tasks Other B. Industrial/Occupational Ergonomics Activities 1. Pre-OSHA Activity 2. OSHA-Driven Activity- Citations or Concerns 3. Ergonomics/Human Factors/Product Design C. Ergonomics Educational and Professional Activity 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Schools - Different Emphases Continuing Education/Seminars Professional Societies Publications Accreditation Activity D. Medical and Allied Health Activity 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Rehabilitation/Return-To-Work Handicapp·ed/Disabled Legislation Industrial Medicine Proactive versus Reactive- Health Care vs Wellness Job Accommodation/Placement Assessment of Worker Capabilities E. Need for Multidisciplinary Approaches To Keep People On the Job 1. Demographics of Workforce 2. Investment in Skilled Workers 3. More Need to Accommodate Change F. Review of the Objectives of this Semiri,ar �Friday, October 4, 1991 3:45 - 5:00 - S. Rodgers Manual Handling Guidelines - NIOSH, Snook, U of M, Kodak A. Biomechanical Guidelines B. Psychophysical Guidelines C. Physiological Guidelines D. NIOSH 1981 and 1991 (?) Guidelines E. Kodak Problem Solving Guidelines ), �2-Day Ergonomics Course for Engineers at the Bloomington, Indiana General Electric Appliance Plant, October, 1991 Syllabus Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 ~ '·. �~\) \ 2-Day Ergonomics Seminar for Engineers at the Bloomington, IN General Electric Appliance Plant, October 28-30, Oct 30-Nov 1, 1991 Schedule Session 1: Overview, Work Capacities, Workplace Design OveNiew of Ergonomics/Human Factors 1:45PM 1:00 Work Capacities of an Industrial Population 1:45 - 2:45 Break 2:45 - 3:00 Problem Solving: Determining the Best Height of a 3:00 - 4:00 Standing Workstation General Layout Principles 4:00 - 4:45 Workplace Design Guidelines - Summary 4:45 - 5:00 Session 2: Workplace and Equipment Design, Environmental Design, Work Pace 8:00 - 9:00AM Seated Workplace Design- Computer Workplaces 9:00 - 9:45 Problem Solving: Designing a Sub-Assembly Seated Workplace Break 9:45 - 10:00 Lighting, Noise, Temperature/Humidity 10:00- 11 :00 Work Pace - Impact on Recovery Time for Static Work 11 :00 - 11 :30 Automation/Human Interfaces/Complexity 11 :30 - 12:00 Lunch 12:00- 1:00 PM Session 3: Reducing Overexertion Injuries Through Ergonomic Design Problem Solving: Assembly Line Tasks 1:00 - 2:00 PM Repetitive Motions Problems - Risk Factors 2:00 - 2:45 Break 2:45 - 3:00 Techniques To Reduce the Risk Factors 3:00 - 3:30 Low Back Pain Risk Factors and Manual Handling 3:30 - 4:30 Problem Solving: Overexertion Injury Prevention 4:30 - 5:00 ( \'---// Session 4: Resources, Cost/Benefit Analyses 8:00 - 9:00AM Examples of Ergonomics Tools and Equipment to Reduce the Risk for Overexertion Injuries Cost/Benefit Analyses 9:00 - 9:45 Break 9:45 - 10:00 Problem Solving: New Design 10:00- 11 :45 Resources, Evaluations 11:45- 12:00 10/22/91 • L �Ergonomics Training Course for Engineers Table of Contents Topic Schedule Table of Contents Aclmow1edgements I t \.___/" Starting Page Location Syllabus EDFPAW1 i EDFPAW2 11 iv Ergonomics Goals Plant Ergonomics Programs - Overview Costs of Poor Design Capacity and Workload Determinants Sensitizers to Stress Ergonomic Approaches to Reduce Injuries Recovery Time/Static Muscle Work 5 Questions AbOut Workplace Design Ergonomics Problem Solving 1 2 6 8 9 11 13 20 21 The Variability of People, Anthropometry Height and Reach Interactions Using Anthropometric Data Who Do We Design For ? Best Height for a Standing Workplace General Layout and Materials Flow Designing to Minimize Effort 23 28 29 31 32 34 36 VDT Workplace Design Kit VDT Workplace Analysis Seated Arm Reach How To Deal With Posture Problems How To Deal With Visual Problems Ergonomics Problem Solving 37 46 47 48 50 52 Environmental Factors - Lighting, Noise, Temperature Work Pace!fime Pressure Job Control and Task Complexity Human Reliability - Man vs Machine Ergo Opportunities - Automation or People Problem Solving Form 54 57 60 62 63 64 Risk Factors for Carpal Tunnel Factors Affecting Grip Strength .Risk Factor Analysis Form Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique Table 2: Levels of Muscle Effort Table 3: Heavy Effort in Manual Handling 67 69 70 71 74 75 Risk Factors for Low Back Pain Strength and Location Maximum Force Applications Kodak Lifting Guidelines Summary - Guidelines to Reduce Back Pain Analyzing Jobs For Low Back Risk Factors 76 78 79 80 82 85 Hand Tool Selection and Design 87 3 2 9 112, 140 112,140,150,338 24,217 24,217 8,285,290 20,24,30 285 13,446 218,255 23,50 52 28,101,179 20 ---- 17,30,50 -223,282 181 -- --151,244 151,254 360,254,403 15,122,151 140 135,340 135,338 384,446 360,403 256 �Cost/Benefit Analyses Problem Solving Form - Cost/Benefit Ergonomic New Design Analysis Form Summary of Operation Design 91 97 100 101 12 Ergonomics Guidelines Ergonomics Checklist Resources - Bibliographies Course Evaluation Form 103 108 114 end 10/22/91 SHR 313 365 559 �Acknowledgements ,~~ CJ The illustrations on pages 25-28, 47, 80, and 81 are used with permission from Eastman Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volumes 1 and 2 published by Van Nostrand Reinhold. The tables, text, and illustrations on pages 24, 78, 79, and 82-84 are from Working With Backache by S. H. Rodgers. The article on pages 13-18 was published by Thieme Publishers in Seminars in Occupational Medicine in March 1987. The article on pages 11-12 was published in 1987 by the Polinsky Foundation's Functional Capacities Assessment Network. The table on page 62 is from Human Performance in Industry by Murrell, published by Reinhold in 1965. Information on pages 9, 37 to 46,48-51, and 71 has been developed in conjunction with Dr. Inger Williams. The analytical technique on page 71 has been published by Hanley and Belfuss in a 1988 Occupational Medicine: State of the Art Review edition on Worker Fitness Evaluations. All other material in this syllabus is by Dr. S.H. Rodgers and permission to reproduce it must be obtained from her. 6/90 SHR t 0 I Lv �... 4-Day Ergonomics Training Course For The Eastman Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, November 5-8,1991 Syllabus .· \ (__j Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �() Eastman Kodak Rochester, 4-Day Ergonomics Training Course, Training and Educational Resource Center, Nov 5-8,1991 Tuesday, November 5th: Overview, Posture and Productivity 8:00 8:309:009:45- 8:30 AM 9:00 9:45 10:00 Introductions and Overview Work Capacity · Who Do We Design Fo'r ? Break f, 10:45- 11 :15 11:15- 12:00 12:00 - 12:45 PM Posture and Productivity - Static Work, Reach/Height Interactions Work/Recovery Curves Layout of Workplaces/ Automation Lunch 12:45- 1:15 1:15- 2:15 2:15- 2:30 Problem Solving: Layout/Standing Work Design Visual Work and Lighting - Bob Weneck Break 10:00- 10:45 2:30- 3:15 3:15- 4:15 4:15- 4:30 Design of Seated Workplaces and Office Ergonomics - Inger Williams Problem Solving: Seated Workplace Design Summary of Workplace Design Guidelines Wednesday, Nov 6th - Preventing Overexertion Injuries and Enhancing Human Reliability 8:00 - 8:30 AM 8:309:15 9:15- 10:00 10:00-10:15 Repetitive Motions Disorders Risk Factors for Tendonitis, Carpal Tunnel, etc. Ergonomic Job Analysis Form Break 10:15-11:00 11 :00 - 12:00 12:00 - 12:45 PM Problem Solving: Rep~titive Tasks Tool Design and Selection Lunch 12:45-1:15 1:15-2:15 2:15- 2:45 Ergonomics and Quality - Puzzle Human Reliability- Overview Reducing Job Complexity- Information, Pacing, Controls/Displays/Automation Break 2:45- 3:00 , L �3:00- 3:45 3:45- 4:30 Environmental Factors ilnfluencing Performance Problem Solving: Information and Environment Thursday, Nov 7th: Manual Handling and Costi;Benefit Analyses · f (_) 8:00- 9:00 9:00 -10:00 10:00-10:15 Hours of Work and Shiftwork - Carol McCreary Systems Approach to MMH - Joel Wilson Break 10:15-10:45 10:45 -11:30 11 :30 -12:00 12:00 -12:45 Low Back Risk Factors - MMH Guidelines Problem Solving: Manual Handling Frequent Lifting/ Total Workload Lunch 12:45-2:00 2:00- 2:15 2:15- 3:15 3:15- 3:30 Problem Solving: Designing a New Handling Task Cost-Benefit Analyses of Solutions Problem Solving Using! Cost-Benefit Approach Break 3:30-4:00 4:00-4:30 SuNeys/Checklists/Resources Instructions for Day 4 Problem Solving Session and Initial Preparation Time for Groups Friday Nov 8th, 1991 : Problem Solving and Group Presentations - Cost-Justified Solutions 8:00- 10:45 10:45 - 11 :00 11 :00 - 11 :45 11:45-12:45 12:45- 2:00 2:00- 2:15 2:15- 2:45 2:45- 3:00 Time to Complete Presentation for Today Break Presentations Lunch Presentations Break Where From Here ? Course Evaluations Homework Suggestions: (_) Night Before Course: Review Volume 1, Ch 2, Appendix, Syllabus Tuesday Night: Review Volume 1, Chs 3,4,5, Volunie 2, Work Patterns Wednesday Night: Review Volume 2, Manual Handling 9/26/91 SHR I I (...l,.. �Ergonomics Training Course Table of Contents (~\ \. ) ;~\ "-_) _) ,_ Topic Schedule Table of Contents Acknowledgements Syllabus i iii v Starting Page Location EDFPAW 1 EDFPAW2 General Industry Ergo Guidelines Introduction and Course Goals Ergonomics Goals Capacities for Work Factors That Increase Stress The Variability of People Anthropometric Data Height and Reach Interactions Using Anthropometric Data Distributions and Design 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 10 11 13 Static Muscle Work Recovery Time/Static Work Design to Minimize Effort Finding the Best Solutions Ergonomic Problem Solving 14 22 27 28 29 Layout and Materials Flow Worksheet Humans vs Machines Automation or Manual Worksheet Questions to Ask Problem Analysis: Standing Work 31 33 34 35 36 Risk Factors for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Factors Mfecting Grip Strength Risk Factor Analyses Ergonomic Job Analysis Form Tables 2-3: Effort Definitions Effort Estimation Scales Problem Analysis: Repetitive Work 38 151,244 40 41 42 45 47 50 151,254 Puzzle Exercise Ergonomics and Quality Paced Work - Time Pressure Information Transfer- Controls and Displays Job Control and Task Complexity Environmental Factors Problem Solving Form 58 60 63 Risk Factors for Low Back Pain Natural History Degenerative Disc Manual Materials Handling Strength and Location Maximum Force Applications Kodak Lifting Guidelines Problem Analysis: Manl Handling 66 68 69 71 72 73 74 51 52 54 57 3 8,285,290 8,285,290 20,24,30 285 112,140,150 2 210,446,496 237 13,446 13,446 218,255 24,217 217 52 14 83 342 23,50 338 230 90,107,162 -- 210, 242, 320 --- -135,340 15,122,151 -338 135,338 384,446 360,403 -- \ . ,.. {.,(,.,(. �(~) Repetitive Lifting Guidelines Total Workload General Guidelines/Lifting! Repetitive Work 75 76 81 Ergonomic Design Analysis Form Cost/Benefit Analyses The Costs of Poor Design Ergonomics in Old/New Design Problem Solving Form 82 83 87 89 90 How to - Ergonomics Survey Questions to Ask Line Workers 12 Ergonomics Design Guidelines 93 95 97 313 --- Ergonomics Project Instructions. Extra Problem Solving Forms 102 103 ff -- Course Evaluation Form end -- 9/26/91 SHR (~ ~/ -- -- 403 206,276,480 ----- 9 -- -98 �Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544·3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 1-Day Ergonomics Seminar for Managers and Engineers from 3 Sara Lee Meatcutting Plants in the Cincinnati Area, November 25, 1991 Schedule ~·~ . 8:30- 8:45AM 9:15 - 10:15 10:15- 10:30 Introductions - Goals of Course, Preventing Injury and Illness Through Reduction of Fatigue on a Job Postural Fatigue - Static Muscle Loading, Work/Recovery Needs. Ways to Reduce Static Loading. Problem Solving: Postural Fatigue Break 10:30-11:15 11:15 - 11:30 11:30-12:15 PM 12:15 - 1:00 Repetitive Work Fatigue- Risk Factors, Ergonomic Job Analysis Techniques to Reduce Repetitive Work Fatigue Problem Solving: Repetitive Work Lunch '"-----) 8:45- 9:15 1:00 1:45 2:15 2:30 3:00 - 1:45 2:15 2:30 3:00 3:15 3:15 - 4:25 4:25 - 4:55 4:55 - 5:00 \ /_r_.· ' - ' - - / Cost/Benefit Analyses of Ergonomic Solutions - Selling Change Fatigue Associated With Manual Handling Tasks Techniques to Reduce Handling Fatigue Problem Solving: Manual Handling Break Projects: Each Plant Team Work on a Problem Using the Techniques Presented in This Course Presentations: Each Team Present Their Solution (in 10 Minutes) Final Comments �Table of Contents Page# Topic , ' \I I Table of Contents/Acknowledgments Thoughts on Ergonomics Processes Capacity and Workload Determinants Ergonomic Approaches to Reduce Injuries Recovery Time Needs for Repetitive Work Work/Recovery Curves Anthropometric Data Height and Reach Interaction Redesigning Jobs to Minimize Unnecessary Effort Finding the Best Solution to an Ergonomics Problem Ergonomics Problem Solving Forms Risk Factors for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Risk Factor Evaluation Forms Ergonomic Job Analysis Form Table 2: Muscle Effort Levels Table 3: Heavy Effort in Manual Handling Tasks Extra Forms Ergonomic and Risk Factor Analysis Cost-Benefit Analyses of Ergonomic Problem Solutions The Costs of Poor Design Cost Justifying Problem Solving Forms 1981 NIOSH Manual Lifting Guide Formula Kodak Occasional Lifting Guidelines Kodak Frequent Lifting Guidelines Instructions for Problem Presentations Extra Forms for Problem Solving Ergonomic Case Study Form Ergonomics Videotapes for Employee Awareness S.H. Rodgers References in Ergonomics 1 2 5 7 9 15 16 17 18 19 20 24 27 28 31 32 33 34 38 40 46 47 48 49 50 56 57 58 Acknowledgements r The illustrations on pages 17, 47 and 48 are used with permission from Eastman Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volumes 1 and 2 published by Van Nostrand Reinhold. The illustration on page 16 is from Working With Backache by S.H.Rodgers. Information on page 28 has been developed in conjunction with Dr. Inger Williams. The article on work/recovery curves was published by Thieme Publishers in Seminars in Occupational Medicine in March 1987. The analytical technique on page 28 has been published by Hanley and Belfuss in a 19880ccupational Medicine: State of the Art Review edition on Worker Fitness Evaluations. The formula on page 46 is from NIOSH's Manual Lifting Guide written in July, 1981. All other material in this syllabus is by Dr. S.H. Rodgers and permission to reproduce it must be obtained from her. J 11/16/91 f, �i ~·<,~ll ) Ergonomics Awareness Seminar for Vermont Employers and VOSHA, Rutland, VT, December 3,1991 Sponsored by General Electric Aircraft Engine Plants, Rutland, VT Presented by Suzanne H. Rodgers, PhD, Consultant in Ergonomics 30 min A. VOSHA's Responsibilities to Reduce illjuries Related to Ergonomic Problems in the Workplace- VOSHA 30 min B. Overview of Ergonomics/Human Factors -Benefits to Employers/Employees 60 min C. Overexertion fujuries 1. Recognition of CTDs (Cumulative Trauma Disorders) 2. Fatigue Model to Explain CTDs 3. Risk Factors and Factors Affecting Grip Strength 4. Techniques to Reduce the Risk Factors 5. Early Detection and Medical Management of CTDs 60 min D. Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique to Identify the Need for Change in Tasks 1. Level of Effort Defined 2. Duration of Muscle Effort and Frequency of Effort 3. Total Time of Task and Pattern of Work 30 min E. Job and Workplace Design Guidelines to Reduce the Risk for CTDs at Work 120 min F. Problem Solving Examples 60 min G. Setting Up an Ergonomics Process in Your Business 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Management Commitment Employment fuvolvement Job Analysis Hazard Prevention and Control Medical Management Training and Education Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D .t(----.· ~ CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS �Occupational Ergonomics 3-Hour Ergonomic Awareness Session for People on the Ham Bone Lines, Bryan Foods, West Point, MS, January 27, 28, 1992 Topics Covered Preventing Excessive Fatigue Designing Jobs to Reduce Small Muscle Stress Finding the Best Work Patterns Analyzing Jobs Problem Solving - Ham Bone Line Jobs Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMA.N FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �Ergonomics \ / I Job Setisfection Productivity Quel ity Sefety 3.5-Day Ergonomics Training Course for GE Appliances Dishwasher Plant, Louisville, KY, Fe_bruary 10-13, 1992 Syllabus Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1, AWARENESS SEMINARS 2, TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3, HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �Regulatory Agencies: Standards That Impact Industry and Health care, Lecture/Discussion Session on Sunday, March 1, 1992 in San Antonio, TX for the Polinsky Advantage FCA's Seminar, "Keeping Pace With Occupational Medicine" (90 minutes) A. Ergonomics Guidelines Through OSHA 1. Ergonomics Program Management Guidelines for Meatpacking Plants · a. Primary Components b. How Guidelines Have Been Used By OSHA Inspectors c. Using the Guidelines Proactively Rather Than In Response to Citations 2. Ergonomics Program Management Guidelines for General Industry a. Primary Components and How Used by OSHA Inspectors b. Checklists- What To Be Aware Of In Using Them c. ANSI Z-365 Standards Committee Work B. NIOSH Guidelines for Manual Lifting 1. 1981 Guidelines vs 1991 Proposed Guidelines 2. Using the Guidelines to Evaluate Lifting Tasks C. San Francisco Video Display Terminal Worker Safety Ordinance 1. Content 2. Applications and Concerns 3. Office Ergonomics Approaches 2/5/92 SHR Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS {716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �I I '. \ ~zanne H. Rodgers, PhD. Consultant In Ergonomics/Human Factors 169 Huntington Hills ROCHESTER, NEW YORK 14622 Job Analysis and Placement- The Ergonomics Viewpoint Lecture/Problem Solving Session on Sunday, March 1, 1992 in San Antonio, TX for the Polinsky Advantage FCA's Seminar, "Keeping Pace With Occupational Medicine" (90 minutes) A. Assessing Job Demands 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Musculoskeletal Stresses Cardiopulmonary Stresses Perceptual Demands External Pacing Stress Job Environment Psychosocial Stressors B. Defining Work Capacities 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Strength Reach/Range of Motion Endurance- Local Muscle and Whole Body Tolerance of Environmental Stresses Perceptual Capacities Mental Capacities 215/92 SHR (716) 544·3587 �Suzanne H. Rodgers, PhD. Consultant In Ergonomics/Human Factors 169 Huntington Hills ROCHESTER, NEW YORK 14622 Ergonomic Job Analyses and Design Guidelines Support Material for Ergonomics Reviews of Jobs in 3 Departments at Astra Valcour in Glens Falls, NY, March 12, 1992 Table of Contents Topic Identifying Ergonomics Problems Anthropometric Data Height and Reach Guidelines · Overexertion Injury Risk Factors Work-Recovery Curves for Muscles Ergonomic Job Anallsis Technique Table 2: Examples o Muscle Effort Rating of Perceived Exertion Scales Table 3: Definitions of Heavy Effort in Manual Handling Strength in Different Locations Maximum Forces for Design Biomechanics of Lifting - Low Back Risk NIOSH Lifting Guidelines Kodak Lifting Guidelines Extra Analysis and Problem Solving Forms References - SH Rodgers Pm:e # 1 7 10 11 12 13 16 17 19 20 21 22 23 25 27 31 Acknowledgements The illustrations on pages 7 to 10, 17, 25 and 26 are used with permission from Eastman Kodak's Ergonomic Designfor People at Work, Volumes 1 and2 published by Van Nostrand Reinhold in 1983 and 1986. The tables and illustrations on pages 20 to 22 are from Working With Backache by S. H. Rodgers published by Perinton Press in 1985. Information on page 12 has been developed in conjunction with Dr. Inger Williams. The analytical technique on pages 13 to 15 has been published by Hanley and Belfuss in a 1988 Occupational Medicine: State of the Art Review edition on Worker Fitness Evaluations. All other unreferenced material in this syllabus is by Dr. S.H. Rodgers and permission to reproduce it must be obtained from her. (716) 544·3587 �Table of Contents Topic OSHA and ADA and Ergonomics Ergonomics in Industry The Costs of Non-Ergonomic Design Capacity and Workload Determinants Who Do We Design For? The Variability of People, Anthropometry Height and Reach Interactions Using Anthropometric Data 1 5 7 9 12 14 21 23 Strength Data - Strength/Location Interaction Maximum Force Applications NIOSH Lifting Guidelines Kodak Lifting Guidelines 25 Recovery Time/Static Muscle Work Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique Table 2: Levels of Muscle Effort Table 3: Heavy Effort in Manual Handling 30 37 41 42 Risk Factors for Carpal Tunnel Risk Factors for Low Back Pain Risk Factor Analysis Form Environmental Considerations 43 45 5 Questions About Workplace Design Designing to Minimize Effort Ergonomics Problem Solving - New Design General Layout and Materials Flow Human Reliability - Man vs Machine Ergo Opportunities - Automation or People Job Control and Task Complexity Environmental Factors - Lighting, Noise, Temperature, Work Pace!fime Pressure Seated vs Standing Work Best Height for a Standing Workplace Hand Tool Selection and Design Visibility Issues Dealing With Postural and Visual Problems Design of a Subassembly Workplace - Control Panel Design of Containers - Size, Handholds, Weights, Locations - Page# 12 Ergonomics Guidelines Ergonomics Checklist Examples of Questions Resources - Bibliographies Extra Forms 3/31/92 26 27 28 47 48 51 52 53 55 57 58 59 61 64 65 67 69 73 77 80 81 86 92 94 98 �Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14822 2-Hour Ergonomic Awareness Sessions for Supervisors, Planners, and Engineers at General Electric's Dishwasher Plant in Louisville, KY, April 6-8,1992 Syllabus Table of Contents Topic OSHA Draft of General Ergonomics Program Guidelines ADA Legislation (Americans With Disabilities Act) Ergonomic Goals The Costs of Poor Design Recovery Time Needs for Repetitive Work Work/Recovery Curves Overexertion Injury Risk Factors Risk Factor Analysis Form Ergonomic Job Anallsis Technique Table 2: Examples o Muscle Effort Table 3: Definitions of Heavy Effort in Manual Handling Kodak Lifting Guidelines Anthropometric Data Height and Reach Guidelines Ergonomics Problem Solving Form 12 Ergonomic Design Guidelines Extra Analysis and Problem Solving Forms References - SH Rodgers Pa2e# 2 4 13 14 16 22: 23 24 25 28 29 30 32 33 34 36 41 45 �Acknowledgements The OSHA Ergonomics Program Management Recommendations for General Industry outline is from an unpublished document being worked on within the agency and regularly "leaked" to interested industry groups. This version appears to be from the summer of 1990 draft. The ADA handout is from the new Technical Assistance Manual on ADA available from EEOC as of February, 1992. The article on pages 16-21 is from Thieme Publishers Seminars in Occupational Medicine: Repetitive Motions Injuries of March, 1987. The illustrations on pages 30, 31 and 33 are used with permission from Eastman Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volumes 1 and 2 published by Van Nostrand Reinhold in 1983 and 1986. The illustrations on page 32 are from Working With Backache by S. H. Rodgers published by Perinton Press in 1985. Information on page 25 has been developed in conjunction with Dr. Inger Williams. The analytical technique on pages 25-27 has been published by Hanley and Belfuss in a 1988 Occupational Medicine: State of the Art Review edition on Worker Fitness Evaluations. All other unreferenced material in this syllabus is by Dr. S.H. Rodgers and permission to reproduce it must be obtained from her. t. �Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 4-Hour Ergonomics Training for Departmental Teams, at Plant 3, GE Appliances, Louisville, KY, April 7, 1992 Table of Contents Topic General Industry Ergonomics Guideline - Draft Plant Ergonomics Programs and Organization Figure 1: The Costs of Poor Design Identifying Ergonomics Problems Work/Recovery Curves Anthro12_ometric Data Height/Reach Interaction Risk Factor Analysis Risk Factors for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Factors Mfecting Grip Strength Ergonomic Job Analysis Table 2: Examples of Muscle Effort Levels Table 3: Definitions of Heavy Effort in Manual Handling Extra Problem Solving Forms Risk Factors for Low Back Pain Strength and Location Maximum Forces Kodak Lifting Guidelines Overexertion Injury Risk Factors 12 Guidelines for Design References - SHRodgers Startint: Pa2e 1 2 3 5 11 16 17 18 19 21 22 25 26 27 28 30 31 32 34 35 end Acknowledgements The illustrations on pages 17, 32 and 33 are used with permission from Eastman Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volumes 1 and 2 published by Van Nostrand Reinhold. The illustrations and tables on pages 16, 30, and 31 are from Working With Backache by S.H.Rodgers. Information on pages 31 and 42-47 has been developed in conjunction with Dr. Inger Williams. The curves on page 11 and the table on page 21 are described in an article on work/recovery curves published by Thieme Publishers in Seminars in Occupational Medicine in March 1987. The analytical technique on page 25 has been published by Hanley and Belfuss in a 19880ccupational Medicine: State of the Art Review edition on Worker Fitness Evaluations. All other material in this syllabus is by Dr. S.H. Rodgers and permission to reproduce it must be obtained from her. �6-Hour Ergonomics Course for Engineers at the Louisville, KY General Electric Appliances Plant 3, April 8-9,1992 Syllabus A. Scope of Ergonomics/Human Factors in Industry B. Who Do We Design For? 1. General Issues 2. Anthropometric Data 3. Strength and Endurance Data 4. Environmental Considerations C. Design of a New Line 1. Gathering Information for a New Design a. Questions for Operators, Supervisors, Safety & Health Specs. b. Quality, Productivity, Rework, Scrap Data 2. Layout a. Materials Flow b. Environmental Issues- Lighting, Vibration, Noise, etc. 3. Line Heights a. Seated vs Standing b. Reaches Required c. Postural Effects of Line Height Variations 4. Visibility Issues a. Nature of the Target To Be Seen b. Effect of Lighting on Visibility/Upper Body Posture 5. Subassembly- Control Panel Design a. Heights/Reaches b. ClearancesNisibility c. Repetitive Work c. Controls and Displays 6. Containers for Incommg and Outgoing Parts , a. Characteristics of Containers - Size, Handholds b. Container W~ights c. Locations in Workplace D. General Ergonomics Guidelines for Design 1. 2. 3. 4. Checklists/Guidelines Resource Books Philoso.Phical Guidelines - People vs Automation Designmg to Reduce the Risk for Overexertion Injuries �--, R ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ::: ~ ~-J ' . 3-Day Ergonomics Training Course for Amoco of Canada Fabrics and Fibers Plants Hawkesbury, ONT, April14-16, 1992 Syllabus _ _) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 --~ �\ ) DON"T WORRY; EVERYTHING IS GOING TO BE ALL RIGHT :7:0 I.OCAtS 'liiROIQIO, ATHBHJ, STUNNED LII"DIIII,:!AlUI, liD I'll --- GENEVA SHOCKED l!XlJJ:OW. "WASHINGtON ................. ................. ................. ................. ................................. .. ................. ................. ................................. .... ,............ ................. ................................. . ................. ................. . ................. ................. ................ ................. NO l'.R.OBLEM! ................. ................................ ................. .................................. ..,............., .................. " ................ ................................ ............ t... ................. ................ ................. ................ ..u,............... ,............ BARRE , .............. ,. ................. ................ ................. ................ ................ .... ., ......... . ................. ..... , ......... . ................ ................. ~ ................. .......... ,..... ................. ................, ,,,u, .............. ,........... .. ................ ................. .... ................. .............. ................ ................. ................. u............... BURLINGTON ................ ................. ....... ,......... ................ . ................. 1'""1""1'""1 ................ ~ ................ .................................. ................. ................. ................. ................ . ................. ................. u ............... ................ ................. ............................. ........... . .............. ............ ................. . .... ..... .. .......... ..... .......... ..................... ......... II o II I II ht(llttllllallt o o o • o o o o H U II II II lhtlllulllhll I I tl(nlhtlllltl I I . hthndnahu IIJI•I•t••l•alh tltttllnlllltll I I I lhlttflllhlllll .. tlfhhtnlultn thtlilllltllllh .......... llttllt I I I .... . ...... 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 hllltiiUitdht lhlthuh• I 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN . '"l•hnll""" I lnlyntltrnltl Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS ""HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN"" 'ulllh•• ..... Resource Manual for the Ergonomics Core Team at General Electric Aircraft Engine Plants in Rutland,VT CJ April 20-21, 1992 Schedule Monday . April 20th 7:00 Review of Progress Since December 8:00 Review of Goals for Core Team Training/New Team Development 8:45 Break 9:00 Review of Material in Resource Manual/GE Manual/Kodak Books 10:00 Identification of Most Useful Information To Team Members 11:00 Suggested Material for Syllabus for Training New Teams 11:30 Lunch 12:30 Problem Solving: New Tapes 2:15 Break 2:30 Finalize Content for Training Session Syllabus 3:30 Adjourn Tuesday. April 21st 7:00 Finalize Training Session Schedule and Respoonsibilities 8:00 Practice Sessions with Videotapes 8:45 Break 9:00 Practice Session (continued) 11 :00 Final Preparation for Course 11:30 Lunch �Table of Contents Topic General Industry Ergonomics Guideline Ergonomics Process Components Ergonomic Program Approaches Ergonomics Organizational Ideas Characteristics of First Job Use of the Problem Solv4lg_and Cost Analysis Forms Analyzing Standing Reach/Height Requirements Use of the Height/Reach Guidelines for Seated Work Instructions for the Ergonomic Job Analysis Form Use of the Lifting Guidelines Chart Static Muscle Work Demonstration Arm Reach and Height Demonstration Factors Affecting Handgrip Strength Hand Tools Demonstration Assembly Task Perlormance Demonstration - Puzzle Recovery Time Needs for Repetitive Tasks Work/Recovery Curves Anthropometric Data Analysis of the VDT Workstation Cost-Benefit Analysis Costs of Poor Design Training Module #1 -Ergonomics Overview Training Module #2 - Repetitive Motions Problems Training Module #3 - Manual Handling/Low Back Pain Case Study Form Work Practices in Repetitive Tasks Recommended Videotapes on Ergonomic Subjects Equipment for Ergonomics Work in Industry Guidelines for Preparing Videotapes of Jobs Resource Materials for Plants and Workers Suggested Published Resource Materials References - S.H. Rodgers Startin2 Pa2e # 1 2 3 7 10 11 24 28 32 42 51 56 61 68 71 77 83 84 87 95 99 101 107 111 118 119 120 121 123 124 126 129 Acknowledgements (_/ The illustrations on pages 27, 31, 47, 48, 84-86, and 115 are used with permission from Eastman Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volumes 1 and 2 published by Van Nostrand Reinhold. The tables and illustrations on pages 9, 68, 49 and 50 are from Working With Backache by S. H. Rodgers. Information on pages 36 and 87-94 has been developed in conjunction with Dr. Inger Williams. The article on Recovery Time Needs for Repetitive Work on pages 77-82 and the table on page 108 has been published by Thieme Publishers in Seminars in Occupational Medicine in March 1987. The analytical technique on page 36 has been published by Hanley and Belfuss in a 1988 Occupational Medicine: State ofthe Art Review edition on Worker Fitness Evaluations. The outline on page 1 is from a draft copy of a proposed ergonomics guideline for general industry by OSHA written in September, 1990. All other material in this syllabus is by Dr. S.H. Rodgers and permission to reproduce it must be obtained from her. �:'~ \ J 4-Day Ergonomics Training Course for General Electric Aircraft Engine Plants at Lynn, MA, May 4-7, 1992 Syllabus Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN '-'- ..) 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �i t· 4-Day Ergonomics Training Course Monday: Ergonomics Overview/Update, Reducing Fatigue at Work, Workplace and Equipment Design 7:30- 9:00AM 9:00- 9:15 9:15- 9:45 9:45- 10:15 10:15- 11:00 11:00- 11:30 Introductions & Review of Ergonomics Activity at Lynn Break 11:30-12:15 PM Work Capacities- Who Do We Design For? Preventing Fatigue: Work/Recovery Curves Problem Solving: Postural Fatigue Using Body Size Data - Heights and Reaches, Visual Needs Lunch 12:15- 12:45 12:45- 2:00 2:00- 2:30 2:30- 2:45 Problem Solving Exercise: Standing Workplace Height Workplace Layout: Design to Reduce Extra Effort Seated Workplace Design Break 2:45- 3:30 Problem Solving: Seated Workplace Design Tuesday: Preventing Overexertion Injuries and Reducing Error 7:30- 8:15AM 8:15- 8:45AM 0 8:45- 9:30 9:30- 9:45 Computer Workplaces Risk -pactors for Tendonitis, CafJ?al Tunnel Syndrome, and Other Overexertion Injuries Ergonomic Job Analysis Form Break 9:45- 11:00 11:00- 11:30 11:30- 12:15 PM Problem Solving: Repetitive Tasks Tool Design and Selection Lunch 12:15- 1:00 1:00- 1:45 1:45- 2:15 2:15- 2:30 Ergonomics and Quality Performance - Puzzle Improving Human Reliability - Reducing Job Complexity and Providing Operator Control Controls/Displays and Automation Break 2:30- 3:30 Environmental Factors Influencing Performance Wednesday: Manual Handling and Cost/Benefit Analyses \ I . '--____/ 7:308:309:009:30- 8:30 9:00 9:30 9:45 Low Back Pain- Job Risk Factors Designing Manual Handling Tasks Manual Lifting Guidelines Break l �~\ ' 9:45 -10:45 10:45 -11:15 11:15 -11:30 11:30 -12:15 Problem Solving: Manual Handling Total Workload/Hours of Work Cost-Benefit Analyses of Ergonomic Problems Lunch 12:30- 1:30 1:30- 2:15 2:15- 2:30 Problem Solving Using Cost-Benefit Approach Surveys/Checklists/Resources Break 2:30- 3:00 3:00- 3:30 Ergonomics Programs: Where From Here ? Problem Selection for Day 4, Instructions for Presentations ) Thursday: Problem Solving and Presentations by Class Members 7:30- 11:30 11:30- 12:15 PM Work on Presentations (with Oversight) Lunch 12:151:452:003:30- Practice Presentations Break Presentations to Managers Action Plan Discussion, Course Evaluations 4/92SHR i "--j 1:45 2:00 3:30 4:00 �4-Day Ergonomics Training Program for the Decatur, AL GE Appliances Plant, June 1-4,1992 Syllabus Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �4-Day Ergonomics Training Course Day 1: Ergonomics Overview, Reducing Fatigue at Work, Workplace and Equipment Design 7:30 - 8:30 AM 8:30- 9:00 9:00- 9:15 9:15- 9:45 9:45- 10:15 10:15- 11:00 11:00- 11:30 Introductions & Review of Ergonomics Legislation Scope of Ergonomics Break 11:15- 11:30 11:30 - 12:15 PM Work Capacities - Who Do We Design For ? Preventing Fatigue: Work/Recovery Curves Problem Solving: Postural Fatigue Using Body Size Data - Heights and Reaches, Visual Needs Problem Solving: Standing Workplace Heights Lunch 12:15- 12:45 12:45- 2:00 2:00- 2:30 2:30- 2:45 Finish Problem Solving Exercise Workplace Layout: Design to Reduce Extra Effort Seated Workplace Design Break 2:45- 3:30 Problem Solving: Seated Workplace Design- VDTs Day 2: Preventing Overexertion Injuries and Reducing Error 7:30- 8:30AM 8:30- 9:00 9:15- 9:45 9:45- 10:00 Risk Factors for Tendonitis, CafJ?al Tunnel Syndrome, and Other Overexertion Injuries Ergonomic Job Analysis Form Factors Affecting Grip Strength, Level of Effort Break 10:00- 11:30 11:30- 12:15 PM Problem Solving: Repetitive Tasks Lunch 12:15 - 12:45 12:45- 1:15 1:15- 1:45 Tool Design and Selection Ergonomics and Quality Performance - Puzzle Improving Human Reliability - Reducing Job Complexity and Providing Operator Control Controls/Displays and Automation Break 1:45- 2:15 2:15- 2:30 2:30- 3:30 Problem Solving: Accident Investigation and Ergonomics Day 3: Manual Handling and Cost/Benefit Analyses 7:308:309:009:30- 8:30 9:00 9:30 9:45 Low Back Pain- Job Risk Factors Designing Manual Handling Tasks Manual Lifting Guidelines Break I t �9:45 -10:45 10:45 -11:15 11:15-11:30 11:30 -12:15 Problem Solving: Manual Handling Total Workload/Hours of Work Environmental Factors Lunch 12:30- 1:30 1:30- 2:15 2:15- 2:30 Cost-Benefit Approach Surveys/Checklists/Resources Break 2:30- 3:15 3:15- 3:30 Ergonomics Programs: Where From Here ? Problem Selection for Day 4, Instructions for Presentations . Day 4: Problem Solving and Presentations by Class Members and Others With Ergonomics Training 7:30- 10:30 10:30-11:30 11:30 - 12:30 Work on Presentations (with Oversight) Practice Sessions Lunch 12:30 - 12:45 12:45- 1:00 1:00- 1:15 1:15- 1:30 1:30- 1:45 1:45- 2:15 Case Study # 1 Case Study # 2 Case Study # 3 Case Study # 4 Case Study # 5 Action Plan Discussion, Course Evaluations 5/92 SHR t i l.L- �Syllabus for a 1-Day Seminar on Applied Ergonomics for Clients of The Therapy Source, Boise, 10, June 10, 1992 8:00- 8:30AM 8:30- 9:15 9:15- 9:45 9:45- 10:00 10:00 - 11 :00 /----\ I'-' \.. 11:00-12:00 12:00 - 1:00 PM Introductions, Review of Content of Seminar Overview of Ergonomics, Legislation (OSHA, ADA), Benefits of Designing With Ergonomics in Mind Designing Jobs to Prevent Fatigue Break Risk Factors for Overexertion Injuries on the Job Managing Carpal Tunnel Syndrome/Low Back Pain Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique Lunch . 1:00- 2:00 2:00- 3:00 3:00- 3:15 Problem Solving: Overexertion Injuries Office Ergonomics - VDT Users Break 3:15- 3:45 Cost/Benefit Analyses of Ergonomic Problem Solutions Questions/Comments 3:45- 4:30 Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS / 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �1-Day Ergonomics Seminar for the VA Medical Center in Boise, 10, September 30, 1992 Schedule 8:00 - 8:30AM 8:30-9:45 9:45-10:00 10:00- 11:00 11:00- 12:00 12:00-1:00 PM 1:00-2:15 2:15-3:00 3:00-4:00 4:00-5:00 Introductions, Review of Areas of Interest Defming Ergonomics Problems in the Workplace - Risk Factors for Overexertion, Stress Factors Break Ergonomics and Low Back Pain - Reducing Risk Factors Postural and Manual Handling Requirements Problem Solving: Handling Tasks - Patient Handling, Receiving, Laundry, Supplies Lunch Office Ergonomics - Evaluation and Problem Solving Medical Administration, Clinics, etc. Repetitive Tasks - Ergonomic Accommodations Problem Solving - Repetitive Work - Food Preparation, Cleaning, Pharmacy Questions, Discussion Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �8:35 9:00 9:40 10:00 10:30 11:30 1:00PM 2:00 3:00-4:30 3:30 5:00 Patterns of Work - Shift Work, Job Organization - Day Interviews, Questionnaires and Psychophysical MethodsWilliams Workplace Measurements - Stuart-Buttle Break Biomechanical Analysis of Postures, Lifts- Cook Lunch Problem Solving: Manual Lifting Tasks- Cook Risk Factors for Overexertion Injuries, Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique- Rodgers Vendor Demonstrations Break Adjourn Friday, March 12th 8:00AM 8:05 9:15 10:00 10:30 10:45 11:45 1:15PM 1:20 2:15 3:15 Case Studies Showing Utilization of Different Techniques for Analyzing Job Demands - Panel of All Faculty Members Participating Repetitive Tasks- Day, leader VDT Workplaces - Williams, leader Break VDT Workplaces (continued)- Williams, leader Manual Handling Tasks- Cook, leader Lunch Functional Assessments of Work Capacities and Capabilities Tests of Functional Capabilities- Walker Research on Static Strength Assessments and Lifting C~pabilities - Golden Adjourn Saturday, March 13th 8:30AM 9:30 9:35 10:30 Relationship of Strength Assessments and Other Variables: Testing Reliability and Relationship to Work CapabilitiesHickey Testing for Susceptibility; Relating Capacities to Work Requirements; Reasonable Accommodations Studies on Early Detection of Repetitive Motions Disorders Cook Break �11:00 11:45 Medical Assessment of the Back - Parrotte Lunch 1:00PM Relating Job Demands to Functional Capacity Data and Defining How Much Change is Needed to Make Jobs More Ergonomic - Rodgers When to Fix the Person and When to Fix the Job - Work Hardening, Fitness, Ergonomics- Walker, Golden, Hickey, Day Break Examples of Reasonable Accommodations - Panel Adjourn 2:00 3:00 3:30 4:30 Sunday. March 14th 8:30AM 8:35 9:05 9:35 10:00 10:30 11 :15 11:45 12:00 10/7/92 SHR/bl Building Ergonomics Into the Occupational Setting On-Site Therapy Clinics- Golden, Parrotte Ergonomics and Wellness Programming - Day, Hickey Ergonomics and Management Programs for Quality, etc.Rodgers Break Helping an Employer Respond to an OSHA Citation (or avoid one) - Stuart-Buttle Ergonomics Solutions- Ensuring Longevity of the Ergonomics Process - Panel Resources, Training, Equipment, etc.; Course Evaluations; Credits - Panel Final Adjournment �() :~~:a.o~i.cS:········ P~luti.nty ::t::::: ··~~i·:·i···s~ety :::::j:(i~··: ····+···· Ergonomics: Practical and Cost-Effective Approaches to Improve Health, Safety and Performance at Work A 2-Day Seminar Sponsored by: Safety Council, GRM Chamber of Commerce National Safety Council Professional Development Group, Inc. 0 Speakers: Michael Gladden, BSIE, MSIH Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Location: PDG Training Center, Bushnell's Basin Dates: November 23-24, 1992 - =~t-= IlL: ~ - == - =- ~=- ~ Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" ( \ \.___j 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �n Ergonomics: Practical and Cost-Effective Approaches to Improve Health, Safety and Performance at Work Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Michael Gladden, M.S. Schedule Day 1: 8:30AM Introductions 9:00 A. Why Ergonomics? 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 0 Occupational Injuries and illnesses W orlCers Compensation Costs Competitivity- Productivity and Quality Needs Nature of the Workforce- Older, Women, Fewer for More Work Interaction of PeoJ?le with Automation - New Concerns Legislation Mfectmg Ergonomics - OSHA, ADA, Lifting Guidelines Questions and Comments from Participants 10:15 Break 10:30 B. Starting an Ergonomics Process 1. Data Systems to Identify Areas of Concern - Health, Safety, Human Resources (Turnover, Absenteeism), Productivity, Quality Control, Scrap, etc. 2. Who Should Be Involved ? 3. Pilot Pro grams - How to Prioritize 4. Reactive and Proactive Approaches 5. Problem Solving Session- Working With Data to Prioritize Ergonomics Projects 11:30 Lunch 12:15 C. Risk Factors for Occupational Injury and Illness 1. ·Factors Contributing to Fatigue or Overexertion at Work 2. Risk Factors for Upper and Lower Extremity Injuries and illnesses Tendonitis, Carpal Tunnel Syndrome, Shoulder and Knee Problems, etc. 3. Risk Factors for Low Back Pain - Posture and Safe Lifting Guidelines 4. Job Risk Factor Identification Exercise with Seminar Attendees 2:15 Break �2. 2:30 D. Medical Management 1. Identification of Overexertion or Cumulative Injuries and Illnesses at Work 2. Initial Treatment 3. Referrals and/or Work Restrictions 4. Return-to-Work Issues 5. Work Hardening and Functional Assessments 6. Interaction of Ergonomics and ADA in the Medical Management Process 7. Questions from and Discussion with Attendees (\ \. J 4:30 Adjourn Day2: 8:30 E. Job Site Analysis 1. Survey Techniques - Questionnaires, Checklists, Postures, etc. 2. Relating Observations to Human Capacity Information to Determine Extent of the Problem - Anthropometric Data, Strengths, etc. 3. Prioritization Techniques 4. Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique - Fatigue Prediction 10:00 Break 10:15 0 F. Problem Solving 1. Finding Root Causes of Ergonomic Problems 2. Developing a Problem Solvmg Team 3. Finding Cost-Effective and Practical Solutions 4. Reasonable Accommodations for Individuals vs Job Improvements for All 5. Case Studies: Office Workplace, Manual Materials Handling Tasks, Repetitive Tasks 11:30 Lunch 12:15 F. Problem Solving Case Studies (cont'd) 2:00 Break 2:15 G. Proactive Ergonomics- Design Guidelines 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Heights, Reaches, Visibility, Clearances Manual Handling and Force Exertion Guidelines Environmental Tolerances and Guidelines Tool Design Pacing Guidelines 3:15 H. Making Ergonomics Changes 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Management Commitment Selling Change - Problem Must Be Clear Ergonomics When There is No Money Available Building Ergonomics Concepts Into Your Business Processes Questions from and Discussion with the Attendees 4:30 Adjourn �Biograpical Information on Speakers for 2-Day Ergonomics Seminar November 23-24,1992 Michael Gladden - Mike is currently a safety engineer/ergonomist employed by the Xerox Corporation. He has 8 years of experience in providing ergonomics support and guidance to manufacturing facilities with Xerox Corporation, General Motors Corporation, and the Saturn Corporation. He obtained his Bachelor's degree in Industrial Engineering in 1979 and his Master's degree in Industrial Hygiene in 1991, both from the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor. Mike has also taught courses in Advanced Ergonomics and Personal Ergonomics orientation in the facilitie8 in which he has worked. Suzanne H. Rodgers - Sue has been a full-time Consultant in Ergonomics since 1982 following 13 years as an ergonomist in the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company. Her current clients include General Electric, Mobil Chemical, Amoco, Goodyear, the City of Rochester, Delco, Kodak, Astro Valcour, Cabledata, Oneida Silver, the Boise, Idaho VA Hospital, and NIOSH. Sue earned her Ph.D. in Physiology at the U of R Medical Center in 1967 and has taught as an adjunct faculty member at the U of R Medical School (21 years) and at SUNY at Buffalo in the Industrial Engineering Department (6 years). A major part of her business is to train teams from production and support services to identify, analyze, and find cost-effective and practical solutions to problems associated with job, equipment, workplace, and environmental designs, and to train designers how to use data on human capabilities in their work. Sue has authored 3 books on ergonomics plus several chapters for professional journals and is a USA Editor for the English JOurnal, Ergonomics . �. .. ,_.·.·r·' ·. :(/(' Goals of the Course: 1. To provide attendees with information that will recognize ergonomic problems at work and ·. · cost-effective manner. . .. · .· · · ..-.,. ,.,.. , 2. To provide up-to-date information on legislation · · ·•········ ,..,.,..."'*"'·"'.,..,....,,.. related areas (ADA) and to show how to derive the from implementing an ergonomics process. 3. To provide information about the medical management of overexertion and cumulative injuries and illnesses in order to reduce the opportunity for re-injury while still getting people back to work in a timely manner. 4. To provide the attendees with techniques for doing job site analyses and for developing reasonable accommodations, as needed, through a team problem solving process. 5. To reinforce the information with case studies and examples of successful ergonomic interventions to reduce occupational injury and illness while improving people's ability to do quality work. Who Should Attend: . , ...· . Safety and health specialists and representatives; human resources; Workers' Compensation, and labor placement specialists; insurance and rehabilitiation specralists; ergonomics coordinators, industrial engineers, production engineers; supervisors, and key operators, labor representatives; occupational nurses and physicians, vocational trainers and therapists, exercise physiologists; and managers. �Ergonomics: Practical and Cost-Effective Improve Health, Safety and Performance Outline Day 1: A. Why Ergonomics ? 1. Occupational Injuries and illnesses 2. Workers Compensation Costs 3. Competitivity- Productivity and Quality Needs 4. Nature of the Workforce- Older, Women, Fewer for More Work 5. Interaction of PeoJ?le with Automation- New Concerns 6. Legislation Mfectmg Ergonomics - OSHA, ADA, Lifting Guidelines 7. Questions and Comments from Participants B. Starting an Ergonomics Process 1. Data Systems to Identify Areas of Concern - Health, Safety, 2. 3. 4. 5. Human Resources (Turnover, Absenteeism), Productivity, Quality Control, Scrap, etc. Who Should Be Involved ? Pilot Programs- How to Prioritize Reactive and Proactive Approaches Problem Solving Session- Working With Data to Prioritize Ergonomics Projects C. Risk Factors for Occupational Injury and Illness 1. Factors Contributing to Fatigue or Overexertion at Work 2. Risk Factors for Upper and Lower Extremity Injuries and illnesses Tendonitis, Carpal Tunnel Syndrome, Shoulder and Knee Problems, etc. 3. Risk Factors for Low Back Pain- Posture and Safe Lifting Guidelines 4. Job Risk Factor Identification Exercise with Seminar Attendees D. Medical Management 1. Identification of Overexertion or Cumulative Injuries and illnesses at Work 2. 3. 4. 5. Initial Treatment Referrals and/or Work Restrictions Return-to-Work Issues Work Hardening and Functional Assessments 6. Interaction of Ergonomics and ADA in the Medical Management Process 7. Questions from and Discussion with Attendees Day2: E. Job Site Analysis 1. Survey Techniques - Questionnaires, Checklists, Postures, etc. 2. Relating Observations to Human Capacity Information to Determine Extent of the Problem - Anthropometric Data, Strengths, etc. 3. Prioritization Techniques 4. Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique - Fatigue Prediction �F. Problem Solving 1. Finding Root Causes of Ergonomic 2. Developing a Problem Solving Team 3. Finding Cost-Effective and Practical 4. Reasonable Accommodations for 5. Case Studies: Office Workplace, Manual·· Repetitive Tasks G. Proactive Ergonomics- Design Guidelines 1. Heights, Reaches, Visibility, Clearances 2. Manual Handling and Force Exertion Guidelines 3. Environmental Tolerances and Guidelines 4. Tool Design 5. Pacing Guidelines H. Making Ergonomics Changes 1. Management Commitment 2. Selling Change - Problem Must Be Clear 3. Ergonomics When There is No Money Available 4. Building Ergonomics Concepts Into Your Business Processes 5. Questions from and Discussion with the Attendees �November 23rd Registrants Bill Czech Xorox Corporation 800 Phillips Road Building 311 ..23B Webster, NY 14580 422u2S47 Dous Stryker Wegmans Risk Management Dept. 1500 Brooks Avenue Box 844 Rochester, NY 14692 328-2550 Dr. Bruce, Barron Occupational & Medi~ Divi.skm Strong Memorial Hospital 601 Elmwood Avenue Box 65~· Rochester, NY 14642~863d. 275 ..9192 Steve Burton, Jane Prior and Ht-.rvici Russ,eU Write Woman 2320 Brighton Henrietta Townline RoG!d Roohesterl NY 14623 272-0960 �FAX from Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D., Consultant in Ergonomics 169 Huntington Hills- Center, Rochester, New York 14622 Phone# (716) 544-3587; FAX# (716) 266-8749 To:~])~J~~--~-~_. _-_ __ FAX#: ( Of: ) 38g- ..- /b7 f ------------------------------- Date: ~/~92 Comments: Total Pages (incl cover) : Mvvlu__~ ~ L/2--'2--'fx-~ ± JtJ 3 -#:- o:r~-K_ kk- l~ ~-~ ~£.,,~ ~ ~l) 1\h\o.,.,J, �Acknowledgements 0 The illustrations and tables on pages C-16 to 19, C-22, and C23 are used with permission from Eastman Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volumes 1 and 2 published by Van Nostrand Reinhold in 1983 and 1986. The tables, text, and illustrations on pages C-15, C-20, and C-21 are from Working With Backache by S. H. Rodgers published by Perinton Press in 1985. The VDT Workplace Design Kit on pages F-8 to F-16 has been developed in conjunction with Dr. Inger Williams. The article on pages C-1 to C-6 and the table on page C-lOb were published by Thieme Publishers in Seminars in Occupational Medicine in March 1987. The analytical technique on page E-23 and F-17 has been published by Hanley and Belfuss in a 1988 Occupational Medicine: State of the Art Review edition on Worker Fitness Evaluations. The srticle starting on page E-5 to E22 has been published in October, 1992 by Hanley and Belfuss in theOccupational Medicine: State of the Art Reviews edition on Ergonomics The material on the 1991 NIOSH Manual Lifting Guidelines is from a talk by A. Garg and T. Waters given in Denver, CO in June, 1992. The material on pages D-1 to D9 is from the January, 1992 ADA Technical Assistance Manual from the EEOC. All other unreferenced material in this syllabus is by Dr. S.H. Rodgers and permission to reproduce it must be obtained from her. �Ergonomics and the ADA Sponsored by Riccardi & Burton Physical Therapy, P.C. in Fulton, NY, December 11,1992 Schedule 8:00AM General Introductions, Review of Course 8:20 A. Why Ergonomics ? 1. OSHA, ADA and Ergonomics Opportunities 2. Benefits to the Business 8:45 B. What Makes Jobs Difficult? 1. Postures 2. Strength Requirements 3. Endurance Demands 4. Amount of Control Over Work Pattern 5. Other Factors- Complexity, Environmental Stressors 10:00 Break 10:15 C. Techniques for Job Site Analysis 1. Checklists - Risk Factors 2. Subjective Information Collection 3. Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique 4. Lifting Guidelines Use 5. Employee Monitoring or Job Simulation 12:00 Lunch 1:00 D. Case Studies 2:45 E. Examples of Reasonable Accommodations 3:15 Break 3:30 F. Developing an Ergonomics Process in a Company 4:00 G. Ergonomics Panel 5:00 Adjourn Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Consultant in Ergonomics 169 Huntington Hills- Center Rochester, NY 14622 (716) 544-3587; 266-8749 (FAX) �Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE. EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 3-Day Ergonomics Courses for Engineers and Plant Production Specialists at Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company, Akron, OH, January 19-21, 1993 Syllabus A. Scope of Ergonomics/Human Factors in Industry B. Who Do We Design For? 1. General Issues 2. Anthropometric Data 3. Strength and Endurance Data 4. Environmental Considerations C. Design of a New Line 1. Gathering Information for a New Design a. Questions for Operators, Supervisors, Safety & Health Specs. b. Quality, Productivity, Rework, Scrap Data 2. Layout a. Materials Flow b. Environmental Issues- Lighting, Vibration, Noise, etc. 3. Line Heights a. Seated vs Standing b. Reaches Required c. Postural Effects of Line Height Variations 4. Visibility Issues a. Nature of the Target To Be Seen b. Effect of Lighting on Visibility/Upper Body Posture 5. Subassembly- Control Panel Design a. Heights/Reaches b. ClearancesNisibility c. Repetitive Work c. Controls and Displays 6. Containers for Incommg and Outgoing Parts a. Characteristics of Containers - Size, Handholds b. Container Weights c. Locations in Workplace D. General Ergonomics Guidelines for Design 1. Checklists/Guidelines 2. Resource Books 3. Philosophical Guidelines- People vs Automation 4. Designing to Reduce the Risk for Overexertion Injuries �3-Day Ergonomics Courses for Engineers and Plant Production Specialists at Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company, Akron, OH, January 19-21, 1993 Schedule Tuesday, January 19,1993: 8:00AM A. Introductions, Scope of Ergonomics/Human Factors in Industry 8:30 B. Who Do We Design For? 1. General Issues 2. Anthropometric Data 3. Strength and Endurance Data 4. Environmental Considerations 10:00 Break 10:15 C. Design of a New Line or Machine 1. Gathering Information for a New Design a. Questions for Operators, Supervisors, Safety & Health Specs. b. Quality, Productivity, Rework, Scrap Data 2. Layout a. Materials Flow b. Environmental Issues - Lighting, Vibration, Noise, etc. 3. Line Heights a. Seated vs Standing b. Reaches Required c. Postural Effects of Line Height Variations 12:00 Lunch 1:00 PM 2:00 2:30 2:45 4:30 d. Problem Solving: Working Heights 4. Visibility Issues a. Nature of the Target To Be Seen b. Effect of Lighting on Visibility/Upper Body Posture Break 5. Subassembly- Control Panel Design a. Heights/Reaches b. ClearancesNisibility c. Controls and Displays d. Problem Solving: Controls and Displays Adjourn Wednesday, January 20, 1993: 8:00 6. Risk Factors for Overexertion Injuries a. Repetitive Motions Injuries b. Manual Handling Tasks c. Problem Solving: Avoiding Overexertion Injury Risk �2. 10:00 10:15 12:00 Break 7. Containers/Cartsffrucks for Incoming and Outgoing Parts a. Characteristics of Containers - Size, Handholds b. Container Weights c. Locations in Workplace d. Push/Pull Forces for Hand Carts and Trucks e. Materials Handling Approaches Lunch 1:00 PM Problem Solving: Materials Handling Approaches 2:30 D. General Ergonomics Guidelines for Design 1. Checklists/Guidelines 2. Resource Books 3. Philosophical Guidelines- People vs Automation 4. Designmg to Reduce the Risk for Overexertion Injuries 4:00 Selection of Projects for Day 3 4:30 Adjourn Thursday, January 21, 1993: /-\ 0 8:00AM Break Up Into Project Groups; Define Scope of Design Needs or Production Problem 10:00 Break 10:15 Continue Working on Project 12:00 Lunch 1:00 Prepare Visual Aids for Presentations 2:00 Break 2:15 Presentations of Project Results (15 tminutes each) 3:30 Course Evaluations, Final Comments 3:45 Arrivederci 1/8/93 SHR \ _j �Ergonomics and Safety Presentation to the Harris Corporation Safety Committee, Rochester, NY, March 4, 1993, 12:00-1:00 PM Outline A. Harris Corporation Safety Committee Involvement in Ergonomics B. National Activity in Ergonomics C. Fatigue Model to Identify and Resolve Potential Ergonomics Problems D. Ergonomic Problem Solving Approaches E. Ergonomics and Job Safety Analysis - Investigating Accidents F. Setting· Up an Ergonomics Process at Harris Corporation Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y, 14622 �GENERAL INDUSTRY ERGONOMICS GUIDELINE I. MANAGEMENT COMMITMENT/EMPLOYEE INVOLVEMENT A. B. C. D. II. Top management commitment Written Program Employee Involvement Regular Review and Evaluation PROGRAM ELEMENTS A. Work site Analysis B. Hazard Prevention & Control 1. Engineering 2. Work Practices 3. PPE 4. Administrative C. Medical Management i. Early detection - education 2. Care/case management 3. Intervention - Light duty work hardening, etc. 4. Record keeping - Evaluation of program D Training + Education 1. General 2. Job Specific 3. Supervisors 4. Managers 5. Engineers and maintenance E. Checklists and Screening Tests 1. Work station 2. Task analysis 3. MMH 4. VDT 5. Symptoms 6. Screening Tests �Ergonomic Approaches to Improve Working Comfort in OEC Winter, 1993 A. Purpose of the Training Session- Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow B. Why People May Be Uncomfortable in Computer Workstations 1. Different Body Sizes and Standard Workplaces 2. Risk Factors for Discomfort and How to Reduce Them C. Postural Discomfort D. Visual Discomfort E. Driving Factors for Discomfort and the Problem Solving Process F. Rating Your Comfort and Requesting Assistance in Problem Solving G. Lending Library Approach to Find Appropriate Comfort Enhancers Importance of Analysis Before Throwing Equipment at a Problem H. Questions and Answers Sue Rodgers, Ph.D. Consultant in Ergonomics 169 Huntington Hills Rochester, NY 14622 (716) 544-3587 (716) 266-8749 (FAX) Inger Williams, Ph.D. Consultant in Ergonomics 28 Shelter Creek Fairport, NY 14450 {716) 377-7791 {also FAX#) �2-Day Ergonomics Team Training Course for the Optics Center of Bausch & Lomb Rochester, NV, May 10-11 , 1993 Syllabus May lOth 8:00 8:30 9:00 9:30 9:45 10:30 11:15 11:30 12:30 1:30 2:00 2:15 3:00 3:45 4:15 5:00 May 11th 8:00 8:45 9:30 9:45 10:15 11:00 11:30 12:30 2:30 2:45 3:15 4:15 4:45 Introductions, Review of Course Goals, Overview Fatigue Model for Defining Ergonomic Problems and Solutions Muscle Work/Recovery Time Needs- Postural Work Break Problem Solving: Postural Work Body Size Data- Use in Design and Analysis of Jobs/Workplaces Height and Reach Interactions Lunch Problem Solving: Determining the Best Height for a Workplace Seated Work- VDT Workplaces Break Problem Solving: VDT Workplace Evaluations and Solutions Risk Factors for Repetitive Tasks Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique Problem Solving: Repetitive Tasks Adjourn Manual Materials Handling Risk Factors Problem Solving: Manual Lifting Break Job Control and Job Complexity - Controls and Displays Cost-Benefit Analyses - How to Sell Change Project Selection for Last Session Lunch Work on Projects Break Prepare Presentations Present Projects Resources, Program Discussion, Evaluations Adjourn �2-Day Ergonomics Training Course for the GE Plastics Mt Vernon Plant Mt Vernon, IN, June, 1;993 Syllabus Day 1: 8:00 8:30 9:00 9:30 9:45 10:30 11:15 11:30 12:30 1:30 2:00 2:15 3:00 3:45 4:15 5:00 Day 2: 8:00 8:45 9:30 9:45 10:15 11:00 11:30 12:30 2:30 2:45 3:15 4:15 4:45 Introductions, Review of Course Goals, Overview Fatigue Model for Defining Ergonomic Problems and Solutions Muscle Work/Recovery Time Nyeds- Postural Work Break Problem Solving: Postural.\Vork Body Size Data- Use in Design and Analysis of Jobs/Workplaces Height and Reach Interactions Lunch Problem Solving: Determining the Best Height for a Workplace Seated Work- V:OT Workplaces Break Problem Solving: VDT Workplace Evaluations and Solutions Risk Factors for Repetitive Tasks Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique Problem Solving: Repetitive Tasks Adjourn Manual Materials Handling Risk Factors Problem Solving: Manual Lifting Break Job Control and Job Complexity- Controls and Displays Cost-Benefit Analyses- How to Sell Change Project Selection for Last Session Lunch \Vork on Projects Break Prepare Presentations Present Projects Resources, Program Discussion, Evaluations Adjourn �j I 1 I I I I ! \ I J I ' Ergonomics Awareness for Mack Molding Company, Arlington, Vermont August 2, 1993 Outline A. Scope of Ergonomics - Who, What, Where, When, Why ? B. Improving Working Comfort 1. Fatigue Model 2. Postural Comfort 3. Visual Comfort C. Work Design to Improve Comfort 1. Risk Factors for Overexertion/Cumulative Injuries - How Much Is Too Much? a. Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique b. Lifting Task Analysis 2. Examples of Job Analyses to Define Risk D. Developing Cost Effective Solutions to Ergonomics Problems 1. Problem Solving Approach 2. Examples of Ergonomic Assists and Equipment 3. Evaluating "Ergonomic" Equipment a. Evaluating Office Furniture Needs b. Evaluating Tools and Equipment E. Case Studies �( ------- ' .. Ergonomic Workplace Analysis Ergonomics Problem Solving for GE Transportation Teams, Erie, PA, August 26-27, 1993 Outline A. The Fatigue Model for Predicting Potential CTDs B. Analyzing Jobs for CTD Risk Factors C. Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique D. Problem Solving 1. Highly Repetitive Tasks 2. Postural Stress 3. Manual Handling Tasks E. Defining the Benefits of Ergonomic Improvements in the Workplace L~•~ Jll'~ Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 1~ �2.5-Day Engineers' Training Course in Ergonomics - Designing for People Amoco Foam Products Technical Center Atlanta, GA, September 20-22, 1993 Syllabus Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 ' 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �... Ergonomic Workplace Analysis Ergonomic Refresher Course for Amoco Fabrics & Fibers, Hazelhurst, GA, November 18-19, 1993 Outline A. The Fatigue Model for Predicting Potential CTDs B. Analyzing Jobs for CTD Risk Factors C. Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique D. Problem Solving 1. Highly Repetitive Tasks 2. Postural Stress 3. Manual Handling Tasks E. Defining the Benefits of Ergonomic Improvements in the Workplace Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �3.5 Day Ergonomics Training Course for the GE Aircraft Engine Plant in Evendale, OH, January4 -7,1994 Syllabus Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �3.5-Day Ergonomics Training Course Day 1: Ergonomics and Legislation Overviews, Reducing Fatigue, Workplace and Equipment Design 8:00 - 8:30AM 8:30 - 9:00 9:00 - 9:30 9:30- 10:00 10:00- 10:15 Introductions, Course Goals Ergonomics Overview Legislation Relating to Ergonomics - OSHA, ADA Designing Jobs to Reduce Fatigue Break 10:15- 10:45 10:45- 11:30 11 :30 - 12:30 Work and Recovery Time Needs - Postural Stress Problem Solving: Fatigue Reduction/Posture Lunch Break 12:301:151:302:30- Using Anthropometric Data for Design Heights and Reaches Problem Solving: Working Heights Break 1:15PM 1:30 2:30 2:45 2:45- 3:15 3:15-3:45 3:45- 4:15 Office Workplaces - VDT Use Layout Analyses Discussion: Enabling Employers To Design Jobs Ergonomically Day 2: Repetitive Tasks, Ergonomic Job Analysis, Human Reliability, Ergonomics and Quality, Automation, Information Flow, Environment 8:00 - 9:00AM 9:00- 9:45 9:45- 10:15 10:15- 10:30 Risk Factors for Repetitive Motions Problems Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique Problem Solving: Ergonomic Job Analysis Break Problem Solving: Ergonomic Job Analysis cont'd Using the Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique to Define Light Duty Jobs and to Develop Priorities for Ergonomics Interventions in the Workplace 11:30- 12:30 PM Lunch Break 10:30- 11:00 11:00- 11:30 12:301:00 1:302:15 - 1:00AM Human Reliability, Accident Analyses 1:30 .. Problem Solving: Ergonomics and Accident Analysis 2:15 · Ergonomics and Quality- Puzzle Exercise 2:30 Break 2:30- 3:15 3:15- 4:15 Environmental Factors- Noise, Vibration, Heat, Cold, Lighting DiscussiOn: Integrating Ergonomics Into Plant Operations - Safety, Engineering, Purchasing c• �2. , ~~, Day 3: Manual Materials Handling, Total Workload, Cost-Benefit Analyses, Programmatic Issues Relating to OSHA and ADA Legislation j 8:00 - 9:00AM 9:00- 10:00 10:00"' 10:15 10:15- 10:45 10:45- 11:00 11:00- 11:30 11:30- 12:15 Low Back Pain Risk Factors Guidelines for Manual Handling Tasks - NIOSH, Kodak Break Problem Solving: Lifting and Lowering Guidelines for Pushing and Pulling Frequent Lifting and Overall Workload Guidelines Lunch Break 12:15 - 1:00PM Using the Guidelines to Develop Plant Policies On 1:00 1:45 2:00 2:45 3:15 - 1:45 2:00 2:45 3:15 4:15 Manual Materials Handling Hours of Work and Shiftwork Break Problem Solving: Manual Handling Tasks Cost-Benefit Analysis To Sell Ergonomic Change Problem Solving: Cost Benefit Analyses Day 4: Project, Presentations, Program Discussion, Resources 8:00- 9:45 9:45- 10:00 Work on Projects, Prepare Presentations Break 10:00- 11:00 11:00- 12:00 Project Presentations Review of Ergonomics Applications and Program Development, Resources, Evaluations 10/92SHR f .- Lt. �. > 0 0 0 .. llttLIJ~•••• ltl3 ••••••••Lmt•.&sa 1311GttNttt•l~ttll SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CIDRA- PUERTO RICO MARZO 24 - 2G DE 1994 SUZANNE H. RODGERS, PhD CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (715) 544-3587. 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS. ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �Schedule for the Ergonomics Problem Solving Course conducted by Dr. Suzanne H. Rodgers, SB, Cidra, PR Wednesday, March 24, 1994: Fatigue Problem Solving on Postural and Repetitive Stresses, Manual Handling Tasks 8:00AM The Fatigue Model and Overexertion Injuries 8:30 Ergonomic Problem Solving Approach 9:30 Developing Solutions to Ergonomic Problems Break 10:00 10:15 Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique 11:00 Problem Solving: Postural and Repetitive Tasks 12:00 Lunch 1:00PM 2:00 2:30 2:45 3:30 4:00 Presentations on Problem Solving Projects Manual Handling Guidelines Review Break Problem Solving: Manual Handling Tasks Presentations on Manual Handling Projects End of Day Thursday, March 25, 1994: Office Ergonomics, Human Reliability, Designing with Capacity Data, Cost/Benefit Analyses 8:00AM Self-Help Approach to Office Ergonomics 9:00 Human Reliability and Accident Investigations 9:45 Break 10:00 Problem Solving: Accident Investigations 11 :00 Presentations on Investigation Findings 12:00 Lunch 1:00PM 1:30 2:30 2:45 3:30 Designing With Capacity Data- Data Review Problem Solving: Designing a Workplace/Handling Task Break Presentations on Design Projects Cost/Benefit Analyses Friday, March 26,1994: Ergonomics Process Issues, Projects 8:00AM Ergonomics Processes- Building It Into The Business Start Work on Projects 9:00 12:00 Lunch 1:00PM 2:15 Prepare Presentations Make Presentations to Managers (" (_ �PROGRAMA SOLUCION DE PROBLEMAS ERGONOMICOS DIRIGIDO POR: SUZANNE H. RODGERS SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CIDRA- PUERTO RICO Mh§rcoles, marzo 24, 1994: Soluci6n de Problema de Fatiga en Esfuerzos Posturales y Repetitivos, Tareas de Manejo Manual 8:00AM 8:30 9:30 10:00 10:15 11 :00 12:00 El Modelo de Fatiga y Lesiones par Agotamiento Acercamiento a Ia Solucion del Problema Ergonomico Desarrollando Soluciones a Problemas Ergonomicos Descanso Tenica de Analisis de Trabajo Ergonomico Solucion de Problema: Tareas Posturales y Repetitivas Almuerzo 1:00PM 2:00 2:30 2:45 3:30 4:00 Presentacion de Proyectos de Solucion de Problemas Manejo del Manual Revision de Directrices Descanso Solucion de Problema: Tareas de Manejo Manual Presentaciones sabre Proyectos de Manejo Manual Fin de Ia Sesion Jueves, marzo 25, 1994: Ergonomia en Ia Oficina, Confiabilidad Humana, Disenando con Datos de Capacidad, Analisis de Costo/Beneficio 8:00AM 9:00 9:45 10:00 11:00 12:00 Acercamiento de Ayuda Personal a Ia Ergonomfa en Ia Oficina Confiabilidad Humana e Investigaciones de Accidentes Descanso Solucion de Problema: Investigaciones de Accidentes Presentacion sabre los Resultados de Ia lnvestigacion Almuerzo 1:00PM 1:30 2:30 2:45 3:30 Disenando con Datos de Capacidad - Revision de Datos Solucion de Problema: Disenando Ia Zona de Trabajoffarea Manual Descanso Presentacion Sabre Proyectos de Diseno Analisis de Costa/Beneficia Viernes, marzo 26, 1994: Temas de Proceso Ergon6mico, Proyectos 8:00AM 9:00 12:00 Procesos Ergonomicos- Crean dolo Dentro del Negocio Empiece a Trabajar en los Proyectos Almuerzo 1:00 2:15 Prepare las Presentaciones Haga las Presentaciones a los Gerentes �Table of Contents - Cidra Course Topic A. Fatigue Recovery Time Needs for Repetitive Work Work/Recovery Time Graphs for Static Work Starting Page A1 A7 B. Problem Solving A Functional Job Analysis Technique Ergonomics Problem Solving Form 5 Questions About Workplace and Job Design Finding the Best Solutions Problem Solving Form, end Ergonomic Job Analysis Table 2: Examples of Muscle Effort Levels Table 3: Heavy Effort in Manual Handling Tasks Extra Job Analysis and Risk Factor Analysis Forms Ergonomic Principles for Layout and Flow Best Height for a Standing Workplace Human Reliability Form Summary of Ergonomic Analyses, When to Use Them B15b C. Office Ergonc-:-Analysis of the Vu. Nark Station Body Discomfort Scale Risk Factors for Discomfort Observed Postures Checklist Self-Help to Increase Seated Work Comfort Examples of Workplace Assists C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C7 D. Guidelines 12 Ergonomics Design Guidelines Standing Height/Reach Capabilities Kodak Lifting Guidelines Maximum Forces E. Cost/Benefit and Projects How to Do and Ergonomics Survey Examples of Questions to Ask Production People Cost/Benefit - Existing and New Design Cost-Benefit Analyses of Problem Solutions The Costs of Poor Design Cost Justification Problem Solving Form Instructions for Problem Presentations Extra Forms B1 ff B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B11 B13 B15 D1 D6 D7 D9 E1 E3 ES E6 E10 E12 E15 E16 ff ( I L.i.. �CONTENIDO Tern a A. Fatiga Necesidades de Tiempo de Recuperacion para Trabajo Repetitive Trabajo/Tiempo de Recuperacion para Trabajo Estatico. Graficos B. Problema/Soluci6n Una Tecnica Funcional de Analisis de Trabajo Forma para Ia Solucion de Problema Ergonomico 5 Preguntas Acerca de Ia Zona de Trabajo y Diseiio del Trabajo Encontrando las Soluciones Mejores Forma para Solucion de Problema, termina Analisis de Trabajo Ergonomico Tabla 2: Ejemplos de Niveles de Esfuerzo Muscular Tabla 3: Esfuerzo Fuerte en Tareas de Manejo Manual Formas para Analis,is de Trabajo Adicional y Factor de Riesgo Principios Ergonomicos para Exponer y Desarrollar Altura Mas Adecuada para una Estacion de Trabajo de Pie Forma de Confiabilidad Humana Sumarios de Analisis Ergonomico, Cuando Usarlo F1 F7 P/S1ff P/S2 P/S3 P/S4 P/S5 P/S6 P/S7 P/S8 P/S9 P/S11 P/S13 P/S15 P/S15b C. Ergonomia en Oficinas Analisis de una Estacion de Trabajo con Terminal de Video Nivel de Molestia Corporal Factores de Riesgo de Molestia Lista de Posturas Observadas Ayuda Personal para lncrementar el Confort del Trabajo Sentado Ejemplos de Ayudas en el Ia Estacion de Trabajo D. Directrices 12 Directrices de Diseiio Ergonomico En Posicion de Pie/Capacidades de Alcance Directrices de Levante de Kodak Esfuerzos Maximos E/01 E/02 E/03 E/04 E/05 E/07 D1 D6 D7 D9 E. Costo/Beneficio y Proyectos Como Hacer una Encuesta Ergonomica Ejemplos de Preguntas para Hacer al Personal de Produccion Costa/Beneficia- Diseiio Existente y Nuevo Costa/Beneficia - Analisis de Soluciones de Problemas El Casto de un Diseiio Pobre Forma Solucion del Problema de Justificacion de Casto lnstrucciones para Presentaciones de Problemas Formas Adicionales C/B1 C/B3 C/B5 C/B6 C/B10 C/B12 C/B15 C/B16ff �Acknowledgements The illustrations on pages D6, D7, and D8 are used with pennission from Eastman Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volumes I and 2 published by Van Nostrand Reinhold in 1983 and 1986. The table on page D9 is from Working With Backache by S. H. Rodgers published by Perinton Press in 1985. The computer workplace material on pages C1 to C7 has been developed in conjunction with Dr. Inger Williams. The article on pages A1 to A6 was published by Thieme Publishers in Seminars in Occupational Medicine in March 1987. The analytical technique on pages B6, B7, and B9 has been published by Hanley and Belfuss in a 1988 Occupational Medicine: State of the Art Review edition on Worker Fitness Evaluations and in more detail (B1 ff) in October, 1992by Hanley and Belfuss in the Occupational Medicine: State of the Art Reviews edition on Ergonomics All other unreferenced material in this syllabus is by Dr. S.H. Rodgers and pennission to reproduce it must be obtained from her. �. ' RECONOCIMIENTOS Las ilustraciones en las paginas 0*7, y 08 son empleadas con el permiso de Eastman Kodak, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, VoWmenes 1 y 2 publicados par Van Nostrand Reinhold en 1983 y 1986. La tabla en Ia pagina 09 viene de Working With Backache par Suzanne Rodgers publicada par Perinton Press en 1985, Los materiales de las paginas 0*1 a 07 han sido desarrollados en conjunto con el Dr. Inger Williams. La tecnica analftica en las paginas P*6, P7, y P8 ha sido publicado par Hanley y Belfuss en 1988 Occupational Medicine: State of the Art Review editado en Worker Fitness Evaluation yen mas detc,!Jle (B1ff) en octubre, 1992 par Hanley y Belfuss en Occupational Medicine State of the Art Review edici6n Ergonomia. El material restante no referenciado es de Ia Ora. Rodgers y debe solicitarse su permiso para reproducci6n. D: Directrices P: Problema/Soluci6n 0: Ergonomfa/Oficinas �' \ ·~~;~ ~ ~ 6 E3 Office Ergonomics Training Session for the ARCO Chemical Beaver Valley Plant, April 6, 1994 Schedule 8:30-9:30 9:30-10:15 I 0:15 - I 0:30 I 0:30- II :30 II :30 - 12:30 12:30-4:30 Factors That Determine Comfort and Discomfort in Seated Work Problem Solving: Postural and Visual Comfort Break Techniques for the Evaluation of Office Workplaces, Comfort, and the Most Cost-Effective Solutions to Ergonomic Problems Lunch ·Site Visits - Problem Solving Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-$87 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y•.14622 �~ ~ 6 " Office Ergonomics Training Session for the City of Rochester, City Council Room, May 3,1994 Schedule 9:00- 10:15 10:15-10:30 10:30-11:00 11 :00 - 12:00 Factors That Determine Comfort and Discomfort in Seated Work Break Problem Solving: Postural and Visual Comfort Techniques for the Evaluation of Office Workplaces, Comfort, and the Most Cost-Effective Solutions to Ergonomic Problems Dr. Rodgers and Dr. Williams will be available to visit individual departments over the next few weeks. Please contact Tassie Bolton if you would like to take advantage of this additional help to strengthen your skills as office ergonomics problem solvers. Suzanne H. Rodgers, PhD Consultant in Ergonomics 169 Huntington Hills · Rochester, NY 14622 (716) 544-3587 Inger M. Williams, PhD Consultant in Ergonomics 28 Shelter Creek Fairport, NY 14450 (716) 377-7791 �-.- 1-Day Ergonomics Course for Engineers at Smith Kline Beecham Clinical Laboratories, May 4,'93, Upper Merion, PA Syllabus Schedule 8:00AM 8:30 9:30 10:00 10:15 10:30 11:00 11:45 Introductions, Goals, Review of Projects Fatigue Model - Design to Reduce Fatigue Designing with Anthropometric Data Break Height and Reach Interaction · VDT Workplace Desi~ . Problem Solving: Usmg Anthropometric Data in Design Lunch 12:45 PM 1:15 1:45 2:15 2:45 3:00 4:00 4:45 Complete the Problem Solving Exercise Factors Affecting Quality Performance Risk Factors for Overexertion Injuries- Upper Extremities Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique Break Manual Handling Task Design Problem Solving: Designing to Prevent Overexertion Injuries Resources, Course EvaluatiOns Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y_ 14822 �SmithKiine Beecham Clinical Labs, Collegetown, PA July 19-21, 1994 Evaluations Summary A. Overall Evaluation of the Course 1. Very informative. Learr",Jed to see things in a different light (Billing). 2. · Very good- made me aware of many important items and explained some things that we might have known instinctively (Clinical Tax.). 3. I found this ergonomics seminar very useful. Excellent tool towards solution of these types of concerns (Dist. Mgr.). 4. Good (Employees Health Admn). 5. Sue Rodgers presents an excellent class and is a resourceful instructor (Facilities). 6. Very good. Amazing how fast you can learn this ! (OHS Nurse). 7. Excellent speakers/presenters. Very good hands-on course training (OHS Nurse). " 8. Good information, excellent syllabus to be used as a future reference. Active participation helped to facilitate understanding of the process (OHS Nurse). 9. Great- very informative and educational. A relaxed and enjoyable atmosphere (OS&EA). 10. Excellent (Safety). 11. The course was excellent. I will never loE:>k at processes with the same eye and attitude (Safety). 12. Very good- it helped me to see how small things need to be looked at to solve more major problems (Specimen Processing). 13. Excellent- very important information that I can bring back to Boston to help reduce future problems and help employees get relief from unnecessary pain (Referral Supv). 14. Outstanding ! (Supv. Specimen Processing). 15. Excellent- did not expect such an extensive course (Medical Tech II). 16. Excellent (Tech II). 17. Excellent- Good work-related analogies. Good explanations on how the body functions in regards to job performed (Tech Rep.). 18. Very good. It really made you look at things you do everyday in a different way (Tech Serv. Rep.). 19. Excellent. I never imagined you would be able to hold my interest for three full days !! Even after the experience, I feel I am a neophyte (Tech Supr). 20. Extremely useful information. Gave you many ways to look at a problem (Training Coord). 21. I think the course was very informative. This new information could lead to reduced cost, more productive workers (Not Indicated). �2. B. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. Most Useful Information Learned to look at the ways different people do their jobs - address different problems (Billing). Measurements, max weights, how to recognize problems- most of course (Clinical Tox.). Types of injuries, etc. (Qist. Mgr). Workbook, fun slides, oharts and graphs, and support (Employee Health Admin). That many ergonomics problems often have a simple solution and do not require large dollars being spent (Facilities). Ergonomics problem solving and presentations (OHS Nurse). Walk through and talking with employees- viewing tapes of areas of concern (OHS Nurse). Ergonomics training manual (OHS Nurse). Information on office ergonomics, on up and coming problem (OS&EA). How to observe potentially serious problems. Amount of emphasis on higher quality, increased productivity, decreased costs. Specific examples from instructor's past experience (Safety). All information was very useful. Lifting and posture were most beneficial to me (Safety). How to evaluate risk factors. How to make presentations to management (Specimen Processing). Evaluating the job and finding the problems. There is some common knowledge but this course lets you see all the problems, even ones that may not have seemed a problem in the past. You look at the task differently now (Referral Supv). The technical analysis techniques for finding optimal work stations (Supv. Specimen Processing). How to set back and look at a job with a critical eye -to see how many actions/influences are involved in a job (Medical Tech II). A new and improved way of looking at our work situation and maybe doing some good as far as helping a fellow employee (Tech II). How ergonomics also relates to quality and quantity. Good information on how to recognize potential problems and solve current ones (Tech Rep.) How to evaluate positions etc. with formulas (Tech SeN. Rep.). Providing me with a new form of critical eye required to learn how to address approaching the work situation. Also extremely valuable guidance on how to question and approach the humans to be affected by our suggestions (Tech Supr.). All info extremely applicable to most job areas (Training Coord.). With the information learned, we can reduce cost and, most important, people can lead healthier lives (Not Indicated). �3. C. 1. 2. 13. Least Useful Information N/A (Dist. Mgr). The graphs and charts are useful but I believe a better explanation of what information can be learned from plotting and graphing would be beneficial (Facilities). Some of the technicalletctures were not as interesting and, therefore, more difficult to comprehend (i.e., lifting guideline graphs) (OHS Nurse). None (OHS Nurse). Formulas- will have to practice (OHS Nurse). A few of the charts, curves etc. More time could have been spent for problem review and problem solving (Safety.). None (Safety). Although not all is applicable all the information is useful. Much can be applied to other areas not just job performance (Specimen Processing). " Everything is useful, maybe not on one project but may be useful down the road (Referral Supv). Everything we saw could be used if not in present job perhaps during an evaluation of another (Medical Tech II). I cannot say all aspects of the information will be useful to us (Tech II). Don't eliminate anything- perhaps a little less on the lifting mechanics and studies/theories (Tech Supr.). None (Training Coord.) D. Specific Suggestions for Improvement 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 1. Should be longer- probably a week, with more prep time for projects (Clinical Tax.). 2. Look for improvements that are cost effective (Dist. Mgr.). 3. More time to spend on information (Employee Health Admin). 4. Limit lecture time- especially the more technical information to 30 min. a session, then perhaps include an interactive exercise (OHS Nurse). 5. More specific instructions for presentation (OHS Nurse). 6. Encourage audience to participate more and require them to participate more. This will keep their interest a little more (OS&EA). 7. None at this time (Safety). 8.. Increase the length of the training session. There's a lot of information to be absorbed in three days (Specimen Processing). 9. More involvement in mathematical features- graphs, etc. Instead of just explaining, break into groups and actually do the calculations (Referral Supv.). �4. 10. List all formulae and tables in one section for easy analysis (Supv. Specimen Processing). 11. Really none - however, it is a lot of information to absorb in a short amount of time. Perhaps follow up with Carol or Sue to keep us informed of new issues or problems (Medical Tech II). 12. Not qualified to make a1suggestion- maybe we could have some follow-up meetings (Tech II). 13. More problem solving (Training Coord.) 14. More videos, organize workbook (Not Indicated). 6/94 SHR/bl �Ergonomics Training Course for General Electric Aircraft Engines in Lynn, MA, October18-21, 1994 Syllabus ~11~-! Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D Consultant in Ergonomics HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS 0 ROCHESTER. NEW YORK 14622 Phone: (716) 544-3587 0 Fax: (716} 266-8749 �2.5-Day Engineers' Training Course in Ergonomics- Designing for People Amoco Foam Products Technical Center Atlanta, GA, October 24-26, 1994 Syllabus ~11~-~ Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D Consultant in Ergonomics ( HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN \'-____./ 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS ~ ROCHESTER. NEW YORK 14622 Fax.· (7161 266-8749 Phone: (716) 544-3587 :J �2.5-Day Ergonomics Course for Engineers at the Amoco Foam Products Technical Center, Atlanta, GA, October 24-26,1994 ~ Schedule ) Day 1: 8:00AM 8:30 A. Introductions, Scope of Ergonomics/Human Factors in Industry B. Who Do We Design For? 1. General Issues 2. Anthropometric Data 3. Strength and Endurance Data 4. Environmental Considerations 10:00 Break 10:15 C. Design of a New Line or Machine 1. Gathering Information for a New Design a. Questions for Operators, Supervisors, Safety & Health Specs. b. Quality, Productivity, Rework, Scrap Data 2. Layout a. Materials Flow b. Environmental Issues - Lighting, Vibration, Noise, etc. 3. Line Heights a. Seated vs Standing b. Reaches Required c. Postural Effects of Line Height Variations 12:00 Lunch 1:00PM 2:00 2:30 2:45 4:30 Day 2: 8:00 d. Problem Solving: Working Heights 4. Visibility Issues a. Nature of the Target To Be Seen b. Effect of Lighting on Visibility/Upper Body Posture Break 5. Subassembly- Control Panel Design a. Heights/Reaches b. ClearancesNisibility c. Controls and Displays d. Problem Solving: Controls and Displays Adjourn 6. Risk Factors for Overexertion Injuries a. Repetitive Motions Injuries b. Manual Handling Tasks c. Problem Solving: Avoiding Overexertion Injury Risk �2. 10:00 10:15 / ~, ) 12:00 Break 7. Containers/Carts!frucks for Incoming and Outgoing Parts a. Characteristics of Containers - Size, Handholds b. Container Weights c. Locations in Workfclace d. Push/Pull Forces or Hand Carts and Trucks e. Materials Handling Approaches Lunch 1:00PM Problem Solving: Materials Handling Approaches =) 2:15 Break 2:30 When To Automate - Man /Machine Capabilities 3:30 D. General Ergonomics Guidelines for Design 1. Checklists/Guidelines 2. Resource Books 3. Philosophical Guidelif\es- Peofcle vs Automation 4. Designmg to Reduce the Risk or Overexertion Injuries 4:00 Selection of Projects 4:30 Adjourn Day 3: 8:00AM Break Up Into Project Groups; Define Scope of Design Needs or Production Problem, Apply Analysis Techniques, Guidelines, etc. 10:00 Break 10:15 Prepare Presentations 10:45 Make Presentations 12:00 Evaluations, Adjourn 9/23/94 SHR �.. -- :~T.:a.o~:Us_. ........ P~luti.nty ::"t:::: ~I ' ) --~~i:·&···s~ety :::::j:Q~··: ·····~····· Ergonomics Team Training and Problem Solving for Amoco Foam Products, Atlanta, GA, October 27,1994 Syllabus 11:30 12:00 Schedule Preventing Postural Fatigue Reaches and Heights Break Problem Solving: Postural Fatigue Repetitive Tasks - Techniques to Analyze and Solve Problems Problem Solving: Repetitive Tasks Lunch 12:45 1:30 2:15 2:30 3:00 3:30 3:45 4:00 Problem Solving: ReJ?etitive Tasks - continued Manual Handling Gmdelines Break Problem Solving - Manual Handling Ergonomics and Safety - Human Reliability Cost Benefit Analysis · Resources, Evaluations Adjourn 8:00 9:00 9:30 9:45 10:30 Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D Consultant in Ergonomics HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS 0 ROCHESTER. NEW YORK 14622 Phone: (716) 544·3587 0 Fax: (715) 265-8749 �Ergonomics Team Training Course for Amoco Foam Products, Atlanta, GA, October 27,1994 Course Evaluation I. Overall Evaluation of the Course II. Most Useful Information Ill. Least Useful Information / - \ ~j IV. Specific Suggestions for Improvement Job and Department: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Date: _ _ _ _ _ __ 10/94 SHR �Ergonomic Training for Smith Kline Beecham Clinical Labs Atlanta Cluster, November 15-17, 1994 j Evaluations Summary A. Overall Evaluation of the Course 1. 2. 19. 20. 21. 22. Very good, very vital to our company (Data Entry). Wonderful instruction on how to i.d. and rate jobs and ergonomic problems (DSRII). Quite an eye-opener, very educational (DSR/Safety). Very good and very much needed (Analyst). Excellent (Lead Tech). Wonderful introduction to the team approach to solve problems related to ergonomics (Lead Tech/Safety). Very informative, helpful to improve both quality of job satisfaction and reduce injury (Manager). Very good course. The material will be very helpful and should generate lots of teams and improvements (Manager). Very good because of dealing with problems that pertain to our lab (Med Tech). Very informative in diagnosing ergonomic issues. Sue was quite knowledgeable in addressing the key topics and helpful in thinking out the entire picture (Med Tech). Very good use of physiology to explain why we suffer everyday pains at work--pain that most people can't visualize (Med Tech). Very good--excellent depth of knowledge by Dr. Rodgers, interesting/ anecdotal information kept it interesting (NIDA). Very informative and thought provoking. Will change the way I look at work spaces (PhlebotomisVSKJF). Excellent, more practical than any I have attended (QA/Safety). Very relaxed and informal. Very educational (QA/Safety). Excellent, Dr. Rodgers and Joe Milligan did a wonderful. Also, the Marriott personnel treated us well !(Safety and Purchasing Manager). Very good, excellent instructor (Secretary, HR). Very good. Room size was inadequate for size of group (Supervisor, Spec. Proc.). Excellent (Supervisor). Enjoyed presentation, very informative (Tech Coor). It was a good course with lots of information (Trainer/Specimen Pro). Good course content (Not Indicated). B. Most Useful Information 1. Risk factors for work (solving problems) and analysis (Data Entry). 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. �~~- ..... - ... ,.._ ~ 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. Was there any? (Med Tech). Some of the data could have been more current (Safe. & Pure. Manager). Data compiled in 1980's (Secretary, HR). Strength measurement for my particular area (Supervisor, Spec. Proc). None (Supervisor). The way the formulas for deciding what hardware was ergonomically correct came about (Trainer). The amount of physiology background. Although very informative, it is not information that will be retained (Not Indicated). D. Specific Suggestions for Improvement 1. We need longer than three days to absorb this information (Toy with info, if you wiii!)(Data Entry). More hands-on in-person tours of areas, video great but naked eye better (DSRII). Maybe extend course time (DSR). Look at shortening course (Analyst). More organization of team work. Larger room (Lead Tech). Work through several problems in more detail start to finish before attempting to solve own (Manager). So much information, could shorten course a little but overall a very worthwhile program (Manager). Deal a little more with our videos. I would have like to have seen more jobs (Med Tech). None (Med Tech). Bigger meeting space (NIDA/Safety). Maybe go over needed bookwork and then spend more time in split groups that work around same areas. That way story time would be more interesting, if we could relate (Phlebotomist). More time (QA/Safety). Allow more time than one hour to present "projects" from a three day seminar (Safety and Purchasing Manager). More time spent on specific issues affecting the company involved. Longer presentation time for attendees (Secretary). None (Supervisor). None (Tech Coor). Make course a little less technical, unless you are talking to engineers (Trainer). Work more on specific situations and maybe actually solve two or more actual ergonomic problems (Not Indicated). 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 11/17/94 SHR/bl �2-Day Ergonomics Training Course for the Amoco Fabrics & Fibers Ergonomics Team Rocky Mount, NC, November 29-30, 1994 Syllabus Day 1: 10:00 10:30 11:00 11:30 12:00 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:15 3:45 4:30 5:30 ( \ Day2: 7:30 8:45 9:30 9:45 10:15 11:00 11:15 12:00 1:00 2:15 2:45 3:15 3:30 Introductions, Review of Course Goals, Overview Fatigue Model for Defining Ergonomic Problems and Solutions Muscle Work/Recovery Time Needs- Postural Work Problem Solving: Postural Work Lunch Body Size Data- Use in Design and Analysis of Jobs/Workplaces Height and Reach Interactions Seated Work- VDT Workplaces Problem Solving: Using Body Size Data for Design Evaluation Break Risk Factors for Repetitive Tasks Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique Problem Solving: Repetitive Tasks Adjourn Manual Materials Handling Risk Factors Problem Solving: Manual Lifting · Break Human Reliability - Accident Investigation Cost-Benefit Analyses- How to Sell Change Project Selection for Last Session Work on Projects Lunch Work on Projects Prepare Presentations Present Projects Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D Evaluations Consultant in Ergonomics Adjourn HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN .. , 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS 0 ROCHESTER, NEW YORK 14622 Phone: (716) 544-3587 0 Fax: (716} 266-8749 �Table of Contents /~ ' ' Topic A Functional Job Analysis Technique Work/Recovery Time Curves Table 1: Risk Factor Analysis Anthro2_ometric Data Height/Reach Curves - Standing Height/Reach Curves - Seated Work VDT Workplace Design Kit Analysis o(VDT Workstation Visual Target Process for Evaluating Comfort in a Seated Workplace Ergonomics Survey - Office Job Demands Form Postural Comfort Rating Form Visual Comfort Rating Form Observed Postures Checklist Self-Help to Increase Seated Work Comfort Risk Factors for Upper Extremity Disorders Table 1: Factors Affecting Grip Strength Ergonomic Job Analysis Form Table 2: Examples of Muscle Effort Levels Table 1: Risk Factor Analysis Extra Forms Figure 1: Risk Factors for Low Back Pain Occasional Lifting Guidelines - Kodak Frequent Lifting Guidelines - Kodak Accident Investigations - Ergonomics Viewpoint Human Reliability Analysis Form Instructions for Problem Presentations Summary of Ergonomic Analyses - When to Use Them Extra Forms Case Study Form for Documentation Recommended Videotapes on Ergonomic Topics References - S .H.Rodgers Startin2 Pa2e 1 19 20 21 22 23 24 33 34 35 37 38 39 40 41 44 46 47 48 49 50 52 54 55 56 57 58 59 62 66 67 68 Acknowledgements The illustrations on pages 22, 23, 54, and 55 are used with permission from Eastman Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volumes 1 and 2 published by Van Nostrand Reinhold in 1983 and 1986. The illustration on page 21 is from Working With Backache by S.H. Rodgers published by Perinton Press in 1985. The computer workplace material on pages 24 to 43 has been developed in conjunction with Dr. Inger Williams. The analytical technique on pages 47 and 50 has been published by Hanley and Belfuss in a 1988 Occupational Medicine: State of the Art Review edition on Worker Fitness Evaluations and in more detail (pages 1-19, "A Functional Job Analysis Technique") in the October, 1992 issue of the same series by Hanley and Belfuss on Ergonomics, edited by J.S.Moore and A. Garg. All other unreferenced material in this syllabus is by Dr. S.H. Rodgers and permission to reproduce it must be obtained from her. �'} ·•... .. -. . .. ··.. . ·· ·..... . . .. . _ ..·· .... ··..... . Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique ReviewFatigue Model by S.H. Rodgers, Ph.D. l Training for Xerox Ergonomics Team Members and Engineers, December 9,1994 J ( __ , ~ - Lc.Jt-~ ~n~~ Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D Consultant in Ergonomics HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN 169 HUNTINGTO~ HILLS 0 ROCHESTER. NEW YORK 14622 Phone: (716) 5·H-3587 0 Fax: (716) 266-8749 �Table of Contents ( Starting Page 1 A Functional Job Analysis Technique 19 Recovery Time Needs for Static Work 20 Risk Factors for Repetitive Motions Disorders 20 Factors Affecting Grip Strength 21 Risk Factors for Low Back Pain 23 Kodak Lifting Guidelines 25 Accident fuvestigations 26 Human Reliability Form 27 Ergonomic Job Analysis Forms 30 Risk Factor Analysis Problem Solving Forms Summary of Ergonomic Analyses and When to Use 34 Them 37 Ergonomic Case Study Documentation Form 38 References- S.H.Rodgers Topic Acknowledgments The materials in this syllabus, unless otherwise noted, are the property of Dr. Rodgers. Permission to reproduce them outside of the grOU£S participating in the training program should be obtained from her. Phone: (715) 544-3587; Fax: (716) 266-8749. Mailing Address: 169 Huntington Hills, Rochester, NY 14622 �~ ~ 6 Office Ergonomics Training Session for the Rochester Police Department, Public safety Building, Room 635,9:00 to 12:00 noon, March 13,1995 Schedule 9:00 - 9:15 AM 9:15- 9:45 9:45- 10:15 10:15- 10:30 10:30- 11:00 11:00- 11:15 11:15- 11:30 11:45 - 12:00 Ergonomics in the Office Setting Factors That Determine Postural Comfort or Discomfort in Seated Work Visual Comfort and Discomfort in Computer Work Break Problem Solving: Postural and Visual Comfort Techniques for the Evaluation of Comfort in Office Workplaces Guidelines for Selection of Equipment in New Workplaces Cost-Effective Solutions to Office Ergonomic ProblemsDefining Driving Factors · Tassie Bolton and Dr. Rodgers or Dr. Williams will be available to visit your workplaces over the next few weeks. Please sign the sheet here or contact Tassie Bolton if you would like to take advantage of this additional help to strengthen your skills as office ergonomics problem solvers. If a colleague who is not here today would like assistance, please indicate her/his name and location on the sheet. Suzanne H. Rodgers, PhD Consultant in Ergonomics 169 Huntington Hills Rochester, NY 14622 (716) 544-3587 Inger M. Williams, PhD Consultant in Ergonomics 28 Shelter Creek Fairport, NY 14450 (716) 377-7791 �... ·- 2.5-Day Ergonomics Training for GE Aircraft Engines Ergonomics Teams in Hooksett, NH, May 10-t1,1995 Syllabus Day 1: 7:15 7:30 7:45 8:00 8:30 8:45 9:30 10:15 10:30 11:00 11 :45 12:30 1:00 1:30 1:45 2:45 3:15-4:00 Day 2: 7:15 8:00 8:45 9:15 9:30 10:30 11:00 11:45 2:00 2:15 3:00 3:45-4:00 l_ Introductions, Review of Course Goals, Overview Recent OSHA Activities in Ergonomics Fatigue Model for Defming Ergonomic Problems and Solutions Muscle Work/Recovery Time Needs- Postural Work Break Problem Solving: Postural Work Body Size Data- Use in Design and Analysis of Jobs/Workplaces Height and Reach Interactions Problem Solving: Determining the Best Height for a Workplace Lunch Problem Solving (contd) Seated Work- VDT Workplaces Problem Solving: VDT Workplace Evaluations and Solutions Break Risk Factors for Repetitive Tasks Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique Problem Solving: Repetitive Tasks Manual Materials Handling Risk Factors Problem Solving: Manual Lifting Human Reliability and Accident Analysis Break Cost-Benefit Analyses- How to Sell Change Project Selection for Last Session Lunch Work on Projects Break Work on Projects Prepare Presentations Evaluations Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Consultant in Ergonomics 169 Huntington Hills Rochester, NY 14622 (716) 544-3587 (0) (716) 266-8749 (Fax) Day 3: 7:15 Complete Presentation Preparations 8:00 Discussion of Ergonomics Teams' Future Activities 9:15 Break 9:30-11:00 Project Presentations to Managers �3.0-Day Ergonomics Team Training Course for Sf / SmithKiine Beecham Clinical Lab, May 24-26, 1995 .. ! Evaluations Summary A. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. I Overall Evaluation of the Course Enlightening and informative. Presented risk factors most people would not usually be aware of in the workplace (Business Services). Very interesting and informative, good participation due to organization. Anecdotes and stories very helpful to show us different perspectives (CRC Rep). I was not only surprised but extremely impressed with the last three days of our ergonomics training, well worth my time (Client Service Supervisor). Very informative. I learned a lot from Rich and Sue (Lead DSR). Thought course was very insightful. Learned a lot of useful information and techniques (Data Entry). Very good, comprehensive, a lot of information and we were well fed too ! (Data Entry). Excellent. Good supporting documentation, references and visuals (Human Resources). I learned alot in this training. Before this, I didn't realize that small things we do contribute a lot in relation to our work. This course is very educational (Lab Clerk). Good (Network Tech). An eye opener! Covered the information needed for our presentation. Nice mix between films, slides, book and graphs (Phleb. Coordinator). Very good. Lots of information and pertinent examples to help us relate it to our work (Phlebotomist Support): Excellent. Lots of information, lots of application of all areas. Useful tools (Safety Officer). Learned different approach to human factors. Highly recommend to extend to other sites. Expand/enforced ergonomic knowledge and resources (SH&E). This has been great ! I was one who began not knowing anything about ergonomics. Now I feel educated ! Not only that, but I want to learn more (Training Coordinator). B. Most Useful Information 1. Learning how to view and analyze workers method of doing a job (Business Services). Office ergonomics pertains more to my job (CRC Rep). Overall definition and explanation of ergonomics. I'll never look at 2. 3. �2. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. C. 1. 2. anything the same (Client Service Supervisor). How to look at jobs and find ways to help improve people's comfort and job (Lead DSR). How to adjust my work station to where I am most comfortable (Data Entry). Evaluation of risk factors, risk analysis; design of work environment for people using keyboards; actual analyses of work environments; preparation for project presentation (Data Entry). Dr. Rodgers--anything she said, her presence was a fantastic tool itself ! (Human Resources). Evaluating the job's physical movement. This way we can use it in the future on following projects (Lab Clerk). Hand outs, printed materials and videos (Network Tech). Seeing the physical plant after being taught what to look for. The videos made the difference (Phleb. Coordinator). How to identify the problems and how they have been solved in other places (Phlebotomist Support). Use of information in practice-training in evaluation and presentation (Safety Officer). Fatigue factors and lift data. Also physiological effects (SH&E). New eyes ! Looking at an old situation in a new way. Also a different way to ask questions about accidents (Training Coordinator). Least Useful Information All of it was in some way useful (Business Services). Lifting--not in my job area, but useful information nonetheless (CRC Rep). 3. The lift guideline graph seemed to give me extreme difficulty. Hopefully next year at this time I will understand graphs (Client Service Supervisor). 4. Analyses of work environment not related to jobs in the lab (Data Entry). 5. Too much analytical background information for general populace (Human Resources). 6. None (Lab Clerk). 7. Presentation (Network Tech). 8. The lifting guidelines graph. Had some trouble applying it the first part of the discussion (Phleb. Coordinator). 9. Too hard to find anything not valuable (Safety Officer). 10. Actually it was all useful in a different way (Training Coordinator). �3. D. Specific Suggestions for Improvement ;. j 1. 2. More time to digest information (Business Services). Technical information was useful but difficult to absorb on full stomach (CRC Rep). 3. Keep up the great work. Thank you Rick and Sue ! (Client Service Supervisor). 4. There is a lot to learn. Maybe if we had more time, maybe five days for training, a lot more could have been learned (Data Entry). 5. More time to work on projects, more on relaxation exercises to relieve tension (Data Entry). 6. Speak louder or use microphone (Lab Clerk). 7. More time, more handouts (Network Tech). 8. None really--a very enjoyable presentation. Thank you (Phleb. Coordinator). 9. More reference to manual so we can find the information readily (Phlebotomist Support). 10. Get more information to prepare videos for presentation when camera might be needed during training (Safety Officer). 11. Spend more time with presentations--give specifics/examples to others less knowledgeable of presentations (SH&E). 12. More time to analyze information before the presentations (Training Coordinator). 5/26/95 SHR/bl �.~·· Ergonomics Training Course for Thomson Professional Publishing Ergonomics Teams, Webster, NY, June 12,13,15,1995 Syllabus Day1: 7:30AM 8:00 8:30 9:00 9:30 9:45 11:00 12:00 12:30PM 1:45 2:00 2:15 2:45 3:30 Day 2: 7:30AM 8:30 8:45 9:30 12:00 12:30 1:00 2:00 2:30 2:45 3:00 3:30 Day 3: 7:30AM 12:00 12:30PM 2:00 2:30 3:30 Introductions, Review of Course Goals, Overview Fatigue Model for Defming Ergonomic Problems and Solutions Human Capacity and Stress Sensitizers - Inger Williams, Ph.D. Muscle Worlc/Recovery Time Needs- Postural Work Break Problem Solving: Postural Work Body Size Data- Use in Design and Analysis of Jobs/Workplaces, Height and Reach Interactions Lunch Problem Solving: Determining the Best Height for a Workplace Risk Factors for Repetitive Tasks Break Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique Problem Solving: Repetitive Work Adjourn Visual Work- Inger Williams, Ph.D. Manual Materials Handling Risk Factors Problem Solving: Manual Lifting Break Lunch Ergonomics and Accident Analysis Problem Solving: Accident Analysis Reports on Accident Analyses Break Cost-Benefit Analyses- How to Sell Change Discussion: Implementing an Ergonomics Process; Choose Projects Adjourn Work on Projects Lunch Prepare Presentations Present Projects to Managers Resources, Evaluations Adjourn S.H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Consultant in Ergonomics (716) 544-3587 (0) (716) 266-8749 (Fax) ( ~ �-=·:t~·~·~ =-== ===- -=- Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D Consultant in Ergonomics ----· -· - - · ··- -- .. ---· --·-··-··-----·----- 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS 0 ROCHESTER. NEW YORK 14622 1'/Jmw.· (71!i) !144-3:,1\7 0 Fax: {716} 266-8749 Ergonomics and the Computer Workplace Office Ergonomics Training Session for Amoco Corporation Personnel in Chicago, Illinois, November 3, 1995 Outline A. Why Office Ergonomics ? Driving Factor Approach. B. VDT Workplace Design- TI1eoretical and Real 1. Use of Body Size Data 2. Functional Design with T\1ultiple Variables C. Visual Aspects of Computer Work 1. Visual Discomfort 2. Layout and Lighting 3. Color and Readabil!ty D. Repetitive Task Problems in the. Office 1. Risk Factors for Injury/Illness 2. Workplace and Job Factors Contributing To Risk 3. Techniques to Reduce the Risk E. Selecting Computer Workplace Fumiture 1. Determining Job Requirements 2. Defining Needed Features 3. Defining Work Pattem and Load 4. Evaluating; Available Fumiture 5. On-Site P1lot Study and Data Collection 6. Lending Library �Ergonomic Principles for Design - A 2-Day Course for Engineers in the Bausch & Lomb Contact Lens Division Rochester, NY, December 7-8, 1995 Syllabus Lc.Jt: ~n~~ Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D Consultant in Ergonomics HIGHER PRODUGriVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS 0 ROCHESTER. NEW YORK 14622 Phone: (716] 544·3587 :J Fax: (716) 266-8749 �Ergonomics Principles for Design - 2-Day Course for Engineers at Bausch & Lomb's Contact Lens Division, December 7-8, 1995 Instructor: Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D., Consultant in Ergonomics Day 1: Ergonomics and Legislation Overviews; Design to Reduce Fatigue; Clearances, Reaches, Heights, Visibility, Layout / 7:30AM Caloric Intake, Introductions, Course Goals 8:00 Regulations, Scope of Ergonomics Designing Jobs to Reduce Fatigue- Work/Recovery Time Needs 8:15 Ergonomic Problem IdentificatiOn Exercise: 3 Contact Lens Jobs 8:45 9:30 Postural Break 9:45 Who Do We Design For? Using Anthropometric Data for Design 10:15 Reducing Postural Stress and Fatigue- Design of Seated and Standing Workplaces- Clearances, Heights, Reaches 11:00 Visual Work and VDT Workplaces- Inger Williams, Ph.D. 12:00 Caloric Intake- On Your Own 12:45 Problem Solving: Seated Workplaces- Contact Lens Inspection Tasks 1:30PM Layout Issues - Ergonomics and Flow, Ergonomics and Automation 2:00 Postural Break 2:15 Projects: Applying Ergonomics Design Data to Specific B&L Contact Lens Division Examples - 4 project groups Report Out the Design Projects 3:45 4:30 Adjourn Day 2: Designing to Prevent Overexertion and Repetitive Work Illnesses and Injuries; Design to Minimize Human Error, Cost/Benefit Analyses; Building Ergonomics Into the Business 7:30AM Caloric Intake, Questions Answered, Commercial Videotape Shared 8:00 Risk Factors for Upper Extremity and Low Back Problems 9:00 Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique to Determine the Fatigue Potential of a Task and How to Reduce It 9:30 Stretch Break 9:45 Lifting and Force Exertion Guidelines - How Much Is Too Much ? 10:15 Applying Risk Factor Data to Specific B&L Contact Lens Examples 11:15 Human Engineering Issues -Information Transfer, Reducing Complexity, and Reducing Error Opportunities 12:00 Caloric Intake - On Your Own 12:45PM Problem Solving: Desi~ning a Packing/Shipping Job- 3 teams 2:00 Report Out Design ProJect Exercise Break 2:30 2: 45 Cost/Benefit Analyses to Sell Ergonomic Changes at the Design or at the Production Level 3:15 Integrating Ergonomics Into the Business- Sustaining the Process 3:45 Selection of Design Projects for 2-day Follow-On Training Resources, Course Evaluation 4:15 Adjourn 4:30 ' l, �2-Day Ergonomics Training Course Table of Contents Starting Page Location Topic Schedule Table of Contents Acknowledgements Introduction and Course Goals Ergonomics Legislation - US The Cost of Poor Design Capacities for Work Factors That Increase Stress I Syllabus i ii 111 1 2 7 9 11 EDFPAWl -- -- EDFPAW2 --- ------ 338 Recovery Time/Static Work Identifying Ergonomic Problems Risk Factors for Discomfort Ergonomics Problem Solving Questions to Defme Job Demands Measurements andJob Improvements Risk Factor Analysis Anthropometric Data Height and Reach Interactions General Guidelines for Anthro Data Use Problem Analysis: Standing Work General Layout Guidelines Form VDT Workplace Design Kit Process for Evaluating Comfort Seated Observed Postures Checklist Self-Help in VDT Workplace Comfort Chair Characteristics Analysis of VDT Work Station 12 13 19 20 21 22 24 25 29 31 33 35 37 46 48 49 51 52 A Functional Job Analysis Technique Risk Factors for Repetitive Motions Injuries - Carpal Tunnel Syndrome, etc. Factors Affecting Grip Strength Ergonomic Job Analysis Form Table 2: Muscle Effort Levels Risk Factor Analysis Form Risk Factors for Low Back Pain Strength and Location Maximum Force Applications Kodak Lifting Guidelines Summary of Operation Design Problem Solving Form 53 71 -- 73 74 75 76 77 79 80 81 83 85 --- Accident Investigation Ergonomics Human Reliability Analyses Ergonomics and Quality Information Transfer Paced Work!fime Pressure Job Control and Task Complexity Man/Machine Functions 88 89 90 92 96 99 101 9 210,446,496 237 217 --- --285 18,20,24,28,30,50 --- 142,218,2$5 23,50 14 --- -- 15,122,151 151,244 151,254 -135,340 135,338 360,384,446 403 -181 �Automation or Peoiple Form Design Project Data Collection/Guidelines 12 Ergonomic Design Guidelines Ergonomics Processes - Action Plans Recommended Videotapes References - SHRodgers Cost-Benefit Problem Solving Form Problem Presentations Summary of Ergonomic Analyses Extra Problem Solving Forms Course Evaluation Form 102 103 106 111 116 117 118 121 122 126ff end -- --365 - 559 --- -- Acknowledgements The illustrations on pages 26-30, 81, and 82 are used with permission from Eastman Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volumes 1 and 2 published by Van Nostrand Reinhold. The tables and illustrations on pages 25, 51, 79 and 80 are from Working With Backache by S. H. Rodgers. Information on pages 11, 37-45, 48-50, 52 and 74 has been developed in conjunction with Dr. Inger Williams. Work/recovery curves based on those on page 12 and the material on page 73 have been published by Thieme Publishers in Seminars in Occupational Medicine in March 1987. The analytical technique on page 74 has been published by Hanley and Belfuss in a 1988 Occupational Medicine: State of the Art Review edition on Worker Fitness Evaluations. The article on pages 53-70 was published by the same press in 1992 in the Ergonomics issue edited by J.S.Moore and A.Garg. The outline on page 2 is from a draft copy of a proposed ergonomics guideline for general industry by OSHA written in September, 1990, and the outline of the proposed OSHA standard on ergonomics is from The Occupational Safety and Health Reporter.. All other unreferenced material in this syllabus is by Dr. S.H. Rodgers and permission to reproduce it must be obtained from her. �1 Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. r-~~onsultant , In Ergonomics _~69 Huntington Hills- Center Rochester, New York 14622 (716) 544-3587 (716) 266-8749 (FAX) Ergonomics Training and Awareness Courses Offered by Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D., Consultant in Ergonomics, Rochester, NY June, 1997 Update Table of Contents Course Startin& Paee General Ergonomics Awareness Courses Management - 1 to 2 hours Supen'isors and Team Leaders- 2 to 4 hours Union Representatives/Health & Safety Specialists Safety or EHS Committee - 6 to 8 hours Associates/Team Members/Hourly Workers- 1 to 8 hours Health & Safety/Human Resources Specialists- 2 to 8 hours Process Engineering/Planning Specialists - 2 to 8 hours Machine and Equipment Designers- 2 to 8 hours General Ergonomics Training Courses Ergonomics Steering Committee - Coordinators - 1 day EHS Team- Primary Ergonomic Response Team- 3 to 4 days Work Center Ergonomics Teams- 4 days Process Engineers/Planners/Layout Specialists - 2 to 4 days Machine or Product Designers - 2 to 4 days . Medical Specialists - In-House and Contract - 1 to 2 days Refresher Course (Kick-Up) for Teams- 1 to 2 days .., 3 3 3 4 4 4 5 5 6 7 7 .. 7 8 8 9 9 Specialized Topics - Ergonomics Training Courses Office and Computer Workplace Ergonomics- 4 to 8 hours An Ergonomics Approach to Accident Analysis - 8 hours Ergonomic Approaches to PreYenting and Managing Low Back Pain - 4 to 8 hours · Ergonomic Approaches to Reducing Repetitive Motions Disorders in the Workplace- 4 to 8 hours Strategies for the Prevention of Musculoskeletal Injuries and Illnesses in Occupational Tasks - 1 to 2 days The Design of Manual Handling Tasks - 1 day Engineering Courses Using a Current Project - 1 to 2 days 10 10 10 Costs for Ergonomics Awareness and Training Courses 12 11 11 ]1 1] 11 f"' �SI:S Sm1thiCI1r.e Befecha,.... ARGENTINA E -N'·T·Rr-E·~·-N·rA.··.M··/"IrE>,N·:-T,:o,·; E:··-N:•· ·.·.. . . . . . . : ... ; ·_ ..... ..... :' ·.: . .: .. ....... · .. __ E.RG-ONOMlA . ···G· · •E:'.N·:·T··: 'I•·N·•A, S.E:.M/:J.·N·rA:·-R·)1•·o,···} A.-.·.R ' . - ..-· .. · .... · .. : ...... ·' . .... '• . . . . . . . ·· .. - : ... ·.. · .... : .- . Dr. Suzanne Rodgers �WORKSHOPERGONOM~ ARGENTINA AGENDA Julio/Agosto, 1997 �Lunes 28 de julio de 1997 - Resumen de Ergonomia, Capacidades, Postura y Productividad 8:00-8:30 8:30-9:00 9:00-9:45 lntroducciones y Resumen Capacidad de Trabajo l,Para quien disenamos? 9:45- 10:00 Descanso 10:00- 10:45 10:45-11,15 11:15-12:00 Postura y Productividad . Trabajo Estatico, lnteracciones de Alcance/Aitura Curvas de Trabajo/Recuperaci6n Soluci6n de Problema: Reducci6n de Fatiga. 12:00 - 12:45 Almuerzo 12:45 - 13:45 13:45-14:15 Soluci6n de Problema: Diseno del Iugar de trabajo de pie Diseno del Iugar de trabajo sentado y trabajo visual 14:15- 14:30 Descanso 14:30 - 15:00 15:00- 16:00 Soluci6n de Problema: diseno del Iugar de trabajo sentado Revision del Trabajo: Posturas �Martes 29 de julio de 1997 - Previniendo Lesiones por esfuerzo excesivo, Tareas repetitivas, Manejo manual 8:00-8:30 8:30-9:15 9:15- 10:00 Des6rdenes por movimientos repetitivos Factores de riesgo para tendinitis, sindrome del tune! carpiano, etc. Forma para Analisis Ergon6mico del Trabajo 10:00-10:15 Descanso 10:15- 10:30 10:30-11,30 11:30- 12:00 Selecci6n y Disefio de Herramienta Soluci6n de Problema: Tareas Repetitivas Revision del Trabajo : Tareas Repetitivas 12:00- 12:45 Almuerzo 12:45 - 13:45 13:45- 14:00 14:00- 14:30 Dolor en Ia espalda baja; Factores de riesgo en el trabajo lmpedimentos en las extremidades superiores yen Ia espalda baja en el trabajo Directrices de manejo manual 14:30- 14:45 Descanso 14:45 - 15:30 15:30 - 16:00 Soluci6n de problema: manejo manual Levantamiento frecuente/Carga Total de trabajo/horas de Trabajo �Miercoles 30 de julio de 1997 - Confiabilidad Humana, analisis de Costo/Beneficio, Proyectos 8:00-8:30 8:30-9:00 9:00-9:30 Reduciendo Ia complejidad del Trabajo: Informacion, Ritmo Confiabilidad Humana: Controles/Paneles y Automatizaci6n Factores Ambientales influenciando el desemperio 9:30-9:45 Descanso 9:45- 10:30 10:30-11:15 11:15- 12:00 Analisis de Costo/Beneficio de Soluciones Encuestas/Listas de Cotejo/Recursos/Procesos Ergon6micos Empezar a trabajar en proyectos 12:00- 12:45 Almuerzo 12:45 - 14:30 Trabajar en proyectos 14:30 - 14:45 Descanso 14:45 - 15:45 15:45 - 16:00 Presentaciones de Proyectos Evaluaciones del Curso �Jueves 31 de julio de 1997 8:30 Ergonomla reactiva 10:00 Descanso 10:30 Definir, priorizar, solucionar e implementar soluciones para problemas ergon6micos 12:00 Almuerzo 13:00 Ergonomla preventiva Dr. Rodgers 13:30 La ergonomla en el diseno y anal isis de procesos Dr. Rodgers 14:30 Descanso 15:00 Uso de datos conocidos de Seguridad y Media Ambiente para prevenir futuras enfermedades o danos ergon6micos Dr. Rodgers 16:00 Analisis del costa ergon6mico Dr. Rodgers 17:00 Cierre del dla Dr. Rodgers Dr. Rodgers �Viernes 1 de agosto de 1997 8:30 Anillisis y presentaciones de proyectos ergon6micos de los participantes 10:00 Descanso 10:30 Continuaci6n: Analisis y presentaciones de proyectos ergon6micos de los participantes 12:00 Almuerzo 13:00 Continuaci6n: Analisis y presentaciones de proyectos ergon6micos de los participantes 14:30 Descanso 15:00 Continuaci6n: Analisis y presentaciones de proyectos ergon6micos de los participantes 17:00 Comentarios finales y Clausura Dr. Rodgers Dr. Rodgers Dr. Rodgers Dr. Rodgers P. Campos �S.H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Fax:716-266-8749 Jun 11 '97 9:28 P.04 Suuested Amendments to the May 27th Ergonomics Workshop Sehedule .. 6/11/97 • S.H.Rodgers Monday~ July 28th Plant Tour. ~eview of Accident Data, Orientation for Plant Managers or Supervisors. Check out Training Facilities, Review Videotapes, Meet Team(s) Tuesday, July 29th (use Monday schedu~e with changes indicated below) 10:30am The Fatigue ModCl for Assessing Musculoskeletal Stress 1:00pm Postural Fatigue Job Analysis and Problem Solving 3;00 pm Designing to Minimize Static Muscular Fatigue at Work Wednesday, July 30th (use Tuesday schedule with changes indicated below) 8:30 am 10:30 am Office Ergonomics and Seated Workplace Design Repetitive Motions Disorders .. eros - Risk Assessment 1:00 pm ·Problem Solving: Seated and Visual Work 3:00 pm Using Ergonomics Data and Guidelines for New Design Thursday, July 31st (use Wednesday schedule wi~h changes indicated below) 8:30 am Manual Materials Handling Guidelines !O:OOam Problem Solving: Manual Handling Tasks 1:00pm An Ergonomic Approach to Accident Analysis 3:00 pm Project: Accident Analysis �S.H. Rodgers. Ph.D. Fax:716-266-8749 Jun 11 '97 9:28 P.05 Friday, August 1st (use Thursday schedule with changes indicated below) 8:30 am Cost-Benefit Analysis for Ergonomics Projects and Selling Change 10:30 am Select Project and Start Analyses 1:00pm Work on Projects and Presentations 3:30 pm Presentations on Projects (15 minutes each)• * :Managers and Supervisom should attend th'* presentations 6111/f¥1 SHR �Ergonon1ics Training for New En1ployees Office of E1nergency Co1nn1unications Rochester, NY, August 19,1997 Outline I. Reducing Discomfort and Fatigue Through Ergonomics II. Risk Factors for Back and Upper Extremity Discomfort III. Risk Factors for Eye and Head Discomfort IV. Dtiving Factor Analysis of Seated Discomfort V. Strategies to Improve Comfort VI. Ergonomics Resources in OEO and the City Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �\ ~ ~\_Y (!j)~ 'f\w~ ('~'· ~ Applied Ergonomics: An Evidence Based Approach Suzanne Rodgers, Ph.D. i Sept 22, 1997 Vancouver, B.C. Sept 24, 1997 Edmonton, Alberta ~- Profes~ional Training Seminars Sept 26, 1997 Toronto, Ontario �Applied Ergonomics This workshop will enable you to prwrrze change and use problem solving techniques to determine cost effective changes. INSTRUCTOR: Sue Rodgers, Ph.D. earned her doctorate in physiology from the University of Rochester, New York. From 1968 to 1982 she worked in Eastman Kodak Company's Human Factors Section and served as Group Leader for the application of ergonomics to the work place. She is the technical editor and principal author of the two volume reference books by Kodak's Human Factors Section, Ergonomic Design for People at Work. In 1982, Dr. Rodgers started her own consulting and training business. Its focus is to help companies and service organizations initiate in house ergonomics programs in order to reduce occupational illness and injury and improve workers' quality performance. Her clients include General Electric, Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company, General Motors, Eastman Kodak, NIOSH, Amoco, the City of Rochester, and SmithK!ine Beecham. Dr. Rodgers is the author of Working with Backache, edited and contributed to the March, 1987 issue of Seminars in Occupational Medicine on "Repetitive Motions Injuries", and has contributed chapters on job evaluation and ergonomics to occupational medicine and physical therapy books. She speaks often at national and international medical and industrial conferences. WORKSHOP DESCRIPTION: Ergonomics is the study of work with the goal of designing jobs, workplaces, equipment and environments to be within the capabilities and tolerances of most people. In this presentation, Dr. Rodgers will review four types of ergonomic job analyses and discuss the strengths and weakness of each for assessing job stress on the musculoskeletal system. Four jobs will be analyzed using these techniques covering postural, repetitive, and manual handling tasks. Methods for moving from the job analysis to the development of solutions for improved job demands will be discussed. Quantification of the effort through job analysis is emphasized in order to defme the degree of risk on a job. SEMINAR GOALS: To provide an overview of ergonomics analysis and problem solving techniques. To identify, evaluate and fmd effective solutions for tasks that are difficult to perform or where injuries or illnesses have been seen. To evaluate several job analysis methods in the solution of ergonomic problems at work, and to determine which are appropriate for different types of work. To learn how to use quantitative data in assessment of risk for injury Program AGENDA- (8:30A.M. -5:00P.M.) 1. When is ergonomic job analysis needed? 2. Types of job analysis - Strengths and weaknesses. a. b. c. d. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Interview data - descriptive. Check lists. Computer models - biomechanical analysis. Fatigue analysis. Case studies using four job analysis techniques. Problem solving from job analysis information. Case study- Repetitive work- upper extremity problem. Case study- Manual handling -low back pain. Case study - Office ergonomics. Discussion and questions. FEE: $185.00 + $12.95 GST (Total $197.95) (Payable to: Professional training Seminars). The tuition fee qualifies for deduction under the Income Tax Act. GST # 125642504. Early Bird Registration, 10% discount (prior to August 22, 1997; $166.50 + $11.66 GST =Total$ 178.16) Group discount, 10% for three or more participants from the same facility ($166.50 + $11.66 GST = Total $ 178.16 ). Lunch is included. CONTACT: Maureen Dwight Professional Training Seminars 371 Markham Street Toronto, Ontario M6G 2K8 Phone: (416) - 961-2669 Outside Toronto: (800)-915-8950 Fax: (416) - 925-6823 e-mail: www.seminars.on.ca :Z 0 LOCATION: Simon Fraser University at Harbour Center Vancouver, B.C. Sept 22, 1997 Grant McEwan College Edmonton, Alberta Sept 24, 1997 Airport Board of Trade Toronto, Ontario Sept 26, 1997 t :ll t:ll ~ ~ �Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN Maureen Dwight, PT Professional Training Seminars 371 Markham Street Toronto, Ontario M6G 2K8 (416) 961-2669 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 Applied Ergonomics - An EvidenceBased Approach. ) Job Analysis and Problem Solving Workshop ' September 24,'97 Edmonton, Alberta Grant McEwen College September 26,'97 Toronto, Ontario Airport Board of Trade �A Guide to the Understanding of Work-Related Musculoskeletal Discomfort, Illness, and. Injury in Repetitive Work General Electric Aircraft Engines Hooksett, New Hampshire September 30, 1997 <-..; Outline A. Fatigue, Acute Over-Exertion, Chronic Injury/Illness B. Risk Factors for Repetitive Motions C. Strategies to Reduce the Risk for Injury and Illness Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMIC:S!>'~MAN FACTORS . "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE. EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN J. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS �Ergon(nnics 1'raining for Ne'v En1ployees Office of E1nergency ConHnunications Rochester, NY, December, 1997 Outline I. Reducing Discomfort and Fatigue TI1rough Ergonomics II. Risk Factors for Back and Upper Extremity Discomfort III. Risk Factors for Eye and Head Discomfort IV. Driving Factor Analysis of Seated Discomfott V. Strategies to Improve Comfort VI. Ergonomics Resources in OEO and the City Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D 'CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/I!UMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY TltnOliGII JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF llliMAN FAC:TORS IN WOfiKPLAGE, EQ!JII'MENI ANlll'llOOllCI DESIGN 3. IIEALHI AND SAFETY PflOGIIAMS (716) 544-3567 • 16911UNTINGTON I !ILLS • HOC! lESTER, N.Y. 14622 •• �Ergonomics Training for New Employees Office of Emergency Communications Rochester, NY,. June 18, 1998 Outline I. Reducing Discomfort and Fatigue Through Ergonomics II. Risk Factors for Back and Upper Extremity Discomfort ill. Risk Factors for Eye and Head Discomfort IV. Driving Factor Analysis of Seated Discomfort V. Strategies to Improve Comfort VI. Ergonomics Resources in OEO and the City Suzanne H. Rodgers. Ph.D Consultant m Ergonomic.< HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROLIGH JOB DESIGN lnf• HL'h"TJNGTOI'\ HILLS :J RO:HESTE!'. NEW YOR}: 14£i:!:2 :>44·:l~R7 :J Fax ·-1 f>i ::r;r..f.74c Pizont ·!711>1 �Ergonomics Job Set i sfect ion Productivity Quality ·····.~ Safety Ergonomic Job Analysis and Problem Solving Review Course Syllabus July, 1998 Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1. AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEA~TH AND 1'L."~gry: .PROGRAMS (716) 544·3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �() ' ,' Ergonomics Team Training for General Electric Aircraft Engines, Evendale, OH July 20-23,1998 Syllabus ••. Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" 1, AWARENESS SEMINARS 2. TRAINING ON USE OF HUMAN FACTORS IN WORKPLACE, EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCT DESIGN 3. HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS (716) 544-3587 • 169 HUNTINGTON HILLS • ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14622 �100-r------------., 80 so 40 .. '96·7 FII/Slps fa '96-7 LfUPsh : 20 Oiv SWOl Reducing Accidents Through Ergonomics City of Rochester Training Program by Sue Rodgers, Ph.D., Consultant in Ergonomics Tassie Demps, Safety Specialist~ BER February 9 & 16 or April 20 & 21, 1999, 8 am-12 noon Goals: To learn ways to analyze occupational accidents and injuries that can lead to cost-effective preventive measures to reduce risk in the future. To become familiar with ergonomics information relevant to risk definitions and to learn to apply that information to work problems. To learn more about the proactive approach to safety being developed by the Safety Specialist and Ergonomics Consultant and the Supervisors' Role in its success. �Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. Consultant In Ergonomics 169 Huntington Hills - Center Rochester, New York 14622 (716) 544-3587 (716) 266-8749 (FAX) 2-Day Ergonomics Training Course for Engineers at USCS, IBS, Cabledata in El Dorado Hills, CA, March 18-19, 1999 Syllabus Schedule: Start Time Topic Day 1 8:00 AM 8:30 9:00 10:00 10:15 11:30 12:00 1:00PM 1:45 2:30 3:15 3:30 4:00 5:00 Overview of Course -Review of Videotaped Jobs Ergonomic Design Guidelines- Upper Limits Anthropometric Data- Population Capabilities Break Problem Solving: Workplace and Job Design Seated Workplace Design Lunch Problem Solving: Layout Repetitive Work: Fatigue and Job Pattern Problem Solving: Repetitive Tasks . Break Pacing and Quality Performance Problem Solving: Paced Work Adjourn Day2 8:00AM 9:15 10:00 10:15 12:00 1:00PM 2:00 3:30 4:30 Manual Handling and Force Guidelines Problem Solving: Lifting and Pushing Break Problem Solving: Repetitive Lifting Lunch Incorporating Ergonomics Guidelines Into New Design Problem Solving: Ergonomics in New Design/Selection of Equipment Selling Ergonomic Improvements Resources, Course Evaluations, and Adjourn �2-Day Ergonomics Training Course for Engineers at USCS, IBS, Cabledata in ElDorado Hills, CA, March 18-19, 1999 Table of Contents Starting Page 1 I iiL. 1 3 5 6 8 12 14 17 19 28 31 33 37 39 40 41 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 59 66 83 84 Topic Table of Contents Acknowledgements Job Analysis Techniques and Solution Strategies Rapid Ergonomics Job/Workplace Review Figure 1: Ergonomic Risk Factors Figure 1: Risk Factors for Low Back Pain Anthropometric Data General guidelines for Using Anthropometric Data Clearances Reaches- Standing and Sitting VDT Workplace Design Kit Observed Postures- Seated Work and Self-Help Process for Evaluating Comfort- Seated Work Chair Selection Determining Best Height for Standing Workplace Ergonomics Principles for General Layout and Flow Problem Solving Form- Anthropometric Data Use Risk Factors for Upper Extremity Discomfort Table 1: Factors Affecting Grip Strength Work/Recovery Times for Static Work Functional Job Fatigue Analysis Form Table 2: Examples of Muscle Effort Levels Table 3: Definitions of Heavy Effort Ergonomic Problem Solving Analysis Form Basis for Supervisory and Employee Awareness Training Self-Help Approach to Reduce Risk Methodology for Fatigue Analysis in Repetitive Jobs Figure 3: Sustained Effort Time Limits References for Fatigue Analysis ( L. �:~-\ ) Cai/OSHA Ergonomics Problem Solving Course2 Oakland2 CA2 May 4-62 1999 EZ Ergo Re[. Teacher Topic Sue lntros!Expectations Types of Jobs Seen Befores and Afters Importance ofDefming Risk Hazard vs Good Design Problem Solving Approach- Task Analysis, Risk Factors, Whys? Day 1: 4-5 8-10, 17 Ira Sue 9-17, 72-73 Ira Sue 41-51 /:) 28-32, 40-41 19-26 Ira Sue Ira& Sue Risk Factors and Occupational Hazards - Anatomy Fatigue Guidelines for Determining Risk in Workplace Design- Reaches, etc. Examples of Solutions Techniques for Assessing Risk- Checklists, etc. Postural Stress and Workplace Design- Problem Solving Day2: 18 9-17 40-41, 66-71 36-39 41-43 57-65,33-36, 42-43 \ ~J 2-3 44, 74-75 Sue Ira Sue Ira Ira& Sue Contributing Factors to Musculoskeletal Disorders Risk Factors- Effort Intensity Fatigue Rating Technique Approaches to Reduce the Risk Ergonomic Tooling Repetitive Tasks -Problem Solving Sue Sue Ira Manual Materials Handling- Biomechanics and Psychophysical Analyses- NIOSH Guidelines Kodak Lifting Guidelines Push/Pull Improvements in MMH Ira & Sue Sue Ira Problem Solving - MMH Cost Effective Solutions- Multifactorial Exercises to Reduce Risk ofMSDs/Health Care Ira �Providers Day3: 2-3, 47-51 52-53 Sue & Ira Sue 76-84, Section IV Ira Effective Programs- Critical Factors Building Ergonomics Into Other Processes Define Problem Before Solving It Resources Sue & Ira Projects- Problem Solving/Solutions 5/3/99 \) / \ '---./} �too,------------. 80 . Q. ~ .. 60 . 40 : • '98·7 Fllr.31p; Ef '96~7 LfUPsh 20 Dlv SWOl Reducing Accidents Through Ergonomics City of Rochester Training Program by t:~ Sue Rodgers, Ph.D., Consultant in Ergonomics Tassie Demps, Safety Specialist~ BHRM May 18th and 25th, 1999, 8 AM to 12 noon, Colfax Street Training Center Goals: . To learn ways to analyze occupational accidents and injuries that can lead to cost-effective preventive measures to reduce risk in the future. To become familiar with ergonomics information relevant to risk definitions and to learn to apply that information to work problems. To learn more about the proactive approach to safety being developed by the Safety Specialist and Ergonomics Consultant and the Supervisors' Role in its success. �Course Schedule May 18th morning 8:00 Introductions/Course Goals/ Accident Data and Form 8:30 Ergonomic Approach to Accident Investigations - Why ? 9:15 Exercise to Find Multiple Factors in an Air Crash 9:45 Break 10:00 Using Human Capabilities Data to Assess Risk for Injury 10:45 Review of Several Accidents and Jobs in the City 11 :45 Chose Projects for Next Week's Session 12:00 Adjourn May 25th morning 8:00 Feedback on Topics Where More Time Is Needed 8:30 Reports on Accident Investigations Done 9:45 Break 10:00 Discussion on Topics Chosen Earlier and Feedback on Reports 11:45 Concluding Remarks and Course Evaluations 12:00 Adjourn / r �I. I Treinamento de Ergonomia para ; GE Celma e GE Varig Novembro de 1999. Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/ HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" (7~ 6} 544-3587 • Fax (716} 266-8749 Email SHAODGERS@aol.com 169 Huntington Hills • Rochester, NY 14622 �• I )uzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. :onsultant In Ergonomics l69 Huntington Hills - Center ~ochester, New York 14622 (716) 544-3587 (716) 266-8749 (FA~) Ergonomics Opportunities at GEES Celma and Varig, Petropolis and Rio de Janeiro, Brasil, Summary of Jobs Seen in November, 1999 as Part of Ergonomics Team Training Table of Contents pages 1-21 Summary of Jobs Videotaped at GE Celma and GE Varig GECelma A. GEREP, CEMGB B. GEMOG, EQLPC C. GEMOG, EQLPT D. GEREP, EQPQI E. GEMSS, EQMAM F. GEACE, EGNDT G. GEACE, EGPAC H. GEACE, EGEAC I. GEPMI, EQJ85 GEVarig 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 6-7 7-8 8 8-9 9-10 11- 14 GECelma A.GEREP B. DIFAB C. Other Jobs from Projects- 1 Celma, 2 Varig 15-18 18-20 20-21 Office-related Consultations and Observations at GE Celma A. Black Belts' Office B. Sourcing and Vendor Communications Offices 1- 2 2- 5 Grip Strengths of Ergonomics Team Training Course Members Appendix: Ergonomic Equipment Vendors!URLs pages 1 - 5 3 pages 8 pages �City of Rochester Parks Department Wellness Program April 13, 2000 I. A. B. C. D. ...... \ Risk Factors for Low Back Pain Postural Risk Factors Manual Handling Tasks Force Exertion Combined Risk Factors -Fatigue II. Guidelines for Reducing Risk to the Back A. Keeping the load or force close to the body B. Stable footing C. Good grip D. Minimize twisting E. Minimize time in awkward postures- mini-breaks F. Slide instead of lift G. Lift between knees and mid-chest levels H. Get help on bulky lifts III. Review of Some Jobs for Low Back Risk Factors A. Tree trimming B. Cemetery cement work C. Parks brush removal, equipment handling ._· ••• < �r) \ ~ ... Low Back Pain Risk Factors A. Postures Sustained for 15 seconds or More 1. Bending forward 2. Leaning to one side 3. Twisting 4. Arching the back - overhead work 5. Crouching 6. One-sided standing 7. Extended reaches 8. Constant standing 9. Constant sitting 10. Long truck/car rides, especially over uneven terrain 11. Feet at different levels- side of hill, stepping out of the truck, etc. B. Manual Handling Activities 1. Lifting, lowering or force exertion more than 14 inches in front of the body 2. Lifting, lowering, or exerting force while twisting 3. Unevenly weighted loads (e.g., chain saw) 4. Shifting loads (e.g., bags of chemicals) 5. Exerting high forces while kneeling 6. Handling items or exerting forces below knee level or above shoulder level 7. Poor grasping points 8. Lifting with a sudden acceleration or jerk 9. Handling wide objects on one side of the body 10. Sustained carrying 11. Frequent handling of items (>3/minute for 3-second lifts) C. Other Contributors 1. Slippery walking surfaces, especially ice and snow 2. Projections, obstructions that limit access to a work area and may be struck 3. Climbing 4. Poor housekeeping, trash/litter �Ergonomics Team Training Course forGE Superabrasives, Worthington, OH, June 6-9, 2000 Syllabus Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/ HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" (716) 544-3587 • Fax (716) 266-8749 Email SHRODGERS@aol.com 169 Huntington Hills • Rochester, NY 14622 �Outline of the Course (8:00AM to 3:45PM) Day One Ergonomics Scope and Potential Legislation Fatigue and How to Reduce It Postural Risk Factors Problem Solving: Postural Stress Design of Workplaces -Using Anthropometric Data Problem Solving: Working Height Determinations Office Ergonomics Problem Solving: Seated Workplace Design Layout of Workplaces Day Two Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders- Definitions, Risk Factors, Control Measures Ergonomic Job Analysis Technique to Prioritize the Need for Change on a Job - Fatigue Prediction Problem Solving: Repetitive Tasks Low Back Pain and Disorders - Risk Factors and Control Measures Guidelines for Safe Force Exertions Guidelines for Safe Lifting Total Physical Workload- Guidelines for Good Job Design Problem Solving: Manual Handling Tasks Day Three Ergonomics and Quality- Information Transfer Environmental Guidelines- Heat and Humidity, Noise, Lighting An Ergonomic Approach to Accident Analysis Problem Solving: Accident Follow-Up from an Ergonomics Viewpoint Cost/Benefit Analysis of Ergonomic Problem Solutions Ergonomics Program Goals at Worthington and Activities Identifying Projects for Rest of Course Initial Analysis of Jobffask- Data Collection �Day Four Work on Projects With Coaching Prepare Presentations for Managers Make Presentations (10 minutes each) to Managers Evaluations �Ergonomics Team Training Course for GEAE Evendale, Evendale, OH, October 9-13, 2000 Syllabus \f"" fVv L~~~ ~II~~ Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/ HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" (716) 544-3587 • Fax (716) 266-8749 Email SHRODGERS@aol.com 169 Huntington Hills • Rochester, NY 14622 ··~·· �Office Ergonomics - Evaluating Workplaces GEAE Evendale, 10/13/2000 Table of Contents Topic Office Ergonomics -Self Help... Postural and Visual Comfort Rating Forms Risk Factors for Discomfort Process for Evaluating Comfort in a Seated Workplace Observed Postures ... and Self-Help to Improve Comfort Analysis of the VDT Workstation- Visual Posture and Vision and Productivity Factors That Contribute to Visual Discomfort Questionnaire to Evaluate Job Requirements ... Anthropometric Data VDT Workplace Design Kit Seated Arm Reach General Guidelines for Chair Selection Examples of Workplace Assists ... Extra Forms Starting Page 1 2 4 5 7 10 11 12 13 15 16 25 26 30 31 Acknowledgements The illustration on page 15 is from Working With Backache by S.H.Rodgers, published by Perinton Press in 1985. The illustration on page 25 is from Eastman Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work, Volume 1, published by von Nostrand Reinhold (now Wiley and Sons) in 1983. All of the other material has been developed by Inger Williams, Ph.D. and S.H. Rodgers. Permission to reproduce it must be obtained from them. Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D '· ~' CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/ HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" (716) 544-3587 • Fax (716) 266-8749 Email SHRODGERS@aol.com 169 Huntington Hills • Rocheste;, NY 14622 �2-Dav Er2onomics Team Trainin!! Course for GEES MiamiPower Systems~ Jt,ebruary 1-2~ 2001 w ~ ~ Syllabus Section 1: SeCtion 2: Section 3: Section 4: Section 5: Section 6: Section 7: Section 8: Section 9: OSHA 2000 Ergonomics Program Standard Ergonomics, Fatigue, and Body Size Data Office Ergonomics- Evaluating Workplaces Reducing Work-Related rvtusculoskeletai Disorders Reducing Strains and Sprains by Improving Manual Handling Tasks Factors A1Iecting Quality Performance, Environment An Ergonomics Approach to Accident Analysis Ergonomics Processes, Cost/Benefit Analyses Project Information and Extra Fon:ns Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D· · · · CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/ HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" (716) 544-3587 •' Fax (716) 266~.87 49 · . . :1 Email SHRODGERS@aol.com 169 Huntington Hills • Rochester, NY 14622 �Ergonomics Job Analysis and Applications in the Field A Course for Loss Control Specialists and Others at the California State Compensation Insurance Fund, March, 2001 Course Outline Day 1: Review of Ergonomics Areas of Particular Interest to Attendees Review of Musculoskeletal Risk Factors That Ergonomic Job Design Addresses OSHA Ergonomics Program Standard- Job Analysis Requirements Other Job Analysis Techniques- Fatigue Analysis Problem Solving to Develop Cost-Effective Solutions for the Business Day2: Using Accident/Incident and Health Data to Identify Ergonomics Opportunities Getting Management Commitment to Ergonomics in a Business Effective In-House Ergonomics Programs for Employers Lessons Learned About Ergonomics Training Measuring the Effectiveness of an Ergonomics Program Case Studies Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/ HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" (716) 544-3587 • Fax (716) 266-87 49 Email SHRODGERS@aol.com 169 Huntington Hills • Rochester, NY 14622 �Ergonomic Job Analysis and Applications in the Field Table of Contents Topic Table of Contents Acknowledgements Starting Page Basis for Supervisory and Employee Training- MSDs Table 2: A Self-Help Approach to Reducing the Risk ... Figure 1: Risk Factors for Low Back Pain -Checklist OSHA Ergonomics Program Standard- Job Analysis Table W -1: OSHA Basic Screening Tool Moore-Garg Strain Index NIOSH Work Practices Guidelines- 1991 Snook Tables for Lifting, Carrying, Pushing and Pulling RULA Employee Assessment Worksheet Rapid Entire Body Assessment Washington State Ergonomics Standard Appendix ACGIH TLVs for Hand Activity Rodgers Priority for Change (Fatigue Analysis) Observed Postures for People in Seated Workplaces A Functional Job Analysis Technique Predicting Ergonomically -Acceptable Highly Repetitive Tasks Job Analysis Techniques and Solution Strategies Lessons Learned: Ergonomics in the Trenches A Process for Identifying Ergonomic Opportunities ... A Process for Analyzing Workplace Accidents, Rapid Ergonomics Job/Workplace Review ... ii 1 11 18 20 22 24 26 29 38 39 42 48 50 54 57 74 83 85 89 98 104 106 111 112 115 Securing Management Commitment and Employee Involvement Ergonomics Process Components Thoughts on Ergonomics Programs and Processes in Plants Ergonomic Program Approaches Lessons Learned About Ergonomics Training Return-to-Work/Medical Management Approaches- Ergonomics Assessing the Effectiveness of an Ergonomics Process Ergonomic Case Study Bibliography- Rodgers 131 132 Graphs and Forms for Problem Solving 134ff 119 121 125 ,_ �Acknowledgements: The material on pages 20 to 23 is from the November 14, 2000 Federal Register publication of the OSHA Ergonomics Program Standard 1910. The summary of several job analysis methods on pages 24 to 53 has been taken, with his permission, from an excellent website by Dr. Thomas Bernard of the University of South Aorida College of Public Health in Tampa. The URL is http://www.bsc.usf.edu/~tbemard/ergotools. The illustrations on pages 136 and 144 are from Eastman Kodak's Ergonomic Design for People at Work, VoJumes 1 and 2 published by van Nostrand Reinhold (now Wiley and Sons) in 1983 and 1986 in New York City. The article on pages 57-73, "A functional job analysis technique" appeared in a monograph on Ergonomics edited by A. Garg and J.S. Moore and published by Hanley and Belfus of Philadelphia in their series, Occupational Medicine: State of the Art Reviews. The article on pages 74 to 82 is from the Proceedings of ErfloCon'98, the Silicon Valley Ergonomics Conference on May 3-6, 1998 in San Jose, CA, pages 3-11. The article on pages 98 to 103 was published in Aoolie4 Occupational and Environmental Hylriene 15(7): 529-534in 2000. The material on pages 135 and 143 is from Workine-withBackache by SH Rodgers, 1986. Dr. Inger Williams developed the material on pages 54 to 56 and 137 in co1Uunction with SH Rodgers. Everything else in the syllabus, unless otherwise noted, was developed by S.H. Rodgers, and permission to reproduce it must be obtained from her. I I Li �E11gonomics Semina~R>n Musculai?Fatigue Evaluation and Pmblem Solving to Develop Stmtegies to Dec11ease the Risk of Occupational MSDs, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Feb. 19,2003 Outline Muscular Fatigue in Occupational Tasks Recovery Time Needs in Static Muscular Work Rodgers' Muscle Fatigue Analysis Tool Problem Solving and Solution Strategy Generation Case Studies from LLNL- Glassware Washing, Demolition Work Overhead, Photographer Table of Contents Starting Page A Participatory Approach to Categorize Fatigue on Occupational Tasks I Work/Recovery Curves 6 Rodgers Muscle Fatigue Analysis Tool 7 Discomfort Survey Form 18 An Ergonomics Problem Solving Technique 20 Basis for Supervisory and Employee Training- MSDs 35 Table 2: A Self-Help Approach to Reduce Risk of MSDs 45a A Functional Job Evaluation Technique 51 References- SHR 68 Extra Forms .. �University of Alabama at Tuscaloosa Ergonomics Training Course for Health and Safety Consultants, College of Continuing Studies, September 16-17,2003. Outline of Course Day One A. Overview - Scope of Ergonomics 1. What to look for on surveys 2. Mistakes to avoid- My lessons learned B. Fatigue 1. What causes fatigue? 2. How do we measure fatigue? 3. How do we reduce fatigue? 4. Postural work 5. Repetitive tasks 6. Heavy work C. Problem Solving 1. Defining the problem 2. Problem solving technique 3. Examples of low cost solutions D. Use of Body Size and Strength Data to Assess Risk 1. Anthropometric Data 2. Hand Grip Strength 3. Lifting Strength Day Two E. Accident Investigation 1. Looking at Accident Data 2. Finding Root Causes of Accidents 3. Making Jobs Safer F. Case Studies- Using the Forms G. Cost/Benefit Analysis of Ergonomics Improvements Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/ HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" (716) 544-3587 • Fax (716) 266-8749 Email SHRODGERS@aol.com 169 Huntington Hills • Rochester, NY 14622 �Ergonomics Awareness Course for the City of Rochester February 18th and March lOt\ 2005 at SWO's Colfax Street Training Room Presenter: Sue Rodgers, Consultant in Ergonomics Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D Ergonomics =Designing with People in Mind Syllabus Table of Contents CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/ HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" (716) 544-3587 • Fax (716) 266-8749 Email SHRODGERS@aol.com 169 Huntington Hills • Rochester, NY 14622 Starting Page ( Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders A Checklist to Categorize Muscle Fatigue ... Musculoskeletal Disorders and How to Reduce Them Musculoskeletal Risk Factors Rodgers Muscle Fatigue Analysis An Ergonomics Problem Solving Process 11 13 14 Office Ergonomics - Comfort Assessment Individual Ergonomic Workstation Evaluation Form Process for Evaluating Comfort in a Seated Workplace Finding Your Comfortable Viewing Distance Types of Assist Devices 15 16 17 19 20 Natural History ofDegenerative Disc Disease Risk Factors for Low Back Pain and Ways To reduce Them Lifting Strength Lifting Guidelines Carrying Guidelines Force Exertion Guidelines 23 24 28 29 34 35 Work Design- Organizational Factors Total Workload, Shift Work, and Overtime Job Analysis and Solution Strategies Evaluating Workplace Interventions 36 38 43 45 Analysis of a Headstone Setting Task Extra Forms 48 50 Equipment Sources Design and Selection recommendations for hand Tools 55 56 1 6 8 �w<. 'l•' Follow-Up Ergonomics Training and Awareness for B.G. Sulzle, Syracuse, NY, May 17,2005 Table of Contents Page 1 General Comments About Getting an Ergonomics Process Started 2 Who Should Be Trained? 3 How Do You Get Their Attention? Demonstrations. 6 Risk Factors for Injuries -Videos, Checklists 23 Fatigue Interactions 27 Ergonomic Problem Solving- Participative, Strategies, Why? Why? Why? 29 Solutions- Examples of Equipment, Outcomes of Problem Solving Solutions 36 Information on Human Capabilities 44 Examples of Job Demands That Should Be Addressed 48 Extra Forms L-.ut~ ~~~~ Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/ HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" srs.;- (~) 5'1>.s 544-3587 • Fax(~) 266-8749 Email SHRODGERS@aol.com 169 Huntington Hills • Rochester, NY 14622 �Ergonomics Awareness for New Emergency Communications Specialists Emergency Communications Department, September 26, 2005, 9:30-11 :OOAM A. What is Ergonomics and Why Should you Know About It? 1. Designing for People 2. Injury, Illness, and Fatigue Prevention B. The Telecommunicators' Workplace 1. Adjusting the Keying and Visual Heights and Distances 2. Adjusting the Chair 3. Organizing the Workplace 4. Visual Demands - Optimizing them C. What to Do If You Have Musculoskeletal Discomfort 1. Early reporting 2. Recovery activities .Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D CONSULTANT IN ERGONOMICS/ HUMAN FACTORS "HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY THROUGH JOB DESIGN" _.t;'y;' $-j.:,-544-3587 • Fax~) 266-8749 Email SHRODGERS@aol.com i 69 Huntington Hills • Rochester, NY i 4622 ~) � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Suzanne Rodgers Collection Subject The topic of the resource Human engineering Description An account of the resource Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. (1939-2017) Suzanne H. Rodgers, Ph.D. was an internationally recognized scholar, consultant and leader of the field of occupational ergonomics. She received her doctorate in Physiology in 1967 from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, New York. After a two-year post-doctoral fellowship in London where she studied the control of blood pressure, heart rate and respiration, she joined the Human Factors/Ergonomics Group at Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York. Working with engineers, medical specialists, psychologists and computer and statistical specialists, Dr. Rodgers spent the next thirteen years studying people at work. In 1982, she left Kodak to start her own ergonomics consulting and training business with the focus on participatory approaches to ergonomics problem solving. From 1982-1988, she taught IE 436/536 “The Physiological Basis of Human Factors” to students of the Department of Industrial Engineering at the State University of New York at Buffalo [now the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the University at Buffalo, SUNY]. Dr. Rodgers was a principal author and technical editor for Kodak’s two-volume series, Ergonomic Design for People at Work, published in 1982 and 1986, and the second edition that was published in 2004. She also wrote Working with Backache that was published in 1985. She has published a number of important journal articles and position papers in ergonomics and medical journals, and spoke frequently at professional conferences. For many years, she was an important leader and organizer of the Lucien Brouha Work Physiology Symposium. Dr. Rodgers had a profound impact on many ergonomics professionals, hundreds of students and thousands of workers. This collection illustrates some of the many contributions Dr. Rodgers made as a leader and pioneer of the ergonomics profession. It includes samples of her textbooks, journal articles, worksite training syllabi, conference presentations and other professional and personal contributions. This collection also contains examples of her writing, illustrations, and workshop/conference schedules. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University at Buffalo. University Libraries. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource University at Buffalo. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering. Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Images Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001 Suzanne Rodgers Collection Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource IN COPYRIGHT - EDUCATIONAL USE PERMITTED This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/ Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Training Seminars Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Rodgers, Suzanne H. Description An account of the resource A set of title pages and schedules for seminars given by Dr. Rodgers. A list of the seminars included is given at the beginning of the document. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1984-2005 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context IE-001_001 Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2018-12-17 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Extent The size or duration of the resource. 348 p. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Susanne Rodgers Collection IE-001 Table Of Contents A list of subunits of the resource. Pages 1-6 of the document summarizes the trainings in chronological order and then the following pages are the associated cover pages, schedules, agendas, table of contents and acknowledgements. Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). Copyright Estate of Suzanne Rodgers https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/9f61aa9e85b06cb19d604cd4b7ccba55.jpg 4df5964cbdbbe38f966022207e68a550 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource Four musicians play string instruments while a person in the foreground sits with their back to the camera. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource June in Buffalo Photograph Collection Subject The topic of the resource Music festivals Description An account of the resource The Irene Haupt Photographs of June in Buffalo document the annual contemporary music festival held at the University at Buffalo, The State University of New York. The festival was begun in 1975 by composer Morton Feldman who directed the festival 1975-78 and in 1980. The festival was dormant from 1981 through 1985. David Felder revived the festival in 1986 and has been its director since that time. June in Buffalo provides young composers the opportunity to work with senior composers from around the world. The invited faculty members not only have works performed at the festival, they also present lectures, seminars, and master classes. The student composers have the opportunity to hear their works in performance by professional musicians of the highest caliber. This online collection is a compilation of photographs by Irene Haupt beginning with the 2000 June in Buffalo. Haupt, a graduate of the State University of New York at Buffalo, has been documenting the Buffalo arts scene through her photography since 1976. During that time she has worked for, or with, some of the most notable institutions in Buffalo, including the Irish Classical Theatre, Studio Arena Theater, the Kavinoky Theatre, the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra, the Theatre of Youth, the Albright-Knox Art Gallery, and the State University of New York at Buffalo. In addition to her specialty of theater photography, Irene Haupt has also devoted much of her career to the photography of musicians and musical events, especially the contemporary music scene in Buffalo. A broader representation of Irene Haupt's photographs of musical activities in Buffalo are also available online in the Irene Haupt Photographs of Musicians in Buffalo . The musicians who have participated in the June in Buffalo festival include University at Buffalo faculty members David Felder, Cort Lippe, Jeffrey Stadelman, Cheryl Gobbetti-Hoffman, Jonathan Golove, Tony Conrad, Stephen Manes, Tony Arnold, Magnus Mårtensson, Jon Nelson, Movses Pogossian, and Jan Williams. Visiting artists have included Lukas Foss, Amy Williams, Helena Bugallo, Charles Wuorinen, Joji Yuasa, George Crumb, Augusta Read Thomas, Bernard Rands, Philip Glass, Steve Reich, Harvey Sollberger, Roger Reynolds, John Harbison, Dora Ohrenstein, Philippe Manoury, Jonathan Harvey, John Corigliano, and the New York New Music Ensemble. Complete details about the annual collections can be found in their respective finding aids. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LIB-MUS009 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Mivos Quartet members Olivia De Prato and Lauren Cauley Kalal, violin, Victor Lowrie Tafoya, and Mariel Roberts, violoncello in rehearsal of Mathew Arrellin's Cacodemonic at June in Buffalo 2018 Subject The topic of the resource String quartets (Musical groups) De Prato, Olivia - Violin Cauley, Lauren - Violin Tafoya, Victor Lowrie - Viola Roberts, Mariel - Violoncello Arrellin, Mathew - Composer Mivos Quartet - Ensemble Composers Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Haupt, Irene Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018-06-07 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Still image Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 81 ubmu0081_190 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Frederick C. and Alice Slee Chamber Hall (State University of New York at Buffalo) Buffalo (N.Y.) New York (State) United States Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. June in Buffalo Photograph Collection LIB-MUS009 Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Digital photographs -- 2011-2020 Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Haupt, Irene Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> Description An account of the resource Four people dressed in black sit in a semi-circle playing violins, a viola, and a cello. They face music stands in front of a beige paneled wall. In the foreground, a person sits in a red chair with their back to the camera, holding sheet music. The description and alternative text may have been partially generated using an AI tool and may contain errors or omissions. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/f83926dc0e427b77943fd18e5b055df8.jpg adb969d0edeffb123b7317ef9b58e06b Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource People with cellos and double basses are on a stage with others standing nearby. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource June in Buffalo Photograph Collection Subject The topic of the resource Music festivals Description An account of the resource The Irene Haupt Photographs of June in Buffalo document the annual contemporary music festival held at the University at Buffalo, The State University of New York. The festival was begun in 1975 by composer Morton Feldman who directed the festival 1975-78 and in 1980. The festival was dormant from 1981 through 1985. David Felder revived the festival in 1986 and has been its director since that time. June in Buffalo provides young composers the opportunity to work with senior composers from around the world. The invited faculty members not only have works performed at the festival, they also present lectures, seminars, and master classes. The student composers have the opportunity to hear their works in performance by professional musicians of the highest caliber. This online collection is a compilation of photographs by Irene Haupt beginning with the 2000 June in Buffalo. Haupt, a graduate of the State University of New York at Buffalo, has been documenting the Buffalo arts scene through her photography since 1976. During that time she has worked for, or with, some of the most notable institutions in Buffalo, including the Irish Classical Theatre, Studio Arena Theater, the Kavinoky Theatre, the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra, the Theatre of Youth, the Albright-Knox Art Gallery, and the State University of New York at Buffalo. In addition to her specialty of theater photography, Irene Haupt has also devoted much of her career to the photography of musicians and musical events, especially the contemporary music scene in Buffalo. A broader representation of Irene Haupt's photographs of musical activities in Buffalo are also available online in the Irene Haupt Photographs of Musicians in Buffalo . The musicians who have participated in the June in Buffalo festival include University at Buffalo faculty members David Felder, Cort Lippe, Jeffrey Stadelman, Cheryl Gobbetti-Hoffman, Jonathan Golove, Tony Conrad, Stephen Manes, Tony Arnold, Magnus Mårtensson, Jon Nelson, Movses Pogossian, and Jan Williams. Visiting artists have included Lukas Foss, Amy Williams, Helena Bugallo, Charles Wuorinen, Joji Yuasa, George Crumb, Augusta Read Thomas, Bernard Rands, Philip Glass, Steve Reich, Harvey Sollberger, Roger Reynolds, John Harbison, Dora Ohrenstein, Philippe Manoury, Jonathan Harvey, John Corigliano, and the New York New Music Ensemble. Complete details about the annual collections can be found in their respective finding aids. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LIB-MUS009 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples of still images are: paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type "text" to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Composer John Harbison speaks with JoAnn Falletta, conductor during rehearsal of Harbison's pieces Darkbloom: Overture for an Imagined Opera and Remembering Gatsby (Foxtrot for Orchestra) at June in Buffalo 2018 Subject The topic of the resource Composers Conductors Musical groups Falletta, JoAnn - Conductor Harbison, John - Composer Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra - Ensemble Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Haupt, Irene Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018-06-10 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Digital photographs -- 2011-2020 Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Still image Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 81 ubmu0081_250 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Frederick C. and Alice Slee Chamber Hall (State University of New York at Buffalo) Buffalo (N.Y.) New York (State) United States Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. June in Buffalo Photograph Collection LIB-MUS009 Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Haupt, Irene Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> Description An account of the resource A group of people with cellos and double basses are positioned on a wooden stage in front of a wood-paneled wall. One person stands on a raised platform in the center while others stand or sit facing music stands. Microphones and sheet music are visible throughout the scene. The description and alternative text may have been partially generated using an AI tool and may contain errors or omissions. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/57ff807be0521f1627edab8309e37ae9.jpg f8a3aea76ef29fc53623e3d15150a380 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource A group of musicians with string instruments are seated on a stage around two people standing near a central platform. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource June in Buffalo Photograph Collection Subject The topic of the resource Music festivals Description An account of the resource The Irene Haupt Photographs of June in Buffalo document the annual contemporary music festival held at the University at Buffalo, The State University of New York. The festival was begun in 1975 by composer Morton Feldman who directed the festival 1975-78 and in 1980. The festival was dormant from 1981 through 1985. David Felder revived the festival in 1986 and has been its director since that time. June in Buffalo provides young composers the opportunity to work with senior composers from around the world. The invited faculty members not only have works performed at the festival, they also present lectures, seminars, and master classes. The student composers have the opportunity to hear their works in performance by professional musicians of the highest caliber. This online collection is a compilation of photographs by Irene Haupt beginning with the 2000 June in Buffalo. Haupt, a graduate of the State University of New York at Buffalo, has been documenting the Buffalo arts scene through her photography since 1976. During that time she has worked for, or with, some of the most notable institutions in Buffalo, including the Irish Classical Theatre, Studio Arena Theater, the Kavinoky Theatre, the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra, the Theatre of Youth, the Albright-Knox Art Gallery, and the State University of New York at Buffalo. In addition to her specialty of theater photography, Irene Haupt has also devoted much of her career to the photography of musicians and musical events, especially the contemporary music scene in Buffalo. A broader representation of Irene Haupt's photographs of musical activities in Buffalo are also available online in the Irene Haupt Photographs of Musicians in Buffalo . The musicians who have participated in the June in Buffalo festival include University at Buffalo faculty members David Felder, Cort Lippe, Jeffrey Stadelman, Cheryl Gobbetti-Hoffman, Jonathan Golove, Tony Conrad, Stephen Manes, Tony Arnold, Magnus Mårtensson, Jon Nelson, Movses Pogossian, and Jan Williams. Visiting artists have included Lukas Foss, Amy Williams, Helena Bugallo, Charles Wuorinen, Joji Yuasa, George Crumb, Augusta Read Thomas, Bernard Rands, Philip Glass, Steve Reich, Harvey Sollberger, Roger Reynolds, John Harbison, Dora Ohrenstein, Philippe Manoury, Jonathan Harvey, John Corigliano, and the New York New Music Ensemble. Complete details about the annual collections can be found in their respective finding aids. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LIB-MUS009 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples of still images are: paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type "text" to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Composer John Harbison speaks with JoAnn Falletta, conductor during rehearsal of Harbison's pieces Darkbloom: Overture for an Imagined Opera and Remembering Gatsby (Foxtrot for Orchestra) at June in Buffalo 2018 Subject The topic of the resource Composers Conductors Musical groups Falletta, JoAnn - Conductor Harbison, John - Composer Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra - Ensemble Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Haupt, Irene Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018-06-10 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Digital photographs -- 2011-2020 Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Still image Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 81 ubmu0081_249 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Frederick C. and Alice Slee Chamber Hall (State University of New York at Buffalo) Buffalo (N.Y.) New York (State) United States Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. June in Buffalo Photograph Collection LIB-MUS009 Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Haupt, Irene Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> Description An account of the resource A person in a patterned shirt stands on a dark platform while another person stands in the foreground to the right. Seated musicians with cellos and double basses surround the central area on a wooden stage. Music stands and microphones are visible throughout the arrangement. The description and alternative text may have been partially generated using an AI tool and may contain errors or omissions. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/5cae0d24eec51a77970e10df0ef5ed1b.jpg 5d59d11ef140bde87033fc32701db0e2 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource Several musicians hold string instruments while two people stand near a podium on a stage. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource June in Buffalo Photograph Collection Subject The topic of the resource Music festivals Description An account of the resource The Irene Haupt Photographs of June in Buffalo document the annual contemporary music festival held at the University at Buffalo, The State University of New York. The festival was begun in 1975 by composer Morton Feldman who directed the festival 1975-78 and in 1980. The festival was dormant from 1981 through 1985. David Felder revived the festival in 1986 and has been its director since that time. June in Buffalo provides young composers the opportunity to work with senior composers from around the world. The invited faculty members not only have works performed at the festival, they also present lectures, seminars, and master classes. The student composers have the opportunity to hear their works in performance by professional musicians of the highest caliber. This online collection is a compilation of photographs by Irene Haupt beginning with the 2000 June in Buffalo. Haupt, a graduate of the State University of New York at Buffalo, has been documenting the Buffalo arts scene through her photography since 1976. During that time she has worked for, or with, some of the most notable institutions in Buffalo, including the Irish Classical Theatre, Studio Arena Theater, the Kavinoky Theatre, the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra, the Theatre of Youth, the Albright-Knox Art Gallery, and the State University of New York at Buffalo. In addition to her specialty of theater photography, Irene Haupt has also devoted much of her career to the photography of musicians and musical events, especially the contemporary music scene in Buffalo. A broader representation of Irene Haupt's photographs of musical activities in Buffalo are also available online in the Irene Haupt Photographs of Musicians in Buffalo . The musicians who have participated in the June in Buffalo festival include University at Buffalo faculty members David Felder, Cort Lippe, Jeffrey Stadelman, Cheryl Gobbetti-Hoffman, Jonathan Golove, Tony Conrad, Stephen Manes, Tony Arnold, Magnus Mårtensson, Jon Nelson, Movses Pogossian, and Jan Williams. Visiting artists have included Lukas Foss, Amy Williams, Helena Bugallo, Charles Wuorinen, Joji Yuasa, George Crumb, Augusta Read Thomas, Bernard Rands, Philip Glass, Steve Reich, Harvey Sollberger, Roger Reynolds, John Harbison, Dora Ohrenstein, Philippe Manoury, Jonathan Harvey, John Corigliano, and the New York New Music Ensemble. Complete details about the annual collections can be found in their respective finding aids. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LIB-MUS009 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples of still images are: paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type "text" to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Composer John Harbison speaks with JoAnn Falletta, conductor during rehearsal of Harbison's pieces Darkbloom: Overture for an Imagined Opera and Remembering Gatsby (Foxtrot for Orchestra) at June in Buffalo 2018 Subject The topic of the resource Composers Conductors Musical groups Falletta, JoAnn - Conductor Harbison, John - Composer Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra - Ensemble Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Haupt, Irene Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018-06-10 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Digital photographs -- 2011-2020 Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Still image Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 81 ubmu0081_248 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Frederick C. and Alice Slee Chamber Hall (State University of New York at Buffalo) Buffalo (N.Y.) New York (State) United States Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. June in Buffalo Photograph Collection LIB-MUS009 Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Haupt, Irene Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> Description An account of the resource An orchestra is positioned on a stage with a person standing on a small platform in the center and another person standing at the edge of the stage. Musicians in the background hold cellos and double basses, while a person in the foreground sits facing them with sheet music nearby. Wooden panels line the wall behind the group, and a microphone stand is visible on the right. The description and alternative text may have been partially generated using an AI tool and may contain errors or omissions. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/cacd2d5bdf842349d132d3cd8594249f.jpg 9c26822d6693f3e6c64e94088a82dffa Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource A person stands on a platform in front of an orchestra seated with cellos and double basses on a wooden stage. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource June in Buffalo Photograph Collection Subject The topic of the resource Music festivals Description An account of the resource The Irene Haupt Photographs of June in Buffalo document the annual contemporary music festival held at the University at Buffalo, The State University of New York. The festival was begun in 1975 by composer Morton Feldman who directed the festival 1975-78 and in 1980. The festival was dormant from 1981 through 1985. David Felder revived the festival in 1986 and has been its director since that time. June in Buffalo provides young composers the opportunity to work with senior composers from around the world. The invited faculty members not only have works performed at the festival, they also present lectures, seminars, and master classes. The student composers have the opportunity to hear their works in performance by professional musicians of the highest caliber. This online collection is a compilation of photographs by Irene Haupt beginning with the 2000 June in Buffalo. Haupt, a graduate of the State University of New York at Buffalo, has been documenting the Buffalo arts scene through her photography since 1976. During that time she has worked for, or with, some of the most notable institutions in Buffalo, including the Irish Classical Theatre, Studio Arena Theater, the Kavinoky Theatre, the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra, the Theatre of Youth, the Albright-Knox Art Gallery, and the State University of New York at Buffalo. In addition to her specialty of theater photography, Irene Haupt has also devoted much of her career to the photography of musicians and musical events, especially the contemporary music scene in Buffalo. A broader representation of Irene Haupt's photographs of musical activities in Buffalo are also available online in the Irene Haupt Photographs of Musicians in Buffalo . The musicians who have participated in the June in Buffalo festival include University at Buffalo faculty members David Felder, Cort Lippe, Jeffrey Stadelman, Cheryl Gobbetti-Hoffman, Jonathan Golove, Tony Conrad, Stephen Manes, Tony Arnold, Magnus Mårtensson, Jon Nelson, Movses Pogossian, and Jan Williams. Visiting artists have included Lukas Foss, Amy Williams, Helena Bugallo, Charles Wuorinen, Joji Yuasa, George Crumb, Augusta Read Thomas, Bernard Rands, Philip Glass, Steve Reich, Harvey Sollberger, Roger Reynolds, John Harbison, Dora Ohrenstein, Philippe Manoury, Jonathan Harvey, John Corigliano, and the New York New Music Ensemble. Complete details about the annual collections can be found in their respective finding aids. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LIB-MUS009 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples of still images are: paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type "text" to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Composer John Harbison speaks with JoAnn Falletta, conductor during rehearsal of Harbison's pieces Darkbloom: Overture for an Imagined Opera and Remembering Gatsby (Foxtrot for Orchestra) at June in Buffalo 2018 Subject The topic of the resource Composers Conductors Musical groups Falletta, JoAnn - Conductor Harbison, John - Composer Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra - Ensemble Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Haupt, Irene Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018-06-10 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Digital photographs -- 2011-2020 Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Still image Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 81 ubmu0081_247 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Frederick C. and Alice Slee Chamber Hall (State University of New York at Buffalo) Buffalo (N.Y.) New York (State) United States Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. June in Buffalo Photograph Collection LIB-MUS009 Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Haupt, Irene Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> Description An account of the resource Musicians sit with string instruments on a stage in front of a wood-paneled wall. One person stands on a central platform facing the ensemble, while another stands in the foreground looking towards the group. Sheet music and music stands are positioned among the seated players. The description and alternative text may have been partially generated using an AI tool and may contain errors or omissions. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/9a45c21977ab9492839ff3621a43f8d5.jpg 4bb147b9bcb95347ae5c028631e656ca Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource A group of people with cellos and violins stand and sit on a wooden stage with a person in a polka-dot shirt standing in the center. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource June in Buffalo Photograph Collection Subject The topic of the resource Music festivals Description An account of the resource The Irene Haupt Photographs of June in Buffalo document the annual contemporary music festival held at the University at Buffalo, The State University of New York. The festival was begun in 1975 by composer Morton Feldman who directed the festival 1975-78 and in 1980. The festival was dormant from 1981 through 1985. David Felder revived the festival in 1986 and has been its director since that time. June in Buffalo provides young composers the opportunity to work with senior composers from around the world. The invited faculty members not only have works performed at the festival, they also present lectures, seminars, and master classes. The student composers have the opportunity to hear their works in performance by professional musicians of the highest caliber. This online collection is a compilation of photographs by Irene Haupt beginning with the 2000 June in Buffalo. Haupt, a graduate of the State University of New York at Buffalo, has been documenting the Buffalo arts scene through her photography since 1976. During that time she has worked for, or with, some of the most notable institutions in Buffalo, including the Irish Classical Theatre, Studio Arena Theater, the Kavinoky Theatre, the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra, the Theatre of Youth, the Albright-Knox Art Gallery, and the State University of New York at Buffalo. In addition to her specialty of theater photography, Irene Haupt has also devoted much of her career to the photography of musicians and musical events, especially the contemporary music scene in Buffalo. A broader representation of Irene Haupt's photographs of musical activities in Buffalo are also available online in the Irene Haupt Photographs of Musicians in Buffalo . The musicians who have participated in the June in Buffalo festival include University at Buffalo faculty members David Felder, Cort Lippe, Jeffrey Stadelman, Cheryl Gobbetti-Hoffman, Jonathan Golove, Tony Conrad, Stephen Manes, Tony Arnold, Magnus Mårtensson, Jon Nelson, Movses Pogossian, and Jan Williams. Visiting artists have included Lukas Foss, Amy Williams, Helena Bugallo, Charles Wuorinen, Joji Yuasa, George Crumb, Augusta Read Thomas, Bernard Rands, Philip Glass, Steve Reich, Harvey Sollberger, Roger Reynolds, John Harbison, Dora Ohrenstein, Philippe Manoury, Jonathan Harvey, John Corigliano, and the New York New Music Ensemble. Complete details about the annual collections can be found in their respective finding aids. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LIB-MUS009 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples of still images are: paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type "text" to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Composer John Harbison speaks with JoAnn Falletta, conductor during rehearsal of Harbison's pieces Darkbloom: Overture for an Imagined Opera and Remembering Gatsby (Foxtrot for Orchestra) at June in Buffalo 2018 Subject The topic of the resource Composers Conductors Musical groups Falletta, JoAnn - Conductor Harbison, John - Composer Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra - Ensemble Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Haupt, Irene Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018-06-10 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Digital photographs -- 2011-2020 Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Still image Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 81 ubmu0081_246 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Frederick C. and Alice Slee Chamber Hall (State University of New York at Buffalo) Buffalo (N.Y.) New York (State) United States Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. June in Buffalo Photograph Collection LIB-MUS009 Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Haupt, Irene Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> Description An account of the resource Several people are positioned on a stage with wood-paneled walls, holding or playing instruments such as cellos and violins. In the center, a person in a black and white patterned shirt stands near a small platform, while others are seated in chairs with music stands in front of them. Microphone stands are placed around the performers, and one person is seated in the foreground with their back to the camera, looking at sheet music. The description and alternative text may have been partially generated using an AI tool and may contain errors or omissions. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/38f24ee58505b6d199383118b95df4f3.jpg c9001248f307294b7a6b15f8a16d466d Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource A group of people with musical instruments, including cellos, are gathered on a stage in a room with wood-panneled walls. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource June in Buffalo Photograph Collection Subject The topic of the resource Music festivals Description An account of the resource The Irene Haupt Photographs of June in Buffalo document the annual contemporary music festival held at the University at Buffalo, The State University of New York. The festival was begun in 1975 by composer Morton Feldman who directed the festival 1975-78 and in 1980. The festival was dormant from 1981 through 1985. David Felder revived the festival in 1986 and has been its director since that time. June in Buffalo provides young composers the opportunity to work with senior composers from around the world. The invited faculty members not only have works performed at the festival, they also present lectures, seminars, and master classes. The student composers have the opportunity to hear their works in performance by professional musicians of the highest caliber. This online collection is a compilation of photographs by Irene Haupt beginning with the 2000 June in Buffalo. Haupt, a graduate of the State University of New York at Buffalo, has been documenting the Buffalo arts scene through her photography since 1976. During that time she has worked for, or with, some of the most notable institutions in Buffalo, including the Irish Classical Theatre, Studio Arena Theater, the Kavinoky Theatre, the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra, the Theatre of Youth, the Albright-Knox Art Gallery, and the State University of New York at Buffalo. In addition to her specialty of theater photography, Irene Haupt has also devoted much of her career to the photography of musicians and musical events, especially the contemporary music scene in Buffalo. A broader representation of Irene Haupt's photographs of musical activities in Buffalo are also available online in the Irene Haupt Photographs of Musicians in Buffalo . The musicians who have participated in the June in Buffalo festival include University at Buffalo faculty members David Felder, Cort Lippe, Jeffrey Stadelman, Cheryl Gobbetti-Hoffman, Jonathan Golove, Tony Conrad, Stephen Manes, Tony Arnold, Magnus Mårtensson, Jon Nelson, Movses Pogossian, and Jan Williams. Visiting artists have included Lukas Foss, Amy Williams, Helena Bugallo, Charles Wuorinen, Joji Yuasa, George Crumb, Augusta Read Thomas, Bernard Rands, Philip Glass, Steve Reich, Harvey Sollberger, Roger Reynolds, John Harbison, Dora Ohrenstein, Philippe Manoury, Jonathan Harvey, John Corigliano, and the New York New Music Ensemble. Complete details about the annual collections can be found in their respective finding aids. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LIB-MUS009 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples of still images are: paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type "text" to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Composer John Harbison speaks with JoAnn Falletta, conductor during rehearsal of Harbison's pieces Darkbloom: Overture for an Imagined Opera and Remembering Gatsby (Foxtrot for Orchestra) at June in Buffalo 2018 Subject The topic of the resource Composers Conductors Musical groups Falletta, JoAnn - Conductor Harbison, John - Composer Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra - Ensemble Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Haupt, Irene Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018-06-10 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Digital photographs -- 2011-2020 Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Still image Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 81 ubmu0081_245 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Frederick C. and Alice Slee Chamber Hall (State University of New York at Buffalo) Buffalo (N.Y.) New York (State) United States Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. June in Buffalo Photograph Collection LIB-MUS009 Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Haupt, Irene Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> Description An account of the resource Several individuals sit and stand on a wooden stage with music stands and instruments such as cellos and a double bass. One person in a patterned shirt stands at the center of the stage while others sit behind music stands or hold their instruments. Microphone stands are positioned across the stage, and one person sits in the foreground with their back to the viewer. The description and alternative text may have been partially generated using an AI tool and may contain errors or omissions. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/a1e0f39aaf730085f089ee00c6abc6ea.jpg 1beb672df21cc28fc767125c01bdc242 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource Musicians sit on a stage with instruments while two people stand near the center of the ensemble. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource June in Buffalo Photograph Collection Subject The topic of the resource Music festivals Description An account of the resource The Irene Haupt Photographs of June in Buffalo document the annual contemporary music festival held at the University at Buffalo, The State University of New York. The festival was begun in 1975 by composer Morton Feldman who directed the festival 1975-78 and in 1980. The festival was dormant from 1981 through 1985. David Felder revived the festival in 1986 and has been its director since that time. June in Buffalo provides young composers the opportunity to work with senior composers from around the world. The invited faculty members not only have works performed at the festival, they also present lectures, seminars, and master classes. The student composers have the opportunity to hear their works in performance by professional musicians of the highest caliber. This online collection is a compilation of photographs by Irene Haupt beginning with the 2000 June in Buffalo. Haupt, a graduate of the State University of New York at Buffalo, has been documenting the Buffalo arts scene through her photography since 1976. During that time she has worked for, or with, some of the most notable institutions in Buffalo, including the Irish Classical Theatre, Studio Arena Theater, the Kavinoky Theatre, the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra, the Theatre of Youth, the Albright-Knox Art Gallery, and the State University of New York at Buffalo. In addition to her specialty of theater photography, Irene Haupt has also devoted much of her career to the photography of musicians and musical events, especially the contemporary music scene in Buffalo. A broader representation of Irene Haupt's photographs of musical activities in Buffalo are also available online in the Irene Haupt Photographs of Musicians in Buffalo . The musicians who have participated in the June in Buffalo festival include University at Buffalo faculty members David Felder, Cort Lippe, Jeffrey Stadelman, Cheryl Gobbetti-Hoffman, Jonathan Golove, Tony Conrad, Stephen Manes, Tony Arnold, Magnus Mårtensson, Jon Nelson, Movses Pogossian, and Jan Williams. Visiting artists have included Lukas Foss, Amy Williams, Helena Bugallo, Charles Wuorinen, Joji Yuasa, George Crumb, Augusta Read Thomas, Bernard Rands, Philip Glass, Steve Reich, Harvey Sollberger, Roger Reynolds, John Harbison, Dora Ohrenstein, Philippe Manoury, Jonathan Harvey, John Corigliano, and the New York New Music Ensemble. Complete details about the annual collections can be found in their respective finding aids. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LIB-MUS009 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples of still images are: paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type "text" to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Composer John Harbison speaks with JoAnn Falletta, conductor during rehearsal of Harbison's pieces Darkbloom: Overture for an Imagined Opera and Remembering Gatsby (Foxtrot for Orchestra) at June in Buffalo 2018 Subject The topic of the resource Composers Conductors Musical groups Falletta, JoAnn - Conductor Harbison, John - Composer Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra - Ensemble Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Haupt, Irene Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018-06-10 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Digital photographs -- 2011-2020 Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Still image Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 81 ubmu0081_244 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Frederick C. and Alice Slee Chamber Hall (State University of New York at Buffalo) Buffalo (N.Y.) New York (State) United States Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. June in Buffalo Photograph Collection LIB-MUS009 Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Haupt, Irene Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> Description An account of the resource An orchestra rehearsal takes place on a wooden stage with musicians seated behind music stands. One person stands in a patterned shirt with hands raised, while another person stands with their back to the viewer. The room features dark wood-paneled walls and tiered seating in the background. The description and alternative text may have been partially generated using an AI tool and may contain errors or omissions. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/0060d523e15ed5bea4a62e7cbec2286f.jpg b9fceb8a421cb8aa50994e87c61a14b1 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource An orchestra rehearses on a wood-paneled stage with a conductor in the foreground and another individual leading from a podium. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource June in Buffalo Photograph Collection Subject The topic of the resource Music festivals Description An account of the resource The Irene Haupt Photographs of June in Buffalo document the annual contemporary music festival held at the University at Buffalo, The State University of New York. The festival was begun in 1975 by composer Morton Feldman who directed the festival 1975-78 and in 1980. The festival was dormant from 1981 through 1985. David Felder revived the festival in 1986 and has been its director since that time. June in Buffalo provides young composers the opportunity to work with senior composers from around the world. The invited faculty members not only have works performed at the festival, they also present lectures, seminars, and master classes. The student composers have the opportunity to hear their works in performance by professional musicians of the highest caliber. This online collection is a compilation of photographs by Irene Haupt beginning with the 2000 June in Buffalo. Haupt, a graduate of the State University of New York at Buffalo, has been documenting the Buffalo arts scene through her photography since 1976. During that time she has worked for, or with, some of the most notable institutions in Buffalo, including the Irish Classical Theatre, Studio Arena Theater, the Kavinoky Theatre, the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra, the Theatre of Youth, the Albright-Knox Art Gallery, and the State University of New York at Buffalo. In addition to her specialty of theater photography, Irene Haupt has also devoted much of her career to the photography of musicians and musical events, especially the contemporary music scene in Buffalo. A broader representation of Irene Haupt's photographs of musical activities in Buffalo are also available online in the Irene Haupt Photographs of Musicians in Buffalo . The musicians who have participated in the June in Buffalo festival include University at Buffalo faculty members David Felder, Cort Lippe, Jeffrey Stadelman, Cheryl Gobbetti-Hoffman, Jonathan Golove, Tony Conrad, Stephen Manes, Tony Arnold, Magnus Mårtensson, Jon Nelson, Movses Pogossian, and Jan Williams. Visiting artists have included Lukas Foss, Amy Williams, Helena Bugallo, Charles Wuorinen, Joji Yuasa, George Crumb, Augusta Read Thomas, Bernard Rands, Philip Glass, Steve Reich, Harvey Sollberger, Roger Reynolds, John Harbison, Dora Ohrenstein, Philippe Manoury, Jonathan Harvey, John Corigliano, and the New York New Music Ensemble. Complete details about the annual collections can be found in their respective finding aids. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LIB-MUS009 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples of still images are: paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type "text" to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Composer David Felder speaks with JoAnn Falletta, conductor during rehearsal of Felder's piece Jeu de Tarot at June in Buffalo 2018 Subject The topic of the resource Composers Conductors Musical groups Falletta, JoAnn - Conductor Felder, David, 1953- - Composer Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra - Ensemble Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Haupt, Irene Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018-06-10 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Digital photographs -- 2011-2020 Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Still image Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 81 ubmu0081_243 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Frederick C. and Alice Slee Chamber Hall (State University of New York at Buffalo) Buffalo (N.Y.) New York (State) United States Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. June in Buffalo Photograph Collection LIB-MUS009 Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Haupt, Irene Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> Description An account of the resource Multiple musicians sit with string and wind instruments on a stage featuring music stands and sheet music. A person in the foreground stands with their back to the camera facing the ensemble, while a second individual stands on a small podium in the center. Percussion instruments and a clock are visible against the wood-paneled background. The description and alternative text may have been partially generated using an AI tool and may contain errors or omissions. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/45d38f3a0382356a591ccb2408580d53.jpg a3f26dcc941e869d8515239ca923b0c2 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource An orchestra and conductor performing on a stage in a wood-paneled hall with a pipe organ in the background. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource June in Buffalo Photograph Collection Subject The topic of the resource Music festivals Description An account of the resource The Irene Haupt Photographs of June in Buffalo document the annual contemporary music festival held at the University at Buffalo, The State University of New York. The festival was begun in 1975 by composer Morton Feldman who directed the festival 1975-78 and in 1980. The festival was dormant from 1981 through 1985. David Felder revived the festival in 1986 and has been its director since that time. June in Buffalo provides young composers the opportunity to work with senior composers from around the world. The invited faculty members not only have works performed at the festival, they also present lectures, seminars, and master classes. The student composers have the opportunity to hear their works in performance by professional musicians of the highest caliber. This online collection is a compilation of photographs by Irene Haupt beginning with the 2000 June in Buffalo. Haupt, a graduate of the State University of New York at Buffalo, has been documenting the Buffalo arts scene through her photography since 1976. During that time she has worked for, or with, some of the most notable institutions in Buffalo, including the Irish Classical Theatre, Studio Arena Theater, the Kavinoky Theatre, the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra, the Theatre of Youth, the Albright-Knox Art Gallery, and the State University of New York at Buffalo. In addition to her specialty of theater photography, Irene Haupt has also devoted much of her career to the photography of musicians and musical events, especially the contemporary music scene in Buffalo. A broader representation of Irene Haupt's photographs of musical activities in Buffalo are also available online in the Irene Haupt Photographs of Musicians in Buffalo . The musicians who have participated in the June in Buffalo festival include University at Buffalo faculty members David Felder, Cort Lippe, Jeffrey Stadelman, Cheryl Gobbetti-Hoffman, Jonathan Golove, Tony Conrad, Stephen Manes, Tony Arnold, Magnus Mårtensson, Jon Nelson, Movses Pogossian, and Jan Williams. Visiting artists have included Lukas Foss, Amy Williams, Helena Bugallo, Charles Wuorinen, Joji Yuasa, George Crumb, Augusta Read Thomas, Bernard Rands, Philip Glass, Steve Reich, Harvey Sollberger, Roger Reynolds, John Harbison, Dora Ohrenstein, Philippe Manoury, Jonathan Harvey, John Corigliano, and the New York New Music Ensemble. Complete details about the annual collections can be found in their respective finding aids. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LIB-MUS009 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples of still images are: paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type "text" to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource JoAnn Falletta, conductor leads the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra in rehearsal at June in Buffalo 2018 Subject The topic of the resource Conductors Musical groups Falletta, JoAnn - Conductor Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra - Ensemble Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Haupt, Irene Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018-06-10 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Digital photographs -- 2011-2020 Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Still image Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 81 ubmu0081_242 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Frederick C. and Alice Slee Chamber Hall (State University of New York at Buffalo) Buffalo (N.Y.) New York (State) United States Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. June in Buffalo Photograph Collection LIB-MUS009 Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Haupt, Irene Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> Description An account of the resource A large group of musicians plays various string and wind instruments on a stage while a conductor stands on a podium in front of them. The stage is situated in an auditorium with wood-paneled walls and a pipe organ built into the back wall. In the foreground, rows of empty dark seats face the stage under dim lighting. The description and alternative text may have been partially generated using an AI tool and may contain errors or omissions. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/bdfd2e3b25bc08cfdab450fac04ed868.jpg efc2e9b3381f8cce255c9040903d466a Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource An orchestra performs on a wooden stage with a conductor at the center and a piano on the left. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource June in Buffalo Photograph Collection Subject The topic of the resource Music festivals Description An account of the resource The Irene Haupt Photographs of June in Buffalo document the annual contemporary music festival held at the University at Buffalo, The State University of New York. The festival was begun in 1975 by composer Morton Feldman who directed the festival 1975-78 and in 1980. The festival was dormant from 1981 through 1985. David Felder revived the festival in 1986 and has been its director since that time. June in Buffalo provides young composers the opportunity to work with senior composers from around the world. The invited faculty members not only have works performed at the festival, they also present lectures, seminars, and master classes. The student composers have the opportunity to hear their works in performance by professional musicians of the highest caliber. This online collection is a compilation of photographs by Irene Haupt beginning with the 2000 June in Buffalo. Haupt, a graduate of the State University of New York at Buffalo, has been documenting the Buffalo arts scene through her photography since 1976. During that time she has worked for, or with, some of the most notable institutions in Buffalo, including the Irish Classical Theatre, Studio Arena Theater, the Kavinoky Theatre, the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra, the Theatre of Youth, the Albright-Knox Art Gallery, and the State University of New York at Buffalo. In addition to her specialty of theater photography, Irene Haupt has also devoted much of her career to the photography of musicians and musical events, especially the contemporary music scene in Buffalo. A broader representation of Irene Haupt's photographs of musical activities in Buffalo are also available online in the Irene Haupt Photographs of Musicians in Buffalo . The musicians who have participated in the June in Buffalo festival include University at Buffalo faculty members David Felder, Cort Lippe, Jeffrey Stadelman, Cheryl Gobbetti-Hoffman, Jonathan Golove, Tony Conrad, Stephen Manes, Tony Arnold, Magnus Mårtensson, Jon Nelson, Movses Pogossian, and Jan Williams. Visiting artists have included Lukas Foss, Amy Williams, Helena Bugallo, Charles Wuorinen, Joji Yuasa, George Crumb, Augusta Read Thomas, Bernard Rands, Philip Glass, Steve Reich, Harvey Sollberger, Roger Reynolds, John Harbison, Dora Ohrenstein, Philippe Manoury, Jonathan Harvey, John Corigliano, and the New York New Music Ensemble. Complete details about the annual collections can be found in their respective finding aids. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LIB-MUS009 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples of still images are: paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type "text" to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource JoAnn Falletta, conductor leads the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra in rehearsal at June in Buffalo 2018 Subject The topic of the resource Conductors Musical groups Falletta, JoAnn - Conductor Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra - Ensemble Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Haupt, Irene Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018-06-10 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Digital photographs -- 2011-2020 Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Still image Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 81 ubmu0081_241 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Frederick C. and Alice Slee Chamber Hall (State University of New York at Buffalo) Buffalo (N.Y.) New York (State) United States Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. June in Buffalo Photograph Collection LIB-MUS009 Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Haupt, Irene Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> Description An account of the resource Musicians sit in rows on a light-colored wooden stage, playing various string, brass, and woodwind instruments. A person stands on a central podium facing the ensemble with a baton raised. The stage is set within a wood-paneled hall featuring large organ pipes in the background. The description and alternative text may have been partially generated using an AI tool and may contain errors or omissions. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/01957824e5c05a08d7c8b9223ee895a8.jpg bbcc79ec0a880c7de65be363d5ac9607 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource An orchestra and conductor performing on a wooden stage with various instruments. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource June in Buffalo Photograph Collection Subject The topic of the resource Music festivals Description An account of the resource The Irene Haupt Photographs of June in Buffalo document the annual contemporary music festival held at the University at Buffalo, The State University of New York. The festival was begun in 1975 by composer Morton Feldman who directed the festival 1975-78 and in 1980. The festival was dormant from 1981 through 1985. David Felder revived the festival in 1986 and has been its director since that time. June in Buffalo provides young composers the opportunity to work with senior composers from around the world. The invited faculty members not only have works performed at the festival, they also present lectures, seminars, and master classes. The student composers have the opportunity to hear their works in performance by professional musicians of the highest caliber. This online collection is a compilation of photographs by Irene Haupt beginning with the 2000 June in Buffalo. Haupt, a graduate of the State University of New York at Buffalo, has been documenting the Buffalo arts scene through her photography since 1976. During that time she has worked for, or with, some of the most notable institutions in Buffalo, including the Irish Classical Theatre, Studio Arena Theater, the Kavinoky Theatre, the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra, the Theatre of Youth, the Albright-Knox Art Gallery, and the State University of New York at Buffalo. In addition to her specialty of theater photography, Irene Haupt has also devoted much of her career to the photography of musicians and musical events, especially the contemporary music scene in Buffalo. A broader representation of Irene Haupt's photographs of musical activities in Buffalo are also available online in the Irene Haupt Photographs of Musicians in Buffalo . The musicians who have participated in the June in Buffalo festival include University at Buffalo faculty members David Felder, Cort Lippe, Jeffrey Stadelman, Cheryl Gobbetti-Hoffman, Jonathan Golove, Tony Conrad, Stephen Manes, Tony Arnold, Magnus Mårtensson, Jon Nelson, Movses Pogossian, and Jan Williams. Visiting artists have included Lukas Foss, Amy Williams, Helena Bugallo, Charles Wuorinen, Joji Yuasa, George Crumb, Augusta Read Thomas, Bernard Rands, Philip Glass, Steve Reich, Harvey Sollberger, Roger Reynolds, John Harbison, Dora Ohrenstein, Philippe Manoury, Jonathan Harvey, John Corigliano, and the New York New Music Ensemble. Complete details about the annual collections can be found in their respective finding aids. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LIB-MUS009 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples of still images are: paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type "text" to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource JoAnn Falletta, conductor leads the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra in rehearsal at June in Buffalo 2018 Subject The topic of the resource Conductors Musical groups Falletta, JoAnn - Conductor Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra - Ensemble Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Haupt, Irene Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018-06-10 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Digital photographs -- 2011-2020 Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Still image Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 81 ubmu0081_240 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Frederick C. and Alice Slee Chamber Hall (State University of New York at Buffalo) Buffalo (N.Y.) New York (State) United States Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. June in Buffalo Photograph Collection LIB-MUS009 Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Haupt, Irene Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> Description An account of the resource An orchestra sits on a large wooden stage in a hall with wood-paneled walls. A conductor stands on a central podium while musicians play instruments including violins, cellos, double basses, and a grand piano on the left. Darkened rows of empty audience seating occupy the foreground. The description and alternative text may have been partially generated using an AI tool and may contain errors or omissions. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/0975d4906ba08687d3a66faf4d1954fa.jpg 3977e3346f471b3dd7dfc3c59bffb463 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource An orchestra and conductor perform on a stage in front of a pipe organ. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource June in Buffalo Photograph Collection Subject The topic of the resource Music festivals Description An account of the resource The Irene Haupt Photographs of June in Buffalo document the annual contemporary music festival held at the University at Buffalo, The State University of New York. The festival was begun in 1975 by composer Morton Feldman who directed the festival 1975-78 and in 1980. The festival was dormant from 1981 through 1985. David Felder revived the festival in 1986 and has been its director since that time. June in Buffalo provides young composers the opportunity to work with senior composers from around the world. The invited faculty members not only have works performed at the festival, they also present lectures, seminars, and master classes. The student composers have the opportunity to hear their works in performance by professional musicians of the highest caliber. This online collection is a compilation of photographs by Irene Haupt beginning with the 2000 June in Buffalo. Haupt, a graduate of the State University of New York at Buffalo, has been documenting the Buffalo arts scene through her photography since 1976. During that time she has worked for, or with, some of the most notable institutions in Buffalo, including the Irish Classical Theatre, Studio Arena Theater, the Kavinoky Theatre, the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra, the Theatre of Youth, the Albright-Knox Art Gallery, and the State University of New York at Buffalo. In addition to her specialty of theater photography, Irene Haupt has also devoted much of her career to the photography of musicians and musical events, especially the contemporary music scene in Buffalo. A broader representation of Irene Haupt's photographs of musical activities in Buffalo are also available online in the Irene Haupt Photographs of Musicians in Buffalo . The musicians who have participated in the June in Buffalo festival include University at Buffalo faculty members David Felder, Cort Lippe, Jeffrey Stadelman, Cheryl Gobbetti-Hoffman, Jonathan Golove, Tony Conrad, Stephen Manes, Tony Arnold, Magnus Mårtensson, Jon Nelson, Movses Pogossian, and Jan Williams. Visiting artists have included Lukas Foss, Amy Williams, Helena Bugallo, Charles Wuorinen, Joji Yuasa, George Crumb, Augusta Read Thomas, Bernard Rands, Philip Glass, Steve Reich, Harvey Sollberger, Roger Reynolds, John Harbison, Dora Ohrenstein, Philippe Manoury, Jonathan Harvey, John Corigliano, and the New York New Music Ensemble. Complete details about the annual collections can be found in their respective finding aids. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LIB-MUS009 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples of still images are: paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type "text" to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource JoAnn Falletta, conductor leads the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra in rehearsal at June in Buffalo 2018 Subject The topic of the resource Conductors Musical groups Falletta, JoAnn - Conductor Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra - Ensemble Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Haupt, Irene Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018-06-10 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Digital photographs -- 2011-2020 Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Still image Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 81 ubmu0081_239 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Frederick C. and Alice Slee Chamber Hall (State University of New York at Buffalo) Buffalo (N.Y.) New York (State) United States Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. June in Buffalo Photograph Collection LIB-MUS009 Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Haupt, Irene Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> Description An account of the resource Musicians sit on a wooden stage playing instruments including a piano, violins, and cellos with sheet music on stands. A conductor stands on a podium in the center facing the ensemble with a baton. The background features wood-paneled walls and a large pipe organ, with rows of empty seats in the foreground. The description and alternative text may have been partially generated using an AI tool and may contain errors or omissions. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/eb81dfa0962e1360e8e175a0f3a4fba6.jpg bab133a0daf91c43be5372b5d772c73f Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource An orchestra sits on a stage in a wood-paneled concert hall while a conductor stands on a podium. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource June in Buffalo Photograph Collection Subject The topic of the resource Music festivals Description An account of the resource The Irene Haupt Photographs of June in Buffalo document the annual contemporary music festival held at the University at Buffalo, The State University of New York. The festival was begun in 1975 by composer Morton Feldman who directed the festival 1975-78 and in 1980. The festival was dormant from 1981 through 1985. David Felder revived the festival in 1986 and has been its director since that time. June in Buffalo provides young composers the opportunity to work with senior composers from around the world. The invited faculty members not only have works performed at the festival, they also present lectures, seminars, and master classes. The student composers have the opportunity to hear their works in performance by professional musicians of the highest caliber. This online collection is a compilation of photographs by Irene Haupt beginning with the 2000 June in Buffalo. Haupt, a graduate of the State University of New York at Buffalo, has been documenting the Buffalo arts scene through her photography since 1976. During that time she has worked for, or with, some of the most notable institutions in Buffalo, including the Irish Classical Theatre, Studio Arena Theater, the Kavinoky Theatre, the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra, the Theatre of Youth, the Albright-Knox Art Gallery, and the State University of New York at Buffalo. In addition to her specialty of theater photography, Irene Haupt has also devoted much of her career to the photography of musicians and musical events, especially the contemporary music scene in Buffalo. A broader representation of Irene Haupt's photographs of musical activities in Buffalo are also available online in the Irene Haupt Photographs of Musicians in Buffalo . The musicians who have participated in the June in Buffalo festival include University at Buffalo faculty members David Felder, Cort Lippe, Jeffrey Stadelman, Cheryl Gobbetti-Hoffman, Jonathan Golove, Tony Conrad, Stephen Manes, Tony Arnold, Magnus Mårtensson, Jon Nelson, Movses Pogossian, and Jan Williams. Visiting artists have included Lukas Foss, Amy Williams, Helena Bugallo, Charles Wuorinen, Joji Yuasa, George Crumb, Augusta Read Thomas, Bernard Rands, Philip Glass, Steve Reich, Harvey Sollberger, Roger Reynolds, John Harbison, Dora Ohrenstein, Philippe Manoury, Jonathan Harvey, John Corigliano, and the New York New Music Ensemble. Complete details about the annual collections can be found in their respective finding aids. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LIB-MUS009 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples of still images are: paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type "text" to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource JoAnn Falletta, conductor leads the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra in rehearsal at June in Buffalo 2018 Subject The topic of the resource Conductors Musical groups Falletta, JoAnn - Conductor Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra - Ensemble Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Haupt, Irene Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018-06-10 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Digital photographs -- 2011-2020 Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Still image Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 81 ubmu0081_238 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Frederick C. and Alice Slee Chamber Hall (State University of New York at Buffalo) Buffalo (N.Y.) New York (State) United States Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. June in Buffalo Photograph Collection LIB-MUS009 Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Haupt, Irene Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> Description An account of the resource Dozens of musicians sit on a stage with various instruments, including a piano, harps, and stringed instruments. A person stands on a podium in the center of the stage, facing the orchestra with their back to the empty seating area. The concert hall features wood-paneled walls and a pipe organ in the background. The description and alternative text may have been partially generated using an AI tool and may contain errors or omissions. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/cd74765ba9e939bd2b1c64d357c7d79a.jpg 205d4095fa8f750a6e30cf587626fb42 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource A group of musicians sits on a stage with instruments while two people stand in the center. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource June in Buffalo Photograph Collection Subject The topic of the resource Music festivals Description An account of the resource The Irene Haupt Photographs of June in Buffalo document the annual contemporary music festival held at the University at Buffalo, The State University of New York. The festival was begun in 1975 by composer Morton Feldman who directed the festival 1975-78 and in 1980. The festival was dormant from 1981 through 1985. David Felder revived the festival in 1986 and has been its director since that time. June in Buffalo provides young composers the opportunity to work with senior composers from around the world. The invited faculty members not only have works performed at the festival, they also present lectures, seminars, and master classes. The student composers have the opportunity to hear their works in performance by professional musicians of the highest caliber. This online collection is a compilation of photographs by Irene Haupt beginning with the 2000 June in Buffalo. Haupt, a graduate of the State University of New York at Buffalo, has been documenting the Buffalo arts scene through her photography since 1976. During that time she has worked for, or with, some of the most notable institutions in Buffalo, including the Irish Classical Theatre, Studio Arena Theater, the Kavinoky Theatre, the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra, the Theatre of Youth, the Albright-Knox Art Gallery, and the State University of New York at Buffalo. In addition to her specialty of theater photography, Irene Haupt has also devoted much of her career to the photography of musicians and musical events, especially the contemporary music scene in Buffalo. A broader representation of Irene Haupt's photographs of musical activities in Buffalo are also available online in the Irene Haupt Photographs of Musicians in Buffalo . The musicians who have participated in the June in Buffalo festival include University at Buffalo faculty members David Felder, Cort Lippe, Jeffrey Stadelman, Cheryl Gobbetti-Hoffman, Jonathan Golove, Tony Conrad, Stephen Manes, Tony Arnold, Magnus Mårtensson, Jon Nelson, Movses Pogossian, and Jan Williams. Visiting artists have included Lukas Foss, Amy Williams, Helena Bugallo, Charles Wuorinen, Joji Yuasa, George Crumb, Augusta Read Thomas, Bernard Rands, Philip Glass, Steve Reich, Harvey Sollberger, Roger Reynolds, John Harbison, Dora Ohrenstein, Philippe Manoury, Jonathan Harvey, John Corigliano, and the New York New Music Ensemble. Complete details about the annual collections can be found in their respective finding aids. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LIB-MUS009 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples of still images are: paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type "text" to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Composer David Felder speaks with JoAnn Falletta, conductor during rehearsal of Felder's piece Jeu de Tarot at June in Buffalo 2018 Subject The topic of the resource Composers Conductors Musical groups Falletta, JoAnn - Conductor Felder, David, 1953- - Composer Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra - Ensemble Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Haupt, Irene Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018-06-10 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Digital photographs -- 2011-2020 Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Still image Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 81 ubmu0081_237 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Frederick C. and Alice Slee Chamber Hall (State University of New York at Buffalo) Buffalo (N.Y.) New York (State) United States Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. June in Buffalo Photograph Collection LIB-MUS009 Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Haupt, Irene Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> Description An account of the resource Musicians sit on a wooden stage with instruments including violins, cellos, and clarinets. A person in a black shirt stands with their back to the viewer and arms raised toward the group. Another person wearing a patterned top stands near a music stand while others look in their direction. The description and alternative text may have been partially generated using an AI tool and may contain errors or omissions. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/99e04c05c7c408a39cf15eaa92a222f3.jpg dc1f2612d81f7f50cde583f76008237c Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource A group of musicians sits on a stage with instruments while two people stand near the center. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource June in Buffalo Photograph Collection Subject The topic of the resource Music festivals Description An account of the resource The Irene Haupt Photographs of June in Buffalo document the annual contemporary music festival held at the University at Buffalo, The State University of New York. The festival was begun in 1975 by composer Morton Feldman who directed the festival 1975-78 and in 1980. The festival was dormant from 1981 through 1985. David Felder revived the festival in 1986 and has been its director since that time. June in Buffalo provides young composers the opportunity to work with senior composers from around the world. The invited faculty members not only have works performed at the festival, they also present lectures, seminars, and master classes. The student composers have the opportunity to hear their works in performance by professional musicians of the highest caliber. This online collection is a compilation of photographs by Irene Haupt beginning with the 2000 June in Buffalo. Haupt, a graduate of the State University of New York at Buffalo, has been documenting the Buffalo arts scene through her photography since 1976. During that time she has worked for, or with, some of the most notable institutions in Buffalo, including the Irish Classical Theatre, Studio Arena Theater, the Kavinoky Theatre, the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra, the Theatre of Youth, the Albright-Knox Art Gallery, and the State University of New York at Buffalo. In addition to her specialty of theater photography, Irene Haupt has also devoted much of her career to the photography of musicians and musical events, especially the contemporary music scene in Buffalo. A broader representation of Irene Haupt's photographs of musical activities in Buffalo are also available online in the Irene Haupt Photographs of Musicians in Buffalo . The musicians who have participated in the June in Buffalo festival include University at Buffalo faculty members David Felder, Cort Lippe, Jeffrey Stadelman, Cheryl Gobbetti-Hoffman, Jonathan Golove, Tony Conrad, Stephen Manes, Tony Arnold, Magnus Mårtensson, Jon Nelson, Movses Pogossian, and Jan Williams. Visiting artists have included Lukas Foss, Amy Williams, Helena Bugallo, Charles Wuorinen, Joji Yuasa, George Crumb, Augusta Read Thomas, Bernard Rands, Philip Glass, Steve Reich, Harvey Sollberger, Roger Reynolds, John Harbison, Dora Ohrenstein, Philippe Manoury, Jonathan Harvey, John Corigliano, and the New York New Music Ensemble. Complete details about the annual collections can be found in their respective finding aids. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LIB-MUS009 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples of still images are: paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type "text" to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Composer David Felder speaks with JoAnn Falletta, conductor during rehearsal of Felder's piece Jeu de Tarot at June in Buffalo 2018 Subject The topic of the resource Composers Conductors Musical groups Falletta, JoAnn - Conductor Felder, David, 1953- - Composer Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra - Ensemble Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Haupt, Irene Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018-06-10 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Digital photographs -- 2011-2020 Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Still image Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 81 ubmu0081_236 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Frederick C. and Alice Slee Chamber Hall (State University of New York at Buffalo) Buffalo (N.Y.) New York (State) United States Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. June in Buffalo Photograph Collection LIB-MUS009 Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Haupt, Irene Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> Description An account of the resource Seated musicians with instruments including violins, a cello, and woodwinds are positioned behind music stands on a wooden stage. One person stands on a podium in the foreground with their back to the camera, and another person stands facing the ensemble. The background features wood-paneled walls and additional individuals in tiered seating. The description and alternative text may have been partially generated using an AI tool and may contain errors or omissions. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/297240f68a80b04a4e5f6c25c121f01f.jpg 63ccaecaae30cec72266c0cb3543a66b Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource Musicians sit on a stage with instruments and music stands while two people stand facing the ensemble. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource June in Buffalo Photograph Collection Subject The topic of the resource Music festivals Description An account of the resource The Irene Haupt Photographs of June in Buffalo document the annual contemporary music festival held at the University at Buffalo, The State University of New York. The festival was begun in 1975 by composer Morton Feldman who directed the festival 1975-78 and in 1980. The festival was dormant from 1981 through 1985. David Felder revived the festival in 1986 and has been its director since that time. June in Buffalo provides young composers the opportunity to work with senior composers from around the world. The invited faculty members not only have works performed at the festival, they also present lectures, seminars, and master classes. The student composers have the opportunity to hear their works in performance by professional musicians of the highest caliber. This online collection is a compilation of photographs by Irene Haupt beginning with the 2000 June in Buffalo. Haupt, a graduate of the State University of New York at Buffalo, has been documenting the Buffalo arts scene through her photography since 1976. During that time she has worked for, or with, some of the most notable institutions in Buffalo, including the Irish Classical Theatre, Studio Arena Theater, the Kavinoky Theatre, the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra, the Theatre of Youth, the Albright-Knox Art Gallery, and the State University of New York at Buffalo. In addition to her specialty of theater photography, Irene Haupt has also devoted much of her career to the photography of musicians and musical events, especially the contemporary music scene in Buffalo. A broader representation of Irene Haupt's photographs of musical activities in Buffalo are also available online in the Irene Haupt Photographs of Musicians in Buffalo . The musicians who have participated in the June in Buffalo festival include University at Buffalo faculty members David Felder, Cort Lippe, Jeffrey Stadelman, Cheryl Gobbetti-Hoffman, Jonathan Golove, Tony Conrad, Stephen Manes, Tony Arnold, Magnus Mårtensson, Jon Nelson, Movses Pogossian, and Jan Williams. Visiting artists have included Lukas Foss, Amy Williams, Helena Bugallo, Charles Wuorinen, Joji Yuasa, George Crumb, Augusta Read Thomas, Bernard Rands, Philip Glass, Steve Reich, Harvey Sollberger, Roger Reynolds, John Harbison, Dora Ohrenstein, Philippe Manoury, Jonathan Harvey, John Corigliano, and the New York New Music Ensemble. Complete details about the annual collections can be found in their respective finding aids. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LIB-MUS009 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples of still images are: paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type "text" to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Composer David Felder speaks with JoAnn Falletta, conductor during rehearsal of Felder's piece Jeu de Tarot at June in Buffalo 2018 Subject The topic of the resource Composers Conductors Musical groups Falletta, JoAnn - Conductor Felder, David, 1953- - Composer Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra - Ensemble Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Haupt, Irene Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018-06-10 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Digital photographs -- 2011-2020 Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Still image Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 81 ubmu0081_235 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Frederick C. and Alice Slee Chamber Hall (State University of New York at Buffalo) Buffalo (N.Y.) New York (State) United States Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. June in Buffalo Photograph Collection LIB-MUS009 Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Haupt, Irene Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> Description An account of the resource Musicians are seated on a wooden stage with instruments including cellos, violins, and woodwinds. One person stands on a central riser facing the group, while another person in the foreground stands with their back to the camera. Music stands with sheet music are positioned throughout the ensemble in a hall with wood-paneled walls. The description and alternative text may have been partially generated using an AI tool and may contain errors or omissions. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/2af946e74428fd4ace2fcf9262e197b6.jpg 5baa70bd260b19d63ffc044896f19894 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource A conductor stands on a podium facing an orchestra of musicians seated with their instruments on a wooden stage. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource June in Buffalo Photograph Collection Subject The topic of the resource Music festivals Description An account of the resource The Irene Haupt Photographs of June in Buffalo document the annual contemporary music festival held at the University at Buffalo, The State University of New York. The festival was begun in 1975 by composer Morton Feldman who directed the festival 1975-78 and in 1980. The festival was dormant from 1981 through 1985. David Felder revived the festival in 1986 and has been its director since that time. June in Buffalo provides young composers the opportunity to work with senior composers from around the world. The invited faculty members not only have works performed at the festival, they also present lectures, seminars, and master classes. The student composers have the opportunity to hear their works in performance by professional musicians of the highest caliber. This online collection is a compilation of photographs by Irene Haupt beginning with the 2000 June in Buffalo. Haupt, a graduate of the State University of New York at Buffalo, has been documenting the Buffalo arts scene through her photography since 1976. During that time she has worked for, or with, some of the most notable institutions in Buffalo, including the Irish Classical Theatre, Studio Arena Theater, the Kavinoky Theatre, the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra, the Theatre of Youth, the Albright-Knox Art Gallery, and the State University of New York at Buffalo. In addition to her specialty of theater photography, Irene Haupt has also devoted much of her career to the photography of musicians and musical events, especially the contemporary music scene in Buffalo. A broader representation of Irene Haupt's photographs of musical activities in Buffalo are also available online in the Irene Haupt Photographs of Musicians in Buffalo . The musicians who have participated in the June in Buffalo festival include University at Buffalo faculty members David Felder, Cort Lippe, Jeffrey Stadelman, Cheryl Gobbetti-Hoffman, Jonathan Golove, Tony Conrad, Stephen Manes, Tony Arnold, Magnus Mårtensson, Jon Nelson, Movses Pogossian, and Jan Williams. Visiting artists have included Lukas Foss, Amy Williams, Helena Bugallo, Charles Wuorinen, Joji Yuasa, George Crumb, Augusta Read Thomas, Bernard Rands, Philip Glass, Steve Reich, Harvey Sollberger, Roger Reynolds, John Harbison, Dora Ohrenstein, Philippe Manoury, Jonathan Harvey, John Corigliano, and the New York New Music Ensemble. Complete details about the annual collections can be found in their respective finding aids. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LIB-MUS009 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples of still images are: paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type "text" to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Composer David Felder speaks with JoAnn Falletta, conductor during rehearsal of Felder's piece Jeu de Tarot at June in Buffalo 2018 Subject The topic of the resource Composers Conductors Musical groups Falletta, JoAnn - Conductor Felder, David, 1953- - Composer Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra - Ensemble Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Haupt, Irene Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018-06-10 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Digital photographs -- 2011-2020 Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Still image Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 81 ubmu0081_234 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Frederick C. and Alice Slee Chamber Hall (State University of New York at Buffalo) Buffalo (N.Y.) New York (State) United States Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. June in Buffalo Photograph Collection LIB-MUS009 Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Haupt, Irene Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> Description An account of the resource An orchestra of musicians sits on a wooden stage with various instruments, including cellos, violins, and woodwinds. A person stands on a small podium in the center, facing the group with music stands and sheet music arranged throughout. Red theater seats are in the foreground, and a wood-paneled wall serves as the background. The description and alternative text may have been partially generated using an AI tool and may contain errors or omissions. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/1cf04e45d572bc6e4a39ab4966b9ae93.jpg d018952a2480f300d52ce676fa5a6a1a Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource A person stands on a podium in front of an orchestra seated on a stage with instruments and music stands. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource June in Buffalo Photograph Collection Subject The topic of the resource Music festivals Description An account of the resource The Irene Haupt Photographs of June in Buffalo document the annual contemporary music festival held at the University at Buffalo, The State University of New York. The festival was begun in 1975 by composer Morton Feldman who directed the festival 1975-78 and in 1980. The festival was dormant from 1981 through 1985. David Felder revived the festival in 1986 and has been its director since that time. June in Buffalo provides young composers the opportunity to work with senior composers from around the world. The invited faculty members not only have works performed at the festival, they also present lectures, seminars, and master classes. The student composers have the opportunity to hear their works in performance by professional musicians of the highest caliber. This online collection is a compilation of photographs by Irene Haupt beginning with the 2000 June in Buffalo. Haupt, a graduate of the State University of New York at Buffalo, has been documenting the Buffalo arts scene through her photography since 1976. During that time she has worked for, or with, some of the most notable institutions in Buffalo, including the Irish Classical Theatre, Studio Arena Theater, the Kavinoky Theatre, the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra, the Theatre of Youth, the Albright-Knox Art Gallery, and the State University of New York at Buffalo. In addition to her specialty of theater photography, Irene Haupt has also devoted much of her career to the photography of musicians and musical events, especially the contemporary music scene in Buffalo. A broader representation of Irene Haupt's photographs of musical activities in Buffalo are also available online in the Irene Haupt Photographs of Musicians in Buffalo . The musicians who have participated in the June in Buffalo festival include University at Buffalo faculty members David Felder, Cort Lippe, Jeffrey Stadelman, Cheryl Gobbetti-Hoffman, Jonathan Golove, Tony Conrad, Stephen Manes, Tony Arnold, Magnus Mårtensson, Jon Nelson, Movses Pogossian, and Jan Williams. Visiting artists have included Lukas Foss, Amy Williams, Helena Bugallo, Charles Wuorinen, Joji Yuasa, George Crumb, Augusta Read Thomas, Bernard Rands, Philip Glass, Steve Reich, Harvey Sollberger, Roger Reynolds, John Harbison, Dora Ohrenstein, Philippe Manoury, Jonathan Harvey, John Corigliano, and the New York New Music Ensemble. Complete details about the annual collections can be found in their respective finding aids. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LIB-MUS009 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples of still images are: paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type "text" to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Composer David Felder speaks with JoAnn Falletta, conductor during rehearsal of Felder's piece Jeu de Tarot at June in Buffalo 2018 Subject The topic of the resource Composers Conductors Musical groups Falletta, JoAnn - Conductor Felder, David, 1953- - Composer Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra - Ensemble Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Haupt, Irene Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018-06-10 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Digital photographs -- 2011-2020 Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Still image Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 81 ubmu0081_233 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Frederick C. and Alice Slee Chamber Hall (State University of New York at Buffalo) Buffalo (N.Y.) New York (State) United States Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. June in Buffalo Photograph Collection LIB-MUS009 Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Haupt, Irene Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> Description An account of the resource A person in dark clothing stands on a raised platform facing a group of seated musicians on a wooden stage. The musicians hold string and woodwind instruments while looking at sheet music on stands. In the foreground, the back of a person's head is visible from the audience seating area, which features rows of red chairs. The description and alternative text may have been partially generated using an AI tool and may contain errors or omissions. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/6954fc13aea198560343b1e0b4b8b026.jpg 6c902dfa66b969ff55fa666b53a374dc Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource Musicians with cellos and violins sit on a stage while a person on a platform gestures with their hands. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource June in Buffalo Photograph Collection Subject The topic of the resource Music festivals Description An account of the resource The Irene Haupt Photographs of June in Buffalo document the annual contemporary music festival held at the University at Buffalo, The State University of New York. The festival was begun in 1975 by composer Morton Feldman who directed the festival 1975-78 and in 1980. The festival was dormant from 1981 through 1985. David Felder revived the festival in 1986 and has been its director since that time. June in Buffalo provides young composers the opportunity to work with senior composers from around the world. The invited faculty members not only have works performed at the festival, they also present lectures, seminars, and master classes. The student composers have the opportunity to hear their works in performance by professional musicians of the highest caliber. This online collection is a compilation of photographs by Irene Haupt beginning with the 2000 June in Buffalo. Haupt, a graduate of the State University of New York at Buffalo, has been documenting the Buffalo arts scene through her photography since 1976. During that time she has worked for, or with, some of the most notable institutions in Buffalo, including the Irish Classical Theatre, Studio Arena Theater, the Kavinoky Theatre, the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra, the Theatre of Youth, the Albright-Knox Art Gallery, and the State University of New York at Buffalo. In addition to her specialty of theater photography, Irene Haupt has also devoted much of her career to the photography of musicians and musical events, especially the contemporary music scene in Buffalo. A broader representation of Irene Haupt's photographs of musical activities in Buffalo are also available online in the Irene Haupt Photographs of Musicians in Buffalo . The musicians who have participated in the June in Buffalo festival include University at Buffalo faculty members David Felder, Cort Lippe, Jeffrey Stadelman, Cheryl Gobbetti-Hoffman, Jonathan Golove, Tony Conrad, Stephen Manes, Tony Arnold, Magnus Mårtensson, Jon Nelson, Movses Pogossian, and Jan Williams. Visiting artists have included Lukas Foss, Amy Williams, Helena Bugallo, Charles Wuorinen, Joji Yuasa, George Crumb, Augusta Read Thomas, Bernard Rands, Philip Glass, Steve Reich, Harvey Sollberger, Roger Reynolds, John Harbison, Dora Ohrenstein, Philippe Manoury, Jonathan Harvey, John Corigliano, and the New York New Music Ensemble. Complete details about the annual collections can be found in their respective finding aids. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LIB-MUS009 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples of still images are: paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type "text" to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Composer David Felder speaks with JoAnn Falletta, conductor during rehearsal of Felder's piece Jeu de Tarot at June in Buffalo 2018 Subject The topic of the resource Composers Conductors Musical groups Falletta, JoAnn - Conductor Felder, David, 1953- - Composer Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra - Ensemble Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Haupt, Irene Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018-06-10 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Digital photographs -- 2011-2020 Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Still image Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 81 ubmu0081_232 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Frederick C. and Alice Slee Chamber Hall (State University of New York at Buffalo) Buffalo (N.Y.) New York (State) United States Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. June in Buffalo Photograph Collection LIB-MUS009 Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Haupt, Irene Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> Description An account of the resource Musicians sit on a stage holding cellos and violins behind music stands. A person in a patterned shirt sits on a platform and holds their hands up while facing the musicians. In the foreground, a person stands with their back to the camera. The description and alternative text may have been partially generated using an AI tool and may contain errors or omissions. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/3fbfaa047a57f31faf3345beed041f2c.jpg 3972556c89c1ee96c234b1aa0b822f69 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource Orchestra members with instruments on a stage where one person sits on a platform and another stands nearby. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource June in Buffalo Photograph Collection Subject The topic of the resource Music festivals Description An account of the resource The Irene Haupt Photographs of June in Buffalo document the annual contemporary music festival held at the University at Buffalo, The State University of New York. The festival was begun in 1975 by composer Morton Feldman who directed the festival 1975-78 and in 1980. The festival was dormant from 1981 through 1985. David Felder revived the festival in 1986 and has been its director since that time. June in Buffalo provides young composers the opportunity to work with senior composers from around the world. The invited faculty members not only have works performed at the festival, they also present lectures, seminars, and master classes. The student composers have the opportunity to hear their works in performance by professional musicians of the highest caliber. This online collection is a compilation of photographs by Irene Haupt beginning with the 2000 June in Buffalo. Haupt, a graduate of the State University of New York at Buffalo, has been documenting the Buffalo arts scene through her photography since 1976. During that time she has worked for, or with, some of the most notable institutions in Buffalo, including the Irish Classical Theatre, Studio Arena Theater, the Kavinoky Theatre, the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra, the Theatre of Youth, the Albright-Knox Art Gallery, and the State University of New York at Buffalo. In addition to her specialty of theater photography, Irene Haupt has also devoted much of her career to the photography of musicians and musical events, especially the contemporary music scene in Buffalo. A broader representation of Irene Haupt's photographs of musical activities in Buffalo are also available online in the Irene Haupt Photographs of Musicians in Buffalo . The musicians who have participated in the June in Buffalo festival include University at Buffalo faculty members David Felder, Cort Lippe, Jeffrey Stadelman, Cheryl Gobbetti-Hoffman, Jonathan Golove, Tony Conrad, Stephen Manes, Tony Arnold, Magnus Mårtensson, Jon Nelson, Movses Pogossian, and Jan Williams. Visiting artists have included Lukas Foss, Amy Williams, Helena Bugallo, Charles Wuorinen, Joji Yuasa, George Crumb, Augusta Read Thomas, Bernard Rands, Philip Glass, Steve Reich, Harvey Sollberger, Roger Reynolds, John Harbison, Dora Ohrenstein, Philippe Manoury, Jonathan Harvey, John Corigliano, and the New York New Music Ensemble. Complete details about the annual collections can be found in their respective finding aids. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LIB-MUS009 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples of still images are: paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type "text" to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Composer David Felder speaks with JoAnn Falletta, conductor during rehearsal of Felder's piece Jeu de Tarot at June in Buffalo 2018 Subject The topic of the resource Conductors Composers Musical groups Falletta, JoAnn - Conductor Felder, David, 1953- - Composer Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra - Ensemble Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Haupt, Irene Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018-06-10 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Digital photographs -- 2011-2020 Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Still image Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 81 ubmu0081_231 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Frederick C. and Alice Slee Chamber Hall (State University of New York at Buffalo) Buffalo (N.Y.) New York (State) United States Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. June in Buffalo Photograph Collection LIB-MUS009 Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Haupt, Irene Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> Description An account of the resource Multiple people sit with various string and wind instruments on a stage with music stands. In the foreground, one person sits on the edge of a low platform while a second person stands and touches the first person's hand. Musicians in the background hold cellos and violins while looking toward the front. The description and alternative text may have been partially generated using an AI tool and may contain errors or omissions. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/79f43f6a90206ac40763f1677d3bea89.jpg 502097f69b7ab5cf551ba2ecbc50db07 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource Musicians with string and brass instruments are positioned on a stage during a performance or practice session. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource June in Buffalo Photograph Collection Subject The topic of the resource Music festivals Description An account of the resource The Irene Haupt Photographs of June in Buffalo document the annual contemporary music festival held at the University at Buffalo, The State University of New York. The festival was begun in 1975 by composer Morton Feldman who directed the festival 1975-78 and in 1980. The festival was dormant from 1981 through 1985. David Felder revived the festival in 1986 and has been its director since that time. June in Buffalo provides young composers the opportunity to work with senior composers from around the world. The invited faculty members not only have works performed at the festival, they also present lectures, seminars, and master classes. The student composers have the opportunity to hear their works in performance by professional musicians of the highest caliber. This online collection is a compilation of photographs by Irene Haupt beginning with the 2000 June in Buffalo. Haupt, a graduate of the State University of New York at Buffalo, has been documenting the Buffalo arts scene through her photography since 1976. During that time she has worked for, or with, some of the most notable institutions in Buffalo, including the Irish Classical Theatre, Studio Arena Theater, the Kavinoky Theatre, the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra, the Theatre of Youth, the Albright-Knox Art Gallery, and the State University of New York at Buffalo. In addition to her specialty of theater photography, Irene Haupt has also devoted much of her career to the photography of musicians and musical events, especially the contemporary music scene in Buffalo. A broader representation of Irene Haupt's photographs of musical activities in Buffalo are also available online in the Irene Haupt Photographs of Musicians in Buffalo . The musicians who have participated in the June in Buffalo festival include University at Buffalo faculty members David Felder, Cort Lippe, Jeffrey Stadelman, Cheryl Gobbetti-Hoffman, Jonathan Golove, Tony Conrad, Stephen Manes, Tony Arnold, Magnus Mårtensson, Jon Nelson, Movses Pogossian, and Jan Williams. Visiting artists have included Lukas Foss, Amy Williams, Helena Bugallo, Charles Wuorinen, Joji Yuasa, George Crumb, Augusta Read Thomas, Bernard Rands, Philip Glass, Steve Reich, Harvey Sollberger, Roger Reynolds, John Harbison, Dora Ohrenstein, Philippe Manoury, Jonathan Harvey, John Corigliano, and the New York New Music Ensemble. Complete details about the annual collections can be found in their respective finding aids. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LIB-MUS009 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples of still images are: paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type "text" to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Composer David Felder speaks with JoAnn Falletta, conductor during rehearsal of Felder's piece Jeu de Tarot at June in Buffalo 2018 Subject The topic of the resource Composers Conductors Musical groups Falletta, JoAnn - Conductor Felder, David, 1953- - Composer Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra - Ensemble Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Haupt, Irene Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018-06-10 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Digital photographs -- 2011-2020 Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Still image Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 81 ubmu0081_230 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Frederick C. and Alice Slee Chamber Hall (State University of New York at Buffalo) Buffalo (N.Y.) New York (State) United States Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. June in Buffalo Photograph Collection LIB-MUS009 Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Haupt, Irene Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> Description An account of the resource Multiple musicians occupy a wooden stage, with several individuals in the foreground seated while playing cellos and violins. One person leans over a music stand in the center, and others stand in the background near brass instruments and sheet music. A low black platform sits on the stage near the edge, and the tops of red audience seats are visible at the bottom. The description and alternative text may have been partially generated using an AI tool and may contain errors or omissions. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/71ca5143b512da6bae6646f3e27a9c76.jpg 76191efb1273074a13bcfbdfb56ee0fe Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource Eleven musicians pose on a stage with instruments including violins, a flute, a clarinet, a cello, and a trombone. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource June in Buffalo Photograph Collection Subject The topic of the resource Music festivals Description An account of the resource The Irene Haupt Photographs of June in Buffalo document the annual contemporary music festival held at the University at Buffalo, The State University of New York. The festival was begun in 1975 by composer Morton Feldman who directed the festival 1975-78 and in 1980. The festival was dormant from 1981 through 1985. David Felder revived the festival in 1986 and has been its director since that time. June in Buffalo provides young composers the opportunity to work with senior composers from around the world. The invited faculty members not only have works performed at the festival, they also present lectures, seminars, and master classes. The student composers have the opportunity to hear their works in performance by professional musicians of the highest caliber. This online collection is a compilation of photographs by Irene Haupt beginning with the 2000 June in Buffalo. Haupt, a graduate of the State University of New York at Buffalo, has been documenting the Buffalo arts scene through her photography since 1976. During that time she has worked for, or with, some of the most notable institutions in Buffalo, including the Irish Classical Theatre, Studio Arena Theater, the Kavinoky Theatre, the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra, the Theatre of Youth, the Albright-Knox Art Gallery, and the State University of New York at Buffalo. In addition to her specialty of theater photography, Irene Haupt has also devoted much of her career to the photography of musicians and musical events, especially the contemporary music scene in Buffalo. A broader representation of Irene Haupt's photographs of musical activities in Buffalo are also available online in the Irene Haupt Photographs of Musicians in Buffalo . The musicians who have participated in the June in Buffalo festival include University at Buffalo faculty members David Felder, Cort Lippe, Jeffrey Stadelman, Cheryl Gobbetti-Hoffman, Jonathan Golove, Tony Conrad, Stephen Manes, Tony Arnold, Magnus Mårtensson, Jon Nelson, Movses Pogossian, and Jan Williams. Visiting artists have included Lukas Foss, Amy Williams, Helena Bugallo, Charles Wuorinen, Joji Yuasa, George Crumb, Augusta Read Thomas, Bernard Rands, Philip Glass, Steve Reich, Harvey Sollberger, Roger Reynolds, John Harbison, Dora Ohrenstein, Philippe Manoury, Jonathan Harvey, John Corigliano, and the New York New Music Ensemble. Complete details about the annual collections can be found in their respective finding aids. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LIB-MUS009 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples of still images are: paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type "text" to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Moon Young Ha, conductor and Ensemble Mise-En members Maria Im, violin, Hannah Levinson, viola, Yumi Ito, clarinet, Kelley Barnett, flute, Maria Hadge, violoncello, Yumi Suehiro, piano, Josh Perry, percussion, and Mark Broschinsky, trombone pose with composers Louis Karchin and Roger Reynolds after a performance of their works at June in Buffalo 2018 Subject The topic of the resource Conductors Composers Musical groups Ensemble Mise-En - Ensemble Karchin, Louis - Composer Reynolds, Roger, 1934- - Composer Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Haupt, Irene Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018-06-08 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Digital photographs -- 2011-2020 Group portraits -- 2011-2020 Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Still image Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 81 ubmu0081_229 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Frank B. and Cameron Baird Music Hall (State University of New York at Buffalo) Buffalo (N.Y.) New York (State) United States Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. June in Buffalo Photograph Collection LIB-MUS009 Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Haupt, Irene Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> Description An account of the resource Eleven people dressed in dark formal clothing stand on a wooden stage in front of a white wall and a grand piano. Several individuals hold musical instruments, including a cello, violins, a flute, a clarinet, and a trombone. A copyright watermark is superimposed across the center of the group. The description and alternative text may have been partially generated using an AI tool and may contain errors or omissions. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/1ba29ed12fda4c6df56b2001f22cae98.jpg 4e63c92eda4a0926c351687350ca9c81 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource Eleven people stand in a line on a stage with several musical instruments. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource June in Buffalo Photograph Collection Subject The topic of the resource Music festivals Description An account of the resource The Irene Haupt Photographs of June in Buffalo document the annual contemporary music festival held at the University at Buffalo, The State University of New York. The festival was begun in 1975 by composer Morton Feldman who directed the festival 1975-78 and in 1980. The festival was dormant from 1981 through 1985. David Felder revived the festival in 1986 and has been its director since that time. June in Buffalo provides young composers the opportunity to work with senior composers from around the world. The invited faculty members not only have works performed at the festival, they also present lectures, seminars, and master classes. The student composers have the opportunity to hear their works in performance by professional musicians of the highest caliber. This online collection is a compilation of photographs by Irene Haupt beginning with the 2000 June in Buffalo. Haupt, a graduate of the State University of New York at Buffalo, has been documenting the Buffalo arts scene through her photography since 1976. During that time she has worked for, or with, some of the most notable institutions in Buffalo, including the Irish Classical Theatre, Studio Arena Theater, the Kavinoky Theatre, the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra, the Theatre of Youth, the Albright-Knox Art Gallery, and the State University of New York at Buffalo. In addition to her specialty of theater photography, Irene Haupt has also devoted much of her career to the photography of musicians and musical events, especially the contemporary music scene in Buffalo. A broader representation of Irene Haupt's photographs of musical activities in Buffalo are also available online in the Irene Haupt Photographs of Musicians in Buffalo . The musicians who have participated in the June in Buffalo festival include University at Buffalo faculty members David Felder, Cort Lippe, Jeffrey Stadelman, Cheryl Gobbetti-Hoffman, Jonathan Golove, Tony Conrad, Stephen Manes, Tony Arnold, Magnus Mårtensson, Jon Nelson, Movses Pogossian, and Jan Williams. Visiting artists have included Lukas Foss, Amy Williams, Helena Bugallo, Charles Wuorinen, Joji Yuasa, George Crumb, Augusta Read Thomas, Bernard Rands, Philip Glass, Steve Reich, Harvey Sollberger, Roger Reynolds, John Harbison, Dora Ohrenstein, Philippe Manoury, Jonathan Harvey, John Corigliano, and the New York New Music Ensemble. Complete details about the annual collections can be found in their respective finding aids. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LIB-MUS009 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples of still images are: paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type "text" to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Moon Young Ha, conductor and Ensemble Mise-En members Maria Im, violin, Hannah Levinson, viola, Yumi Ito, clarinet, Kelley Barnett, flute, Maria Hadge, violoncello, Yumi Suehiro, piano, Josh Perry, percussion, and Mark Broschinsky, trombone pose with composers Louis Karchin, Roger Reynolds, and Hans Thomalla after a performance of their works at June in Buffalo 2018 Subject The topic of the resource Conductors Composers Musical groups Ensemble Mise-En - Ensemble Karchin, Louis - Composer Reynolds, Roger, 1934- - Composer Thomalla, Hans - Composer Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Haupt, Irene Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018-06-08 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Digital photographs -- 2011-2020 Group portraits -- 2011-2020 Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Still image Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 81 ubmu0081_228 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Frank B. and Cameron Baird Music Hall (State University of New York at Buffalo) Buffalo (N.Y.) New York (State) United States Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. June in Buffalo Photograph Collection LIB-MUS009 Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Haupt, Irene Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> Description An account of the resource The group stands on a light-colored wood floor in front of a neutral-colored wall and dark curtains. Several individuals hold instruments, including two violins, a flute, a clarinet, a cello, and a trombone. Most of the people wear black or dark blue attire. The description and alternative text may have been partially generated using an AI tool and may contain errors or omissions. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/5e217232f87a85e7e63146eca99988f2.jpg 4b6c6a326aa5c5adadda9322fca659eb Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource Eleven musicians stand in a row on a wooden stage holding instruments including a cello, violin, and trombone. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource June in Buffalo Photograph Collection Subject The topic of the resource Music festivals Description An account of the resource The Irene Haupt Photographs of June in Buffalo document the annual contemporary music festival held at the University at Buffalo, The State University of New York. The festival was begun in 1975 by composer Morton Feldman who directed the festival 1975-78 and in 1980. The festival was dormant from 1981 through 1985. David Felder revived the festival in 1986 and has been its director since that time. June in Buffalo provides young composers the opportunity to work with senior composers from around the world. The invited faculty members not only have works performed at the festival, they also present lectures, seminars, and master classes. The student composers have the opportunity to hear their works in performance by professional musicians of the highest caliber. This online collection is a compilation of photographs by Irene Haupt beginning with the 2000 June in Buffalo. Haupt, a graduate of the State University of New York at Buffalo, has been documenting the Buffalo arts scene through her photography since 1976. During that time she has worked for, or with, some of the most notable institutions in Buffalo, including the Irish Classical Theatre, Studio Arena Theater, the Kavinoky Theatre, the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra, the Theatre of Youth, the Albright-Knox Art Gallery, and the State University of New York at Buffalo. In addition to her specialty of theater photography, Irene Haupt has also devoted much of her career to the photography of musicians and musical events, especially the contemporary music scene in Buffalo. A broader representation of Irene Haupt's photographs of musical activities in Buffalo are also available online in the Irene Haupt Photographs of Musicians in Buffalo . The musicians who have participated in the June in Buffalo festival include University at Buffalo faculty members David Felder, Cort Lippe, Jeffrey Stadelman, Cheryl Gobbetti-Hoffman, Jonathan Golove, Tony Conrad, Stephen Manes, Tony Arnold, Magnus Mårtensson, Jon Nelson, Movses Pogossian, and Jan Williams. Visiting artists have included Lukas Foss, Amy Williams, Helena Bugallo, Charles Wuorinen, Joji Yuasa, George Crumb, Augusta Read Thomas, Bernard Rands, Philip Glass, Steve Reich, Harvey Sollberger, Roger Reynolds, John Harbison, Dora Ohrenstein, Philippe Manoury, Jonathan Harvey, John Corigliano, and the New York New Music Ensemble. Complete details about the annual collections can be found in their respective finding aids. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LIB-MUS009 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples of still images are: paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type "text" to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Moon Young Ha, conductor and Ensemble Mise-En members Maria Im, violin, Hannah Levinson, viola, Yumi Ito, clarinet, Kelley Barnett, flute, Maria Hadge, violoncello, Yumi Suehiro, piano, Josh Perry, percussion, and Mark Broschinsky, trombone pose with composers Louis Karchin, Roger Reynolds, and Hans Thomalla after a performance of their works at June in Buffalo 2018 Subject The topic of the resource Conductors Composers Musical groups Ensemble Mise-En - Ensemble Karchin, Louis - Composer Reynolds, Roger, 1934- - Composer Thomalla, Hans - Composer Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Haupt, Irene Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018-06-08 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Digital photographs -- 2011-2020 Group portraits -- 2011-2020 Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Still image Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 81 ubmu0081_227 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Frank B. and Cameron Baird Music Hall (State University of New York at Buffalo) Buffalo (N.Y.) New York (State) United States Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. June in Buffalo Photograph Collection LIB-MUS009 Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Haupt, Irene Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> Description An account of the resource Eleven individuals are positioned in a line on a light-colored wooden stage in front of a white wall. Several people hold musical instruments such as a violin, clarinet, flute, cello, and trombone. Most of the group wears dark-colored clothing, and a grand piano is visible in the background. The description and alternative text may have been partially generated using an AI tool and may contain errors or omissions. https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/files/original/799c7699b06613ae525baab247af2c81.jpg 1c102b856213353f810d81842dec9d47 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Description An account of the resource Musicians stand on a wooden stage with a piano, cello, violin, and other instruments. One person on the left has their hands raised while facing the group. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource June in Buffalo Photograph Collection Subject The topic of the resource Music festivals Description An account of the resource The Irene Haupt Photographs of June in Buffalo document the annual contemporary music festival held at the University at Buffalo, The State University of New York. The festival was begun in 1975 by composer Morton Feldman who directed the festival 1975-78 and in 1980. The festival was dormant from 1981 through 1985. David Felder revived the festival in 1986 and has been its director since that time. June in Buffalo provides young composers the opportunity to work with senior composers from around the world. The invited faculty members not only have works performed at the festival, they also present lectures, seminars, and master classes. The student composers have the opportunity to hear their works in performance by professional musicians of the highest caliber. This online collection is a compilation of photographs by Irene Haupt beginning with the 2000 June in Buffalo. Haupt, a graduate of the State University of New York at Buffalo, has been documenting the Buffalo arts scene through her photography since 1976. During that time she has worked for, or with, some of the most notable institutions in Buffalo, including the Irish Classical Theatre, Studio Arena Theater, the Kavinoky Theatre, the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra, the Theatre of Youth, the Albright-Knox Art Gallery, and the State University of New York at Buffalo. In addition to her specialty of theater photography, Irene Haupt has also devoted much of her career to the photography of musicians and musical events, especially the contemporary music scene in Buffalo. A broader representation of Irene Haupt's photographs of musical activities in Buffalo are also available online in the Irene Haupt Photographs of Musicians in Buffalo . The musicians who have participated in the June in Buffalo festival include University at Buffalo faculty members David Felder, Cort Lippe, Jeffrey Stadelman, Cheryl Gobbetti-Hoffman, Jonathan Golove, Tony Conrad, Stephen Manes, Tony Arnold, Magnus Mårtensson, Jon Nelson, Movses Pogossian, and Jan Williams. Visiting artists have included Lukas Foss, Amy Williams, Helena Bugallo, Charles Wuorinen, Joji Yuasa, George Crumb, Augusta Read Thomas, Bernard Rands, Philip Glass, Steve Reich, Harvey Sollberger, Roger Reynolds, John Harbison, Dora Ohrenstein, Philippe Manoury, Jonathan Harvey, John Corigliano, and the New York New Music Ensemble. Complete details about the annual collections can be found in their respective finding aids. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context LIB-MUS009 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples of still images are: paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type "text" to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Composer Louis Karchin acknowledges Moon Young Ha, conductor and Ensemble Mise-En members Maria Im, violin, Maria Hadge, violoncello, Mark Broschinsky, trombone, Yumi Ito, clarinet, Josh Perry, percussion, and Kelley Barnett, flute after a performance of Karchin's piece As the Circle Opens to Infinity... at June in Buffalo 2018 Subject The topic of the resource Composers Conductors Musical groups Young Ha, Moon - Conductor Karchin, Louis - Composer Im, Maria - Violin Hadge, Maria - Violoncello Broschinsky, Mark - Trombone Ito, Yumi - Clarinet Perry, Josh, 1979- - Percussion Barnett, Kelley - Flute Ensemble Mise-En - Ensemble Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Haupt, Irene Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available State University of New York at Buffalo. Music Library Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018-06-08 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Music Library Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Digital photographs -- 2011-2020 Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Still image Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Mus. Arc. 81 ubmu0081_226 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Frank B. and Cameron Baird Music Hall (State University of New York at Buffalo) Buffalo (N.Y.) New York (State) United States Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. June in Buffalo Photograph Collection LIB-MUS009 Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Haupt, Irene Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">IN COPYRIGHT</a>. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s). <a href="https://library.buffalo.edu/music/about/copyright.html">Copyright Statement for Digitized Materials from the Music Library</a> Description An account of the resource A small ensemble of musicians stands on a lit stage holding instruments including a flute, clarinet, and violin, with a grand piano and cello positioned behind them. The performers are dressed in dark clothing and are situated among music stands and microphone equipment. An audience is visible as dark silhouettes in the foreground below the stage. The description and alternative text may have been partially generated using an AI tool and may contain errors or omissions.