6

ABSTRACTErgonomic field is a huge field. In our daily life, ergonomics is used everywhere, i.e. in cars, in bikes, in an aero plane, in computer workstation design, etc. These ergonomically fit and designed things make the lifestyle better. Mobile fast-food business becomes one of the growing environments in the self-employment sector of the young India. In the occupation majority of men or youth are having a low social status, low income, less education and less social support. It is seen that vendors (man or youth) are working in this sector for many years with almost having some disability in their body like (reaching, stooping and found the condition that promote various occupation diseases i.e. musculoskeletal disorder (MSDs)Some factors responsible for that are poor working postures, lack of task variables, ergonomically poor work and workstation. As it is not required much skill and lacking prestige it has been ignored for the scientific consideration and special attention in the study. It is most unattended area for workstation design with ergonomics aspect. Hence it is necessary to work, working conditions, work layout and psychological determinants. And it is an essential step to initially understand the scope of the problems and find the ways to eliminate them.The primary goal of this research work is to study the existing problem of vendors (I. e. Making food, serve and taking money), identifies various MSDs problem due to working condition. Formulating questionnaires related to work, working conditions, MSDs problems, working hours, the problem faced during working and surveyed in the vendors area to get the information about the actual root cause of problems. This study is done by analysis with consideration of anthropological characteristics, use of ergonomics software (tools of ERGOFELLOW SOFTWARE), image analysis, posture study. And to give suggestions for the proper workstation and working method in which vendor can do better work without any MSDs problem and increase working efficiencyContentsABSTRACT1CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION11.1 AIM AND OBJECTIVE21.2 ASSUMPTION31.3 SCOPE OF PROJECT31.4 LIMITATION31.5 ORGANIZATION OF THE REPORT4CHAPTER 2: PROBLEM ON HAND62.1 INTRODUCTION62.2. PROBLEM DEFINATION72.2.1 WORKSTATION OBSERVATION72.2.2 OBSERVATION HAS DONE ON VENDORS72.3 METHODOLOGY82.4 STEPS FOR ACHIEVEMENT OF PROJECT GOAL102.5 CONCLUSION10CHAPTER 3: LITERATURE REVIEW113.1 INTRODUCTION113.2 VARIOUS APPROACHES TO THE PRODUCT DESIGN123.3 ERGONOMIC APPROACH TO PRODUCT DESIGN143.4. VARIUOS ERGONOMICS CONSIDERATION163.4.1 POSTURE ANALYSIS163.4.3 IMPORTANCES OF ERGONOMICS AT WORKPLACES173.4.4. ERGONOMICS RISK FACTORS183.4.5. MUSCULOSKELETAL DISORDER (MSDs)203.4.5. RANGE OF MOTION22CHAPTER 4: PRIMARY ERGONOMIC SURVEY284.1 INTRODUCTION284.2 OBSERVTION METHOD284.3 ERGOFELLOW SOFTWARE USED284.3.1 IMAGE ANALYSIS294.3.2VIDEO ANALYSIS304.4 DESIGN OF QUESTIONNARE304.5. ANALYSIS OF OCCUPATIONAL DISORERS WITH QUESTIONNAIRE304.6 ANALYSIS OF WORKING POSTURE324.4RULA (Rapid Upper Limb Assessment) ANALYSIS:344.4.1RULA TEST OF VENDOR -1344.4.2RLA TEST OF VENDOR -2364.5 OVEARALL SURVEY RESULT374.6CONCLUSION37CHAPTER 5: ERGONOMICS DESIGN OF VENDOR CART385.1 INTRODUCTION385.2 BASIC REQUIREMENT OF VENDOR CART395.3.1 EXISTING WORKPLACE395.3.2 CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF EXISTING VENDOR CART405.3.3. IDENTIFYING THE OPPORTUNITY FOR IMPROVEMENT (BASE ON SHORTCOMING)425.4PROPOSED ERGONOMIC DESIGN425.4.1 IDENTIFY FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS (FRS):425.4.2 IDENTIFYING THE DESIGN PARAMETERS (DPS)445.4.3 LINKING OF FRS AND DPS:46. 5.4.4 ERGONOMIC CONSIDERATION475.4.5. DESIGN DETAILS:515.5 CONCLUSION:55CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSION AND FUTURE SCOPE566.1 CONCLUSION566.2 FUTURE SCOPE:57

]LIST OF FIGURE

DESCRIPTION PAGE NO.1 Figure 2.1: Snaps of vendors during their working hours.62 Figure 2.2- Methodology: phase 183 Figure 2.3- Methodology: phase 2 and 394 Figure 3.4. The range limits of different postures of the trunk and up275 Figure 4.1.: Graph of % of vendors suffering from MSDs problem in different body parts.326 Figure 4.2.: Graph of % of vendors suffering from MSDs problem in different body parts.337 Fig 4.3 diagram posture angle during working vendor-2348 Fig 4.4 RULA result sheet for vendor 1359 Figure 4.5 RULA result sheet for vendor 23610 Figure 5.1: existing cart layout made by Catia v5 software4011 Figure 5.3: Dimension of existing cart4112 Figure 5.4 A sample tree diagram for the FR of Mobile fast-food4313 Figure 5.5 Design parameters of vendor cart4414 Figure 5.6 A sample tree diagram for the DP of vendor cart4515 Figure 5.7 Link between FRs and DP4616 FIGURE 5.8 PROPOSE A NEW MODEL54

1 Table 3.1 Ergonomic risk factors and related possible solution202 Table 3.2: Musculoskeletal disorders in body parts223 Table 3.3: The range limits of different postures of the trunk and upper body254 Table 3.4 directional signs of body segment rotation265 Table 4.1: Information for vendors participated in the survey316 Table 4.2 posture angle of vendor -1357 Table 4.3 posture angle of vendor -2368 Table 4.4 overall survey results379 Table 5.1 : Design parameters of existing cart4110 Table 5.2 Ergonomics measurement Table 14811 Table: 5.3 Ergonomics measurement Table 24912 Table 5.4 Ergonomics measurement Table 35013 Table 5.5 position of using parameters5114 Table 5.6 Design parameters of a new model54

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

In our country generally mobile fast-food business now becomes more reliable and self-employed business. For this business to be recognized vendor cart is a well-known mean of transportation space directly affect the business of a person. The working area belongs to the unorganized sector to run a business depending upon cart skill is not being required. Thats why there is a lack of not scientific consideration and special attention is unnecessary. A large number of youth, men and women are working in this sector for prolonged periods with inappropriate working posture, workstation design, and furlong working hours, task variable without consideration appropriate space for their movement. This leads to the development of different kinds of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) among them. As a problem shooter ergonomics place an essential rule in order to design a workplace in analyzing the task. The ergonomically designed workstation also gives healthy working environment, safety, increase efficiency, and reduce work related musculoskeletal injuries and problem such as occupational diseases, cumulative trauma, repetitive stress injuries, and occupational overexertion syndrome which mostly affect to arm and back.The complete work pattern for the vendor cart consist up taking orders, making and serving food, and collect money has to do work in static posture for long duration in a poor workstation which promote unnecessary in a physical effort. Standing position creates not only pressure on the spine and disc, but also knee and elbow pain. This type of posture can increase the pressure on the muscles, ligaments and other soft tissues of the musculoskeletal system. Hence the overall discomfort and pain in the back, neck, and shoulder are common symptoms observed in the vendors. Considering the above aspects it is been decided to take a step regarding the working pattern in this socially unattended area by introducing basic aspects of ergonomics which reduces work related MSDs and suggest of proper methods to work and for workstation comfortable without any physical fatigue.In the present study around 20 vendors from Nagpur have participated. To evaluate the actual presence of problem, a detailed questionnaire is made by considering the information related to MSDs problems. Working condition, compatibility, working hours, the problem faced during working. The existing workstation and worker, poor body postures are assessed and analyzed with the help of ERGOFELLOW SOFTWARE tools. After all analysis a workstation and working method are suggested at the same place where worker used to do the work. And to check the feasibility of working method and workstation various value from software, body parts movements within ROM, postures, are compared with the previous method and workstation to get the same result.1.1 AIM AND OBJECTIVEThe primary objective of this research work was to study existing workstation, MSDs problem, and psychological aspects among vendor. And remedy them with a proper scientific study and workstation design so that vendors can do better workout any consequences.Following objective is chosen for the achievement of AIM:-1. To study existing workstation, working layout aspect.2. To identify musculoskeletal risk factors and problems in this occupation.3. To analyses body postures and workstation with ergonomic aspects.4. To design workstation in which worker can do better work without musculoskeletal problems. 1.2 ASSUMPTION1. The vendors answered the questionnaires as accurately possible as they can.2. This study is limited to a small area in NAGPUR.3. As all of vendors working in Nagpur are male so gender factor is not considered.4. The information regarding their work, work layout, comfort level given by them is true and best of their experience.1.3 SCOPE OF PROJECTIt was decided to carry out this project on the road side vendors and their carts. The actual workstation was organized. But due to irregular fashion of keeping utensils and containers were not in the range of vendors body parts. As a result of which vendors offend stress the body during the work. In the traditional vendor cart workplace was not made by considering the vendors comfort. Also, after discussion, it was found that many vendors were suffering from back, shoulder and neck problems.Here it is decided to study workstation, working postures of the vendors to help of ergonomics aspects and ERGOFELLOW software tools. And suggest a proper method and workstation design to reduce the physical problems.

1.4 LIMITATIONAs the vendors have less education, lack of knowledge about proper workstation. It was quite difficult to convince the vendor to participate in the project work. It eliminates the discussion with vendors about the problems faced by them and benefits after workstation design.

1.5 ORGANIZATION OF THE REPORT

CHAPTER 2This chapter describes The Problem is defined after a precise observation regarding workstation, vendors activities during a complete a business. Workstation observation, Observation has done on vendors. The various methods used for workstation analysis Description of steps and their analysis of project workCHAPTER 3This chapter describes the literature reviewed contained the following points which are very useful for the successes of the project. Ergonomics intervention for preventing musculoskeletal disorders in the workplace. Evaluation methods and suggestion for a good workstation design. Questionnaire development to access the actual problem. Ergonomic its importance and risk factors at work place. Musculoskeletal disorder, its risk factors and various disorders in body parts. Range of motion and the range limits of different posture of trunk and upper body with directional sign of body segment rotation.CHAPTER 4This chapter describes the primary ergonomic surveyed the following points which are useful for the project. Description of steps and their analysis of project work. Design of questionnaire, its analysis with survey result, job description and task analysis with the help of observation method and Ergo-fellow software tools. Overall result of ergonomic analysis in base on primary survey.

CHAPTER 5This chapter discusses- Basic requirement of the vendor cart Critical analysis of existing VENDOR CART Identifying the opportunity for improvement (base on shortcoming) Identifying the functional requirements (FRs) Identifying the design parameters (DPs) and linking of FRs with DPs Ergonomics consideration and design details.CHAPTER 6This chapter deals with- Conclusion and future scope of the project.

CHAPTER 2: PROBLEM ON HAND 2.1 INTRODUCTIONOn an average, each vendor does work for 5 to 6 hours in a day. To get the actual idea about the workstation 20 vendors has been visited space for work over the cart were observed by measuring the working area, position of the vendor in the working area, position of containers over the cart, availability of the raw materials for the preparation for food, the technique adopted for serving food. Following figure shows, vendors postures and workstation arrangement during their business.

1 Figure 2.1: Snaps of vendors during their working hours.

2.2. PROBLEM DEFINATIONThe problem is defined after a precise observation regarding workstation, vendors activities during a complete a business. Following are some observation- 2.2.1 WORKSTATION OBSERVATION1. Working space is not hygienic considering vendors comfort.2. Generally two and three containers carrying water, food storage box, stove, serving containers, money collecting box is being observed in the workstation.3. After serving the food generally it is being found that customers keep the serving intense randomly on the either side of the cart.4. There is no any proper method to keep the things in the desirable place to do work with less effort.5. Work is always done without considering the body fatigues, body parts range, arrangement of workstation and comfort etc.2.2.2 OBSERVATION HAS DONE ON VENDORS1. Forward bending of trunk and neck is large2. The Vendor does the work in a static position for long duration.3. Rotation of trunk on both sides of the body is occurring may times during work.4. Vendors do not have the knowledge about proper workstation.5. Vendors dont consider about the items distances from the body range.6. Vendors do not consider the effort level, body fatigue during working.7. Vendors are always trying to adjust with given facilities, without considering that much.8. No one is conscious about the work layout, conditions, and proper facilities to do work with less effort.2.3 METHODOLOGYThe goal of the project was to find out the major WMSDs such as back, shoulder, wrist, neck pain the vendor carts are responsible for above the problem and risk factors. The anthropometries parameter of the human dimension is responsible for WMSDs problem. The dimension of the vendor cart should be proper design. In doing so the steps we have followed are shown in the flow chart below:

2 Figure 2.2- Methodology: phase 1

3 Figure 2.3- Methodology: phase 2 and 3

2.4 STEPS FOR ACHIEVEMENT OF PROJECT GOAL

1. Review of literature.2. Design of questionnaire.3. Survey to identify various musculoskeletal problems of vendors.4. Analysis of working posture with help of ergonomic software.5. Existing design.6. Proposed ergonomic design.7. Design details.

2.5 CONCLUSION

As per the problem which is being found through an observation from both workstation & vendors activities. We are trying to resolve these problems through ergonomics aspect.

CHAPTER 3: LITERATURE REVIEW

3.1 INTRODUCTION

Study of ErgonomicsThe word ERGONOMICS comes from two Greek words-ERGO- WordNOMOUS-LawThe names developed in 1949 by Murrell during World War II after working with a team of physiologists, anatomists and engineers at Cambridge University. At the end of the War Ergonomic Research Society is formed by this group, which is now the forerunner of similar organizations in many countries todays Ergonomics means The Natural Laws for doing work, also known as Human Engineering implies to fit the jobs and worker together. Ergonomics is the study of designing equipment and devices that fit the human body, its movements, and its related abilities.A more detailed definition describes ergonomics as- According to International Labor Organization (ILO) -It is the application of human biological sciences in conjunction with engineering sciences to the worker and his working environment, so to obtain maximum satisfaction for the worker which at the same time enhances productivity.The International Ergonomics Association (IEA) -Ergonomics (for human factors) is the scientific discipline concerned with the understanding of interactions among humans and other elements of a system, and the profession that applies theory, principles, data and methods to design in order to optimize human well-being and overall system performance. [1]According to the International Ergonomics Association there are three disciplines of ergonomics- Physical ergonomics: is concerned with anatomy and some of the anthropometric, Physiological and bio mechanical characteristics as they related to physical activity. Cognitive ergonomics: is concerned with mental processes, such as perception, memory, reasoning, and motor response. Organizational ergonomics: is concerned with the optimization of social, technical systems, including their organizational structures, policies, and processes.

3.2 VARIOUS APPROACHES TO THE PRODUCT DESIGN

Hubka [2] proposes to use process structure and function structure to elaborate and solve design problems. For instance, let us take this problem statement: "A welding fixture is to be designed that is capable of bringing a work piece into a desired position for welding, and to hold it in that position during work. A universally usable fixture is required for application to a wide range of tasks...";the design problem is represented by a process structure which is a trans formation between the input and output situations demanded by the problem (in this instance, from situation where all work pieces are unwelded and unfastened, it must go to an output situation where all work pieces fastened and unwelded) ,and the function structure in terms of verbs(such as enable change in height, connect with the fixed frame, etc.) enabling these processes to happen. Design solutions are represented, in conceptual design for instance, as schematic diagrams of abstract elements in action.In Pye's view[3],functional designs are those that are designed on ".measurable, quantifiable, testable criteria.. " and excludes aesthetic/ appearance/ decoration/ ornamentation and applied art aspects. In short, functional designs are ".. things designed for use and not solely for contemplation such as pictures and statues." To him, designer's "..freedom in choosing the shape is an imposed freedom...the limitations arise only in small parts from the physical nature of the world, but in a very large measure from considerations of economy and style, Both are matters purely of choice." He, however, maintains a distinction between the purpose of advice and the result of a device being used. In his words, "the purposes of things are purposes of men, and change according to who entertains them. The fact that every device when used produces concrete, measurable, objective results is the only basis for the theory of design. He takes the example of a cargo liner whose purpose to the owner is to make money, to the captain is to ply seas, etc. the result however is "cargo transported overseas"Suh[4] maintains that function is something "we want to achieve in design(say, to go to the moon),and a physical solution is "how we want to achieve it" (e.g., physical embodiments of rockets and space capsules). Functional requirements are described in ten us of asset of FR (functional requirements) (such as: for birds, flying, vertical take-off, power for propulsion, etc.), And these are satisfied by asset of design parameters DPs of the structure (in this case the wing structure of the bird). In Suh's view, reduction of the cost of a material or maintenance of a material property such as toughness while the material cost is reduced is considered functional requirements. He does not believe that there is any method of function to form transition; however, his principles in his view decide whether or not a design, described in terms of asset of DP(design parameters),is a good one, against a set of FRs.Yoshikawa [5] proposes functions as "asset of a sub-class of abstract concepts "in his Genera Design Theory. Function of a pencil, for instance, is that letters are written on papers with it. This function manifests itself as a result of the activation of a number of attributes of the entities constituting the design (e.g., the total form, tip form, structure, length and section for writing letters). He describes visible function as a behavior exhibited under a given circumstance; the total of the behaviors the design could potentially exhibit under various possible circumstances are called its latent functions. Problem-to-solution transition in real-world situations is seen as a sequence of patching operations on a promising provisional solution, until the whole problem specification is met. How exactly these operations have to bed one is not clear, although he presumes some form of search might be involved.

3.3 ERGONOMIC APPROACH TO PRODUCT DESIGN

Chou & Hsiao (2005) have used two-dimensional anthropometric data for developing an electric scooter in Taiwan. The developed electric scooter resulted in a significant improvement in its appearance and ergonomic performance. The hierarchical estimation method was applied to 60 anthropometric variables by using the 1988 US Army anthropometric survey data and used to design an occupant package layout in a passenger car (You & Ryu 2005).In 2006 Sebo et.al. have collected anthropometric data that were performed by 12 primary care physicians on 24 adult volunteers in Geneva, Switzerland and that was published in 2008. [6]For ergonomic product design with better safety, comfort and health consideration three dimensional anthropometry is very important as it gather rich information. Chang et.al. (2007) have used three-dimensional anthropometric measurements that offer much more surface information than traditional dimension measurement and proposed methods for low cost portable hand-hell laser scanner along with a piece of glass used as a hand support to reduce scanning shadow areas.[7]Engineering design is a strong determinant of workplace ergonomics. A survey among engineers in 20 Danish enterprises indicated that engineers are not aware that they influence the work environment of other people (Broberg 2007). Ergonomics had a low rating among engineers, perhaps because neither management nor safety organizations expressed any expectations in that area. The study further indicated that the effects of ergonomics training in engineering schools were very limited. [8]The anthropometric measurement can be used as a basis for the design of workstations and personal protective equipments that can make work environments safer and more users friendly. Currently, there is increasing demand for this kind of information among those who develop measures to prevent occupational injuries and increase the level of satisfaction. Anthropometric measurements among 1805 Filipino workers in 31 manufacturing industries showed data for standing, sitting, hand and foot dimensions, breadth and circumference of various body part and grip strength that was the first ever comprehensive anthropometric measurement of Filipino manufacturing workers in the country which is seen as a significant contribution to the Filipino labor force who are increasingly employed by both domestic and foreign multinationals and was published in 2007 (Pardo -Lu 2007). This study helps Filipino working population for the economic design of workstations, personal protective equipment, tools, furniture and interface systems that aid in providing a safer, effective, more productive and user friendly workplace.[9] Das, Shikdar & Winters (2007) demonstrated the beneficial effect of a combined work design and ergonomics approach, especially for the redesign of a workstation for a repetitive drill press operation that increase both the production output and operator sat is faction. The result showed significant improvement in production quantity (22%) and quality (50%) output as a consequence of applying work design and ergonomics principles.[10]Laios & Giannatsis (2010) have employed virtual modeling technique and the method of principle component analysis for ergonomic evaluation and redesign of children bicycles based on anthropometric data. In Greece the redesigned bicycles are now in full Production and distribution is underway in many commercial outlets as proper fitting increases cycling performance, efficiency, and comfort and injury prevention. [11]

3.4. VARIUOS ERGONOMICS CONSIDERATION

3.4.1 POSTURE ANALYSISBody posture can be analysed using Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA) method also by REBA (Rapid Entire Body Assessment).RULA is a method developed for use in ergonomics investigation of workplaces where work related upper limb disorders are reported. RULA is a screening tool that assesses biomechanical and postural loading on the whole body with particular attention to the neck, trunk and upper limbs. A RULA assessment requires little time to complete and the scoring generates an action list, which indicated the level of intervention required to reduce the risks of a broader ergonomic study.Drs. McAtamney and Corlett(1993) of the University of Nottinghams Institute of Occupational Ergonomics developed the RULA[12]. Steps for posture assessment by RULA,1. Observing and selecting the posture(s) to assess: - A RULA assessment represents a moment in the work cycle and it is important to observe the pressures being adopted whilst undertaking the tasks prior to selecting the posture (s) for assessment. Depending upon the type of study, selection may be made of the longest held posture or what appears to be the worst posture(s) adopted. In some instances, for example when the work cycle is long or postures are varied it may be more appropriate to take an assessment at regular intervals. It will be evident that if assessments are taken at set intervals over the working period the proportion of time spent in the various postures can be evaluated.2. Scoring and Recording the posture: - Decide whether the left, right or both upper arms are to be assessed. Score the posture of each body part using the software. Review the scoring and make any adjustment if required. Select calculation button.3. Action Level: - The grand score can be compared to the Action Level list however it must be remembered that since the human body is a complex and adaptive system, they provide a guide for further action.RULA sheet format given Appendix 1.3.4.2. INDIAN ANTHROPOMETRIC DIMENSIONS (FOR ERGONOMICS DESIGN PRACTICE)This is the book written by Debkumar Chakrabarti of National Institute of Design. It gives the detailed information about the anthropometry of Indian population, their design application, measurement of all body parts in various postures. It can be used in any ergonomic workstation design. [13]3.4.3 IMPORTANCES OF ERGONOMICS AT WORKPLACES

To make the work comfortable for the individual workers. To reduce the risk factors that leads to discomfort. To reduce the primary risk factors for MSDs To do work more efficiently. To increase comfort of worker at workplace. To get greater job satisfaction. To increase productivity. To make healthy and pain free worker To reduce accidents assure safety. To reduce absenteeism

3.4.4. ERGONOMICS RISK FACTORSErgonomic risk factors are workplace elements that are associated with discomfort you may experience, and if ignored, over time many contribute to wear and tear on your body. Following table 2.1shows a risk factors and related possible solution. [14]RISK FACTORS

DEFINITIONPOSSIBLE SOLUTIONS

Poor work organizationAspects of how a job is organized.Examples include monotonous task, machine paced work, inadequate breaks, multiple deadlinesReasonable workload, sufficient breaks, task variety, individual autonomy

Continual RepetitionPerforming the same motion over and overRedesign the task to reduce the number of repetitions or motions; increase recovery time, rotate to different tasks.

Excessive ForceForceful body movement. Excessive physical effort, pulling, pounding, and pushingReduce the exertion needed to accomplish the task; redesign task; assign more staff; use mechanical assists.

Awkward postureProlonge dbending,reaching, twisting, squatting, kneeling. Awkward posture is the opposite of natural position.Design task and equipment to keep the body in neutral positions. Neutral positions put no undue stress on muscles, joints and nerves.

Stationary PositionsStaying in one position too long, causing muscles to contract and fatigue.Design task to avoid stationary position; provide opportunities to change positions.

Excessive Direct PositionsContact of the body with a hard surface or edge, such as the corner of a table or too little illuminationAvoid resting body on hard surfaces, such as desks and counters. Upgrade equipment or provide cushioning: e.g. ergonomic pens, mats for standing.

Inadequate lightingSources and levels of light that provide too much of too little illumination.Adjust natural and artificial lighting. Avoid direct and indirect light that can cause eye-strain. Use glare screens, shades for windows.

1 Table 3.1 Ergonomic risk factors and related possible solution3.4.5. MUSCULOSKELETAL DISORDER (MSDs)Injuries and disorders of the soft tissues (muscles, tendons, ligaments, joints and cartilage) and nervous system are called as musculoskeletal disorders. They can affect nearly all tissues, nerves and tendons sheaths; most frequently involve the arms and back. Occupational safety and health professionals have called these disorders as cumulative trauma, repeated trauma, repetitive stress injuries, and occupational overexertion syndrome.MSDs usually result from exposure to multiple risk factors that can cause disorder not from a single event or trauma such as a fail, collision, or entanglement. These painful and disabling injuries generally developed gradually over week, months, and years. MSDs can cause pain, numbness, tingling, staff joints, movement difficulty, muscle loss, and sometimes paralysis. These disorder include-carpel tunnel syndrome, tendinitis, sciatica, herniated discs, and low back pain. Parts of the Body Affected by MSDs are Arms, Back, Hands, Wrists, Fingers, Legs, Neck, and Shoulders.When the physical capabilities of worker do not match with the physical requirement of the job that times WMSDs occurs.[15]3.4.4.1. MSD RISK FACTORS

Force Repetition Awkward postures Static postures Quick motions Compression or contact stress Vibration Cold temperatures3.4.4.2. MUSCULOSKELETAL DISORDERS IN BODY PARTS

Following table 2.2 shows the possible cause of diseases and their symptoms to various body parts during work.

Body parts affectedSymptoms Possible causeDisease name

Fingers Difficulty moving finger, snapping and jerking movementsRepetitive and forceful manual task without time to recoverTrigger finger

Shoulder Pain, stiffnessWorking with the hands above the headRotator cuff tendinitis

Wrist Pain, swellingRepetitive and forceful hand and wrist motionsCarpel tunnel syndrome

Hand Pain, swellingArms outstretched sideways, forward or upwardTenosynovitis

Back Low back pain, shooting pain or numbness in the upper legs Trunk curved forward while standing/sittingBack disability

Legs Feet,leg,pain, varicose veinsStanding in one place too long, kneeling continuouslyStanding disability, knee pain

Neck Neck pain Head inclined too much forward or backward Cervical spondylitis

2 Table 3.2: Musculoskeletal disorders in body parts3.4.5. RANGE OF MOTION

Generally Range of motion refers to the distance and direction a joint can move to its full protection. Each specific joint has a normal range of motion that is expressed in degrees after being measured with a Goniometer (i.e., an instrument that measures angles from axis of the joint). It is very much useful in workstation design for a worker, assess the worst posture which is not suitable for the work and can cause the MSDs problem, also useful to eliminate the muscle fatigue, joint pain during working. Study or analysis of workstation and worker with the help of ergonomics assessment tools such as IMAGE ANALYSIS, VIDEO ANALYSIS, RULA (Rapid upper Limb Assessment), REBA (Rapid Entire Body Assessment), SUZZANE RODGERS, MOORE E GARG (The strain index), and DISCOMFORT QUESTIONNAIRE is very much easy with the help of this information. Range of motion can be divided into-[16]a) Neutral range: The range of motion which presents minimal discomfort to the joint and adjacent body segments.b) Effort range: The range of-motion that can be achieved with mild discomfort to the joint and adjacent body segments.c) Maximum range: The maximum limits of a joints range-of-motionAccording to the above three ranges of motion, the range limits of different posture of the trunk and upper body is shown in table and Directional signs of body segment rotation in table, related image are shown by figure 3.4

FIG. NO.POSTURENEUTRAL RANGE( in degree x0)EFFORT RANGE(in degree xo)MAXIMUM RANGE(in degree xo)

a.Viewing angles(vertical)-45 to 15-70 to 48

b.Viewing angle(horizontal)-15 to 15-30 to 30

c.Neck /head vertical angle -45 to 45-75 to 75

d.Neck /head rotation angle-20 to 20-45 to 45-80 to 80

e.Neck /head lateral angle-20 to 20-35 to 35

f.Trunk flexion-extension-30 to 30-70 to 30

g.Trunk twist/rotation angle -20to 20-42 to 42

h.Trunk lateral bending -20 to 20-40 to 40

I.Wrist extension-flexion -15 to 15-45 to 45-85 to 85

j.Wrist deviation angle-15 to 5-40 to 25-45 to 40

k.Elbow included angle70 to 13550 to -16035 to 180

l.Forearm rotation angle-90 to -30-120 to 30-180 to 90

m.Shoulder extension- flexion-27 to -45-45 to 90-61 to 188

n.Shoulder add, -abduction-45 to 20-90 to 45-134 to 48

o.Human rotation angle-20 to 45-34 to 97

3 Table 3.3: The range limits of different postures of the trunk and upper body

DIRECTIONAL SIGNlS OF BODY SEGMENT ROTATIONFIGURE NO.POSTUREPOSITIVE SIGN(+)NEGATIVE (-)

a.Viewing angles(vertical)Upward rotationDownward rotation

b.Viewing angle(horizontal)Left rotationRight rotation

c.Neck /head vertical angle Extension Flexion

d.Neck /head rotation angleLeft rotationRight rotation

e.Neck /head lateral angleRight bendingLeft bending

f.Trunk flexion-extensionExtension Flexion

g.Trunk twist/rotation angle Left rotationRight rotation

h.Trunk lateral bending Right bendingLeft bending

I.Wrist extension-flexion Flexion Extension

j.Wrist deviation angleRadial deviationUlnar deviation

k.Elbow included angleAlways positive-

l.Forearm rotation angleSupinationPronation

m.Shoulder extension- flexionFlexion Extension

n.Shoulder add, -abductionAdductionAbduction

o.Human rotation angleMedial rotationLateral rotation

4 Table 3.4 directional signs of body segment rotation

4 Figure 3.4. The range limits of different postures of the trunk and up CHAPTER 4: PRIMARY ERGONOMIC SURVEY

4.1 INTRODUCTIONIn this research various ergonomics methods and techniques have been used and applied to obtain information related to musculoskeletal disorder and risk factors. Ergonomics evaluation is done by observational methods with the help of some tools of ERGOFELLOW SOFTWARE such as Image analysis, Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA). Survey is done by making the questionnaire related to work, working condition and work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs) to get about actual problem existence.4.2 OBSERVTION METHODThis method needs to observe the procedure of the work by vendor and the positions of their odd posture during performing their job. The observation method has two way is through by video analysis or image capture. By this method, the position of body posture like awkward or normal position can be defined and also can find out the angles of each position of everybody member. These data will analysis by a tool assessment such as RULA (Rapid Upper Limb Assessment)

4.3 ERGOFELLOW SOFTWARE USEDThe software was developed by FBF SISTEMAS in 2009 and it is very useful for ergonomists and for all professionals in the area of occupational safety and health. The software ERGOFELLOW has 17 ergonomic tools to evaluate and improve workplace conditions, in order to reduce occupational risk and increase productivity. [17]

1. NIOSH (Revised Lifting Equation)2. OWAS (Ovaco Working Posture Analysing System)3. RULA (Rapid Upper Limb Assessment)4. REBA (Rapid Entire Body Assessment)5. SUZZANE RODGERS6. MOORE E GARG (The Strain Index)7. DISCOMFORT QUESTIONNAIRE8. QEC (Quick Exposure Check)9. LEHMANN10. IMAGE ANALYSIS11. VIDEO ANALYSIS12. ANTHROPOMETRY13. CALCULATION OF FORCE14. PPE (Personal Protective Equipment)15. HEAT STRESS16. NOISE EXPOSURE (OSHA)17. TYPING EVALUATIONFrom those tools only three tools have been used, i.e. IMAGE ANALYSIS, VIDEO ANALYSIS, RULA (Rapid Upper Limb Assessment). 4.3.1 IMAGE ANALYSISImage analysis is very important in the Ergonomics, mainly for evaluation of position and determination of points and angles. In this software, user can open an image, move it with the scrollbars, apply polar and linear grids, and calculate angles.

4.3.2 VIDEO ANALYSISVideo analysis is very important in the Ergonomics, mainly to evaluate posture, time in each posture, time of the work cycle, and improvement in the task act. In this software, user can load a video, play it in three different speeds, increase zooms, regulate the sound and pause at any point during the execution4.4 DESIGN OF QUESTIONNARE`To get the information about the existence of problems related to vendor and working area, one questionnaire is made (Hindi and English) containing the questions related to, whole information of vendors (age, weight, height, working years) MSDs problems, working conditions, working environment, compatibility, working hours, the problem faced during working. (The Questionnaire is shown in appendix 1)4.5. ANALYSIS OF OCCUPATIONAL DISORERS WITH QUESTIONNAIRE A survey is done on 20 vendors by asking those questions (with the help of Hindi sheet) to them and data are analyzed.Information of vendor is given the Table 4.1 and Results are shown graphically in fig. 4.1Total number of vendors 20 Age - 21 to 46 yearsWorking hours - 5 to 6 hours

Sl noName AgeWeight Height Years of experienceWorking hours

1Sandip Jogdane26605.535

2Netish Desai35655.7126

3Ekbal Khan40685.3206

4Samir Mujmule28705.746

5Rum Wnkhade46685.6205

6Nilesh More30605.265

7Imran43675.5155

8Amon Sakat32695.176

9Sagar Jogdande2870635

10Pandit26685.725

11Suraj Solanki32665.465

12Pappu27635.625

13Chotu23585.426

14Anil kumar42695.7175

15Ashok Desai32615.585

16Sumit Amle40705.1155

17Vikash Pande29605.355

18Nikil Bisandre30655.786

19Soyal Khan32635.25

20Mridul akat28705.645

5 Table 4.1: Information for vendors participated in the surveyThose all surveyed sheet is analyzed and it is seen that many vendors was facing the MSDs problem in various body parts. The percentage of vendors suffering from MSDs in different parts of the body are as back 70%, Neck 75%, Shoulder 55%, Wrist 40%, Leg 45%, Knee 50%, Arm 40%, Elbow 35%. The result is shown graphically in Figure 4.1.

5 Figure 4.1.: Graph of % of vendors suffering from MSDs problem in different body parts.

4.6 ANALYSIS OF WORKING POSTUREImage analysis tool of ERGOFELLOW SOFTWARE and standard ROM (Range of Motion) (Table 2.2) containing the value of angle of different body parts movement are used to analyses posture. Photography and video are taken during working. Photo and freeze frame from video records are subjected to analyses. Posture angle is determined to help of photos. Measurement of the angle between the angle between the body parts, the length of working time for specific repetitive harmful postures and effort on the vendors is taken into account. Those angles of body parts movements are comparable with the table 2.1 and table 2.2 to get information about MSDs problems. Following figure shows the vendor posture analysis with the help of image analysis tools by drawing the different analysis on the image during the work.

Vendor- 1 selected for analysis was Sandi Jogdan , Age-26, Weight-60 and Height-5.5 feet 6 Figure 4.2.: diagram posture angle during working vendor-1

Vendor 2 selected for analysis was Pappu, Age-27, Weight-63 and Height-5.6 feet

7 Fig 4.3 diagram posture angle during working vendor-2From above observation, it is seen that the posture is not suitable for working as the neck and trunk forward bending angle is not in a neutral angle (see table 2.2). Lower arm and upper arm too much angle to the body, also long duration static position is seen during working which is very much harmful for the body. Flexion, forward bending, in the hip-joint and back can cause lordships in the lumbar region. 4.4 RULA (Rapid Upper Limb Assessment) ANALYSIS:4.4.1 RULA TEST OF VENDOR -1Angle Degree

Neck Angle

25o

Trunk Angle

450

Upper arm

300

Lower arm

45o

Wrist

160

Leg

Balance

6 Table 4.2 posture angle of vendor -1Lower arm- across the midline of the body, Wrist-wrist is bent away from the midline, Wrist twist- twisted away from handshake position, neck- twist, trunk-twist, leg and feet are well supported and in an evenly balanced posture RESULT

8 Fig 4.4 RULA result sheet for vendor 1

From this it is seen that the score of RULA assessment is 7 i.e. high risk of MSDs problem. Hence there is need to investigate the working posture and action must take as early as possible to avoid further discrepancies.4.4.2 RLA TEST OF VENDOR -2Angle Degree

Neck Angle20

Trunk Angle 5

Upper arm30

Lower arm45

Wrist 15

LegBalance

7 Table 4.3 posture angle of vendor -2Lower Arm- across outside of the body, Wrist twist- twisted away from handshake position, Neck- twist, Leg and Feet are well supported and in an evenly balanced posture.RESULT

9 Figure 4.5 RULA result sheet for vendor 2From this it is seen that the score of RULA assessment is 5 i.e. high risk of MSDs problem. Hence there is need to investigate the working posture and changes are required soon.4.5 OVEARALL SURVEY RESULT

ACTIVITYTOOLSCORERISK LEVELACTION

Vendor made and served food at ground level in standing positionRULA7 & 5High Investigation & changes required immediately

WMSDsShoulder, neck,Elbow, back, Leg,High Change working posture

8 Table 4.4 overall survey results

4.6 CONCLUSIONFrom the above analysis, it was confirmed that the working place is not suitable for working and vendors. Vendors are going through the MSDs problem and there is need to study, analysis that working area, to get a proper method or technique or remedy all those problems.

CHAPTER 5: ERGONOMICS DESIGN OF VENDOR CART

5.1 INTRODUCTION

Workplace to be functional, both the user of the space and work to be performed must be considered. Workplace arrangement should consider worker comfort, physical constraints and performance requirement. Some considerations regarding worker are as- What the workers need to see? The amount of communication with owner Equipment and material that the worker must be able to work with and reach Body clearance that is needed by the workerIt is important to consider both physiological and psychological elements in the design of the workplace. Space should be designed so that proper posture can be maintained, body weight can be properly distributed, cardiovascular action is properly maintained, and the possibility of fatigue is minimized.A worker should receive psychological motivation from the workplace.to facilities this, the workplace needs to be attractive, convenient, organized, safe and simple.Arm reach and hand motion are important considerations in the workplace design. There are two types of arms reach; normal work area and maximum reach area. Normal area is the position of a workplace that can be reached by hand without moving the arm from the side of the body. Maximum reach area is the position of a workplace that can be reached by stretching the arms to full length without disturbing the body. Ideally a worker should able a perform work at a station without moving beyond the normal work area or occasionally maximum reach area [21]5.2 BASIC REQUIREMENT OF VENDOR CART

The vendor cart is generally a compact mobile cart fully self-contained and design to serve of limited menu. Typically in vendors cart stove is being used for making and reheating the fast food. Most of the carts which is being surveyed use an LPG cylinder to heat the food, containers over the cart, availability the raw material for the preparation of the food, money collection box. Colorful canopy is installed in protective the food preparation area from contamination, provide some shad and advertised cart location.Cart is generally built from materials that resist corrosion and are easy to clean. This generally means that they are made up of plastic, wood or fiberglass. The food preparation body of the cart is offending mounted on a chassis that can be easily towed, to a vendor location by hand. Sl. No Basic things

1.Flat table

2.Canopy

3Storage box

4Containers

5Stove

5.3. EXISTING DESIGN 5.3.1 EXISTING WORKPLACE The work place for all the vendors is depends upon the area or the periphery over their own cart it has been found that the in most of the case vendors keep their water in the container for cleaning of the utensils out of the cart, just nearby their comfortable working zone of their cart.

5.3.2 CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF EXISTING VENDOR CART The critical analysis is being done by surveying about 20 vendors, which is being displayed in the Following figure 5.1 and 5.2.

10 Figure 5.1: existing cart layout made by Catia v5 software

11 Figure 5.3: Dimension of existing cartComplete analysis has been summarized in the following table:-Sl. NoDESIGN PARAMETERSDIMENSION(MM)

1.Cart height 2128

2.Working table to canopy height1368

3Working table height760

4.Working table length1500

5.Working table width1000

6.Working table thickness50

7.Food storage box length1300

8.Food storage box width450

9Food storage box height450

10. Big container diameter200

11. Big container height280

9 Table 5.1 : Design parameters of existing cart5.3.3. IDENTIFYING THE OPPORTUNITY FOR IMPROVEMENT (BASE ON SHORTCOMING)1. Often its been seen in practice that utensils have been kept in an irregular fashion.2. Unhygienic / unscientific to work throughout the cart periphery.3. There is a possibility of any sought of accident regarding fire where since the cart which where been surveyed were made up of wood.4. As a comfortable standing and sitting posture the table height creates a problem.5. Basically vendors cart are mobile carts, thus to the movement of cart become problematic because of the height of the storage box.6. Due to the height of shelves it is inconvenient to see through the glass.5.4 PROPOSED ERGONOMIC DESIGN

5.4.1 IDENTIFY FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS (FRS):Identify Functional requirements (FRs) are a minimum set of independent requirements that completely characterizes the functional needs of the product (or software, organizations, systems, etc.) in the functional domain. By definition, each FRs is independent of every other FR at the time the FRs are established. The FRs must be stated with expected environmental variation, customer usage variation, and required useful life before disposal as requirements of the system so that accommodation to handle these noise variables is included in the design. After establishing the top-level FRs and DPs, the decomposition starts in order to achieve a design that could be implemented. During the decomposition, the independence axiom is used to make sure that an acceptable design is achieved. When the detailed design is completed and FR and DP hierarchies are obtained, the second axiom, information axiom, and the constraints are used to find the best design solution. In the design process of any device of meaningful complexity, there will be a hierarchical ordering to the functional requirements (FRs). Figure 5.2 displays the functional hierarchy for a mobile fast food cart. The most general functional description appears at the top of the hierarchy and is labeled mobile fast food At the next lower level in the hierarchy; the functions are broken up into four separate functions.

12 Figure 5.4 A sample tree diagram for the FR of Mobile fast-food

5.4.2 IDENTIFYING THE DESIGN PARAMETERS (DPS)Design Parameters (DPs)Variables that describe the design in the physical solution space. DPs are the physical characteristics of a particular design that has been specified through the design process. The design process starts with identifying the customer needs (CNs). Then, functional requirements (FRs), design parameters (DPs), and constraints are derived from the CNs. If a customer need specifies existence of particular subcomponents or a part of the design solution, it is considered as a DP [Suh, 2001]. The top level FRs that are derived from the CNs should be explicitly stated in solution neutral terms (i.e., without thinking about existing designs or what the design solution should be) to avoid imposing unnecessary design constraints and therefore encouraging creativity in finding innovative solutions.

13 Figure 5.5 Design parameters of vendor cart

14 Figure 5.6 A sample tree diagram for the DP of vendor cart 5.4.3 LINKING OF FRS AND DPS:

15 Figure 5.7 Link between FRs and DP. 5.4.4 ERGONOMIC CONSIDERATION

Nowadays the Indian market follows standards are basically referred from American or European ergonomics standards. It becomes a quiet, serious concern when we talk about working efficiency, personal health over the usage cycle. Erroneously designed systems persuade improper postures leads to operational uneasiness. Designing of systems without considering body dimensional requirements for envisioning users causes operational uneasiness, musculoskeletal and sometimes physiological disorders.For getting the , anthropometric data, the researchers revised themselves amongst various populations in different countries and are used as ready references by designers. Specialists suggest that anthropometric data to be used for specific groups should be based on same population groups. [9]. In our day to day life the global products today are designed for global audience, which offers very less flexibility, customization to users across. There are a lot of examples where its been found that a bulk of furniture in Indian market fails to address the issue of designs confining to Indian anthropometric data. It is because of absence of indigenous design development in furniture and above them to stay in the competition, manufacturers often copy existing furniture designs and fold them in the local market. Furniture designing which were deprived of consideration for the proper body dimensional requirement of intended users do not serve purpose and have less acceptance value. Along with this Indian behavior also differs from western behavior. Designing of products should be based on factors like users age, sex and postural considerations.Table underneath shows key ergonomic parameters for 50 percentile of Indian dimension used in deciding critical dimensions of design a prototype.

5.4.4.1 ERGONOMICS MEASUREMENT TABLE 1

10 Table 5.2 Ergonomics measurement Table 1source: Chakrabarti, D.,1997: Indian Anthropometric Dimensions for Ergonomic design Practice, NID, Ahmedabad, India 5.4.4.2 ERGONOMICS MEASUREMENT TABLE 2

11 Table: 5.3 Ergonomics measurement Table 2source: Chakrabarti, D.,1997: Indian Anthropometric Dimensions for Ergonomic design Practice, NID, Ahmedabad, India 5.4.4.3. ERGONOMICS MEASUREMENT TABLE 3

12 Table 5.4 Ergonomics measurement Table 3 source: Chakrabarti, D.,1997: Indian Anthropometric Dimensions for Ergonomic design Practice, NID, Ahmedabad, India

5.4.5. DESIGN DETAILS:Materials used in cart furniture include wood, plywood, chipboard, plastic, mild steel or stainless steel. Exposed wood surfaces are varnished or laminated with plastic. Shelves are of wood or plastic coated chipboard; metal shelves are best for pans and pots. Special equipments like universal cutting board, pull out drawers, pull out towel rails, hinged compartments etc. save time and effort. Plates washers to be fitted on the left side of sink.9

NUMBER POSITION

1Storage box

2Stove

3Drinking water

4Cutting food table

5,6,7Big & small container

8Shelve box

9Money box

13 Table 5.5 position of using parametersSLNO.DESIGN PARAMETERSDIMENSION(mm)FIGURE

1. Working table height(H)779

L

H D

2. Working table length(L)1500

3. Working table width(D)1004

4. Storage box height ( h)1209

h l d

5. Storage box length(l)1400

6. Storage box width(d)500

7. Shelve height(h)1749

w

8. Shelve box depth(w)300

9. Canopy height1869

14 Table 5.6 Design parameters of a new model

5.4.6. PROPOSE OF A NEW MOBILE VENDOR CART

16 FIGURE 5.8 PROPOSE A NEW MODEL

5.5 CONCLUSION:

Using anthropometry data, the work reach envelope analysis is carried out to relocate various elements of work station. Ergo fellow and CATIA-V5 software the existing situation is modeled to identify the need of redesigning of a cart.It may be suggested from the present study that the design criteria should be selected based on the anthropometric dimensions of Indian. There are chances of mismatch between the Indian dimensions and available vendor carts. The ill and improper design of carts may create many problems for the vendors such as fatigue, muscular stress, and discomfort/pain in different body parts. Based on the relevant dimensions, the anthropometric data of Indian in table-5.2,5.3, and 5.4 were compared with the dimensions of different models of Carts in table-.5.6. The analysis shows that most of the models of carts used which were designed without considering the anthropometry of users dont match with the user population and were not compatible with the majority of the user population and causes a feeling of discomfort which may result in lack of concentration and future MSDs . A design with combined appropriate values from the table 5.6 can give a better design model which can reduce the problems and improve the efficiency. While making vendor cart the anthropometric dimension of the user population should be used. The cart should be designed to suit the majority of the user population, therefore it should be concentrated 50th percentile male which covers the majority of the user population. Even though it is difficult to design for all the users, but a product that matches the majority of the user population can be designed and the problems solved up to a considerable extent. The anthropometric measurements from the present study may be helpful in designing the vendor cart used in the business purpose for vendors.

CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSION AND FUTURE SCOPE

6.1 CONCLUSION:This thesis attempts to identify key user needs in Indian vendor cart. This population segment is uneducated. Hence forth concepts are proposed and a physical prototype is proposed that meets user requirements. The thesis takes a bold step ahead in adding an interactive element to concepts which might become a standard in the future. The contributions of this dissertation are stated as under 1. This thesis gives out a step by step approach which should be carried out in developing vendor cart starting from need identification to physical product development and beyond. We hopes that the process followed could be useful to unorganized or small scale industries in gaining competency. 2. This thesis also documents relevant anthropometric data, important guidelines necessary for planning any vendor cart. Reference to this thesis work would acts as a quick guide to Indian vendors in creating efficient carts. 3. Various surveys are done with the help of questionnaires made and the root cause of the problem in operating vendor cart is determined.4. By using observation method and ERGOFELLOW software tools worst posture of vendors are found out and remedy action are suggested.

6.2 FUTURE SCOPE:

1. To the best of our knowledge, a concept like this for mobile vendor cart does not exist at present in the market. 2. Future refinement of the idea on these lines and development could create an indigenous product of high value. 3. This thesis is only a small step towards future development of an efficient smart vendor carts. 4. There is scope of work over how physical embodiment of existing technology in communication, information display etc. takes place into the vendor carts furniture in future.

REFERENCES1. Gavriel Salvendry(2000). Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics 7th Ed, John Wiley & Sony , Inc. Hoboken, New Jersey

2. Hubka, V. " Principles of Engineering Design", Butterworth Scientific.1982.

3. Pye, D.. "The Nature of Design", Studio Vista, London, 1964

4. Suh, N.P. "The Principles of Design", Oxford University Press.1990

5. Yoshikawa, H. "General Design Theory and a CAD System", IFIP Man-machine Communication in CAD/CAM in T.Sata and E.Warman (eds.), 35-88,1981.

6. Chou, J.-R. and S.-W. Hsiao (2005). "An anthropometric measurement for developing an electric scooter." International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 35: 10471063.

7. Chang, C.-C., et al. (2007). "Error control and calibration in three-dimensional anthropometric measurement of the hand by laser scanning with glass support." Science Direct(40): 2127.

8. Broberg, O. (2007). "Integrating Ergonomics In to Engineering: Empirical Evidence and Implications for the Ergonomists." Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing 17(4): 353366.

9. Prado-Lu, J. L. D. (2007). "Anthropometric measurement of Filipino manufacturing workers." International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 37: 497503

10. Das, B., et al. (2007). "Workstation Redesign for a Repetitive Drill Press Operation: A Combined Work Design and Ergonomics Approach." Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing 17(4): 395410.

11. Laios, L. and J. Giannatsis (2010). "Ergonomic evaluation and redesign of children bicycles based on anthropometric data." Applied Ergonomics 41: 428435.

12. McAtamney, L. and E. N. Corlett (1993). "RULA: a survey method for the investigation of work-related upper limb disorders." Applied Ergonomics 24(2): 91-99.

13. Debkumar

14. Scott Openshaw et.al (2006), Ergonomics and Design- A Reference Guide Allsteel

15. OSHA ACADAMY GUIDE 3125(2000),Ergonomics: The Study of Work, U.S. Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration 16. Hsiao, H. and W. M. Keyserling (1991). "Evaluating posture behavior during seated tasks." International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 8: 313- 334

17. ERGOFELLOW SOFTWARE by FBF SISTIMAS in 2009 Available on- http://www.fbfsistemas.com/ergonomics.html

30