Introduction .id



Determining Handle Position for Boxes Based on Psychophysical and Physiological Studies on Male WorkersBoy Nurtjahyo Muchamad1, Maya Arlini Puspasari2, Erlinda Muslim3, and Aisyah Iadha Nuraini4Abstract— Handle on the container used in industry has an important role to reduce injuries while doing the activity Manual Materials Handling (MMH). Handle design in most industries in Indonesia is usually located on top or no handle. Therefore, this study is conducted to determine the handle position on the box. The method used is the Design of Experiment (DOE) based on psychophysical and physiological criteria for male workers. A psychophysical criterion refers to the Borg scale for Rating Perceived Exertion (RPE), whereas the physiological criterion refers to the heart rate. RPE and heart rate is a dependent variable, while the independent variables used were four box sizes, nine handling positions, and three handle positions on the box. Ten subjects from industrial workers performed 27 combinations for one day during four day. The results of this study indicate that a significant factor influencing psychophysical criteria are 3 main effects, while the physiological criteria just 2 main effects, handle position and box size; based on psychophysical criteria, the handle position on top has a higher RPE values ??than other positions; and based on physiological criteria, the handle position on top produces a higher heart rate than the other positions.(This paper is an extension of Mechanical, Industrial, and Material International Conference (MIMT 2014))Index Terms— Design of Experiment; Handle Position; Manual Material Handling; Physiological; PsychophysicalIntroductionNowadays, although the technology and the use of machines is growing, human intervention in some jobs that require convenience and flexibility still has a big role in industry. For example, the loading and unloading activities of product get into the pallet and truck in the manufacturing industry. The product loading activity is often referred as Manual Materials Handling (MMH). Manual Material Handling is an activity consisting of lifting, carrying, bending, and twisting motion on the torso which is a major cause of spinal cord injury and other diseases [1] [2]. In Indonesia, workers who perform MMH activities still occur due to the nature of many types of jobs that are flexible and inexpensive. Workers who normally perform the work are male workers.One example of MMH activities is the process of transporting the products which are usually packaged in a cardboard box. The use of box often used as a container that can hold a variety of products and facilitate the transport process. A number of designs are raised to protect the product in the box and also packing/unpacking system. Design in Indonesia based on observations without a handle or the position is at the top. Existing size is also varies depending on the type of product that is packaged so there are no specific standards in determining the size of the box and also the determination of the required handle. Therefore, the research discussed about this topic is needed.Based on previous studies related to the carry activity, it is known there are 3 factors that affect the maximum load capacity: the individual, the workers, occupational activity, and environmental factors [3]. Examples of worker factors are age, gender, and experiences of individuals [4]. Examples of work activity factors are carrying distance, weight, frequency, position while carrying, shape objects, and the materials used [4]. Examples of environmental factors are the room temperature and the room while doing the [4]. In addition, there are studies that divide into 5 factors which affect the physical stress. There are the physical and physiological? characteristics when do the MMH activities, the characteristics of the object, the position of lifting (methods of handling materials), spatial aspects of MMH, and environmental factors [5]. These factors need to be considered in carrying out related research activities MMH.According to Chaffin (1987), Sanders and McCormick (1992), Mital et al (1993), Waters et al (1993), Ciriello (2005), based on factors that are studied, the characteristics of object lifted have a significant effect on stress level of biomechanical, physiological, and psychophysical activities that accompany the MMH [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]. One of the characteristics of the object studied is the influence of whether there is a handle for the load-carrying capacity. In addition, it states that the existence of the handle will provide a higher level of security and a low pressure compared to no handle when carrying [11]. This study also suggested conducting further research on the position of the handle that can provide comfort and have a low stress [11]. Besides the research conducted by Drury, the study by Cheng and Lee was related to the position of handle which is more comfortable [12]. Based on previous studies related to MMH, psychophysical and physiological approach is the most often performed to calculate the maximum capacity of load when lifting or carrying, duration of lifting capacity, as well as the factors that influence of lifting such as the size of the box and the way to hold it [10] [4] [13]. However, research on the optimal position of the handle was done by Jung and Jung, by using variable grip positions and lifting positions using the Likert 5-scale Summated Rating and Preferences and Body Part (BPD) [5].Therefore, based on knowledge gained associated with the studies outlined above, there has been no research related to handle position in terms of psychophysical and physiological methods. Method used in this study is valid and used by the studies related to MMH for 3 decades [3].The objectives to be achieved in this study was to determine the factors that influence the physiological and psychophysical criteria in determining the position of the handle on the box and determine the position of the handle in accordance with the approach of psychophysical and physiological for male workers.LITERATURE REVIEWDesign of ExperimentThe method used in this study is Full Factorial Design, a part of Design of Experiment. Full Factorial Design tests every combination of factors in different levels. This method has several advantages compared to 2 previous methods. One of them is that the result is more accurate because every combination is tested. On the other hand, the disadvantage of this method lies in time needed to conduct the experiment and also the costs will be higher because every combination of factors is tested [14]. The number of experiment will increase significantly if the number of factor increased. The usage of DOE method in factorial design is more accurate and has more advantages than OFAT method.Factors used in this research are 3 factors, therefore the general model of experiment are: yijkl=μ+ Ai+ Bj+Ck+(AB)ij+(AC)ik+(BC)jk+(ABC)ijk+εijkl (1)with i=1,2, …, a , j=1, 2,…, b , k=1, 2, …, c , and l= 1, 2, …, nPsychophysicalPsychophysical stated that human activity is composed of physical and psychological aspects. This psychophysical aspect depends on the subjectivity and environment. For measuring psychophysical aspect, there are three lifting positions that were stated by Snook [15]:From floor height to knuckle heightFrom knuckle height to shoulder heightFrom shoulder height to maximum range of hand in vertical distance This method is based on several experiments that purposed to obtain the load in every condition and height of lifting. This method, having described by Snook, is stated as ”the workers monitor their own feelings and determine the weight of the load to their maximum limit of lifting”[15].Rating of Perceived Exertion is a method that measure intensity level of a job, such as how hard is the effort in lifting. Rating of Perceived Exertion is also named Borg Scale, because it was stated by Borg in 1998 [16]. Perceived exertion is described as how hard subject feel the body works. This is based on physical sensation and physical experience, such as heart rate, respiration rate, sweat, and muscle fatigue [17]. Borg Scale has a scale from 6 to 20.PhysiologyPhysiology is solely based on Greek, which means the mechanical, physical, and biochemical function of human. The method of physiology is affected by metabolism from repeated lifting activity and VO2 consumption. MethodDetermining the factorsBased on research conducted by Jung and Jung (2010), this research uses 3 parameters. Each factor has various levels that also extracted from future research of Jung and Jung [5]. Figure 1 shows a diagram of the factors and levels used in this study. Here is an explanation for each factor and level: Box SizeBased on research conducted by Jung and Jung (2010), there are 4 box sizes, which are 30x30x30 cm, 40x40x40 cm, 50x50x50 cm and 60x60x60 cm. Cube shape is used because it is the shape which is often used in the industrial world. There is no standard of any industry for the exact size, therefore the difference was made ??in the shape of a cube. Additionally, various sizes of boxes are used to see the influence of the size and the handle position.Handle Position The handle position used is located in the left and right side because lifted the box with two hands is more frequent and more secure. For the position, is divided into three, namely top, middle, and bottom. Three levels of grip position are also based on research conducted by Jung and Jung [5]. Lifting PositionLifting position is the position which begins when the subject start to lift and position when putting the box. This position is divided into 3 types, namely floor position, the position of the knuckle height (74 cm), and the position of the shoulder height (110 cm).Figure 1. Diagram of Factors and LevelsDetermining Response VariableResponse variables studied were heart rate, Rating Perceived exertion (RPE), and user preferences using Likert scale 5. Design of ExperimentExperimental design used was a randomized complete block design. This design is purposed to control variability, arising from non-uniform experimental units that needs blocking. On this design, all blocks contain all treatment. Randomization was performed on each block. Randomization was performed in this study is randomizing the order of trials of 108 existing combinations. This randomization using a random number that is in that excel further sorted with the greatest value was as a first treatment to the smallest value as a treatment done last. Repetition (replication) is a repetition of the basic treatment given to the experimental units. Replication of this research is the number of subjects entering the study. The number of subjects who began the study as many as 10 men who have experienced the heavy work and in good health, mean replication in this study as much as 10 times.Research ToolThe following instruments and equipment are required in the study are:QuestionnaireBoxes used in prototype (can be seen in Figure 2). This box was made based on previous research, especially the size and position of the handle. Prototype was designed to be able to open the top of the box so the box can be filled with loads to adjust the weight of the box. On both sides, three handles are made at the top, middle, and bottom. The top handle is positioned 5 cm from the top, the middle handle was right in the middle, and the bottom handle is positioned 5 cm from the bottom. This prototype has a thickness of 0.5 cm. Materials used in this prototype on the carton box duplex. This cardboard made ??to strengthen the infrastructure of double box when carrying loads.The placement of the box that has 2 vertical distance of 74 cm and 110 cmLoads used in this study consist of square tiles measuring 20 cm x 20 cm with a weight of 500 grams of ceramicsOmron scales that can digitally measure the body weight, body mass index, percent body fat, muscle mass percent, biological age, and the number of calories neededDigital sphygmomanometer is used to measure pulse and blood pressure. This tool is used before the subject conducted an experiment. This tool will measure heart rate and blood pressure of subjects.Hand Dynamometer to measure the strength of the subject's hand in experimentPush Pull Dynamometer function to measure the tensile strength of the subjectHeart Rate Monitor Tool used to record heart rate during experiment. This tool is used to record heart rate during the experiments Forerunner Garmin 610, made ??in Germany. This tool can record heart rate per second and can be stored up to 100 laps. In use, the tool also requires heart transmitter that looks like a chest belt and paired in the subject. To increase the accuracy of calculations performed by the tool, before doing the experiment, each subject was asked to warm up first.Data Acquisition ProceduresHere is the detail steps of primary data collection conducted in this study: Candidates who are interested in the subject to follow the experiment were gathered and given explanations. Each candidate has the right to chose to participate in this study or not. For those candidates who have been willing to follow the subject of this study, they will sign a promissory note that will follow to complete the study. Prospective subjects who have signed letters of intent will be asked to fill out personal data and medical history.30 x 30 x 30 cm40 x 40 x 40 cm50 x 50 x 50 cm60 x 60 x 60 cmFigure 2. Prototype of the boxNext, measurements were taken to see the body weight, height, knuckle height, shoulder height, blood pressure, heart rate, hand grip strength, and tensile strength.After the subject has met the criteria and was willing to follow the research, timetable of data acquisition was determined. In the study of data collection, the subject should not do strenuous activity. Candidates who are willing to follow the study are only 10 people. Table 1 shows the anthropometric data and isometric strength possessed by the subjects in this study.At the time of the study prior to data collection, subjects will be given an explanation of the steps and procedures that must be performed during the study. Explanations include: Explanation of safe lifting procedures which can be seen in Figure 3. According to NIOSH (1981), there is a safe lifting procedure when performing Manual Material Handling. Subjects are not allowed to immediately standing when lifting from the floor, but they must starts from a squatting position. Furthermore, when carrying, the load or the box brought closer to the body so that the load is not too heavy and reduce the risk of injury [18].The load used in this study was determined from load that is frequently lift by workers and adapted to the size of the box. Weight of each box is 1 kg for size 30 x 30 x 30 cm, 2.5 kg for size 40 x 40 x 40 cm, 5 kg for size 50 x 50 x 50 cm, and 6 kg for size 60 x 60 x 60 cm. The average weight of the load used each subject is 13.9 kg for size 30 x 30 x 30 cm, 14.4 kg for size 40 x 40 x 40 cm, 16:35 kg for size 50 x 50 x 50 cm, and 16:15 kg for size 60 x 60 x 60 cm.Explanation and simulation on how to fill or answer Borg Scale and Likert 5 [16].Warm up about 10-15 minutes in advance in order to improve the accuracy of measurement of the heart rate.The combination takes approximately 1.5 minutes to 2 minutes. Each completed a combination; each subject will rest for 1 minute to 2 minutes.Table 1. Anthropometric Data of SubjectsVariable Mean (N=10) SD Range Age (Year)27.7 2.06 25-30 Weight (kg) 60.64 8.48 50.9-73.7 BMI 21.67 2.94 18-27.1 Height (cm) 167.45 8.13 152-180 Knuckle Height (cm) 78.45 4.88 69-84.5 Shoulder Height (cm) 135 8.68 122-150 Isometric Strength Grip Strength Right Hand (kg) 42.8 11.98 27-58 Left Hand (kg) 38.1 11.27 23-57 Pull Strength 38.6 13.37 25-68 Blood Pressure Systole 122.6 6.33 111-131 Diastole 77.9 7.61 63-90 LiftingCarryingPlacingMengangkatMembawaMenaruhFigure 3. Safe Lifting Procedure Hypothesis TestingHypothesis testing is done to see the influence of the main factors on heart rate, RPE, and Likert-5 and also the interaction between factors. Equation model used is the model three way because the number of factors used in this study, there are 3 factors. The following equation models in this study:yijkl=μ+ Ai+ Bj+Ck+(AB)ij+(AC)ik+(BC)jk+(ABC)ijk+εijkl (1)with i=1,2, …, a , j=1, 2,…, b , k=1, 2, …, c , and l= 1, 2, …, nResults And Discussion1. Rating Perceived Exertion (RPE)Table 2 shows the average of the RPE value that is obtained. RPE are divided into 3 groups on the handle position and 9 groups on the lifting position. To determine whether RPE value differed significantly in three factors (handle position, the lifting position, and the size of the box), the three-way ANOVA is applied. Table 3 shows the results of the three-way ANOVA. 2. Heart RateTable 4 shows the average of the heart rate that is obtained. To determine whether heart rate value differed significantly in three factors (handle position, the lifting position, and the size of the box), the three-way ANOVA is applied. Table 5 shows the results of the three-way ANOVA. 3. Likert scaleData processing for Likert scale is based on research by Jung and Jung (2010) [5]. Table 6 shows the results of ANOVA analysis for the Likert scale.Table 2. Rating of Perceived Exertion DataBox SizeHandle PositionClassificationLifting PositionFloor-FloorFloor-KnuckleKnuckle-FloorKnuckle-KnuckleFloor-ShoulderShoulder-FloorKnuckle-ShoulderShoulder-KnuckleShoulder-ShoulderK1K2K3K4K5K6K7K8K930 x 30 x 30 cmTopMean13.412.913.313.214.313.81414.113.7?Std1.071.662.061.481.161.141.561.602.00MiddleMean12.813.213.713.213.913.413.71313.3?Std1.811.552.121.421.140.991.231.702.04BottomMean13.112.613.012.113.513.112.913.513.5?Std1.201.781.831.660.851.452.181.430.9740 x 40 x 40 cmTopMean13.914.213.813.914.414.014.514.214.6?Std0.881.480.921.100.841.150.970.791.26MiddleMean12.913.212.712.714.013.313.912.813.9?Std1.451.141.571.341.251.340.741.321.10BottomMean13.113.112.312.213.413.713.312.513.6?Std1.291.731.421.402.011.771.341.651.4350 x 50 x 50 cmTopMean14.213.914.314.215.114.214.414.515.1?Std1.140.881.491.480.881.401.351.651.52MiddleMean13.513.112.812.614.213.513.812.313.7?Std1.430.881.751.581.751.351.551.341.34BottomMean13.012.612.511.913.513.512.812.913.4?Std1.411.711.271.201.431.351.621.791.5160 x 60 x 60 cmTopMean15.115.114.714.515.715.315.214.916.1?Std1.101.100.950.971.251.421.551.101.29MiddleMean14.313.813.012.814.213.913.913.814.1?Std1.491.141.411.551.481.101.201.481.20BottomMean14.314.014.012.514.314.313.613.514.1?Std2.111.561.562.071.891.571.261.511.66Table 3. ANOVA Result of RPESource? FactorSum of SquareDfMean Square Computed F p-Value InformationMain Effect Box Size 136,793 45,598 22,339 0,000*** Significant Handle Position 270,732 135,369 66,320 0,000*** Significant Lifting Position140 8 17,500 8,574 0,000*** Significant Two-way interaction Box Size*Handle Position 40,006 6,667 3,266 0,003*** Significant Box Size* Lifting Position 32,9424 1,373 0,672 0,881 Not Significant Handle Position*Lifting Position 28,5816 1,786 0,875 0,599 Not SignificantThree-way Interaction Box Size*Handle Position*Lifting Position 32,8148 0,684 0,335 1,000 Not SignificantTable 4. Heart Rate DataBox SizeHandle PositionClassificationLifting PositionFloor-FloorFloor-KnuckleKnuckle-FloorKnuckle-KnuckleFloor-ShoulderShoulder-FloorKnuckle-ShoulderShoulder-KnuckleShoulder-ShoulderK1K2K3K4K5K6K7K8K930 x 30 x 30 cm?????TopMean94.695.793.495.396.296.893.697.696.9?Std6.988.145.277.808.486.617.328.538.49MiddleMean91.294.593.195.193.195.894.394.597?Std5.987.534.798.466.827.138.345.548.16BottomMean94.192.493.194.295.192.194.696.195.5?Std6.747.896.236.807.237.756.776.546.0440 x 40 x 40 cm?????TopMean97.1101.598.499.499.699.199.999.999.6?Std7.210.17.07.36.37.58.05.36.1MiddleMean98.1100.895.399.297.497.297.997.499.4?Std8.47.68.29.85.76.38.17.27.3BottomMean96.398.296.498.399.097.997.598.9100.1?Std6.88.89.07.27.87.96.68.36.050 x 50 x 50 cm?????TopMean99.799.797.2100.099.398.5100.798.898.7?Std9.29.55.17.48.68.69.47.77.0MiddleMean97.097.597.797.2100.397.997.296.796.3?Std6.69.06.98.46.17.77.48.35.3BottomMean96.995.694.997.699.096.196.698.097.9?Std6.27.66.55.28.56.08.26.56.360 x 60 x 60 cm????TopMean103.5104.8100.2103.5106.5103.5103.2102.3104.7?Std10.49.710.27.811.09.58.111.29.4MiddleMean103.0103.098.998.4102.7100.2100.1100.3100.4?Std12.210.67.17.610.211.78.810.48.0BottomMean102.599.6100.899.2103.0101.5101.6103.9101.7??Std10.28.17.18.210.88.77.59.59.5Table 5. ANOVA Result of Heart RateSource?FactorSum of SquareDfMean SquareComputed Fp-ValueInformationMain Effect Box Size 7249,8632416,637,850,000***SignificantHandle Position 740,852370,425,800,003***SignificantLifting Position584,83873,101,140,330Not SignificantTwo-way interaction Box Size*Handle Position 91,52615,250,240,964Not SignificantBox Size* Lifting Position 525,12421,880,340,999Not SignificantHandle Position*Lifting Position 293,951618,370,290,997Not SignificantThree-way Interaction Box Size*Handle Position*Lifting Position 573,144811,940,191,000Not SignificantTable 6. ANOVA Result for Likert scaleSource?Sum of SquareDfMean SquareComputed Fp-ValueInformationMain Effect Box Size 21,8737,2919,0400,000***SignificantHandle Position 386,372193,184239,5090,000***SignificantLifting Position41,6385,2046,4520,000***SignificantTwo-way interaction Box Size*Handle Position 58,369,71612,0460,000***SignificantBox Size* Lifting Position 11,06240,4610,5710,952Not SignificantHandle Position*Lifting Position 26,35161,6472,0420,009***SignificantThree-way Interaction Box Size*Handle Position*Lifting Position 19,52480,4070,5040,998Not Significant Rating Perceived Exertion (RPE)Based on the results in Table 2, the significant variables need a Duncan Test to determine the real differences of each level / degree of factors. Duncan's test results show that the size of 30 x 30 x 30 cm, 40 x 40 x 40 cm, and 50 x 50 x 50 cm are in the same subset that means are not significantly differed, where size 60 x 60 x 60 cm is in different subset, so it is significantly differed. Thus it can be stated that the RPE is the highest in the 60 x 60 x 60 cm box size. Duncan test is then performed on the handle position factor on RPE values. Duncan test results indicate that all real handle position differed significantly. The handle which required higher energy is in the top, while the smallest is in the bottom. Duncan test is then performed on the lifting position on RPE values. Duncan test results showed that the position of the knuckle-knuckle (or positions K4) produces the lowest value of RPE. Positions are significantly differed at the K9 position (height shoulder-shoulder height) and K5 (floor-shoulder height). In both these positions require higher RPE compared to other positions. In addition to Duncan test, also tests for normality and homogeneity of RPE value. From both the results of the test, the normality and homogeneity assumption are fulfilled.Heart RateDuncan's test results show that the size of 30 x 30 x 30 cm and 60 x 60 x 60 cm are significantly differed, whereas the size 40 x 40 x 40 cm and 50 x 50 x 50 cm are in the same subset size means it is no differed significantly. Thus it can be stated that the highest heart rate is at 60 x 60 x 60 cm, while the lowest in the size of 30 x 30 x 30 cm. High heart rate showed higher energy expenditure than others.Duncan test is then performed on the handle position factor of heart rate each subject. Duncan test results showed that the position of the handle on the top significantly differed compared to the middle or bottom. Top handle requires higher heart rate, while the smallest is in the bottom and middle positions. Duncan test is then performed on the lifting position factor on heart rate value. Duncan test results showed that the Knuckle-position floor (or position K3) has a low heart rate. Positions are significantly differed at the K9 position (height shoulder-shoulder height) and K5 (floor-shoulder height). At both positions had greater heart rate and requires considerable energy compared to other positions.In addition to Duncan test, normality and homogeneity test are conducted to measure heart rate. From both the results of the test, the normality and homogeneity assumption are fulfilled.Likert 5The factor of box size that have significantly differed there are two sizes 30 x 30 x 30 cm and 60 x 60 x 60 cm. User preference is perceived by the subject that is lighter in size 30 x 30 x 30 cm, whereas the heavier size is 60 x 60 x 60 cm. Furthermore for grip position, all variables are significantly differed. The position on the grip feels heavier in the bottom position. The third factor is the lifting position. Factors that have a significant difference are the position of the appointment of K5, K9, and K4. Position appointment K4 (knuckle-knuckle) is perceived as the most comfortable position.However, Likert 5 data are not normally distributed and should be using non-parametric statistics in its processing. Therefore, the Kruskall-Wallis test was used to see the results of the analysis of the real difference each treatment. Hypothesis on Kruskall-Wallis test, namely: H0 : All combinations were not significantly differedH1 : All combinations were significantly differedBased on the test results, the p-value (0.000) <5% alpha, then reject H0, which means all combinations were significantly differed. Covariate Analysis for LoadThe load has a significant effect on the RPE values, because it is known that the p-value of load is (0.000) <5% alpha. The load also has a significant effect on the value of heart rate. On the results obtained in the analysis of covariates obtained load effects on heart rate, it is known that the p-value of load is (0.000) <5% alpha, then reject H0. Based on the results obtained in the analysis of covariates regarding load effects on the value of Likert 5, note that the p-value (0.113) > 5% alpha, then accept H0. Therefore it can be concluded that the load does not have a significant effect on the value of the value obtained Likert 5.ConclusionBased on psychophysical criteria, factors that significantly influence the value of the RPE are 3 main factors (the position of the handle, the position of the appointment, and the size of the box). In addition to these three factors, there was an interaction between the factors size box with handle position which means a change in the level of one factor may result in significant changes to the value of RPE. The larger the box size, the effort given by the subjects also increased. The position of the handle which gives the highest RPE is in the top position, and the lowest is in middle and bottom position. The knuckle-knuckle lifting position gives the lowest RPE, while floor-shoulder and shoulder-shoulder gives the highest RPE.Based on physiological criteria, factors which significantly affect heart rate are 2 main factors (the position of the handle and the size of the box). The larger the size, the heart rate produced by the subject also increases. For position handle based on physiological criteria, the position of the handle in the middle and bottom position gives lower heart rate than position in the top. This suggests that the lower and middle position gives a lower energy level than the position of the handle at the top.References[1] Wickens, C. D., Gordon, S. E., & Liu, Y. (1998). An Introduction to human factors engineering. New York: Longman.[2] Ayoub, M. M., & Mital, A. (1989). Manual materials handling. London: Taylor and Francis.[3] Lu, H., & Aghazadeh, F. (1994). Psychophysical determination and modeling of load carrying capacity. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 13 (1), 51-65.[4] Wu, S. P. (2006). Psychophysical determined 1-h load carrying capacity of Chinese Female. Elseiver: International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 36 (10), 891-899.[5] ] Jung, H. S., & Jung, H. S. (2010). A survey of the optimal handle position for boxes with different sizes and manual handling positions. Applied Ergonomics 41 (1), 115-122.[6] Chaffin, D. B. (1987). Manual materials handling and the biomechanical basis for prevention of low back pain in industry. American Industrial Hygene Association Journal 48 (12), 989-998.[7] Sanders, M. S., & McCormick, E. J. (1992). Human factors in engineering and design seventh edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.[8] Mital, A., Nicholson, A., & Ayoub, M. (1993). A guide to manual materials handling. London: Taylor & Francis.[9] Waters, T., Putz-Anderson, V., Garg, A., & Fine, L. (1993). Revised NIOSH equation for the design and evaluation of manual lifting tasks. Ergonomics 36 (7), 749-776.[10] Ciriello, V. M. (2005). The effects of box size, vertical distance, and height on lowering tasks for female industrial workers. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 35 (9), 857-863.[11] Drury, C. G. (1980). Handles for manual materials handling. Applied Ergonomics 11 (1), 35-42.[12] Cheng, T. S., & Lee, T. H. (2006). Maximum acceptable weight of manual load carriage for young taiwanese males. Industrial Health 44, 200-206.[13] Wu, S. P., & Chang, S. Y. (2010). Effects of carrying methods and box handles on two person team carrying capacity for females. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 41, 615-619.[14] Antony, J., Chou, T.-Y., & Ghosh, S. (2003). Training for design of experiment. Work Study, 342.[15] Snook, S. (1978). The design of manual handling tasks. Ergonomics 21, 963–985.[16] Borg, G. (1998). Borg's perceived exertion and pain scales. Human Kinetics.[17] Chandradinata, H. (2010). Penentuan faktor koreksi pengali vertikal persamaan NIOSH untuk pekerja pria industri Indonesia berdasarkan aspek psikofisik, fisiologi, dan biomekanika. Jakarta: Universitas Katolik Indonesia Atma Jaya[18] NIOSH. (1981). Work practices guide for manual lifting. Cincinnati, OH: DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No 81. BIOGRAPHY -99060156210Boy Nurtjahyo Muchamad was born in Jakarta, November 3rd 1955. He started his higher education Mechanical Engineering, Universitas Indonesia before he obtained his Master Degree in Wayne State University in USA. Currently, he is a lecturer in Department of Industrial Engineering, Universitas Indonesia. His interest of research is in the field of human factors and ergonomics, organizational aspect of industry, and computer modeling and simulation.-7048559690Maya Arlini Puspasari was born in Jakarta, March 22nd 1988. She was graduated from Industrial Engineering, Universitas Indonesia in 2009. Then, she obtained her Master Degree from double degree of National Taiwan University of Science and Technology (NTUST) and Universitas Indonesia, majoring in Industrial Engineering in 2011. She is a lecturer in Department of Industrial Engineering, Her research interest is in the field of human factors, traffic safety, and product design.342901905Erlinda Muslim was born in Bukittinggi, October 28th 1960. She was graduated from Mechanical Engineering, Bandung Institute of Technology in 1984. Then, she obtained her Master Degree from Universiti Teknologi Malaysia in 1992. Currently, she is a lecturer in Department of Industrial Engineering, Her research interest is in the field of ergonomics and product design.3429064135Aisyah Iadha Nuraini was born in Jakarta, June 29th 1990. She was graduated from Industrial Engineering, Universitas Indonesia in 2013. Currently, she is a master degree student in NTUST, majoring Industrial Management. Her research interest is about ergonomics and safety. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download