170 likes | 295 Vues
This study examines the Pneumatic Jackhammer Lift Assist developed to mitigate musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) in construction workers using jackhammers. Despite its potential for reducing back and shoulder strain, many workers at PG&E prefer traditional methods. Observations, interviews, and questionnaires reveal benefits like ease of use on flat surfaces but highlight limitations in accuracy and operational challenges. Recommendations include modifying device weight and reach and conducting training on jackhammer safety. Findings underscore the need for ergonomic solutions in construction to enhance worker safety.
E N D
UC Ergonomics/ Safe Pavement Breakers Diana J. FloresMPH- University of California, Los Angeles Michael LopezB.S. Bioengineering- University of California, Berkeley
Background • In construction… • 5 out of every 100 workers injured • >50% of injuries = Musculoskeletal Disorders (MSDs) • Jackhammering causes back and shoulder MSDs • Stuck jackhammer = increased strain • Looking for a solution to help prevent MSDs
Background • Jackhammer Lift Assist • Pneumatically powered “foot” pushes jackhammer out of the ground • Reduces effort of lifting/repositioning jackhammer • Decreases back and shoulder strain
Background • Lift Assist available to workers at PG&E • Workers prefer not to use device
Objective • Find out why many workers prefer traditional method of jackhammering
Methods • Site visits at PG&E (2) • Worker interviews (4) • Worker Questionnaires (4) • Interviews with Ergonomist and Construction experts • Interview with PG&E union rep (IBEW 1245) • Visited Northern California Laborer’s Training Center in San Ramon
Whatwe learned THE GOOD: • Helpful on flat, open ground • Reduces back and shoulder strain • Well accepted once workers give it a try THE BAD: • Not appropriate for all situations (hills, limited space) • Decreases accuracy of work • Large reach for activation trigger • Adds 10lbs weight
Evaluation “It’s a good idea, but it needs some work” -PG&E construction worker
Recommendations • Decrease activation trigger reach • Decrease weight of device • Modify foot such that it conforms to sloped surfaces
Further Recommendations • Larger storage compartment for device • Put jackhammer away as a team when possible • Conduct periodic safety training for individual work crews on jackhammer risks and precautions. • Incorporate Lift Assist into initial jackhammer trainings
Challenges • Project time limitation • Small Sample Size • Not much literature specific to Jackhammer MSDs • Jackhammer injuries not limited to MSDs
Issues • Noise • Vibration • Road Traffic • Silica Dust
Successes • Cooperative PG&E liaisons and crews • Interviews with ergonomics and construction experts • Sufficient videotape footage • Understanding additional construction work hazards that we were not previously aware of.
Acknowledgements UC Ergonomics Lab • Maggie Robbins • Dr. David Rempel • Betsy Llosa • Staff CA. Dept. of Public Health • Dr. Bob Harrison • David Harrington • Staff Association of Occupational and Environmental Clinics Occupational Health Internship Program • Diane Bush • Sarah Jacobs PG&E • Garret Chang • TaisirShurasa • Work Crews Northern CA. Laborer’s Training Center • Ollie Hurl • Jerome Williams