desde y de forma anual, su Congreso Internacional de Ergonomía. física de las actividades fue aplicado el método RULA considerando los cambios . Posteriormente se utilizó el método RULA, para evaluar las posturas de estudiantes Humantech de Ergonomía Aplicada () y el texto de Eastman Kodak. View Aula 05 – Método from ENGENHARIA at Universidade Potiguar. Ergonomia UNP | Eng. de Produo | Enver Paiva Mtodo RULA Mtodo.
|Published (Last):||3 December 2016|
|PDF File Size:||6.81 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||5.14 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
The analysis presented in this work suggests that low-cost range sensors can be a useful tool for the collection of data for use in observational methods for the assessment of postures, although further research is needed in order to use them in real work environments. To test these possibilities we randomly took a sample of 50 inferred observations and 50 correctly detected observations from each sequence. The modified skeleton ergoonomia position data is displayed in real time number 4 in Figure 4.
Musculoskeletal disorders and workplace factors: For each sequence ergonautas – NUI determined the number of postures in each type of risk, OWAS risk indicator and the number of inferred postures, i. Our aim was to ervonomia the degree of similarity between the observations agreed upon by human evaluators and those obtained by Kinect. The trunk plane is determined as the plane passing through the hips and neck 12, 16 and 2.
For example, if the error occurs when the subject raises his arm, it will be compensated by the opposite error when the subject lowers his arm again. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden, Wiesbaden, pp. The analysis was then performed on the remaining postures.
Informe Final Ergonomía – Método Rula
Measurement of trunk bending during work by direct observation and continuous measurement. Marker-less systems for tracking working postures–results from two experiments. For this reason we decided not to record the same sequence of movements using several sensors with different orientations with respect to the worker.
Inter-observer and intra-observer rila in the application of OWAS by human observers have been studied in other works De Bruijn et al. This is an important drawback in using Kinect to assess postures in a real work environment. Ergonomic methods for assessing exposure to risk factors for work-related musculoskeletal disorders.
International Journal of Industrial Ergonomicsv.
Accuracy and robustness of Kinect pose estimation in the context of coaching of elderly population. Finally, discarding inferred postures, the results were: Definition of codes for back, arms and legs in the OWAS method.
Augmented rulx applications in manufacturing: The risk category of each posture was correctly classified by the sensor in To identify the position of the back it is necessary to calculate the angles of flexion, lateral bending and trunk rotation.
Validity of fixed-interval observations for postural assessment in construction urla. The procedure followed for data processing is described in the next section. In Figure 7 the estimated percentages over the total number rila observations of right and wrong coded and right and wrong categorized postures are shown for each sequence. In the present study we did not analyze sitting positions or automatic load detection.
It determines how quickly previous known location of a body part match current raw data. These points are the positions of the center of the major joints of the human body and, in some cases head, spine, hands and feetestimations of the center of the major limbs.
Ergonautas- Lab: Aplicación de Kinect para la evaluación de la ergonomía de puestos de trabajo
Table 3 reveals that the sensor does not work well when the tracked user in kneeling. Sets mteodo number of frames to predict the data in the future.
The evaluator makes observations at regular intervals of 30 to 60 seconds coding each posture according to the digits shown in Figure 2, and an additional fourth digit depending on the load handled by the worker. The information is provided in the form of an array with the coordinates of 20 points.
Taylor and Francis, London, pp. The frontal plane is calculated as a vertical plane which passes through both hips 12 and We analyzed each of the postures checking if it was correctly coded and correctly classified into a risk category, obtaining the results shown in Figure 7 and Figure 8. After jointly analyzing the postures the experts came to an agreement about the category they fell into. Videotape replay within qualitative analysis, in: Applied Ergonomics, 45 4pp.
Click Figure to enlarge Figure 7: Assessment of mechanical exposure in ergonomic epidemiology. Therefore a preliminary analysis was carried out to determine which combination of parameters was better suited for our study. Validity of the Microsoft Kinect for assessment of postural control.
Observations are often made on categories of metodl, and the proportion of time recorded for each exposure category is the ratio ergononia the number of observations recorded for the category to the total number of observations. Another main drawback of the Kinect skeleton is in a very non-anthropometric kinematic model with variable limb lengths. Thus, while the position of some body parts was incorrectly coded in postures, in cases this error did not involve a wrong risk category classification.
This process and the characteristics of the data collected by Kinect can be consulted in Henry et al.