Abstract
Several manual lifting evaluation tools are currently available to analyze mono-task jobs, yet most jobs involve multiple varying tasks. Therefore, a summation of mono-task analysis may not be an accurate representation of the degree of compressive forces and stress placed on the spine. The Lifting Fatigue Failure Tool (LiFFT) has been adapted from the fatigue failure theory (FFT) and is capable of both mono-task and cumulative task evaluation. The FFT details cumulative damage of the applied stress and the number of cycles to failure, therefore calculating a representative spinal compression is important in applying the corresponding limits. The original Gallagher method only requires three variables to use the LiFFT: the weight of the load, horizontal distance, and repetition per day. Other methods of applying the tool have emerged to achieve a more accurate calculation of spinal compression. The Potvin method includes a vertical height of the load and the 3DSSPP method uses digital human modeling (DHM) to calculate spine compression. The objective of this study was to compare the different methods of calculating spine compression for entry into the LiFFT to determine the variance in outputs. The results showed that the Gallagher method is best suited for lifts that do not require significant vertical postural changes whereas the Potvin and 3DSSPP methods are able to assess more complex lifts. Although DHM is the gold standard, the Potvin method is preferred for practitioners due to its ease of use. Overall, the LiFFT is a practical, effective, and practitioner friendly tool capable of predicting the risk about the low back in simple and complex manual lift evaluations.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Bobick, T.G., Myers, J.R.: Back injuries in agriculture: operations affected. In: Agricultural Health and Safety – Workplace, Environment, Sustainability, pp. 325–332. Lewis Publishers (1995). https://books.google.ca/books
Gallagher, S., Sesek, R.F., Schall, M.C., Huangfu, R.: Development and validation of an easy-to-use risk assessment tool for cumulative low back loading: the Lifting Fatigue Failure Tool (LiFFT). Appl. Ergon. 63, 142–150 (2017)
Gallagher, S., Heberger, J.R.: Examining the interaction of force and repetition on musculoskeletal disorder risk: a systematic literature review. Hum. Factors 55(1), 108–24 (2013)
Peterson, R.E.: Discussion of a century ago concerning the nature of fatigue, and review of some of the recent researches concerning the mechanism of fatigue. ASTM Bull. 164, 50–56 (1950)
Gallagher, S., Schall, M.C., Jr.: Musculoskeletal disorders as a fatigue failure process: evidence, implications and research needs. Ergonomics 60, 255–269 (2017)
Marras, W.S., Lavender, S.A., Leurgans, S.E., Rajulu, S.L., Allread, W.G., Fathallah, F.A., Ferguson, S.A.: The role of dynamic three-dimensional trunk motion in occupationally related low back disorders: the effects of workplace factors, trunk position, and trunk motion characteristics on risk of injury. Spine 18(5), 617–628 (1993)
Potvin, J.R.: Use of NIOSH equation inputs to calculate lumbrosacral compression forces. Ergonomics 40(7), 691–707 (1997)
Kuijer, P.P., Faber, G.S., Van der Molen, H.F., Loos, R.C., Van Dieen J., Frings-Dresen, M.H.: Can peak compression forces at the low back be assessed in practice. Premus (2007). https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271514632
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the commercial turkey egg production company for inviting us to their facilities, Fanshawe College for their support and resources, London Ergonomics Inc for the collaboration opportunity, and Sandalwood Engineering and Ergonomics for their input.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Wang, J.Y., Loma, C.M., Carswell, M.K., Stephens, A. (2021). Methods of Using the Lifting Fatigue Failure Tool (LiFFT) as an Ergonomic Assessment Tool in the Commercial Production of Turkey Eggs. In: Black, N.L., Neumann, W.P., Noy, I. (eds) Proceedings of the 21st Congress of the International Ergonomics Association (IEA 2021). IEA 2021. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, vol 221. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-74608-7_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-74608-7_14
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-74607-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-74608-7
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)