1 / 15

UC Ergonomics/ Safe Pavement Breakers

UC Ergonomics/ Safe Pavement Breakers. Diana J. Flores MPH- University of California, Los Angeles Michael Lopez B.S. Bioengineering- University of California, Berkeley. Background. In construction… 5 out of every 100 workers injured >50% of injuries = Musculoskeletal Disorders (MSDs)

joann
Download Presentation

UC Ergonomics/ Safe Pavement Breakers

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. UC Ergonomics/ Safe Pavement Breakers Diana J. FloresMPH- University of California, Los Angeles Michael LopezB.S. Bioengineering- University of California, Berkeley

  2. Background • In construction… • 5 out of every 100 workers injured • >50% of injuries = Musculoskeletal Disorders (MSDs) • Jackhammering causes back and shoulder MSDs • Stuck jackhammer = increased strain • Looking for a solution to help prevent MSDs

  3. Background • Jackhammer Lift Assist • Pneumatically powered “foot” pushes jackhammer out of the ground • Reduces effort of lifting/repositioning jackhammer • Decreases back and shoulder strain

  4. Background • Lift Assist available to workers at PG&E • Workers prefer not to use device

  5. Objective • Find out why many workers prefer traditional method of jackhammering

  6. Methods • Site visits at PG&E (2) • Worker interviews (4) • Worker Questionnaires (4) • Interviews with Ergonomist and Construction experts • Interview with PG&E union rep (IBEW 1245) • Visited Northern California Laborer’s Training Center in San Ramon

  7. Whatwe learned THE GOOD: • Helpful on flat, open ground • Reduces back and shoulder strain • Well accepted once workers give it a try THE BAD: • Not appropriate for all situations (hills, limited space) • Decreases accuracy of work • Large reach for activation trigger • Adds 10lbs weight

  8. Evaluation “It’s a good idea, but it needs some work” -PG&E construction worker

  9. Recommendations • Decrease activation trigger reach • Decrease weight of device • Modify foot such that it conforms to sloped surfaces

  10. Further Recommendations • Larger storage compartment for device • Put jackhammer away as a team when possible • Conduct periodic safety training for individual work crews on jackhammer risks and precautions. • Incorporate Lift Assist into initial jackhammer trainings

  11. Challenges • Project time limitation • Small Sample Size • Not much literature specific to Jackhammer MSDs • Jackhammer injuries not limited to MSDs

  12. Issues • Noise • Vibration • Road Traffic • Silica Dust

  13. Successes • Cooperative PG&E liaisons and crews • Interviews with ergonomics and construction experts • Sufficient videotape footage • Understanding additional construction work hazards that we were not previously aware of.

  14. Acknowledgements UC Ergonomics Lab • Maggie Robbins • Dr. David Rempel • Betsy Llosa • Staff CA. Dept. of Public Health • Dr. Bob Harrison • David Harrington • Staff Association of Occupational and Environmental Clinics Occupational Health Internship Program • Diane Bush • Sarah Jacobs PG&E • Garret Chang • TaisirShurasa • Work Crews Northern CA. Laborer’s Training Center • Ollie Hurl • Jerome Williams

  15. Questions?

More Related