Dynamic push–pull characteristics at three hand-reach envelopes: Applications for the workplace

Calé-Benzoor, Maya; Dickstein, Ruth; Arnon, Michal; Ayalon, Moshe

doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2015.06.027

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Workers operating manual-operated pallet truck were suffering high risk of MSDs, especially on their back and upper extremities [ 10 ]. To reduce the risk of MSDs, many studies have been performed to explore the effects of heights, loads, velocities, angles of pulling on the development of muscular fatigue [ 11 , 12 ]. Design and redesign of the materials handling devices to lower pulling burden have also been proposed [ 6 , 10 , 13 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pulling strength, muscular fatigue, and prediction of maximum endurance time for simulated pulling tasks

Tang

et al. 2018

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Truck pulling is one of the common manual materials handling tasks which contribute to musculoskeletal disorders. The maximum endurance time (MET) for two-handed truck pulling tasks has been rarely discussed in the literature. The objectives of this study were to explore the development of muscular fatigue when performing two-handed pulling task and to establish models to predict the MET. A simulated pallet truck pulling experiment was conducted. Sixteen healthy adults including eight females and eight males participated. The participants pulled a handle simulating that of a pallet truck using two hands until they could not pull any longer under two postures. The forces applied for females and males were 139.65 N and 170.03 N, respectively. The maximum voluntary contractions (MVC) of the pulling strength both before and after the simulated pull were measured. After each trial, both the MET and subjective ratings of muscular fatigue on body segments were recorded. The results showed that posture significantly affected MVC of pull both before and after the trial. It was found that foot/shank of the front leg had higher subjective ratings of muscular fatigue than the other body segments. The MET equations employing both power and logarithmic functions were developed to predict the MET of the two-handed pulling tasks. Predictive models established in this study may be used to assess the MET for two-handed pulling tasks.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pulling strength, muscular fatigue, and prediction of maximum endurance time for simulated pulling tasks

Tang

et al. 2018

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The study of Cale-Benzoor et al (2016) found that different muscles were used for pushing (triceps, serratus anterior, anterior deltoid, and scapula extensions) and pulling (triceps long head, biceps, and scapula contractions). The pulling backward force was significantly higher than the pushing forward force when the elbow angle was within 66%–100% of the restricted range of motion [ 40 ]. In our study, the elbow position of the right hand forward and backward was greater than 66% of ROM, and the pulling backward force was higher than the pushing forward force.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigation into the Effects of Backrest Angle and Stick Location on Female Strength

Chao

2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of backrest angle and hand maneuver direction on maximum hand strength and to recommend a strength value for the hand-controlled stick of an aircraft. Methods: Forty-eight female subjects were recruited to perform simulated forward–backward and adduction–abduction maneuvers using control sticks. Each subject was free from musculoskeletal disorders and pain. The independent variables included four control maneuvers (forward, backward, adduction, abduction), two right-hand control stick locations (central, side), and three backrest angles (90°, 103°, 108°). The dependent variable was maximum hand strength. Results: The maximum strength for forward maneuvers with both central and side sticks was strongest at a 90° backrest angle (p < 0.001). The maximum strength for adduction maneuvers with both central and side sticks was also strongest at a 90° backrest angle (p < 0.001). On the other hand, the highest strength was observed at a 108° backrest angle when pulling the stick backward (p < 0.001). The abduction strength was significantly stronger than the adduction strength with a central stick (p < 0.001), but the adduction strength was significantly stronger than the abduction strength with a side stick (p < 0.001–p = 0.017). The forward and abduction strength were significantly different in different locations (p < 0.001). The recommended strength in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) by the US FAA is higher than the strength values observed in this study. Conclusions: The backrest angle, directions, and location affected the muscular strength. The recommended values should be reevaluated and adjusted for Taiwanese pilots.

show abstract

“…Pulling tasks involving both static [ 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 ] and dynamic [ 13 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 ] postures have been reported. The difference between those two approaches was whether the participants needed to walk when they were pulling.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fatigue and Recovery of Muscles for Pulling Tasks

Zuo

Zhao

et al. 2022

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Manual materials handling (MMH) contributes to musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) in the workplace. The development and recovery of muscle fatigue are essential in work/rest arrangements for MMH tasks. A pulling experiment, including a muscle fatigue test and a muscle fatigue recovery test, was conducted. In the muscle fatigue test, the participant performed a pulling task on a treadmill with a walking velocity of 1 km/h until they could no longer do so. The load was either 30 or 45 kg. The maximum endurance time (MET) was recorded. The pull strength (PS) of the participant both before and after the pulling task was measured. The subjective ratings of muscle fatigue after the pulling task were recorded. In the muscle fatigue recovery test, the participant took a rest after performing the pulling task. The participants reported their subjective ratings of muscle fatigue on the CR-10 scale after taking a rest for a time period t, where t = 1, 2,…, 6 min. The PS of the participant was then measured again. It was found that the load significantly affected the MET for pulling tasks. The load was insignificant to the decrease of the PS, but was significant to the decrease rate (PS decrease per min) of the PS. The PS decrease rate for the 45 kg condition (30.8 ± 16.5 N/min) was significantly higher (p < 0.05) than that of the 30 kg condition (15.4 ± 5.5 N/min). The recovery time significantly affected the PS and CR-10. Two MET models were established to explore the development of muscle fatigue in pulling tasks. A PS model was constructed to describe the recovery of muscle force. A CR-10 model was proposed to show the subjective ratings of recovery. These models are beneficial for determining the work/rest allowance for pulling tasks.

show abstract

Dynamic push–pull characteristics at three hand-reach envelopes: Applications for the workplace

Cited by 6 publications

References 33 publications

Pulling strength, muscular fatigue, and prediction of maximum endurance time for simulated pulling tasks

Pulling strength, muscular fatigue, and prediction of maximum endurance time for simulated pulling tasks

Investigation into the Effects of Backrest Angle and Stick Location on Female Strength

Fatigue and Recovery of Muscles for Pulling Tasks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About