hig.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard-cite-them-right
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • sv-SE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • de-DE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Mechanical exposure implications of rationalization: A comparison of two flow strategies in a Swedish manufacturing plant
Occupational and Environmental Medicine, University of Gothenburg, Sweden.
University of Gävle, Faculty of Health and Occupational Studies, Department of Occupational and Public Health Sciences. University of Gävle, Centre for Musculoskeletal Research.
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Ryerson University, Toronto, Canada.
Department of Sociology and Work Science, University of Gothenburg, Sweden.
2012 (English)In: Applied Ergonomics, ISSN 0003-6870, E-ISSN 1872-9126, Vol. 43, no 6, 1110-1121 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The aim of this case study was to (1) investigate differences in mechanical exposure (i.e. mechanical forces arising in the body of the operator) between two production strategies: long-cycle parallelised flow assembly (OLD) and conventional serial flow assembly (NEW), and (2) estimate potential changes in job exposure as a consequence of waste reduction when rationalising a line system.

Data on postures, movements and whole body exposure were collected during an ordinary working shift, by means of video recordings synchronised to direct technical measurements of six professional operators.

The results revealed the machine paced NEW system to have slower movements with less time spent in movements of high velocity compared to the self-paced OLD system. No significant differences were found between time-median posture levels. ‘Disturbances’ in the NEW system offered lower mechanical risk exposures compared to direct assembly work. Modelling the removal of wasteful ‘disturbances’ revealed both an increase in risk-implying fast movements and decrease in recovery-implying periods at low velocity – effectively isolating a work intensification. This study helps expose the complex relationship between rationalizations and mechanical exposure for system operators

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2012. Vol. 43, no 6, 1110-1121 p.
Keyword [en]
Assembly work, Production system design, Simulation modelling, Task level exposure analysis
National Category
Environmental Health and Occupational Health
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-11865DOI: 10.1016/j.apergo.2012.04.001ISI: 000307038900020PubMedID: 22575494Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84863779270OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hig-11865DiVA: diva2:526958
Available from: 2012-05-15 Created: 2012-05-15 Last updated: 2012-11-27Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Forsman, Mikael
By organisation
Department of Occupational and Public Health SciencesCentre for Musculoskeletal Research
In the same journal
Applied Ergonomics
Environmental Health and Occupational Health

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Altmetric score

Total: 39 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard-cite-them-right
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • sv-SE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • de-DE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf