Biomechanical Assessment of Three Rebar Tying Techniques

Albers, James; Hudock, Stephen D.

doi:10.1080/10803548.2007.11076728

Cited by 23 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Bernard, 1997;Burdorf and Sorock, 1997;Keyserling, 2000), and a reduction in trunk inclination has been used to demonstrate the effectiveness of ergonomics interventions aimed at reducing risk of low back disorders (e.g. Alders and Hudock, 2007). Researchers have even found associations between the specific trunk inclination parameter used in the present study and low back symptoms (e.g., Punnett et al, 1991), The European standard EN 1005-4 on working postures and movements in relation to machinery also identifies trunk inclination exceeding 20 as a potential risk factor (CEN, 2005).…”

Section: Exposure Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

The ability of limited exposure sampling to detect effects of interventions that reduce the occurrence of pronounced trunk inclination

Mathiassen

Paquet

2010

Applied Ergonomics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Exposure Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

The ability of limited exposure sampling to detect effects of interventions that reduce the occurrence of pronounced trunk inclination

Mathiassen

Paquet

2010

Applied Ergonomics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…While the absolute low-back loads of rebar workers may not be substantial, their prolonged static working postures may pose threat for LBDs. Albers and Hudock (2007) estimated that the low-back compression load at the L5/S1 joint was lower than the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) defined hazardous load of 3,400 N during the rebar work on a bridge. However, performing repetitive rebar works in a severely flexed trunk posture throughout the day may lead to high cumulative forces over the years, which will increase the risk of developing LBD (Coenen et al 2013;Marras et al 2010;Seidler et al 2001).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Approximately 33% of annual work absenteeism in the American construction industry is related to MSDs (BLS 2013). Compared to workers in different construction trades, rebar workers are at a higher risk of experiencing lowerback disorders (LBDs) (Albers and Hudock 2007). Hunting et al (1999) reported that low-back injuries were the most prevalent musculoskeletal injuries in rebar workers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identification of Biomechanical Risk Factors for the Development of Lower-Back Disorders during Manual Rebar Tying

Umer

Szeto

et al. 2017

J. Constr. Eng. Manage.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

High prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders among construction workers pose challenges to the productivity and occupational health of the construction industry. To mitigate the risk of musculoskeletal disorders, construction managers need to deepen their understanding of the physical and biomechanical demands of various construction tasks so that appropriate policies and preventive measures can be implemented. Among various construction trades, rebar workers are highly susceptible to lower-back disorders (LBDs) given the physically demanding nature of their work tasks. In particular, rebar tying is considered to be closely related to LBDs because it exposes workers to multiple ergonomic risk factors (repetitive works in prolonged static and awkward postures). The objective of the current study was to compare the differences in lumbar biomechanics during three typical rebar tying postures: stooping, one-legged kneeling, and squatting. Biomechanical variables including trunk muscle activity and trunk kinematics were measured by surface electromyography and motion sensors, respectively. Ten healthy male participants performed a simulated rebar tying task in each of the three postures in a laboratory setting. Repeated measures analysis of variance showed that while each posture has its unique trunk kinematic characteristics, all these postures involved excessive trunk inclination that exceeded the internationally recommended trunk inclination angle of 60°for static working postures. Of the three postures, stooping posture demonstrated a significant reduction in electromyographic activity of lumbar muscles (a reduction in 60-80% of muscle activity as compared to the other two postures). The reduced muscle activity may shift the loading to passive spinal structures (e.g., spinal ligaments and joint capsules), which is known to be a risk factor for LBD development. Collectively, the results from this study may help explain the high prevalence of LBDs in rebar workers. Future studies are warranted to confirm the findings at construction sites and to develop appropriate ergonomic approaches for rebar workers.dividual papers. This paper is part of the Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, © ASCE, ISSN 0733-9364. © ASCE 04016080-1 J. Constr. Eng. Manage. J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 04016080 Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Arizona State Univ on 07/26/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved. © ASCE 04016080-2 J. Constr. Eng. Manage. J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 04016080 Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Arizona State Univ on 07/26/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved. © ASCE 04016080-10 J. Constr. Eng. Manage. J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 04016080 Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Arizona State Univ on 07/26/16.

show abstract

“…Whereas, once the automated tier, extension pole included, was introduced, 83% of the time neutral flexion was experienced and moderate forward flexion was experienced 16% of the time, leaving workers in extreme flexion only 1% of the time. These problems were "greatly reduced" while using an automated tier, yet their elimination is possible by attaching the extension handle to the automatic rebar tier, allowing the worker to tie standing erect [8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In fact, this type of injury is predominantly seen in the rod working field [1,2]. This can be reduced, if not eliminated, through use of state-of the-art technology [2,3]. Hence, the primary contribution this study offers is the investigation of using an innovative technological solution to reduce the time, cost, and hazard associated with rebar tying.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving Construction Labor Productivity Using Automatic Rebar Tying Gun

Safa¹,

Cárdenas²,

LeBlanc³

et al. 2016

Proceedings of the International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction (IAARC)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-Rebar tying is labor-intensive and expensive, with a high learning curve that restricts proficiency at the craft to a great deal of construction field experience. Obtaining this experience requires tasks that are taxing on the human body, often resulting in muscular and skeletal injuries. Previously, research and engineering controls for rebar tying/rod busting have been reasonably limited. The main contribution of this study is investigating the use of a new advanced technology to reduce the time, cost, and hazard associated with rebar tying. Hence, several experiments were conducted on the effectiveness of an automatic rebar tying gun by comparing the speed and cost effectiveness of this tool with the common industry practice of manually tying rebar with a spool of wire and pliers. The study results show that the automatic rebar tying gun could lower the learning curve, thereby reducing training times and minimizing redundant routines. By minimizing the amount of time invested in training employees, the possibility of saving time and money is apparent. However, risk reduction is also implied by the lessening of time invested in training employees. This is because resignations frequently happen before a return on the investment of training is produced, resulting in sunk costs. Various repetitive, often manual, movements required of workers have been observed to be reduced from the use of the rebar tying gun. The results of this study also shows that the automatic rebar tying gun has a potential to save time, money, and ergonomic liabilities without risking productivity.

show abstract

Biomechanical Assessment of Three Rebar Tying Techniques

Cited by 23 publications

References 10 publications

The ability of limited exposure sampling to detect effects of interventions that reduce the occurrence of pronounced trunk inclination

The ability of limited exposure sampling to detect effects of interventions that reduce the occurrence of pronounced trunk inclination

Identification of Biomechanical Risk Factors for the Development of Lower-Back Disorders during Manual Rebar Tying

Improving Construction Labor Productivity Using Automatic Rebar Tying Gun

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About