Back loading estimation during team handling: Is the use of only motion data sufficient?

Inertial Motion Capture-Based Estimation of L5/S1 Moments during Manual Materials Handling

Inertial motion capture (IMC) has gained popularity in conducting ergonomic studies in the workplace. Because of the need to measure contact forces, most of these in situ studies are limited to a kinematic analysis, such as posture or working technique analysis. This paper aims to develop and evaluate an IMC-based approach to estimate back loading during manual material handling (MMH) tasks. During various representative workplace MMH tasks performed by nine participants, this approach was evaluated by comparing the results with the ones computed from optical motion capture and a large force platform. Root mean square errors of 21 Nm and 15 Nm were obtained for flexion and asymmetric L5/S1 moments, respectively. Excellent correlations were found between both computations on indicators based on L5/S1 peak and cumulative flexion moments, while lower correlations were found on indicators based on asymmetric moments. Since no force measurement or load kinematics measurement is needed, this study shows the potential of using only the handler's kinematics measured by IMC to estimate kinetics variables. The assessment of workplace physical exposure, including L5/S1 moments, will allow more complete ergonomics evaluation and will improve the ecological validity compared to laboratory studies, where the situations are often simplified and standardized.

Effects of load mass and position on the dynamic loading of the knees, shoulders and lumbar spine during lifting: a musculoskeletal modelling approach

Musculoskeletal models may enhance our understanding of the dynamic loading of the joints during manual material handling. This study used state-of-the-art musculoskeletal models to determine the effects of load mass, asymmetry angle, horizontal location and deposit height on the dynamic loading of the knees, shoulders and lumbar spine during lifting. Recommended weight limits and lifting indices were also calculated using the NIOSH lifting equation. Based on 1832 lifts from 22 subjects, we found that load mass had the most substantial effect on L5-S1 compression. Increments in asymmetry led to large increases in mediolateral shear, while load mass and asymmetry had significant effects on anteroposterior shear. Increased deposit height led to higher shoulder forces, while the horizontal location mostly affected the forces in the knees and shoulders. These results generally support the findings of previous research, but notable differences in the trends and magnitudes of the estimated forces were observed.