| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立清華大學 === 工業工程與工程管理學系碩士在職專班 === 100 === The purpose of this study is to evaluate the accuracy and applicability of RULA, KIM LHC, and KIM MHO checklists against WISHA screening tool. WISHA screening tool is proposed by Washington state as an musculoskeletal hazard standard based on many epidemiological surveys. RULA、KIM LHC、and KIM MHO are newly proposed MSD assessment checklist, are considered to be very promising to become competitive tool for MSD assessment in the future. RULA is designed mainly for hand operation works; KIM LHC is used for whole body typed of work, such as lifting, holding and carrying; KIM MHO is also used for manual hand operations.
This study used RULA、KIM LHC、and KIM MHO checklists to assessment the MSD hazard of a vehicle identification number engraving operation (VIN engraving). VIN engraving operation consists of many postures variation during task performance, its chief task is to repetitively apply his finger pressure on a machine against engraving site, it is a combination of whole body and manual hand operation tasks, there will be big discrepancy by assessing this operation with traditional MSD or OWAS checklist and the like. This study attempts assess this VIN engraving operation by using RULA、KIM LHC、and KIM MHO checklists, and to compare these results against WISHA screening tool, to evaluate their accuracy and applicability.
This VIN engraving operation is classified as caution zone in WISHA screening tool, and risk factors are over-exertion and time (repetitiveness). The results of these three checklists are all fell in 2nd risk rating, all comparable with the WISHA caution zone. Are considered to be accurate. Then the risk factors identified by each checklist are also compared with the WISHA risk factors to evaluate their applicability. For RULA, the risk factor is posture, which is quite different from of the WISHA; for KIM LHC is time (repetitiveness), is not completely match to the WISHA; but, for KIM MHO are over-exertion and time (repetitiveness), which is completely agreed with the WISHA, perfect applicable.
To go a step further, the task content of this VIN engraving operation is varied by altering its force exertion from 0.3kg to 3.3 kg and production volume is increased from 90 to 150 cars. For altering force exertion, and the results of RULA and KIM LHC are 3rd and 2nd risk rating which are comparable with WISHA’s caution zone, and considerd as accurate; mais of KIM MHO is 4th risk rating, which is considered as hazardous zone in WISHA, and is inaccurate. For increasing production volume, all RULA, KIM LHC, and KIM MHO still pertained to 2nd and 3rd risk rating, which are quite differ from the hazardous zone as classified by WISHA.
Based on the above investigation, for this VIN engraving operation, none of RULA、KIM LHC、or KIM MHO results are completely agreed with the WISHA classification, however, KIM MHO seems to be the best, and RULA the least. It indicates that KIM MHO seems to be a promising checklist for operation combining with whole body task and manual hand operation, such as this VIN engraving operation.
|
|---|
