This content is not included in your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.
Assessing the Importance of Motion Dynamics for Ergonomic Analysis of Manual Materials Handling Tasks using the AnyBody Modeling System
ISSN: 0148-7191, e-ISSN: 2688-3627
Published June 12, 2007 by SAE International in United States
Annotation ability available
Most current applications of digital human figure models for ergonomic assessments of manual tasks focus on the analysis of a static posture. Tools available for static analysis include joint-specific strength, calculation of joint moments, balance maintenance capability, and low-back compression or shear force estimates. Yet, for many tasks, the inertial loads due to acceleration of body segments or external objects may contribute significantly to internal body forces and tissue stresses. Due to the complexity of incorporating the dynamics of motion into analysis, most commercial software packages used for ergonomic assessment do not have the capacity to include dynamic effects. Thus, commercial human modeling packages rarely provide an opportunity for the user to determine if a static analysis is sufficient. The goal of this paper is to quantify the differences between a static and dynamic analysis of a materials handling task using the AnyBody modeling system to include the effects of motion. The feasibility and tractability of performing dynamical ergonomic analysis with the AnyBody model is assessed for the analysis of an asymmetric lifting task. Comparisons between low back moments, compression and shear forces for dynamic and static analyses are presented.
CitationWagner, D., Reed, M., and Rasmussen, J., "Assessing the Importance of Motion Dynamics for Ergonomic Analysis of Manual Materials Handling Tasks using the AnyBody Modeling System," SAE Technical Paper 2007-01-2504, 2007, https://doi.org/10.4271/2007-01-2504.
SAE 2007 Transactions Journal of Passenger Cars: Mechanical Systems
Number: V116-6; Published: 2008-08-15
Number: V116-6; Published: 2008-08-15
- Anderson, F.C., Pandy, M.G., 2001. Static and dynamic optimization solutions for gait are practically equivalent. Journal of Biomechanics, 34, 153-161.
- Baril-Gingras, G., Lortie, M., 1995. The handling of objects other than boxes: univariate analysis of handling techniques in a large transport company. Ergonomics, 38(5), 905-925.
- Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2006-07 Edition, Material Moving Occupations, on the Internet at http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos243.htm (visited July 10, 2006 ).
- Damsgaard, M., Rasmussen, J., Christensen, S.T., Surma, E., de Zee, M., 2006. Analysis of musculoskeletal systems in the AnyBody Modeling System. Simulation Modeling Practice and Theory, 14(8), 1100-1111.
- Dickerson, C.R., 2005. A biomechanical analysis of shoulder loading and effort during load transfer tasks, PhD Dissertation, University of Michigan.
- Dysart, M. J., and Woldstad, J. C., 1996. Posture prediction for static sagittal-plane lifting. Journal of Biomechanics, 29(10), 1393-1397, 1996.
- Hooper, D.M., Goel, V.K., Aleksiev, A., Spratt, K., Bolte, K.M., Pope, M., 1998. Three dimensional moments in the lumbar spine during asymmetric lifting. Clinical Biomechanics, 13, 386-393.
- McGill, S. M., Norman, R. W., 1985. Dynamically and statically determined low back moments during lifting. Journal of Biomechanics, 18(12), 877-879.
- National Research Council and Institute of Medicine, Barondess, J.A., 2001. Musculoskeletal Disorders and the Workplace: Low Back and Upper Extremities, National Academies Press, ISBN 0309072840.
- Pai, Y.C., Rogers, M. W., Patton, J., Cain, T. D., Hanke, T. A., 1998. Static versus dynamic predictions of protective stepping following waist-pull perturbations in young and older adults. Journal of Biomechanics, 31(12), 1111-1118.
- Pataky, T.C., Zatsiorsky V.M., and Challis J.H., 2003. A simple method to determine body segment masses in vivo: reliability, accuracy and sensitivity analysis. Clinical Biomechanics, 18, 364-368.
- Plamondon, A., Gagnon, M., Gravel, D., 1995. Moments at the L5/S1 joint during asymmetrical lifting: effects of different load trajectories and initial load positions, Clinical Biomechanics, 10(3), 128-136.
- Rasmussen, J. and Christensen, S.T., 2005. Musculoskeletal Modeling of Egress with the AnyBody Modeling System. SAE 2005 Transactions Journal of Passenger Cars - Electronic and electrical systems, 822-828.
- Rasmussen, J., Christensen, S.T., Sebertz, K, and Rausch, J., 2006. Posture and movement simulation by means of musculoskeletal optimization. SAE Technical Paper 2006-01-2342. SAE International, Warrendale, PA.
- Reed, M.P., Faraway, J.J., Chaffin, D.B., and Martin, B.J. 2006. The HUMOSIM Ergonomics Framework: A new approach to digital human simulation for ergonomic analysis. SAE Technical Paper 2006-01-2365. SAE International, Warrendale, PA.
- Ren, L., Jones, R.K., Howard, D., In press. Predictive modeling of human walking over a compete gait cycle, Journal of Biomechanics, accepted 12 July 2006.
- Stewart, W.F., Ricci J.A., Chee, E., Morganstein, D., Lipton, R., 2003. Lost productive time and cost due to common pain conditions in the US workforce, JAMA, 290(18), 2443-2454.
- Tsuang, Y.H., Schipplein, O.D., Trafimow, J.H., Andersson, G.B., 1992. Influence of body segment dynamics on loads at the lumbar spine during lifting, Ergonomics, 35(4), 437-444.
- Wagner, D.W., Reed, M.P., and Chaffin, D.B., 2005. Predicting foot positions for manual materials handling tasks. SAE Digital Human Modeling for Design and Engineering Symposium, 2005-01-2681, Iowa City, Iowa.
- Wagner, D.W., Reed, M.P., and Chaffin, D.B., 2006. A task-based stepping behavior model for digital human models. SAE Digital Human Modeling for Design and Engineering Symposium, 2006-01-2364, Lyon, France.
- Zhang, X., 2003. Effects of load and speed on lumbar vertebral kinematics during lifting motions. Human Factors, 45(2), 296-306.