Sei sulla pagina 1di 31

1.

1 INTRODUTION

In our country generally mobile fast-food business now becomes most reliable and selfemployed business. For this business to be recognized vendor cart is a well-known mean
of transportation space directly affect the business of a person. The working area belongs
to the unorganized sector to run a business depending upon cart skill is not being
required. Thats why there is a lack of not scientific consideration and special attention is
unnecessary. A large number of youth, men and women are working in this sector for
prolonged periods with inappropriate working posture, workstation design, and furlong
working hours, task variable without consideration appropriate space for their movement.
This leads to the development of different kinds of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs)
among them.
As a problem shooter ergonomics place an essential rule in order to design a
workplace in analyzing the task. The ergonomically designed workstation also gives
healthy working environment, safety, increase efficiency, and reduce work related
musculoskeletal injuries and problem such as occupational diseases, cumulative trauma,
repetitive stress injuries, and occupational overexertion syndrome which mostly affect to
arm and back.
The complete work pattern for the vendor cart consist up taking orders, making
and serving food, and collect money has to do work in static posture for long duration in
a poor workstation which promote unnecessary in a physical effort. Standing

position

creates not only pressure on the spine and disc, but also knee and elbow pain. This type of
posture can increase the pressure on the muscles, ligaments and other soft tissues of the
musculoskeletal system. Hence the overall discomfort and pain in the back, neck, and
shoulder are common symptoms observed in the vendors.
Considering the above aspects it is been decided to take a step regarding the
working pattern in this socially unattended area by introducing basic aspects of

ergonomics which reduces work related MSDs and suggest of proper methods to work
and for workstation comfortable without any physical fatigue.
In the present study around 20 vendors from Nagpur have participated. To
evaluate the actual presence of problem, a detailed questionnaire is made by considering
the information related to MSDs problems. Working condition, compatibility, working
hours, the problem faced during working. The existing workstation and worker, poor
body postures are assessed and analyze with the help of ERGOFELLOW SOFTWARE
tools.
After all analysis a workstation and working method are suggested at the same
place where worker used to do the work. And to check the feasibility of working method
and workstation various value from software, body parts movements within ROM,
postures, are compared with the previous method and workstation to get the same result.
1.2 AIM AND OBJECTIVE
The primary objective of this research work was to study existing workstation, MSDs
problem, and psychological aspects among vendor. And remedy them with a proper
scientific study and workstation design so that vendors can do better workout any
consequences.
Following objective is chosen for achievement of AIM:1.
2.
3.
4.

To study existing workstation, working layout aspect.


To identify musculoskeletal risk factors and problems in this occupation.
To analyze body postures and workstation with ergonomic aspects.
To design workstation in which worker can do better work without
musculoskeletal problems.

1.3 ASSUMTION

1. The vendors answered the questionnaires as accurately possible as they can.


2

2. This study is limited for small area in NAGPUR.


3. As all of vendors working in Nagpur are male so gender factor is not considered.
4. The information regarding their work, work layout, comfort level given by them
is true and best of their experience.
1.4 SCOPE OF PROJECT
It was decided to carry out this project on the road side vendors and their carts.
The actual workstation was organized. But due to irregular fashion of keeping utensils
and containers were not in the range of vendors body parts. As a result of which vendors
offend stress the body during the work. In the traditional vendor cart workplace was not
made by considering the vendors comfort. Also after discussion it was found that many
vendors were suffering from back, shoulder and neck problems.
Here it is decided to study workstation, working postures of the vendors with help
of ergonomics aspects and ERGOFELLOW software tools. And suggest a proper method
and workstation design to reduce the physical problems.

LIMITATION:
As the vendors have less education, lack of knowledge about proper workstation.
It was quite difficult to convince the vendor to participate in the project work. It
eliminates the discussion with vendors about the problems faced by them and benefits
after workstation design.

PROBLEM ON HAND
2.1 INTRODUCTION
On an average, each vendor does work for 5 to 6 hours in a day. To get the actual idea
about the workstation 20 vendors has been visited space for work over the cart were
observed by measuring the working area, position of the vendor in the working area,
position of containers over the cart, availability of the raw materials for the preparation
for food, technique adopted for serving food. Following figure shows, vendors postures
and workstation arrangement during complete business through different working spaces.

2.2. PROBLEM DEFINATION


The Problem is defined after a precise observation regarding workstation, vendors
activities during a complete a business.
Following are some observation
2.2.1 Workstation observation
1. Working space is not hygienic considering vendors comfort.
2. Generally two and three containers carrying water, food storage box, stove,
serving containers, money collecting box is being observed in the workstation.
3. After serving the food generally it is being found that customers keep the serving
intense randomly on the either side of the cart.
4. There is no any proper method to keep the things in the desirable place to do work
with less effort.
5. Work is always done without considering the body fatigues, body parts range,
arrangement of workstation and comfort etc.
2.2.2 Observation done on vendors
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

Forward bending of trunk and neck is large


The Vendor does the work in a static position for long duration.
Rotation of trunk on both sides of the body is occurring may times during work.
Vendors do not have the knowledge about proper workstation.
Vendors dont consider about the items distances from the body range.
Vendors do not consider the effort level, body fatigue during working.
Vendors are always trying to adjust with given facilities, without considering that

much.
8. No one is conscious about the work layout, conditions, and proper facilities to do
work with less effort.

1.3 METHODOLOGICAL STEPS


1. Review of literature.
2. Design of questionnaire.
3. Survey to identify various musculoskeletal problems of vendors.
6

4.
5.
6.
7.

Analysis of working posture with help of ergonomic software.


Existing design.
Proposed ergonomic design.
Design details.

1.4 CONCLUSION
As per the problem which is being found through an observation from both workstation
& vendors activities. We are being trying to resolve this problem through ergonomics
aspect.

2.1 Introduction:
The considerable amount of research had been done by the ergonomic approach to solve
the problem of discomfort in various applications in industrial or non-industrial areas by
eliminating conventional method and introduced new standard method for doing the
work.

Shovel, spade and hoe are common implements used in different types of manual
material handling (MMH) task. Sen. et. al. observed that with the new ergonomically
designed prototype both the purposes of shovel and the hoe could be attained. [1] The
new design is well accepted by the workers.
Work Related Musculoskeletal Disorders (WMSDs) among office worker is considered
by Robertson et.al [2]. In their work the trained group mitigate the symptoms and change
behavior and enhance performance through training combined with a sit-stand work
station has implication s for preventing discomforts in office workers.
The introduction of sitstand worktables was examined by Wilks et.al [3]. It is examining
the four companys use of the worktables sit-stand function and influence to some
variable on this.
A distribution of manual materials handling task parameters is observed by Ciriello et.al
[4]. In their study, they determine the percentage distribution of each of the task
parameters, i.e., weight, height, distance and frequency. They had concluded that
continued effort should be extended toward redesign of MMH tasks and components of
tasks that violate good ergonomic principles.
Ferguson

et.al

[5]

studies

the

musculoskeletal

disorder

risk

associated

with current assembly processes were compared to using a cantilever chair intervention.
Spine loads and normalized shoulder muscle activity were evaluated during assembly in
eight regions of the vehicle. And it is been found that Spine loads were not significantly
different between the current and cantilever chair conditions. Thus, the effectiveness of
the cantilever chair was dependent on the region of the vehicle. Singh et.al has studies the
Musculoskeletal Disorder among Workers in small scale Forging Industry. [6]. the most
common ergonomics problems were found in industry like wrong working positions of
the workers and manual material handling. MSDs are found due to inappropriate and
poor working postures, lack of task variation, poor ergonomic design of work places, and
poor design of plant layout, long working hours, low salaries and awkward schedules are
all areas where relatively simple intervention can significantly reduce the rate of exposure
to MSDs.
8

Dul et al. studied on traditional sewing machine workstation professional operators


worked at ten different combined adjustments of table height, desk slope, and pedal
position [7] they had measured working posture and workers perceptions. Two
recommendations were formulated for minimizing the load on the musculoskeletal
system during operation.
David et al. reviewed the different range of methods that have been developed for the
assessment of exposure to risk factors for work-related musculoskeletal disorders. [8] .
The conclusive idea according to him shows the choice between the methods available
will depend upon the application concerned and the objectives of the study.
Mukhopadhyay et al. investigate three craft sectors in the Jaipur city of Rajasthan, India,
namely stone painting, bangle manufacturing and clay sculpture. [9] Postural analysis
techniques REBA, RULA, and OWAS indicated that the workers were subjected to
vulnerable postures that exposed them to injury and work related musculoskeletal
disorders. They had further found substantiated by high Strain Index scores of 9 and 6.8
in stone painting and clay sculpture sectors, indicating the need for immediate
ergonomics intervention.
Rajesh et.al they presented a case of ergonomic intervention in a manufacturing plant
towards reducing the physical strain for workers undertaking material handling in a work
system. [10] Digital human model in CATIA was used for biomechanical analysis and for
redesign of material handling work system where higher levels of physical exertions are
observed. The ergonomic solutions for the material handling work system are presented.
2.2 Various approaches to the product design
2.2.1 Product design
The term product design itself causes confusion to people in the same way the
generic term design does. When we talk about product design, it usually has an implied
relation with engineering design and industrial design According to Haik et.al.
[11]Product design means engineering design and in the other many cases, it is dealt as
9

the subject in industrial design [12]. In year 1995 Roozenburg et.al. had defined product
design as the process of devising and laying down the plans that are needed for the
manufacturing of a product. [13]
Thus engineering design and industrial design are viewed as the major elements
of product design that take effort in the practical design activity.

Figure 3.1- Two major parts in product design


Product engineering design deals with very wide spectrum, from small
mechanical components to large systems, called technical systems. Pahl et.al. In the
year 1997 had classified the word product design as constitutes plants, equipment,
machine tools, large-scale assembly and components according to their complexity [14].
Based on the comparison of engineering design and industrial design regarding product
design, we can make a conclusion that engineering design plays an important role in
realizing product-working functionality while industrial design is responsible for
human-using functionality of the product. In another words, engineering designers are
the people who concern internal design; actualizing functions, working out performance
and product architecture, and industrial designers are the people who are concerned with
external design or user facing design components, such as the user experience; aesthetics,
ergonomics and user interface. Thus, based on this review of the product types that both

10

disciplines cover, we argue that the products that both disciplines deal with during their
collaboration are those relevant to the study of product design.

Figure 3.2- Industrial design and Engineering design in Product design

2.2.2 Design Approach Design is said to be a human problem solving process. So every design process
has common elements. That is, it starts with a perception of a problem and ends with
some kind of related solution. The problem is transformed into a solution through the
design process. However depending on the discipline, the design processes used is
distinctive in specific way. One of the very simplest and general design process models is
explained in three iterative steps; analysis synthesis evaluation [15].

Figure 3.3- Design process model by Lawson

11

In year 2007 Hong et. al. illustrates this design process in eight steps. They are 1.
Design initiate, 2. Design research, 3. Design analysis, 4. Design concept, 5. Design
development, 6. Design finalization, 7. Design evaluation and 8. Design communication.
[16] In the year 2008 another, industrial design process which is been proposed by Ulrich
et. Alphas six phases; 1. Investigation of customer needs, 2.Conceptualization,
3.preliminary refinement, 4. Further refinement and final concept selection, 5. Control
drawings or models, and 6. Coordination with engineering, manufacturing, and external
vendors [17].
The engineering design process generally has similarity with the industrial design
process but detailed tasks are different. In their design process model, by Pal ET. al. in
1997 describe the engineering design process with four phases shown in Fig. were the
clarification of the task, conceptual design, embodiment design and detail design.

12

Figure 3.4- Engineering design process by Phal & Beitz


Another similar engineering design process model with the Phal & Beitzs model
in 1994 is made by Dym, 1994. He presents a design process consisting of four phases; a
task formulation phase, a functional phase, a form design phase, and forming results
(Fig.). [18]

Figure 3.5- Engineering design process by Dym


13

Most of the design processes from the engineering design discipline have a stance
that layout design is prior to form design although layout and form design are described
to be developed though an iterative and possibly reflective process.

2.3 Ergonomic approach to the product design:2.3.1 Posture Analysis:Body posture can be analyzed using Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA) method also
by REBA (Rapid Entire Body Assessment).RULA is a method developed for use in
ergonomics investigation of workplaces where work related upper limb disorders are
reported. RULA is a screening tool that assesses biomechanical and postural loading on
the whole body with particular attention to the neck, trunk and upper limbs. A RULA
assessment requires little time to complete and the scoring generates an action list, which
indicated the level of intervention required to reduce the risks of a broader ergonomic
study.
Drs. McAtamney and Corlett(1993) of the University of Nottinghams Institute of
Occupational Ergonomics developed the RULA [20]. Steps for posture assessment by
RULA,
1. Observing and selecting the posture(s) to assess: - A RULA assessment
represents a moment in the work cycle and it is important to observe the pressures
being adopted whilst undertaking the tasks prior to selecting the posture (s) for
assessment. Depending upon the type of study, selection may be

made of the

longest held posture or what appears to be the worst posture(s) adopted. In some
instances, for example when the work cycle is long or postures are varied it may
be more appropriate to take an assessment at regular intervals. It will be evident
that if assessments are taken at set intervals over the working period the
proportion of time spent in the various postures can be evaluated.
14

2. Scoring and Recording the posture: - Decide whether the left, right or both
upper arms are to be assessed. Score the posture of each body part using the
software. Review the scoring and make any adjustment if required. Select
calculation button.
3. Action Level: - The grand score can be compared to the Action Level list
however it must be remembered that since the human body is a complex and
adaptive system, they provide a guide for further action.
RULA sheet format given Appendix 1.

2.3.2 Indian anthropometric dimensions (for ergonomics design practice)


This is the book written by Debkumar Chakrabarti of National Institute of Design. It
gives the detailed information about the anthropometry of Indian population, their design
application, measurement of all body parts in various postures. It can be used in any
ergonomics workstation design.
2.4 Various ergonomics consideration
Study of Ergonomics
The word ERGONOMICS comes from two Greek wordsERGO- Word
NOMOUS-Law
The names developed in 1949 by Murrell during World War II after working with a team
of physiologists, anatomist and engineers at Cambridge University. At the end of the War
Ergonomic Research Society is formed by this group, which is now the forerunner of
similar organizations in many countries todays

15

Ergonomics means The Natural Laws for doing work, also known as Human
Engineering implies to fit the jobs and worker together. Ergonomics is the study of
designing equipment and devices that fit the human body, its movements, and its related
abilities.
A more detailed definition describes ergonomics asAccording to International Labor Organization (ILO) -It is the application of human
biological sciences in conjunction with engineering sciences to the worker and his
working environment, so to obtain maximum satisfaction for the worker which at the
same time enhances productivity.
The International Ergonomics Association (IEA) -Ergonomics (for human factors) is the
scientific discipline concerned with the understanding of interactions among humans and
other elements of a system, and the profession that applies theory, principles, data and
methods to design in order to optimize human well-being and overall system
performance. [18]
According to the International Ergonomics Association there are three disciplines of
ergonomics

Physical ergonomics: is concerned with anatomy and some of the anthropometric,


Physiological and bio mechanical characteristics as they related to physical

activity.
Cognitive ergonomics: is concerned with mental processes, such as perception,

memory, reasoning, and motor response.


Organizational ergonomics: is concerned with the optimization of social, technical
systems, including their organizational structures, policies, and processes. [15]

2.4.1. IMPORTANCES OF ERGONOMICS AT WORKPLACES


a)
b)
c)
d)
e)

To make the work comfortable for the individual workers.


To reduce the risk factors that leads to discomfort.
To reduce the primary risk factors for MSDs
To do work more efficiently.
To increase comfort of worker at workplace.
16

f)
g)
h)
i)
j)

To get greater job satisfaction.


To increase productivity.
To make healthy and pain free worker
To reduce accidents assure safety.
To reduce absenteeism

2.4.2 ERGONOMICS RISK FACTORS


Ergonomic risk factors are workplace elements that are associated with discomfort, you
may experience, and if ignored, over time many contribute to wear and tear on your body.
Following table 2.1shows a risk factors and related possible solution. [20]

RISK

DEFINITION

POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS

FACTORS
Poor work Aspects of how a job is organized.
organization

Reasonable

Examples include monotonous task, machine breaks,

task

workload,

sufficient

variety,

individual

paced work, inadequate breaks, multiple autonomy.


Continual

deadlines.
Performing the same motion over and over.

Repetition

Redesign the task to reduce the


number of repetitions or motions;
increase recovery time, rotate to

Excessive

different tasks.
Forceful body movement. Excessive physical Reduce the exertion

Force

effort, pulling, pounding, and pushing.

needed

to

accomplish the task; redesign task;


assign more staff; use mechanical

Awkward

Prolonged

bending,

posture

squatting, kneeling.

reaching,

assists.
twisting, Design task and equipment to keep
the body in neutral positions.

17

Awkward posture is the opposite of natural Neutral positions put no undue stress
Stationary

position.
on muscles, joints and nerves.
Staying in one position too long, causing Design tasks to avoid stationary

Positions

muscles to contract and fatigue.

Excessive

change positions.
Contact of the body with a hard surface or Avoid resting body on hard surfaces,

Direct

edge, such as the corner of a table or too little such as desks and counters. Upgrade

Positions

illumination

position; provide opportunities to

equipment or provide cushioning:


e.g.

ergonomic

pens,

mats

for

Inadequate

standing.
Sources and levels of light that provide too Adjust natural and artificial lighting.

lighting

much of too little illumination.

Avoid direct and indirect light that


can cause eye-strain. Use glare
screens, shades for windows.

Table 3.1 Ergonomic risk factors and related possible solution


2.4.2 MUSCULOSKELETAL DISORDER (MSDs)
Injuries and disorders of the soft tissues (muscles, tendons, ligaments, joints and
cartilage) and nervous system are called as musculoskeletal disorders. They can affect
nearly all tissues, nerves and tendons sheaths; most frequently involve the arms and back.
Occupational safety and health professionals have called these disorders as cumulative
trauma, repeated trauma, repetitive stress injuries, and occupational overexertion
syndrome.
MSDs usually result from exposure to multiple risk factors that can cause
disorder not from a single event or trauma such as a fail, collision, or entanglement.
These painful and disabling injuries generally developed gradually over week, months,
and years. MSDs can cause pain, numbness, tingling, staff joints, movement difficulty,
muscle loss, and sometimes paralysis. These disorder include-carpel tunnel syndrome,
tendinitis, sciatica, herniated discs, and low back pain. Parts of the Body Affected by
MSDs are Arms, Back, Hands, Wrists, Fingers, Legs, Neck, and Shoulders.

18

When the physical capabilities of worker do not match with the physical
requirement of the job that times WMSDs occurs.[13]
2.4.2.1 MSD RISK FACTORS

Force
Repetition
Awkward posture
Static posture
Quick motion
Compression or contact stress
Vibration
Cold temperature

2.4.2.2 MUSCULOSKELETAL DISORDERS IN BODY PARTS:Following table 2.2 shows the possible cause of diseases and their symptoms to various
body parts during work. [13]
Body parts affected
Fingers

Symptoms
Difficulty

Possible cause
Disease name
moving Repetitive and forceful Trigger finger

finger, snapping and manual task without


Shoulder
Wrist

jerking movements
Pain, stiffness

time to recover
Working with

Pain, swelling

hands above the head


Repetitive and forceful Carpel
hand

Hand

and

motions
Arms

Pain, swelling

the Rotator cuff tendinitis


tunnel

wrist syndrome

outstretched Tenosynovitis

sideways, forward or
Back

Legs

Low

upward
pain, Trunk curved forward Back disability

back

shooting

pain

numbness

in

upper legs
Feet
,leg

or while standing/sitting
the
pain, Standing in one place Standing

varicose veins

too
19

long,

kneeling knee pain

disability,

Neck

continuously
Head inclined

Neck pain

much

forward

too Cervical spondylitis


or

backward
Table 3.2: Musculoskeletal disorders in body parts

2.4.3 RANGE OF MOTION


Generally Range of motion refers to the distance and direction a joint can move to
its full protection. Each specific joint has a normal range of motion that is expressed in
degrees after being measured with a Goniometer (i.e. an instrument that measures angles
from axis of the joint). It is very much useful in workstation design for a worker, assess
the worst posture which is not suitable for the work and can cause the MSDs problem,
also useful to eliminate the muscle fatigue, joint pain during working. Study or analysis
of workstation and worker with the help of ergonomics assessment tools such as IMAGE
ANALYSIS, VIDEO ANALYSIS, RULA(Rapid upper Limb Assessment), REBA (Rapid
Entire Body Assessment), SUZZANE RODGERS, MOORE E GARG (The strain index),
and DISCOMFORT QUESTIONNAIRE is very much easy with the help of this
information. Range of motion can be divided into-[12]
a) Neutral range: The range of motion which presents minimal discomfort to the
joint and adjacent body segments.
b) Effort range: The range of-motion that can be achieved with mild discomfort to
the joint and adjacent body segments.
c) Maximum range: The maximum limits of a joints range-of-motion
According to the above three ranges of motion, the range limits of different posture of the
trunk and upper body is shown in table and Directional signs of body segment rotation in
table, related image are shown by figure 3.6

20

FIGURE

POSTURE

NEUTRAL

EFFORT

MAXIMUM

NO.

RANGE

RANGE

RANGE

(in degree xo)

a.
b.

Viewing angles(vertical)
Viewing

( in degree x0)
-45 to 15
-15 to 15

(in degree xo)


-70 to 48
-30 to 30

c.

angle(horizontal)
Neck /head vertical -45 to 45

d.

angle
Neck

e.
f.
g.

angle
Neck /head lateral angle -20 to 20
Trunk flexion-extension -30 to 30
Trunk
twist/rotation -20to 20

-35 to 35
-70 to 30
-42 to 42

h.
I.
j.
k.
l.
m.

angle
Trunk lateral bending
Wrist extension-flexion
Wrist deviation angle
Elbow included angle
Forearm rotation angle
Shoulder
extension-

-40 to 40
-85 to 85
-45 to 40
35 to 180
-180 to 90
-61 to 188

n.
o.

flexion
Shoulder add, -abduction -45 to 20
Human rotation angle
-20 to 45

/head

rotation -20 to 20

-20 to 20
-15 to 15
-15 to 5
70 to 135
-90 to -30
-27 to -45

21

-75 to 75
-45 to 45

-45 to 45
-40 to 25
50 to -160
-120 to 30
-45 to 90
-90 to 45

-80 to 80

-134 to 48
-34 to 97

Table 3.3: The range limits of different postures of the trunk and upper body

DIRECTIONAL SIGNS OF BODY SEGMENT ROTARION


FIGUR

POSTURE

POSITIVE SIGN(+)

NEGATIVE (-)

E NO.
a.
b.

Viewing angles(vertical)
Viewing

Upward rotation
Left rotation

Downward rotation
Right rotation

c.
d.

angle(horizontal)
Neck /head vertical angle Extension
Neck /head rotation Left rotation

Flexion
Right rotation

e.
f.
g.

angle
Neck /head lateral angle
Right bending
Trunk flexion-extension
Extension
Trunk
twist/rotation Left rotation

Left bending
Flexion
Right rotation

h.
I.
j.
k.
l.
m.

angle
Trunk lateral bending
Wrist extension-flexion
Wrist deviation angle
Elbow included angle
Forearm rotation angle
Shoulder
extension-

Left bending
Extension
Ulnar deviation
Pronation
Extension

Right bending
Flexion
Radial deviation
Always positive
Supination
Flexion

flexion
n.
Shoulder add, -abduction Adduction
o.
Human rotation angle
Medial rotation
Table 3.4 directional signs of body segment rotation

22

Abduction
Lateral rotation

23

Figure 36. The range limits of different postures of the trunk and upper body

4. PRIMARY ERGONOMIC SURVEY


4.1. INTRODUCTION
To get the information about the existence of problems related to vendor and working
area, one questionnaire is made (Hindi and English) containing the questions related to,
whole information of vendors (age, weight, height, working years) MSDs problems,
working conditions, working environment, compatibility, working hours, the problem
faced during working. (The Questionnaire is shown in appendix 1)
4.2. ANALYSIS OF OCCUPATIONAL DISORERS WITH QUESTIONNAIRE
A survey is done on 20 vendors by asking those questions (with the help of Hindi sheet)
to them and data are analyzed.
Information of vendor is given the Table 4.1 and Results are shown graphically in fig. 4.1
Total number of vendors 20
Age
Working hours

- 21 to 46 years
- 5 to 6 hours
24

Sl
Name
Age
Weight
Height
no
1
Sandip Jogdane
26
60
5.5
2
Netish Desai
35
65
5.7
3
Ekbal Khan
40
68
5.3
4
Samir Mujmule
28
70
5.7
5
Rum Wnkhade
46
68
5.6
6
Nilesh More
30
60
5.2
7
Imran
43
67
5.5
8
Amon Sakat
32
69
5.1
9
Sagar Jogdande
28
70
6
10
Pandit
26
68
5.7
11
Suraj Solanki
32
66
5.4
12
Pappu
27
63
5.6
13
Chotu
23
58
5.4
14
Anil kumar
42
69
5.7
15
Ashok Desai
32
61
5.5
16
Sumit Amle
40
70
5.1
17
Vikash Pande
29
60
5.3
18
Nikil Bisandre
30
65
5.7
19
Soyal Khan
32
63
5.2
20
Mridul akat
28
70
5.6
Table 4.1: Information for vendors participated in the survey

Years
of
experience
3
12
20
4
20
6
15
7
3
2
6
2
2
17
8
15
5
8
4

Working hours
5
6
6
6
5
5
5
6
5
5
5
5
6
5
5
5
5
6
5
5

Those all surveyed sheet is analyzed and it is seen that many vendors was facing the
MSDs problem in various body parts. The percentage of vendors suffering from MSDs
in different parts of the body are as back 70%, Neck 75%, Shoulder 55%, Wrist 40%,
Leg 45%, Knee 50%, Arm 40%, Elbow 35%. The result is shown graphically in Figure
4.1.

25

80
70
60
50
YES(%)

40

NO(%)
30
20
10
0
Leg

Knee

Back

Arm

Shoulder

Elbow

Wrist

Neck

Figure 4.1.: Graph of % of vendors suffering from MSDs problem in different body
parts.

4.3 ANALYSIS OF WORKING POSTURE


Image analysis tool of ERGOFELLOW SOFTWARE and standard ROM (Range of
Motion) (Table 2.2) containing the value of angle of different body parts movement are
used to analyze posture. Photography and video are taken during working. Photo and
freeze frame from video records are subjected to analyze. Posture angle is determined to
help of photos. Measurement of the angle between the angle between the body parts, the
length of working time for specific repetitive harmful postures and effort on the vendors
is taken into account. Those angles of body parts movements are comparable with the
table 2.1 and table 2.2 to get information about MSDs problems. Following figure shows
the vendor posture analysis with the help of image analysis tools by drawing the different
analysis on the image during the work.

26

Vendor- 1 selected for analysis was Sandi Jogdan , Age-26, Weight-60 and Height-5.5
feet

Fig 4.2 a: posture during work


with posture angle

Fig. 4.2 b: diagram

Vendor 2 selected for analysis was Pappu, Age-27, Weight-63 and Height-5.6 feet

27

Fig 4.3 a: posture during work


with posture angle

Fig 4.3 b: diagram

From above observation, it is seen that the posture is not suitable for working as the neck
and trunk forward bending angle is not in a neutral angle (see table 2.2). Lower arm and
upper arm too much angle to the body, also long duration static position is seen during
working which is very much harmful for the body. Flexion, forward bending, in the hipjoint and back can cause lordships in the lumbar region.
4.4 RULA (Rapid Upper Limb Assessment) ANALYSIS:
28

Vendor -1
Angle
Neck Angle

Degree
25o

Trunk Angle

450

Upper arm

300

Lower arm

45o

Wrist

160

Leg

Balance

Lower arm- across the midline of the body, Wrist-wrist is bent away from the midline,
Wrist twist- twisted away from handshake position, neck- twist, trunk-twist, leg and feet
are well supported and in an evenly balanced posture
RESULT

From this it is seen that the score of RULA assessment is 7 i.e. high risk of MSDs
problem. Hence there is need to investigate the working posture and action must take as
early as possible to avoid further discrepancies.
29

4.5 CONCLUTION
From the above analysis, it was confirmed that the working place is not suitable for
working and vendors. Vendors are going through the MSDs problem and there is need to
study, analyze that working area, to get a proper method or technique or remedy all those
problems.

30

REFERENCES
11.Haik, Y., Engineering Design Process, Thomson Learning Pacific Grove CA.
USA, 2003
12.Lorenz, C., The Design Dimension, Basil Blackwell Ltd. New York, 1986.
13.Roozenburg, N. F. M. & Eekels, J., Product Design: Fundamentals and Methods,
John Wiley & Sons Ltd.Chichester, UK, 1995.
14.

Phal,

G.

&

Beitz,

W.,

Engineering

Design-a

systematic

approach,DongMyungSa,(translated), Seoul, 1997.


15.Lawson, B (1997) How designers think: the design process demystified (3rd edn)
Architectural Press, Oxford, Boston
16.Park, H., Son, J.-S. & Lee, K.-H., Design evaluation of digital consumer products
using virtual reality-based functional behavior simulation, Journal of Engineering
Design, Vol.19, No.4., 2008, pp 359-375
17.Ulrich, K. T. & Eppinger, S. D., Product Design and Development, McGrawHill Singapore, 2008.
18.Dym CL - 1994 Engineering design: a synthesis of views.
19.Ullman, D. G., The Mechanical DesignProcess, McGraw-Hill Singapore, 2004.
20. Mc Atamney, L.and Corlett, E.N. RULA-: A survey method for investigation of
work-related upper limb disorders. Journal of APPLIED ERGONOMICS 1993,VOL.
24, NO.2, 91-99

31