Advertisement

Digitalization of the Ergonomic Assessment Worksheet – User Requirements for EAWS Digital Evaluation Functions

  • Michael Spitzhirn
  • Peter Kuhlang
  • Angelika C. Bullinger
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 824)

Abstract

Background: The Ergonomic Assessment Worksheet method (EAWS) is used to assess biomechanical risks for the whole body and upper extremities and to develop ergonomic measures. Different EAWS software tools are available but are mostly limited to the presentation of EAWS points and the involved strain factors. That limits the deployment of the EAWS method in practical use. Objective: For the purpose of user oriented extension of digital EAWS evaluations, requirements and needs of users have to be determined for EAWS evaluation functions and design elements as well as the user context as part of a user-centered design process. Method: The user context and requirements is investigated by using an online survey and semi-standardized interviews. The target group are EAWS-experienced people to receive more detailed information about the usage and design requirements. Results: The online survey was filled out by 61 people and 13 interviews were conducted. The EAWS is not only applied for the evaluation of working processes, but it is also increasingly used for the deduction of measures and in other cases. In general, a high importance for an EAWS digitalization can be stated. There is a particularly high need for evaluation functions such as ‘ergonomic map’, ‘sensitivity analysis’, ‘design analysis’ and ‘job rotation analysis’. Users deployed certain requirements for the design of these functions such as the presentation of essential information or the use of color coding. Conclusion: The surveys demonstrate that the EAWS method is widely used within companies, but existing digitalizations of EAWS have to be extended by further useful functions. For that purpose, the results of the two surveys can be used to develop more user-friendly EAWS evaluations.

Keywords

Context of use Digitalization Ergonomic assessment worksheet (EAWS) User requirement User-centered-design 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The article would have been impossible without the support of the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (Project: VirtualAging, FKZ: 01IS15002C) from 01.05.2015 to 31.10.2017.

References

  1. 1.
    Bullinger-Hoffmann AC, Mühlstedt J (2017) Homo Sapiens Digitalis - Virtuelle Ergonomie und digitale Menschmodelle. Springer, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    DATech (2001) DATech-Prüfhandbuch Gebrauchstauglichkeit. Deutsche Akkreditierungsstelle Technik e.V. (2001). http://www2.bui.haw-hamburg.de/pers/ulrike.spree/WS2002_03/01-2002_Handbuch_Gebrauchstauglichkeit_V3.2.pdf. Accessed 23 Mar 2018
  3. 3.
    Deutsche MTM-Gesellschaft mbH (2015a) EAWSdigital und HEIdigital, Dresden, pp 1–45Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Deutsche MTM-Gesellschaft mbH (2015b) TiCon, Dresden, pp 1–525Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    DIN EN ISO 9241-011 (2016) Ergonomie der Mensch-System-Interaktion – Teil 11: Gebrauchstauglichkeit: Begriffe und Konzepte (ISO/DIS 9241-11:2015)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Di Valentin C, Emrich A, Werth D, Loos P (2015) User-centric workflow ergonomics in industrial environments: concept and architecture of an assistance system. In: International conference on computational science and computational intelligence, pp 754–759Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Finsterbusch T, Kuhlang P (2015) New methodology for modelling human work - evolution of the process language MTM towards the description and evaluation of productive and ergonomic work processes In: Proceedings 19th congress of the IEA, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fondazione ERGO-MTM ITALIA (2013) Subject: Ergonomic Assessment Work-SheetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fritzsche L, Lindenberg H, Illmann B, Hüter U (2014) Ergonomieoptimierung in Fertigung und Entwicklung von Volkswagen Nutzfahrzeuge ‐ Methoden und Umsetzungsbeispiele aus der Praxis. In: Gesellschaft für Arbeitswissenschaft e.V (eds) Gestaltung der Arbeitswelt der Zukunft., pp 436–438. GfA-Press, DortmundGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Garcua-Ruiz MA (2013) Cases on usability engineering: design and development of digital products. IGI Global, HersheyCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Goeres S (2012) Softwareunterstützte Ergonomieanalyse: Integration der Ergonomie-Analyse in ein betriebliches System zur Beschreibung von Arbeitssystemen. In: MTM Anwenderkonferenz, 11 May 2012, Heilbronn, pp 1–49Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Maguire M (2001) Context of use within usability activities. Academic PressGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mayring P (2010) Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse. Grundlagen und Techniken. Beltz. Weinheim & BaselGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Porst R (2001) Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse. Grundlagen und Techniken. Springer Fachmedien, WiesbadenGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sarodnick F, Brau H (2011) Methoden der Usability Evaluation. Wissenschaftliche Grundlagen und praktische Anwendung. Verlag Hans Huber, Hogrefe AG, BernGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schaub K, Mühlstedt J, Illmann B, Bauer S, Fritzsche L, Wagner T, Bullinger-Hoffmann AC (2012) Ergonomic assessment of automotive assembly tasks with digital human modelling and the ‘ergonomics assessment worksheet’. Int J Hum Factors Model Simul 3:398–426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Spitzhirn M (2017) Erhebung von Nutzeranforderungen an eine digitalisierte EAWS-Auswertung mittels Online-Umfrage. In: Gesellschaft für Arbeitswissenschaft e. V. (eds) Soziotechnische Gestaltung des digitalen Wandels - kreativ, innovativ, sinnhaft, 63. Kongress der Gesellschaft für Arbeitswissenschaft. pp 1–6. GfA-Press, DortmundGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Thielsch MT, Weltzin S (2012) Online-Umfragen und Online-Mitarbeiterbefragungen. In: Brandenburg T (eds) Praxis der Wirtschaftspsychologie II, MV-Wissenschaft, pp 109–127. Monsenstein und Vannerdat, MünsterGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Vitello M, Galante LG, Capoccia M, Caragnano G (2012) Ergonomics and workplace design: application of Ergo-UAS System in Fiat group automobiles. Work 41(Suppl 1):4445–4449Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wagner T, Nickolai M, Schaub K, Bruder R (2013) Digitalisierung des Bewertungsverfahrens EAWS am Beispiel der Softwarelösung IGEL. In: Gesellschaft für Arbeitswissenschaft e.V (eds) Chancen durch Arbeits-, Produkt- und Systemgestaltung, pp 359–362. GfA-Press, DortmundGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael Spitzhirn
    • 1
  • Peter Kuhlang
    • 2
  • Angelika C. Bullinger
    • 1
  1. 1.Chair of Ergonomics and Innovation ManagementChemnitz University of TechnologyChemnitzGermany
  2. 2.MTM-InstitutZeuthenGermany

Personalised recommendations