International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 72 (2019) 188–198

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ergon

Occupational ergonomics research and applied contextual design T

implementation for an industrial shop-floor workstation
J. Sanjoga,b, Thaneswer Patelc, Sougata Karmakarb,∗
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Vaugh Institute of Agricultural Engineering and Technology, Sam Higginbottom University of Agriculture, Technology and Sciences
(SHUATS), Prayagraj (Allahabad), Uttar Pradesh, 211007, India
b
Department of Design, Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Guwahati, Assam, 781039, India
c
Department of Agricultural Engineering, North Eastern Regional Institute of Science and Technology (NERIST), Nirjuli, Arunachal Pradesh, 791109, India

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The aim of this original research article is to identify the occurrence of work-related ergonomics risk factors, in
Human modelling order to implement context specific human centered design interventions in the injection molding shop-floor
Manufacturing workstations of plastic furniture manufacturing factories within the framework of industrially developing
Posture countries. Questionnaire study, postural assessment tools, computer aided design, digital human modeling and
Psychosocial work environment
simulation, and basic work study techniques were used. Plastic processing industry is highly fragmented, con-
Work study
Workload
sisting of small, medium scale enterprises with tremendous growth potential. Occupational design ergonomics
research in the injection molding plastic furniture manufacturing shop-floor workstations is very scarce in in-
dustrially developing countries. Shop-floor workers are affected by prevalent awkward working postures and
consequent body part discomforts. Useful and easily implementable accessories/fixtures with convenient design
features were conceptualized. Virtual ergonomics evaluation of the workstation with proposed accessories/
fixtures showed significant reduction of awkward working postures. Physical prototypes of the proposed fixtures
were constructed and real human trials were performed in the factories. Time study indicated reduction in
operator cycle time when compared with time taken before design modifications. Research methodology, results
and design solutions described from an ergonomics perspective would definitely serve as a helpful guide for
existing as well as upcoming factories in the injection molded plastic furniture manufacturing industry of in-
dustrially developing countries and further similar research endeavors.

1. Introduction
Small and medium enterprises offer significant employment op-
portunities in industrially developing countries like India. Plastic pro-
cessing industry in India is highly fragmented, consisting of small,
medium scale enterprises and has been predicted with tremendous
growth potential driven by the establishment of petro chemical plants
with generation of huge employment opportunities (Central Institute of
Plastic Engineering and Technology, 2010). Molded plastic furniture
manufacturing industry primarily employs injection molding process.
Injection molding process is capable of making articles at high pro-
duction rates and low labor cost per unit (Central Institute of Plastic
Engineering and Technology, 2007). Huge number of injection molding
machines is expected to be installed in India (Central Institute of Plastic
Engineering and Technology, 2010). However, practical occupational
design ergonomics research in shop-floor of Indian plastic processing
industry is very scarce (Sanjog et al., 2016). The same can be said of
industrially developing countries also. Occupational work occupies an
important part of our daily activities and it is the responsibility of
employees, managers and supervisors to create and maintain a safe
workplace (Dodge, 2012).
Identification of workplace risk factors like occurrence of muscu-
loskeletal disorders are one of the initial steps to be performed in re-
cognizing problematic jobs (Pao and Kleiner, 2001). Psychosocial fac-
tors/needs are also very important for employees/workplace wellbeing
(Dickson-Swift et al., 2014; Bone, 2015; Lima and Coelho, 2018).
Subjective measures of operator workload are used in human-machine
system evaluations due to ease of application and non-intrusiveness
(Rubio et al., 2004). Work study (term used for method study and work
measurement) is beneficial for the assessment of human work in all its
contexts, involving systematic investigation of all factors which affect
efficiency, economy of the work being investigated for making suitable

∗
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: karmakar.sougata@iitg.ac.in (S. Karmakar).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2019.05.009
Received 1 February 2018; Received in revised form 25 October 2018; Accepted 16 May 2019
Available online 26 May 2019
0169-8141/ © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
J. Sanjog, et al.
improvements (Bureau of Indian Standards, 2002). Further, the practice
of using Digital Human Modeling (DHM) software, the state of art
technology for human centered design applications (Karmakar et al.,
2012) is also found to be very limited in India in spite of numerous
advantages (Karmakar et al., 2014). DHM has been found to be useful,
reliable in postural assessment and for virtual workstation invesgtiga-
tions (Binoosh et al., 2017). It is interesting to observe that, worldwide,
the application of DHM is found to be the largest in vehicle design
(Reed and University of Michigan, 2017).
The tremendous growth potential of plastic processing activities
using the injection molding machines demands an urgent comprehen-
sive work-related design ergonomics research in various shop-floor
workstations of the injection molded plastic processing industry for
proposing context specific human centered design solutions for the
benefit of all stakeholders. The aim of this research article is to sys-
tematically evaluate the existing injection molding shop-floor work-
stations in plastic furniture manufacturing factories from an occupa-
tional design ergonomics perspective for conceptualizing and
implementing human centered design interventions for humanizing
work activities. Carefully selected appropriate research methods were
utilized, featuring questionnaire study (for investigating the prevalence
of symptoms of musculoskeletal ailments, psychosocial work environ-
ment, and workload), postural assessment tools, statistical analysis,
DHM, and basic work study techniques.
2. Methodology
2.1. Selection of injection molding workstation
A survey was conducted to observe work activities in shop-floor
workstations of four injection molded plastic furniture manufacturing
factories in Assam, a northeastern state of India. Injection molding
workstation (found in all factories surveyed) was selected from a par-
ticular factory to perform ergonomics research.
2.2. Selection of workers towards questionnaire study
Male workers were employed in the injection molding workstations
of all the factories surveyed. Standardized Nordic Questionnaire
(Kuorinka et al., 1987), the commonly used tool for investigating the
existence of musculoskeletal disorders in any occupation (Khan and
Singh, 2018) was used to investigate the occurrence of musculoskeletal
troubles. The procedure involved showing a body map to workers/vo-
lunteers and elucidating responses to various queries.
Healthy (not having any medical report of suffering from chronic
diseases) adult male workers of similar age, height (stature) and weight;
and having more than one-year experience were selected as partici-
pants/responders in agreement with pre-set inclusion criteria. Forty-six
operators (46) from injection molding workstations volunteered as
participants/responders. Injection molding workstation operators were
considered as the experimental group. Fifteen (15) individuals with
similar demographic characteristics but involved in different activities
(administrative/supervisory occupations, having more than one-year
continuous work experience) were selected to constitute the control
group for comparison of troubles (ache/pain/discomfort) in body parts
with the experimental group. None of the respondents included in the
survey suffered from discomfort/pain/ache in body parts as a result of
accidents/injury in the past. Information regarding age, experience was
gathered from an interview followed by direct measurement of stature
and weight.
2.3. Recording and categorizing of work activities in injection molding
workstation
Contextual knowledge is essential for virtual ergonomics in-
vestigations by means of DHM (Dukic et al., 2002). Hence, work
189
International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 72 (2019) 188–198
Fig. 1. Selected working postures in the injection molding workstation.
activities in injection molding workstation were photographed for in-
vestigations. Recording of work activities by means of videography was
not permitted by factory managements. Major work activities (re-
presented by selected working postures of an individual worker) in the
injection molding workstation are as shown in Fig. 1.
2.4. Working posture assessment
Ovako Working Posture Assessment System (OWAS) (Karhu et al.,
1977; Mattila and Vikki, 1998) and Rapid Entire Body Assessment
(REBA) (Hignett and McAtamney, 2000) were utilized for evaluating
the selected working postures. Since continuous video recording was
not permitted by the factory management, evaluation of relative pro-
portion of postures in terms of time (Matitila and Vilkki, 1998) in
OWAS was not possible. Therefore, the classification in OWAS metho-
dology to identify poor posture, determination of action categories for
harmful effect on musculoskeletal system was performed. OWAS tech-
nique was employed first to understand overall scenario of awkward
posture among workers during various activities. As there were some
limitations (absence of neck and elbows/wrist assessments, no separa-
tion of right and left upper extremities) in OWAS technique (Ovako
Working Posture Assessment System, 2009; Battini et al., 2011), pos-
tural assessment using the commonly used REBA technique (Schwartz
et al., 2019) was used subsequently for drawing clear inferences. OWAS
action categories (adopted from, Mattila and Vikki, 1998) for preven-
tion of musculoskeletal disorders and REBA methodology (adopted
from, Hignett and McAtamney, 2000) for determination of risk level,
action to be taken were utilized as guidelines (Table 1) for evaluating
the working postures.
2.5. Creation of digital human models and rendering of comfort angles
Non-availability of Indian anthropometric data base of factory
workers employed in plastic processing industry was observed during
the review of literature. Therefore, civilian anthropometric database
(Chakrabarti, 1997) of adult Indian male population was utilized to
build digital human models for assessments. Smallest, average and
largest dimensional adult Indian male population were represented by
5th p, 50th p and 95th p virtual male human models respectively. All
body dimensions of a particular individual may not fall under the same
percentile category, but, such an ideal condition may be considered for
generating human models for research purposes to solve associated
constraints (Karmakar et al., 2011). Comfort angles were imparted on
digital manikins. Comfort angles for different body segments were
J. Sanjog, et al. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 72 (2019) 188–198

Table 1
OWAS and REBA action categories.
OWAS Action Categories REBA Action Categories

Action category Explanation Score Risk level and action to be taken

(score)

1 Normal and natural postures with no harmful effect on the musculoskeletal system - no action 1 negligible risk, no action necessary
required
2 Postures with some harmful effect on the musculoskeletal system - Corrective actions required in 2 or 3 low risk, change may be needed
near future
3 Postures have harmful effect on the musculoskeletal system - Corrective actions should be done as 4 to 7 medium risk, further investigation,
soon as possible change soon
4 The load caused by these postures has a harmful effect in the musculoskeletal system - corrective 8 to 10 high risk, investigate and implement
actions for improvement required immediately change
11 + very high risk, implement change

adopted and suitably adjusted from published literature (Rebiffé, 1966;

MacLeod, 1999; Henry Dreyfuss Associates, 2002). Uncomfortable
range of movement was given ‘red’ color while ‘green’ color was used to
signify the comfortable range with respect to body segments.

2.6. Creation of virtual model of injection molding workstation

Mechanical design feature of DELMIA DHM software was used to

generate virtual model of injection molding workstation. Actual di-
mensions of injection molding machine and work accessories were
measured at the factory site.

2.7. Interfacing digital manikins with virtual injection molding workstation

DHM helps to improve physical attributes in the manufacturing

work cell by enabling designer/engineer to generate a digital human
(with specific population attributes) which may be inserted into three-
dimensional graphic renderings of work environments (Chaffin, 2007).
Proper interfacings of digital manikins with virtual injection molding
workstation model, featuring selected working postures (Fig. 1) was
done using ergonomics design and analysis feature of DELMIA software.
Computer generated model of injection molding workstation and digital
human model were interfaced on a 1:1 scale. Interfacing on 1:1 scale
helped to impart accurate investigations as workstation dimensions
were in exact proportion to virtual human body dimensions. Existing
workstation and work activities were evaluated using digital human
models representing 5th p, 50th p and 95th p Indian adult males for
identifying postural comfort. Visual representation of the virtual eva-
luation is shown in Fig. 2 (example of 50th p male digital human
model).
2.8. Spinal load analysis
Mechanical load on lumbar spine is considered to be a contributing
factor to many disorders of the back (Chaffin and Andersson, 1991).
‘Biomechanics single angle action analysis’ feature in DELMIA software,
giving details about compression and joint shear values were utilized to
evaluate spinal load of L4-L5 segments in lumbar region of digital
human models for the selected working postures.
2.9. Selection of questionnaire for investigating the psychosocial work
environment
The Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire (COPSOQ) was de-
veloped considering prominent theories and concepts (Nuebling et al.,
2013) and is also a validated questionnaire (Copenhagen Psychosocial
Questionnaire II, 2007). Therefore, COPSOQ II (medium version) was
selected for investigations. Appropriate guidelines (Copenhagen
Psychosocial Questionnaire II, 2007; Kristensen, 2001) were followed
in calculating the scores for each individual scales. The psychosocial
Fig. 2. Virtual representation of working postures a - h, 50th p male.
work environment among the workers in the injection molding work-
station workers was investigated. The findings were also compared with
a control group (administrative/supervisory employees) for arriving at
suitable conclusions.
2.10. Selection of questionnaire for subjective workload assessment
National Aeronautics and Space Administration-Task Load Index
(NASA-TLX) (Hart and Staveland, 1988) provides an overall workload
score based on a weighted average of rating on six subscales (Jung and
Jung, 2001). Therefore, NASA-TLX questionnaire was selected to in-
vestigate the subjective workload of the workers in the injection
molding workstations and the control group. The following formula was
used to calculate the mean weighted ratings (for each scale title) in the
experimental and control group.
2.11. Design of initial concept injection molding workstation accessories
and interfacing with digital human models
Several people were found to be working in different work shifts in
injection molding workstations. Geometric design of equipment, work
places and product should be based on anthropometry of user popula-
tion in order to ensure man machine compatibility and avoiding awk-
ward working postures (Bureau of Indian Standards, 1991; MacLeod,
1999). The common procedure is to design for a range of population
from 5th percentile (small operator) to the 95th percentile (large op-
erator) (Helander, 1995). Extreme group in the population encom-
passing smallest and largest body dimensions are represented by 5th

190
J. Sanjog, et al. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 72 (2019) 188–198

percentile female and 95th percentile male respectively. However, it is Table 2

fitting to design for the predominant gender if the workforce is domi- Comparison of demographic characteristics of experimental and control group.
nated by a particular gender (Helander, 1995). Workers in shop-floor of Variables Units Experimental group Control group Comparisons
injection molded plastic furniture manufacturing were male. Hence, (Mann Whitney U
workstation and work methods were assessed and modified/designed test)
suitably for male gender. Initial concept models were interfaced with
Injection Molding Other Employees IMW Vs. CG
5th p, 50th p, and 95th p digital human models representing adult Indian Workstation (IMW) (CG) (n = 15)
male anthropometry. Practical low-cost improvements, validated with (n = 46)
application of basic ergonomics principles in workstation design should
be attempted in the context of small workplaces in industrially devel- Mean SD Mean SD
oping countries (Kogi, 2012). Hence, workstation accessories which can Age years 25.1 3.3 25.4 2.5 NS
be easily built and low in cost were conceptualized for ergonomics Weight kg 57.9 7.1 58.7 5.3 NS
assessments. Stature cm 165.5 6.3 162.7 7.4 NS
Experience years 2.3 1.3 1.8 0.7 NS
2.12. Method study
‘NS’- No significant difference (p > 0.05); IMW – Injection Molding
Workstation; CG – Control Group.
Method study aims to eliminate unwanted motions, minimize fa-
tigue and enable better synchronization of efforts (Bureau of Indian
elements.
Standards, 2002). Operation chart (left and right hand) is a simple and
Injection molding machine cycle time for a product (armless chair;
effective aid for scrutinizing work activities if the work activities can be
Fig. 1) was observed from three different factories. Observed operator
visualized in terms of elemental hands motions (Barnes, 1980). Two
work cycle times (time taken for processing individual finished pro-
symbols are used for constructing operation charts, namely, small circle
ducts) was timed for two individual workers per factory engaged in
for indicating transportation (moving hand to grasp an object) and a
processing a similar product (armless chair). Sixty injection molding
larger circle to signify actions like grasping, positioning, using, or re-
machine cycle times and observed operator work cycle times were
leasing an object/article (Barnes, 1980). Method study using left and
considered. Statistical analysis for comparison of injection molding
right hand operation chart was used to record and analyze work ac-
machine cycle times (between factories), observed operator work cycle
tivities before and after work station, work method design modifica-
time (before and after design modifications) between workers (within
tions.
factory and between factories) was performed using SPSS software.

2.13. Work measurement

3. Results
Time study technique can be employed as a tool for facilitating
method improvement (Mundel and Danner, 1994; Bureau of Indian 3.1. Demographic, body parts discomfort in experimental and control group
Standards, 1995). Occurrence of work related musculoskeletal dis-
orders are influenced by work pace and other factors like design of Statistical analysis using SPSS software was performed to compare
workstations (Carayon et al., 1999). Observed operator cycle times the experimental group with control group with respect to workers’
before and after suitable ergonomic investigations and design inter- characteristics (age, weight, stature, experience) as shown below in
ventions can serve as indicators for reduction in work pace without Table 2.
compromising on productivity. Incidence of symptoms of musculoskeletal ailments (during last 12
A qualified worker (one who has acquired the skill, knowledge and months) in different body parts is shown below in Table 3.
other attributes to carry out the work in hand to satisfactory standards
of quality and safety) should be timed while performing the job 3.2. Visualization of body segments in uncomfortable range of motion
(Kanawaty, 1992). If more than one worker is doing same operation,
time study analyst should time one or more operators, whereas if all the Proper interfacings of digital manikins with CAD model of injection
workers are found adopting same method for a specific job and a dif- molding workstation and colour coding helped in visualizing body
ference in task completion time is observed then operator performing segments occupying uncomfortable positions (within their range of
the job closely to normal pace should be timed (Barnes, 1980). For
simplicity in calculations, most companies adopt a conventional Table 3
method for determining number of cycles to be timed depending on Number of participants (% of total number) suffering from symptoms of mus-
total number of minutes per cycle (Bureau of Indian Standards, 1995; culoskeletal ailments in different body parts during the last 12 months.
Kanawaty, 1992). Body parts Experimental group Control group
The conventional method for determining number of cycles to be
timed using stopwatch (for timing individual operator work cycle time) Injection molding Administration and supervisory
adopting direct time study (intensive sampling) procedure was fol- Workstation (n = 46) employees (n = 15)
lowed. Three factories were included in time study investigations for
Shoulder (right) 5 (10.9%) 0
ease of comparisons. Two operators from each factory who were ex- Shoulder (both) 26 (56.5%) 0
perienced having necessary skill and knowledge were selected and Elbow (right) 3 (6.5%) 0
cycle time was noted. The present research work is primarily focused on Elbow (Both) 6 (13.0%) 0
Wrist (right) 24 (52.2%) 0
ergonomics design interventions for minimizing awkward working
Wrist (both) 15 (32.6%) 0
posture. Setting of standard times for particular work activity is not the Fingers (right) 2 (4.3%) 0
objective of present study. Hence, individual work element (reaching Upper back 2 (4.3%) 1 (6.7%)
for finished product, de-flashing finished product, reaching for product Low back 38 (82.6%) 2 (13.3%)
label etc.) were combined and the entire operation of retrieval of an Knees (one/ 16 (34.8%) 1 (6.7%)
both)
individual finished product and subsequent activities were taken as a
Ankle (both) 3 (6.5%) 0
single work task for recording time. In other words, time was observed Neck 0 2 (13.3%)
for completing a particular work cycle instead for individual work

191
J. Sanjog, et al. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 72 (2019) 188–198

Table 4 Table 5
OWAS, REBA and spinal load analysis of selected postures (a to h). Status of psychosocial work environment among the injection molding work-
station workers and comparison with control group.
Posture OWAS REBA REBA Digital Human Model
Right Left L4 - L5 Spine Limits Range Dimensions Granulator Control Comparisons
Body Body Workstation Group (CG, (Mann-Whitney U
Side Side (GW, n = 10) n = 15) test) BW Vs. CG
(Mean) (Mean)
Action Score Score Percentile Compression Joint
Category (Newton) Shear Quantitative Demands 34.2 33.0 NS
(Newton) Tempo, Work Pace 85.3 45.0 *
Emotional Demands 42.1 44.6 NS
a 3 6 8 5th p 357–1441 24–91 Influence At Work 45.9 56.7 *
b 1 5 2 50th p 859–3780 12–153 Possibilities For 69.0 78.7 *
c 2 10 10 95th p 576 - 3068 17–152 Development (Skill
d 1 2 5 Discretion)
e 1 7 2 Meaning Of Work 72.3 84.4 *
f 1 4 2 Commitment To The 57.9 73.3 *
g 1 8 8 Workplace
h 1 6 1 Predictability 69.3 77.5 NS
Rewards 59.6 77.5 *
Role Clarity 85.7 80.0 NS
movement) while performing various work activities (Fig. 2). Role Conflicts 25.1 49.2 *
Quality Of Leadership 58.3 75.0 *
Social Support From 57.9 70.0 *
3.3. OWAS, REBA scores and spinal load of selected postures Colleagues
Social Support From 62.9 75.6 *
Supervisors
Observational techniques are mostly preferred for postural assess-
Social Community At 77.5 80.0 NS
ment in industry as they do not interfere with work activities, pro- Work
duction process and no requirement of any additional equipment Satisfaction With Work 59.2 67.8 *
(which may cause operator discomfort) to be placed on worker's body – Job Satisfaction
Work Family Conflict 37.5 30.6 NS
parts (Genaidy et al., 1994; Juul-Kristensen et al., 1997). OWAS and
Horizontal Trust 66.1 53.9 *
REBA scores for working postures were computed (Table 4) for an in- Vertical Trust 71.3 67.5 NS
dividual worker as shown in Fig. 1. Spinal load analysis (at L4 - L5 Justice And Respect 56.8 69.2 *
segments) with respect to selected working postures (Fig. 2) was per- Self-Rated Health 55.9 60.0 NS
formed using DHM software. The range of compression, joint shear Sleeping Troubles 19.6 33.7 *
Burnout 32.6 33.3 NS
values obtained are given in Table 4.
Stress 9.8 28.8 *

3.4. Psychosocial work environment assessment and comparisons
The results of psychosocial work environment survey relating to
workers in the injection molding workstations and control group em-
ployees and comparisons are given below in Table 5.
3.5. Subjective workload assessment
NS – No significant difference (p ≥ 0.05)
* - Significant difference (p ≤ 0.05).
3.9. Work measurement
Injection molding machine cycle time observations (Table 10) and
observed operator work cycle times (Table 11) before and after design
modifications, suitable comparisons are shown below.

Subjective workload scores with respect to workers in injection

molding workstations and control group employees and comparisons
are given below (Table 6).
3.6. Visualization of body segments in comfortable and uncomfortable
range of motion
Proposed injection molding workstation accessories was interfaced
with 5th (Fig. 3), 50th (Fig. 4) and 95th p (Fig. 5) digital human models
for virtual ergonomics evaluation.
3.7. OWAS and REBA scores
OWAS and REBA scores for working postures in proposed work-
station for 5th p, 50th p and 95th p male digital human models are shown
in Table 7.
3.8. Operation chart
Left and right hand operation chart for work activities observed in
existing workstation is shown in Table 8.
Left and right hand operation chart for work activities observed in
the proposed workstation is shown in Table 9.
4. Discussion
Experimental group as well as the control group was of similar age,
stature, weight and work experience (Table 2). Statistical analysis was
performed following a similar method adopted by Gangopadhyay et al.
(2007). It was observed that number of participants suffering from
discomfort in body parts while working was 5 in control group; whereas
number of sufferers was 43 in experimental group. Chi square test of
data revealed that experimental group was significantly different (χ2 -
20.945; P ≤ 0.000) from control group in terms of percentage of re-
sponders suffering from discomfort during work. Although participants
of experimental group were of similar characteristics (age, stature,
weight and work experience) as of control group; higher prevalence of
symptoms of musculoskeletal ailments in various body parts among
participants of the experimental group were due to differences in oc-
cupational activities which in turn were influenced by working posture,
work methods, workstation design/layout etc.
REBA showed presence of risky work postures (Table 4) which
needed to be changed. Work station layout, design of equipment's and
tools, anthropometric characteristics of worker, work methods are the
main reasons for inducing awkward working posture at trunk, neck and
shoulders and further determines positioning of workers' body when
performing a task (Keyserling et al., 1992; Pheasant and Haslegrave,

192
J. Sanjog, et al. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 72 (2019) 188–198

Table 6
Subjective workload assessment of the injection-molding workstation workers and comparisons.
Scale title Mean raw rating Mean weighted rating

IMW (n = 46) CG (n = 15) Comparisons (Mann-Whitney U test) IMW Vs. IMW (n = 46) CG (n = 15) Comparisons (Mann-Whitney U test) IMW Vs.
CG CG

Mental demand 21.7 72.3 * 34.3 72.4 *

Physical demand 79.9 9.6 * 80.8 20.7 *
Temporal demand 94.6 14.6 * 94.6 15.9 *
Performance 27.7 10.3 * 27.7 10.4 *
Effort 70.4 30.0 * 71.3 30.8 *
Frustration level 7.1 15.3 * 13.0 15.8 *

NS – no significant difference (p > 0.05).

* - significant difference (p ≤ 0.05).
IMW – Injection Molding Workstation; CG – Control Group.

Fig. 3. Virtual representations of working postures (a–h), 5th p male, in the Fig. 5. Virtual representations of working postures (a–h), 95th p male, in the
proposed model. proposed model.

deviated work postures are also encompassed (Finneran and O'Sullivan,

Fig. 4. Virtual representations of working postures (a–h), 50th p male, in the
proposed model.
2006). Work activities (Fig. 1; placing retrieval tool, de-flashing
keeping product on floor, reaching activities) characterized by ex-
tensive reach also contributed to risky work postures. Among various
risk factors towards development of musculoskeletal disorders,
2010). It is widely accepted that extremes of posture are associated with
upper-extremity musculoskeletal disorders among workers (Gerr et al.,
2014). Physical mismatch between workers' anthropometry, worktable
and product dimensions, work methods resulted in the prevalence of
awkward work postures (Fig. 1; Table 4) with certain body segments in
uncomfortable range of motion (indicated by red color; Fig. 2).
Compressive forces at L4-L5 lumbar spine (due to mass of body, load
acting on hand and trunk) have an allowable limit of 3433 N and
maximum permissible limit of 6376 N as recommended by National
Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (Leyland, 2008). Safe limit
of 500 N with 1000 N as maximal permissible limit has been suggested
by University of Waterloo ergonomic research group for joint shear
(Leyland, 2008). Spinal load analysis using DHM software indicated
that compressive forces exceeded safe limits (but within maximum
permissible limits) for 50th p digital human model while evaluating
selected working postures. Shear forces were within safe limits
(Table 4). Compression and shear forces generated at L4 - L5 segments,
in selected working postures were within safe limits (Table 4) for 5th p
and 95th p digital human models.
Significant differences in mean values were observed between
workers in the injection-molding worker's workstations and the em-
ployees in the control group for various psychosocial factors (Table 5).
The injection-molding shop-floor workers and administrative/super-
visory employees perceived psychosocial stress differently (in some
aspects) in their respective workplaces. The psychosocial investigations
reveal that there are no serious problems with respect to the

193
J. Sanjog, et al. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 72 (2019) 188–198

Table 7 psychosocial work environment in the factories considered except for

OWAS and REBA postural assessment for working postures in the proposed tempo (work pace) factor among the injection-molding shop-floor
workstation. workstation workers. Therefore, design interventions should also focus
Manikin Posture OWAS REBA (right body REBA (left body on reducing the tempo (work pace) of the workers in addition to re-
side) side) ducing incidence of awkward working postures.
The mean raw ratings for various scale titles for the subjective
Action Score Score
workload assessments were significantly different between the experi-
category
mental group and control group (Table 6). Temporal demand, physical
5th p (Fig. 3) a 1 1 2 demand and effort are rated very high by the experimental group.
b 1 3 3 Mental demand was rated very high by the control group. The perfor-
c 1 1 1
mance of both the experimental group and control group were good as
d 1 2 2
e 1 3 3 they were found to be successful in completing the tasks associated with
f 1 1 1 their jobs. The mean weighted ratings for the scale titles were also
g 1 3 3 significantly different (p ≤ 0.05) between the experimental group and
h 1 2 2 control group (Table 6). The weighted ratings were also found to be
50th p (Fig. 4) a 1 1 1
high for temporal demand, physical demand and effort among injec-
b 1 1 1
c 1 1 1 tion-molding workstation workers. Therefore, attention should also be
d 1 2 2 given to reduce the perceived temporal demand, physical demand and
e 1 3 3 effort with respect to the injection molding shop-floor workstation
f 1 2 1
workers while attempting human centered design interventions.
g 1 3 3
h 1 1 1
Prevalence of distinctive body part discomfort was found among
95th p (Fig. 5) a 1 1 1 injection molding workstation workers. Working table in injection
b 1 1 1 molding workstation was found to be designed arbitrarily thus aiding in
c 1 1 1 the occurrence of risky, uncomfortable work postures. Postural stress on
d 1 1 1
account of various body postures is helpful and should be considered in
e 1 1 1
f 1 1 1 designing or redesigning workplaces (Olendrof and Drury, 2001). Fur-
g 1 3 3 ther, tempo (work pace) was rated to be very high during investigations
h 1 1 1 of the psychosocial work environment. Similarly, workers in the in-
jection molding workstations experienced very high temporal demand,

Table 8
Operation chart for work activities observed in the existing injection molding workstation.
Left hand Symbol Symbol Right hand

– – O Hold de-flashing hand tool

– – O Reach for retrieval tool on work table
– – O Grasp retrieval tool
– – O Transport retrieval tool towards product
– – O Position retrieval tool on product
– – O Retrieve finished product
Reach for finished product o – –
Grasp finished product O O Transport retrieval tool to work table
– – O Place retrieval tool on table
– – O Release grasp on retrieval tool
– – O Reach for finished product
– – O Position cutting tool on finished product
– – O De-flash finished product
Lift finished product o – –
Transport finished product to work table o – –
Position finished product on work table O O Reach for finished product
Grasp finished product O O Position cutting tool on finished product
– – O De-flash finished product
– – O Grasp cut runner
– – O Reach for dropping runner
– – O Release cut runner into collector
– – O Reach for finished product
– – O De-flash finished product
Reach for product label chart 1on work table o O Reach for product label 1on work table
Hold product label chart 1 O O Remove product label 1
Release product label chart 1 O – –
Reach for finished product o O Reach for finished product
Grasp finished product O O Stick product label 1on finished product
Release grip on finished product O – –
Reach for product label chart 2 on work table o O Reach for product label 2 on work table
Hold product label chart 2 O O Remove product label 2
Release product label chart 2 O – –
Reach for finished product o O Reach for finished product
Grasp finished product O O Stick product label 2 on finished product
– – O Reach for finished product
– – O Grasp finished product
Remove finished product form work table O O Remove finished product form work table

194
J. Sanjog, et al. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 72 (2019) 188–198

Table 9 musculoskeletal disorders, all possible ergonomic interventions were

Operation chart for work activities observed in the proposed workstation.
Left hand Symbol Symbol Right hand
– O Reach for de-flashing hand
tool
– – O Grasp de-flashing hand tool
– – O Reach for retrieval tool
– – O Grasp retrieval tool
– – O Transport retrieval tool
– – O Position retrieval tool
– – O Retrieve finished product
Reach for finished product o – –
Grasp finished product O O Transport retrieval tool
– – O Place retrieval tool
– – O Release grasp on retrieval
tool
Transport finished product to O – –
work stand
Position finished product on O O Reach for finished product
work table
Grasp finished product O O Position cutting tool on
finished product
– – O De-flash finished product
– – O Grasp cut runner
– – O Reach for dropping runner
– – O Release cut runner into
collector
– – O Reach for finished product
– – O Grasp finished product
Invert and position finished O O Invert and position finished
product product
position finished product on O O position finished product
work stand work stand
Grasp finished product O O Position cutting tool on
finished product
– – O De-flash finished product
– – O Reach for product label 1
– – O Remove product label 1
– – O Reach for finished product
– – O Stick product label 1
– – O Reach for product label 2
– – O Remove product label 2
– – O Reach for finished product
– – O Stick product label 2
– – O Grasp finished product
Remove finished product form O O Remove finished product
work stand form work stand
physical demand and effort as observed in the subjective workload
assessments. Hence it was primarily deemed essential to design a con-
cept workstation (evaluated using virtual ergonomics technology) in
order to minimize awkward work postures with body segments posi-
tioned within comfortable range of motion. Such an approach may also
help to reduce the work pace and temporal demand of the workers
concerned.
Following initial identification of existence of awkward/risky
working postures and consequent prevalence of symptoms of
brain-stormed. It was realized that behavioural management and
change of work-schedule would not be very much effective in the shop-
floor scenario under study as the key ergonomic stressors were asso-
ciated with the anthropometric mismatch between workers and work-
place work accessories resulting in uncomfortable working posture.
Therefore, the most feasible and implementable solution to ensure di-
mensional compatibility between worker and workstation hardware
could be achieved by introducing easy, low cost and locally manu-
facturable work accessories design.
Before conceptualization of any specific hardware based design
solution, it was envisaged that the height adjustable work stand and the
retrieving tool could be potential design solution towards addressing
the issues of awkward working postures. Organizational context should
be considered for making workplace interventions (McVicar et al.,
2013). Therefore, after discussions with production supervisors/man-
agers and operators, different models of these two hardware were
conceptualized using morphological chart (Norris, 1963) and thereafter
concepts were screened and finalized using Pugh Chart (Pugh, 1990).
The CAD models of the final concepts are shown in Fig. 6. The list of
final accessories is provided below.
(a) height adjustable work stand for positioning plastic furniture for de-
flashing
(b) squared shaped collector (for collecting de-flashed material)
(c) height adjustable stand for keeping the product labels
(d) cylindrical collector for cut-runner
(e) retrieval hand-tool
(f) stand for keeping retrieval hand tool and de-flashing tool
Collector for runner was designed to easily fix collecting bag.
Collector for gathering de-flashed material was designed to hold more
amount of de-flashed material.
Dimensions of collector (for collecting de-flashed material) was
designed to be 1000 mm × 1000 mm × 250 mm with one side open for
allowing de-flashed materials to fall into it. The open end of the col-
lector for dropping the runner (removed from the freshly molded chair)
should be 600 mm from ground level considering height of gunny bags
(commonly used) and also for facilitating 5th p, 50th p and 95th p males
to drop the runners without significantly bending their thoracic and
lumbar regions. The top surface of the work stand (height adjustable)
from the surface of the ground should be 631 mm for 5th p, 809 mm for
50th p and 832 mm for 95th p while height of adjustable product label
stand from ground level should be 995 mm for 5th p, 1046 mm for 50th p
and 973 mm for 95th p. The height of the work stand may be suitable
adjusted by the individual workers (of different body dimensions). Such
adjustments in height will help different percentile workers to work in
good, less risky work postures using same workstation fixtures. Other
design dimensions (diameter, support at the base, round base at the top
provided to position the chair for de-flashing operation) of the stand
may be decided contextually, considering the strength and stability

Table 10
Injection molding machine cycle times.
Factory Descriptive statistics Inferential statisticsa Inferential statisticsb

Existing workstation Proposed workstation Existing Vs. Proposed workstation Factory Existing workstation Proposed workstation

Mean SD Mean SD

A 54.8 0.7 54.9 0.7 NS A vs. B * *

B 51.6 0.6 51.6 0.5 NS A vs. C * *
C 52.1 0.6 52.2 0.5 NS B vs. C * *

‘NS’ – Not Significant (p > 0.05); SD – Standard Deviation; ‘*’ - Significant difference (p < 0.05).
a
Wilcoxon signed rank test.
b
Mann-Whitney test.

195
J. Sanjog, et al. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 72 (2019) 188–198

Table 11
Observed operator work cycle times.
Factory Operator Descriptive statistics Inferential statisticsa Inferential statisticsb

Existing work station Proposed workstation Existing Vs. Proposed workstation Operator Existing workstation Proposed workstation

Mean SD Mean SD

A a 46.6 3.2 44.4 2.4 NS a vs. b * NS

b 42.9 2.1 41.7 1.8 NS
B c 37.5 3.1 34.5 1.5 NS c vs. d * NS
d 35.9 1.9 34.4 1.3 NS
C e 31.6 2.3 30.9 1.6 NS e vs. f * NS
f 32.9 3.2 31.4 2.2 *

‘NS’ – No Significant difference (p > 0.05); ‘*’ - Significant difference (p < 0.05).
a
Wilcoxon signed rank test.
b
Mann - Whitney U test.

Fig. 6. Final proposed model of workstation fixture.

requirements on account of the various models and varied quality

considerations resulting in dissimilar overall weight of the chairs being
manufactured by different companies. Length of the retrieval hand tool
is 1100 mm and it helped 5th p, 50th p and 95th p DHM to retrieve the
finished product (from under the injection molding machine) without
bending the lumbar region significantly. De-flashing hand tool holder
may be provided at a height of 900 mm on the tool stand and other
dimensions of tool stand may be suitably appropriated accordingly.
The concept workstation model enabled 5th p, 50th p and 95th p
digital human models to perform work activities with body segments
within comfortable range of motion as visualized by presence of green
color in body segments. Further, all working postures were categorized
as negligible risk and also under low risk category (Table 7). Spinal load
analysis using DHM software indicated that compressive and shear
forces (for L4-L5 segment) generated for working postures were within
safe limits for 5th p, 50th p, and 95th p digital human models for all work
postures.
Physical mock-up of the final proposed model was constructed for
trials with different factory workers (Fig. 7) for elucidating feedback as
well as for conducting work study. The proposed workstation model Fig. 7. Trial by different workers.
was well received by workers and appreciated by production super-
visors/managers.
benefitted by minor reduction in work activities in a typical work cycle
Needs of the users must be considered in design (Blasco et al., 2016)
because of the large number of repetition of work cycles every day.
and therefore thrust must be on user centered designs. Since the pro-
Injection molding cycle time significantly varies (Table 10) from
posed workstation fixture design consisted of individual modules, the
factory to factory (in spite of similar products manufactured), de-
entire setup can be positioned as per desire of the worker and also based
pending on the type of polymers (virgin/recycled) used, quality of
on their working hand (right/left).
finished product etc. Injection molding cycle time determines the time
Work study techniques were used to visualize benefits of design
available for workers towards processing the finished product (de-
implementation in terms of work activities, operator cycle times before
flashing activities, sticking product label). Significant difference in
and after design modifications. Work activities in existing and proposed
observed operator work cycle times were observed between two (skilled
workstation were charted using an operation chart (Tables 8 and 9).
and experienced) operators within factory (Table 11) while processing
Operation chart may vary based on hand orientation (right/left) and
similar finished products even though no significant differences in in-
tool holding preferences of individual workers. Number of work ac-
jection molded machine cycle times were observed (Table 10) within
tivities was marginally less in the proposed workstation when com-
factory. Reduction in observed operator work cycle times was noticed
pared with the existing workstation. Workers will definitely be

196
J. Sanjog, et al.
when operators used modified/re-designed workstation models, but
reduction in observed operator cycle times were not significant
(Table 11). However, since a large number of products are manu-
factured every day, workers/operators are definitely expected to be
immensely benefitted due to reduced work cycle time. Further in the
modified/re-designed workstation setup, the observed operator work
cycle times between operators within individual factories were not
significantly different from each other (Table 11). No significant dif-
ference in injection molding cycle times (Table 10) was noticed (during
timing of observed operator work cycle times) before and after work-
station design modifications in the respective factories.
5. Conclusion
Research methods featuring questionnaire study (for investigating
the prevalence of symptoms of musculoskeletal ailments, psychosocial
work environment, and workload), postural assessment tools, statistical
analysis, DHM and simulation, and work study technique has proved to
be very much supportive and beneficial for occupational design ergo-
nomics research and implementing human centered designs in an in-
dustrial shop-floor workstation in the context of industrially developing
countries. Research methodology utilized can be easily adopted by re-
searchers, production supervisors/managers/engineers towards im-
plementing context specific human centered design ergonomics solu-
tions in the manufacturing shop-floors of industrially developing
countries. Business houses interested in expanding or establishing new
injection molded plastic furniture manufacturing factories in small and
medium sector of industrially developing countries will definitely find
the results highly helpful. Future research leading to similar human
centered industrial design applications may be attempted in the injec-
tion molding workstations producing other furniture products.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2019.05.009.
References
Barnes, R.M., 1980. Motion and Time Study, seventh ed. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New
York ISBN 0-471-08335-6.
Battini, D., Faccio, M., Persona, A., Sgarbossa, F., 2011. New methodological framework
to improve productivity and ergonomics in assembly system design. Int. J. Ind. Ergon.
41 (1), 30–42.
Binoosh, S.A., Mohan, G.M., Ashok, P., Dhana Sekaran, K., 2017. Virtual postural as-
sessment of an assembly work in a small scale submersible pump manufacturing
industry. Work 58 (4), 567–578.
Blasco, R., Blanco, T., Marco, A., Berbegal, A., Casas, R., 2016. Needs identification
methodology for inclusive design. Behav. Inf. Technol. 35 (4), 304–318.
Bone, K.D., 2015. The Bioecological Model: applications in holistic workplace well-being
management. Int. J. Workplace Health Manag. 8 (4), 256–271.
Bureau of Indian Standards, 1991. Machine Tools – Ergonomics Anthropometric
Terminology, IS 13214: 1991 (Reaffirmed 2001), New Delhi.
Bureau of Indian Standards, 1995. Techniques of Work Study, Part 2, Work Measurement.
IS 13407 (Part 2): 1995 (Reaffirmed 2006), New Delhi.
Bureau of Indian Standards, 2002. Glossary of Terms in Work Study, IS 6363:1997
(Reaffirmed 2006), New Delhi.
Carayon, P., Smith, M.J., Haims, M.C., 1999. Work organization, job stress, and work-
related musculoskeletal disorders. Hum. Factors: The J. of the Hum. Factors and
Ergon. Society 41 (4), 644–663.
Chaffin, D.B., Andersson, G.B.J., 1991. Occupational Biomechanics, second ed. Wiley and
Sons, New York.
Chaffin, D.B., 2007. Human motion simulation for vehicle and workplace design. Hum.
Factors Ergon. Manuf. 17 (5), 475–484.
Chakrabarti, D., 1997. Indian Anthropometric Dimensions for Ergonomic Design Practice.
National Institute of Design, Ahmedabad, India ISBN – 8186199150.
Central Institute of Plastic Engineering and Technology, 2007. Plastic Processing -
Technical Manual, first ed. Central Institute of Plastic Engineering and Technology
(CIPET), Chennai, India.
Central Institute of Plastic Engineering and Technology, 2010. Growth of Plastic
Industries in the Country. (accessed 14.07.12). http://cipet.gov.in/pdfs/Growth_of_
plasic_Industries.pdf.
Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire II, 2007. (accessed 21.08.13). http://www.
arbejdsmiljoforskning.dk/en/publikationer/spoergeskemaer/∼/media/
197
International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 72 (2019) 188–198
Spoergeskemaer/copsoq/uk/scales-of-the-medium-size-copsoq-ii-questionnaire.
pdf#.
Dickson-Swift, V., Fox, C., Marshall, K., Welch, N., Willis, J., 2014. What really improves
employee health and wellbeing: findings from regional Australian workplaces. Int. J.
Workplace Health Manag. 7 (3), 138–155.
Dodge, R.B., 2012. Patterns of root cause in workplace injury. Int. J. Workplace Health
Manag. 5 (1), 31–43.
Dukic, T., Rönnäng, M., Örtengren, R., Christmansson, M., Davidsson, A.J., 2002. Virtual
evaluation of human factors for assembly line work: a case study in an automotive
industry. In: SAE Digital Human Modeling 2002 Proceedings of the Conference in
Munich, Germany, 2002. SAE/VDI, VDI Verlag, Düsseldorf, pp. 129–150.
Finneran, A., O'Sullivan, L., 2010. Force, posture and repetition induced discomfort as a
mediator in self-paced cycle time. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 40 (3), 257–266.
Genaidy, A.M., Al-Shedi, A.A., Karwowski, W., 1994. Postural stress analysis in industry.
Appl. Ergon. 25 (2), 77–87.
Gangopadhyay, S., Ghosh, T., Tamal, D.A.S., Ghoshal, G., Das, B.B., 2007. Prevalence of
upper limb musculo skeletal disorders among brass metal workers in West Bengal,
India. Ind. Health 45 (2), 365–370.
Gerr, F., Fethke, N.B., Anton, D., Merlino, L., Rosecrance, J., Marcus, M., Jones, M.P.,
2014. A prospective study of musculoskeletal outcomes among manufacturing
workers: II. Effects of psychosocial stress and work organization factors. Hum. Factors
56 (1), 178–190.
Hart, S.G., Staveland, L.E., 1988. Development of NASA-TLX (task load Index): results of
empirical and theoretical research. Adv. Psychol. 52, 139–183.
Hignett, S., McAtamney, L., 2000. Rapid entire body assessment (REBA). Appl. Ergon. 31
(2), 201–205.
Henry Dreyfuss Associates, 2002. The Measure of Man and Woman, Human Factors in
Design. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York ISBN – 0471099554.
Helander, M., 1995. A Guide to the Ergonomics of Manufacturing. East-West Press, New
Delhi ISBN - 8185938776.
Jung, H.S., Jung, H.S., 2001. Establishment of overall workload assessment technique for
various tasks and workplaces. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 28 (6), 341–353.
Juul-Kristensen, B., Fallentin, N., Ekdahl, C., 1997. Criteria for classification of posture in
repetitive work by observation methods: a review. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 19 (5), 397–411.
Kanawaty, G., 1992. Introduction to Work Study, fourth ed. International labour orga-
nization, Geneva ISBN 92-2-107108-1.
Karhu, O., Kansi, P., Kuorinka, I., 1977. Correcting working postures in industry: a
practical method for analysis. Appl. Ergon. 8 (4), 199–201.
Karmakar, S., Majumdar, D., Pal, M.S., Majumdar, D., 2011. Ergonomic study of ingress-
egress of an army vehicle in simulated environment. In: Trends in Product Lifecycle,
Modeling, Simulation and Synthesis (PLMSS) 2011 Proceedings of the International
Conference in Bangalore, India, pp. 69–74.
Karmakar, S., Pal, M.S., Majumdar, D., Majumdar, D., 2012. Application of digital human
modeling and simulation for vision analysis of pilots in a jet aircraft: a case study.
Work 41 (Suppl. 1), 3412–3418.
Karmakar, S., Sanjog, J., Patel, T., 2014. Digital human modeling and simulation in
product and workplace design: Indian scenario. Int. J. of Eng. Res. and Applications
(IJERA) ISSN: 2248-9622, Special Issue, 6–12.
Keyserling, W.M., Brouwer, M., Silverstein, B.A., 1992. A checklist for evaluating ergo-
nomic risk factors resulting from awkward postures of the legs, trunk and neck. Int. J.
Ind. Ergon. 9 (4), 283–301.
Khan, M.R., Singh, N.K., 2018. Prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders among Indian
railway sahayaks. Int. J. Occup. Environ. Health 24 (1–2), 27–37.
Kogi, K., 2012. Practical ways to facilitate ergonomics improvements in occupational
health practice. Hum. Factors 54 (6), 890–900.
Kristensen, T.S., 2001. The Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire and the "three-level-
concept". http://www.arbejdsmiljoforskning.dk/∼/media/Spoergeskemaer/copsoq/
copsoq-general-presentation.pdf, Accessed date: 10 April 2014.
Kuorinka, I., Jonsson, B., Kilbom, A., Vinterberg, H., Biering-Sørensen, F., Andersson, G.,
Jørgensen, K., 1987. Standardised Nordic questionnaires for the analysis of muscu-
loskeletal symptoms. Appl. Ergon. 18 (3), 233–237.
Leyland, T., 2008. Biomechanical Analysis of the Dead Lift. (accessed 01.06.13). http://
www.sfu.ca/∼leyland/Kin201%20Files/Deadlift%20Mechanics.pdf?.
Lima, T.M., Coelho, D.A., 2018. Ergonomic and psychosocial factors and musculoskeletal
complaints in public sector administration–A joint monitoring approach with analysis
of association. Int. J. of Ind. Ergon. 66, 85–94.
MacLeod, D., 1999. The Ergonomics Kit for General Industry. Lewis publishers, USA ISBN
– 1566703328.
Matitila, M., Vilkki, M., 1998. OWAS methods. In: Karwowski, W., Marras, W. (Eds.), The
Occupational Ergonomics Hand Book. CRC press, London, pp. 447–459.
McVicar, A., Munn-Giddings, C., Seebohm, P., 2013. Workplace stress interventions using
participatory action research designs. Int. J. Workplace Health Manag. 6 (1), 18–37.
Mundel, M.E., Danner, D.L., 1994. Motion and Time Study Improving Productivity, se-
venth ed. Prentice Hall, USA ISBN 0-13-588369-5.
Norris, K.W., 1963. The morphological approach to engineering design. In: Jones, J.C.,
Thornley, D. (Eds.), Conference on Design Methods. Pergamon, Oxford.
Nuebling, M., Seidler, A., Garthus-Niegel, S., Latza, U., Wagner, M., Hegewald, J., Liebers,
F., Jankowiak, S., Zwiener, I., Wild, P.S., Letzel, S., 2013. The Gutenberg Health
Study: measuring psychosocial factors at work and predicting health and work-re-
lated outcomes with the ERI and the COPSOQ questionnaire. BMC Public Health 13
(1), 538.
Olendorf, M.R., Drury, C.G., 2001. Postural discomfort and perceived exertion in stan-
dardized box-holding postures. Ergonomics 44 (15), 1341–1367.
Ovako Working Posture Assessment System, 2009. Ovako Working Posture Assessment
System. (accessed 04.08.14). http://www.ttl.fi/en/ergonomics/methods/workload_
exposure_methods/table_and_methods/Documents/OWAS.pdf.
J. Sanjog, et al.
Pao, T.H., Kleiner, B.H., 2001. New developments concerning the occupational safety and
health act. Manag. Law 43 (1/2), 138–146.
Pheasant, S., Haslegrave, C.M., 2006. Body Space Anthropometry, Ergonomics and Design
of Work. Taylor and Francis group, CRC press, USA.
Pugh, S., 1990. Total Design. Addison-Wesley, New York.
Rebiffé, R., 1966. An ergonomic study of the arrangement of the driving position in motor
cars. In: Institution of the Mechanical Engineers 1966 Proceedings, vol. 181. pp.
43–50 part 3D 1966-67, 1966.
Reed, M.P., The University of Michigan, 2017. Research: Digital Human Modeling.
198
International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 72 (2019) 188–198
(21.07.17). http://mreed.umtri.umich.edu/mreed/research_dhm.html.
Rubio, S., Díaz, E., Martín, J., Puente, J.M., 2004. Evaluation of subjective mental
workload: a comparison of SWAT, NASA‐TLX, and workload profile methods. Appl.
Psychol. 53 (1), 61–86.
Sanjog, J., Patnaik, B., Patel, T., Karmakar, S., 2016. Context-specific design interventions
in blending workstation: an ergonomics perspective. J. of Ind. and Prod. Eng. 33 (1),
32–50.
Schwartz, A.H., Albin, T.J., Gerberich, S.G., 2019. Intra-rater and inter-rater reliability of
the rapid entire body assessment (REBA) tool. Int. J. of Ind. Ergon. 71, 111–116.