Work Study

Exercise 2 Human Engineering

I. Overview Human Engineering talks about how a certain measurement affects one’s performance towards the workplace and so as to the school activities. How does it affect us? Of course, just by simply measuring what an activity told us to do so with proper procedures and processes for us to get the accurate result of our performance and to know whether we are productive enough or not.

II. Objective ➢ To differentiate each body measurements/dimensions and its effects to

work and productivity. ➢ To know the importance of the different body dimensions in designing facilities, equipment and in the workplace, ➢ to be able to understand how human engineering works

III. Procedure ○ ○ ○ ○

Each group needs to bring their own tape measure Use comfortable clothes. For uniformity, “inches” will be used as a unit of measurement Measure each group members body dimensions. ➢ Measure the height, eyelevel, elbow height, maximum height of control, minimum height of control, maximum distance of control from centreline of body, Body weight, Maximum forward reach from front edge of bench ,Normal forward reach from the edge of bench ,Minimum distance of display from eye, Maximum span of working level ,Normal span of working level, Elbow height above sit, Depth of sit below work surface ,Seat length ,Seat width ,Buttocks to knee, Minimum leg room, Back of seat to front edge of work surface, Seat height, Depth of foot rest when seated on a high chair of every group members. ➢ Write the measurement on a table and get the group average. ➢ Get the group average of other Groups, write it on a table and get the class average

V. Analysis and Discussion ➢ In every group there are those which are taller / bigger than the others and for these reason they rank highest in average specifically height is involve. On the other hand, there are those groups who consist of small individuals (not literally small but average in height while others are above average) that’s why they rank the lowest average. “Persons of larger size in general appear to function better than those with smaller stature (CALLOWAY, 1982) in relation to reproduction (THOMSON, 1980), disease (REDDY et al., 1976), cognition (KLEIN, 1972), and work performance (SPURR, 1983; 1984). Because physical work capacity is a function of body size (ÅSTRAND and RODAHL, 1970), i.e., the mass of muscle tissue involved in the maximum effort, and muscle constitutes about 40% of the body weight and 50% of the LBM (CLARYS, MARTIN and DRINKWATER, , it is interesting to note the correlations between three components of body size and VO2 max presented.”

➢ Examples of body dimensions used in designing facilities. Height • Height of every individual is important. In the hospitality Industry, hotels for instance, doors are based on the height of the guests. We all know that most of the guests especially in a deluxe /suite hotel are foreigners, and indeed their height is way to far from us. That’s why our doors/doorway is made on the people coming in and out of the hotel. You cannot make small doors fitted for average height persons if your guests are very much taller. The front desks also in hotels are based on height of human. The desk should not be taller than the one using it; it should be appropriate so the front desk clerk would be more productive and would not so helpless that she could not even reach it. Depth of sit below work surface ,Seat length ,Seat width • When a person leans into the chair back, there is both a backward and a downward force. The downward force pushes the bottom of the pelvis forward. Eventually, the sitter finds himself sitting on his tailbone at the edge of the chair with the spine as a whole transformed into a C-shaped slouch. Of course the next step is to pick oneself up and lean back into the chair again. This only starts the whole process over again. ‘Sitting up straight’ has to be forced, and is probably worse than the slouch, in hospitality industry chairs has a vital role for workers to increase productivity and the body dimensions has a great effect on it. The answer lies in re-educating the body to move the way it was designed. Simply by using the body properly, the muscles are toned and ‘autonomous’ sitting can be regained Applying Ergonomic Principles in the Workplace: How the Alexander Technique can Help by Holly A. Sweeney As early as the 18th century, doctors noticed that workers whose jobs required them to maintain certain body positions for long periods of time developed musculoskeletal problems. In the last 20 years, research has clearly established the connection between certain job tasks and repetitive stress injuries, or RSI’s.

Two elements are at work here: “static work” and “force.” “Static work” refers to the musculoskeletal effort required to hold a certain position, even a comfortable one. ○ For example, when we sit and work at computers, keeping our head and torso upright requires either small or great amounts of static work depending upon the efficiency of the body positions we choose. “Force” refers to the amount of tension our muscles generate. For example, tilting your head forward or backward from a neutral, vertical position quadruples the amount of force acting on your lower neck vertebra. This increase of force is due to the increase in muscular tension necessary to support your head in a tilted position. The term “ergonomics” is derived from two Greek words: “erg,” meaning work and “nomoi,” meaning natural laws. Ergonomists study human capabilities in relationship to work demands. In recent years, ergonomists have attempted to define postures which minimize unnecessary static work and reduce the forces acting on the body. All of us could significantly reduce our risk of injury if we could adhere to the following ergonomic principles: 1. All work activities should permit the worker to adopt several different, but equally healthy and.safe postures 2. Where muscular force has to be exerted it should be done by the largest appropriate muscle groups available. 3. Work activities should be performed with the joints at about mid-point of their range of movement. This applies particularly to the head, trunk, and upper limbs. (Cortlett, 1983) Here, however, we arrive at a problem: In order to put these recommendations into practice, a person would have to be a skilled observer of his or her own joint and muscle functioning and would have to be able to change his or her posture to a healthier one at will. No one develops this sort of highly refined sensory awareness without special training. Therefore, in order to derive the benefits of ergonomic research, we must learn how to observe our bodies in a new way. One training program that cultivates these skills is the Alexander Technique, which enables its students to put ergonomic principles into practice, and thus helps them reduce their risk of developing an RSI. The Alexander Technique is not new. It was developed in the early 20th century before ergonomics became a recognized science and has been applied throughout this century by people from all walks of life. The Technique is an educational method which shows people how they are misusing their bodies and how their everyday habits of work can be harmful. It also teaches people how to avoid work habits which create excessive amounts of static work and how to reduce the amount of unnecessary muscular force they are applying to their bodies. Performing artists comprise one occupational group which has studied the Alexander Technique extensively. This group of workers is extremely aware of the potential for serious injury as a result of repetitious demands on the body. Typically, the work demands of performing artists require hours of daily practice and rehearsal

plus the rigors of maintaining performance schedules. In addition to the desire to perform at peak levels of skill, performers also hope to extend their careers as far into their life span as possible. RSI’s represent a serious threat to livelihood and career longevity. It is for these reasons that the Alexander Technique is found in the curriculum of most performing arts schools. In an Alexander lesson, students experience profound physical changes through the gentle guidance of the teacher’s hands. These changes are a direct result of reduction of static work demands and force. As students progress in their study of the Technique, they notice that they feel more comfortable performing everyday tasks like sitting, standing, walking, typing because they have learned how to lower static work and applied force within their bodies. Students of the Alexander Technique report increased self confidence as they learn to exert a constructive influence over the repetitive injury process; they discover that they do not have to be unwitting victims of RSI’s. This increased sense of self reliance and fresh perspective on how to protect their body from injury contributes to a mental state that is less anxious, more resilient and better prepared to handle work challenges safely.

Vi. Conclusion Human engineering is a science that focuses on how humans interact with the environment in their workplace. It examines the workplace factors that influence the decisions and actions of workers. No one goes to work intending to be injured. The decisions and actions that workers take make sense to them at the time given their goals, knowledge and focus of attention. Our body measurements has a great effect on our productivity, we should know the proper equipments or even the facilities that is equipped to our body dimensions for us to make our work better.

VII. References http://www.unu.edu/unupress/food2/UID08E/uid08e0f.htm

http://www.alexandertechnique.com/ergonomics.htm http://www.office-ergo.com/ http://www.humaneng.co.uk/index.htm http://www.humanengineering.com.au/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_factors

IV. Findings Table1 Body

Measurement of Group members

Group

Daniel

Chero

Liela

Maximo

Melissa

Height

64

66

58

68

59

Average 63

Eye level

61

60

53

63

53

59

Elbow height

40 56

41 55

36 48

41 56

38 49

39.2 52.8

37

36

34

38

35

36

29

28

28

30

26

28.2

Dimensions

Maximum height of control Minimum height of control Maximum distance of control from centreline of

body

Body weight Maximum forward reach from front edge of bench Normal forward reach from the edge of bench Minimum distance of display from eye Maximum span of working level Normal span of working level Elbow height above sit Depth of sit below work surface Seat length Seat width Buttocks to knee Minimum leg room Back of seat to front edge of work surface Seat height Depth of foot rest when seated on a high chair

15

15

13

18

13

14.8

28

23

20

25

21

23.4

25

21

21

25

21

22.6

19

17

16

19

17

17.6

62

58

52

63

55

58

35

30

26

33

27

30.2

17

15

14

18

15

15.8

20 19 13 24

19 19 14 23

18 17 12 20

21 19 15 21

19 16 13 19

19.4 18 13.4 21.4

27

23

23

30

22

25

10 32

10 32

9 28

12 32

9 27

10 30.2

18

16

14

17

13

15.6

Measurement of Groups Grou Grou Grou Grou p p p p

Grou p

Grou p

1

2

3

4

5

Height

62.25

63

64.7

63.5

Eye level

57.54

58.6

60.1

59.6

64.1 3 56.6 3

Body Dimension s

Grou p

Grou p

6

7

8

Group Avera ge

62

63

63.4

63.25

58

59

59.8

58.66

Elbow height Maximum height of control Minimum height of control Maximum distance of control from centreline of body Body weight Maximum forward reach from front edge of bench Normal forward reach from the edge of bench Minimum distance of display from eye Maximum span of working level Normal span of working level Elbow height above sit Depth of sit below work surface Seat length Seat width Buttocks to knee

39.25

37.5

40.1

40.2

38.7 5

40.1

39.2

42

39.68

50.3

49.7

53.1

54.4

51.8 8

57.1

52.8

54.6

52.24

33.31

31.4

34.8

35.1

32

33.4

36

33.4

33.68

27.1

26.8

27.4

29

27

28.2

28.2

29.4

27.89

16.94

16.8

15.4

15.9

15

16.6

14.8

1`7. 8

16.16

23.5

20

21.2

23.4

24.7

22.89

23.8 22.31

24.2

22.13

12.2

24.4

22.4

17

20.2

22.6

23.6

20.57

18.31

20.7

21.2

19.2

18.9

17.6

20.4

19.50

53.81

54.5

56.2

57.6

18.7 5 55

51.7

58

58.4 8

55.66

32.63

34

27.3

37.2

25.7 5

30.2

30.2

31.9

31.15

16.75

17

19.4

18.8

18.5

12.8

15.8

17.6 2

17.09

19.38 17 13.63 19.75

18.1 20.7 15.2 24.6

17.7 17.2 13.8 20

16.7 18.7 15.6 21.6

16.5 17 13.5 20.2 5

14.2 16.7 11.5 20.3

19.4 18 13.4 21.4

19.3 17.7 14.2 21.4

17.66 17.88 13.85 21.19

Minimum leg room Back of seat to front edge of work surface Seat height Depth of foot rest when seated on a high chair

25.75

30.2

26

28.4

32.7 5

26.4

25

28.9

27.93

10.56

12.8

9.5

11

10.2 5

10.1

10

12

10.78

28.19

28.1

29.1

29.4

28.2 5

28.4

30.2

30.3

28.99

15.13

15.6

15.9

16.1

14.5

15.9

15.6

16.4 6

15.65

EXERCISE 02 Group7 Daniel Jason BaUtista CherOfelle Barcellano Liela May UgalinO MelisSa Cammayo Maximo IbAy Table3

Body Dimensions

Highest

Group

Lowest. 5

Group

Average

Name

Average

Name

64.13

Gr. 5

62

Gr. 6

60.1

Gr. 3

56.63

Gr. 5

42

Gr. 8

37.5

Gr. 2

Maximum height of control Minimum height of control Maximum distance of control from centreline of body Body weight

54.6

Gr. 8

49.7

Gr. 2

36

Gr. 7

31.4

Gr. 2

29.4

Gr. 8

26. 8

Gr. 2

17.8

Gr. 8

14.8

Gr. 7

Maximum forward reach from front edge of bench Normal forward reach from the edge of bench Minimum distance of display from eye Maximum span of working level GNormal span of working level Elbow height above sit Depth of sit below work surface Seat length

24.7

Gr. 8

20

Gr. 5

24.4

Gr. 2

12.2

Gr. 3

20.7

Gr. 2

17.6

Gr. 7

58.48

Gr. 8

51.7

Gr. 6

37.2

Gr. 4

25.75

Gr. 5

19.4

Gr. 3

12.8

Gr. 6

19.38

Gr. 1

14.2

Gr. 6

20.7

Gr. 2

16.7

Gr. 6

Seat width

15.6

Gr. 4

11.5

Gr. 6

Buttocks to knee

24.6

Gr. 2

19.75

Gr. 1

30.75

Gr. 5

25

Gr. 7

Height Eye level Elbow height

Minimum leg room

Back of seat to front edge of work surface Seat height Depth of foot rest when seated on a high chair

12.8

Gr. 2

9.5

Gr. 3

30.30

Gr. 8

28.1

Gr. 2

16.46

Gr.8

14.5

Gr. 5