journal article·2020-04-27Open access

Towards an Ergonomic Assessment Framework for Industrial Assembly Workstations—A Case Study

Ana Colim, Carlos Faria, Ana Cristina Braga, Nuno Sousa, Luís Rocha, Paula Carneiro, Nélson Costa, Pedro Arezes

Applied Sciences· Volume 10· Issue 9

Abstract

Work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSD) are one of the main occupational health problems. The best strategy to prevent them lies on ergonomic interventions. The variety of industrial processes and environments, however, makes it difficult to define an all-purpose framework to guide these ergonomic interventions. This undefinition is exacerbated by recurrent introduction of new technologies, e.g., collaborative robots. In this paper, we propose a framework to guide ergonomics and human factors practitioners through all stages of assessment and redesign of workstations. This framework was applied in a case study at an assembly workstation of a large furniture enterprise. Direct observation of work activity and questionnaires were applied to characterize the workstations, the process, and the workers’ profiles and perceptions. An ergonomic multi-method approach, based on well-known and validated methods (such as the Finnish Institute of Occupational Health and Rapid Upper Limb Assessment), was applied to identify the most critical risk factors. We concluded that this approach supports the process redesign and tasks’ allocation of the future workstation. From these conclusions, we distill a list of requirements for the creation of a collaborative robot cell, specifying which tasks are performed by whom, as well as the scheduling of the human-robot collaboration (HRC).
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation · Ergonomics and Musculoskeletal Disorders · Ergonomics and Human Factors

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

DTx Colab, 4800-058 Guimarães, Portugal

ALGORITMI Centre, University of Minho, 4800-058 Guimarães, Portugal

References (38)

Show source-provided references
1. Schneider, E., Irastorza, X., and Copsey, S. (2010). OSH in Figures: Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders in the EU, Publication.
2. Economic impact of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) on work in Europe10.1016/j.berh.2015.08.002 ↗
3. Risk factors identification and visualization for work-related musculoskeletal disorders with wearable and connected gait analytics system and kinect skeleton models10.1016/j.smhl.2018.05.003 ↗
4. Petreanu, V., and Seracin, A.M. (2017). Risk Factors for Musculoskeletal Disorders Development: Hand-Arm Tasks, Repetitive Work, National Research-Development for Health and Safety.
5. New methodological framework to improve productivity and ergonomics in assembly system design10.1016/j.ergon.2010.12.001 ↗
6. Incorporating ergonomic risks into assembly line balancing10.1016/j.ejor.2011.01.056 ↗
7. The role of assessment of biomechanical exposure at the workplace in the prevention of musculoskeletal disorders10.5271/sjweh.2882 ↗
8. Systematic evaluation of observational methods assessing biomechanical exposures at work10.5271/sjweh.2876 ↗
9. Ergonomic methods for assessing exposure to risk factors for work-related musculoskeletal disorders10.1093/occmed/kqi082 ↗
10. Ellegast, R. (2016). Assessment of Physical Workloads to Prevent Work-Related MSDs, Institute for Occupational Safety and Health of the German Social Accident Insurance.
11. Standardised Nordic questionnaires for the analysis of musculoskeletal symptoms10.1016/0003-6870(87)90010-X ↗
12. The Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire10.1093/occmed/kqm036 ↗
13. NIOSH Ergonomic Hazard Identification Checklist.
14. RULA: A survey method for the investigation of work-related upper limb disorders10.1016/0003-6870(93)90080-S ↗
15. Baua–Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (2012). Key Indicator Method for Assessing and Designing Physical Workloads during Manual Handling Operations KIM-MHO, Baua–Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.
16. The European Assembly Worksheet10.1080/1463922X.2012.678283 ↗
17. Tan, J.T.C., Duan, F., Zhang, Y., Watanabe, K., Kato, R., and Arai, T. (2009, January 10–15). Human-robot collaboration in cellular manufacturing: Design and development. Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS 2009), St. Louis, MO, USA.10.1109/IROS.2009.5354155 ↗
18. Collaborative manufacturing with physical human-robot interaction10.1016/j.rcim.2015.12.007 ↗
19. Human–robot interaction review and challenges on task planning and programming10.1080/0951192X.2015.1130251 ↗
20. Villani, V., Sabattini, L., Czerniak, J., Mertens, A., Vogel-Heuser, B., and Fantuzzi, C. (2017, January 12–15). Towards modern inclusive factories: A methodology for the development of smart adaptive human-machine interfaces. Proceedings of the 22nd IEEE International Conference on Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation (ETFA), Limassol, Cyprus.10.1109/ETFA.2017.8247634 ↗
21. Cobot programming for collaborative industrial tasks: An overview10.1016/j.robot.2019.03.003 ↗
22. The ageing workforce challenge: Investments in collaborative robots or contribution to pension schemes, from the multi-echelon perspective10.1016/j.ijpe.2018.12.016 ↗
23. Ahonen, M., Launis, M., and Kuorinka, T. (1989). Ergonomic Workplace Analysis, Institute of Occupational Health.
24. A Multilevel Approach to Manual Lifting in Manufacturing Industries10.1080/10803548.1996.11076353 ↗
25. French good practice guidelines for management of the risk of low back pain among workers exposed to manual material handling: Hierarchical strategy of risk assessment of work situations10.3233/WOR-162258 ↗
26. Borg CR-10 scale as a new approach to monitoring office exercise training10.3233/WOR-182762 ↗
27. Applying psychophysics to prevent overexposure: On the relationships between acceptable manual force, joint loading, and perception10.1016/j.ergon.2012.09.006 ↗
28. Portuguese version of the standardized Nordic musculoskeletal questionnaire: Cross cultural and reliability10.1007/s10389-010-0331-0 ↗
29. Adaptable Workstations for Human-Robot Collaboration: A Reconfigurable Framework for Improving Worker Ergonomics and Productivity10.1109/MRA.2018.2890460 ↗
30. Influence of musculoskeletal pain on workers’ ergonomic risk-factor assessments10.1016/j.apergo.2014.12.011 ↗
31. An improved physical demand analysis framework based on ergonomic risk assessment tools for the manufacturing industry10.1016/j.ergon.2019.01.004 ↗
32. Comparison of concepts in easy-to-use methods for MSD risk assessment10.1016/j.apergo.2013.05.010 ↗
33. Risk assessment of manual handling operations at work with the key indicator method (KIM-MHO)—Determination of criterion validity regarding the prevalence of musculoskeletal symptoms and clinical conditions within a cross-sectional study10.1186/s12891-017-1542-0 ↗
34. Colim, A., Sousa, N., Carneiro, P., Costa, N., Arezes, P., and Cardoso, A. (2020). Ergonomic Intervention on a Packing Workstation with Robotic Aid—Case Study at a Furniture Manufacturing Industry. Work A J. Prev. Assess. Rehabil., 66, (in press).10.3233/WOR-203144 ↗
35. Participatory ergonomics intervention for improving human and production outcomes of a Brazilian furniture company10.1016/j.ergon.2015.02.002 ↗
36. Improving and Modifying the Design of Workstations within a Manufacturing Environment10.1016/j.promfg.2015.07.631 ↗
37. Anthropometric study of Portuguese workers10.1016/j.ergon.2004.10.005 ↗
38. Adaptive automation assembly: Identifying system requirements for technical efficiency and worker satisfaction10.1016/j.cie.2019.03.036 ↗