Significance of biomechanical and physiological variables during the determination of maximum acceptable weight of lift.

The aim was to identify which biomechanical and physiological variables were associated with the decision to change the weight of lift during the determination of the maximum acceptable weight of lift (MAWL) in a psychophysical study. Fifteen male college students lifted a box of unknown weight at 4.3 lifts/min, and adjusted the weight until their MAWL was reached. Variables such as heart rate, trunk positions, velocities and accelerations were measured during the lifting, as well as estimated spinal loading in terms of moments and spinal forces in three dimensions using an EMG-assisted biomechanical model. Multiple logistic regression techniques identified variables associated with the decision to change the weights up and down prior to a subsequent lift. Results indicated that heart rate, predicted sagittal lift moment and low back disorder (LBD) risk index were associated with decreases in the weight prior to the next lift. Thus, historical measures of LBD risk (e.g. compression, shear force) were not associated with decreases in weight prior to the next lift. Additionally, the magnitudes of the predicted spinal forces and LBD risk were all very high at the MAWL when compared with literature sources of tolerance as well as observational studies on LBD risk. Our findings indicate that the psychophysical methodology may be useful for the decision to lower the weight of loads that may present extreme levels of risk of LBD; however, the psychophysical methodology does not seem to help in the decision to stop changing the weight at a safe load weight.     

An investigation of perceived exertion via whole body exertion and direct muscle force indicators during the determination of the maximum acceptable weight of lift

The objective of this study was to identify the perceived exertion mechanisms (direct muscle force and whole body exertion) associated with the decision to change the weight of lift during the determination of the maximum acceptable weight of lift (MAWL). Fifteen males lifted a box of unknown weight at a rate of 4.3 lifts/min, and adjusted the weight until their MAWL was reached. Variables such as the predicted muscle forces and heart rate were measured during the lifting exertion, as well as the predicted spinal loading in three dimensions using an EMG-assisted biomechanical model. Multiple logistic regression techniques were used to identify variables that were associated with the decision to change the weights up and down prior to a subsequent lift. Results indicated that the force in the left erector spinae, right internal oblique, and left latissimus dorsi muscles as well as heart rate were associated with decreases in the weight prior to the next lift. It appears that a combination of local factors (muscle force) and whole body exertion factors (heart rate) provide the feedback for the perceived exertion when decreasing the weight. The up-change model indicated that the forces of the right erector spinae, left internal oblique, and the right latissimus dorsi muscles were associated with the decision to increase the weight prior to the next lift. Thus, local factors provide feedback during the decision to increase the weight when starting from light weights. Collectively, these findings indicate that psychophysically determined weight limits may be more sensitive to muscular strain rather than spinal loading.     

An investigation of perceived exertion via whole body exertion and direct muscle force indicators during the determination of the maximum acceptable weight of lift

The objective of this study was to identify the perceived exertion mechanisms (direct muscle force and whole body exertion) associated with the decision to change the weight of lift during the determination of the maximum acceptable weight of lift (MAWL). Fifteen males lifted a box of unknown weight at a rate of 4.3 lifts/min, and adjusted the weight until their MAWL was reached. Variables such as the predicted muscle forces and heart rate were measured during the lifting exertion, as well as the predicted spinal loading in three dimensions using an EMG-assisted biomechanical model. Multiple logistic regression techniques were used to identify variables that were associated with the decision to change the weights up and down prior to a subsequent lift. Results indicated that the force in the left erector spinae, right internal oblique, and left latissimus dorsi muscles as well as heart rate were associated with decreases in the weight prior to the next lift. It appears that a combination of local factors (muscle force) and whole body exertion factors (heart rate) provide the feedback for the perceived exertion when decreasing the weight. The up-change model indicated that the forces of the right erector spinae, left internal oblique, and the right latissimus dorsi muscles were associated with the decision to increase the weight prior to the next lift. Thus, local factors provide feedback during the decision to increase the weight when starting from light weights. Collectively, these findings indicate that psychophysically determined weight limits may be more sensitive to muscular strain rather than spinal loading.     

Lifting belts: a psychophysical analysis

The literature supporting the use of lifting belts has not demonstrated consistent trends. It was hypothesized that if lifting belts provide a biomechanical or motivational advantage then the participants in a psychophysical lift test should select a higher maximum acceptable weight of lift (MAWL). Eleven male and five female subjects participated in one session with a lifting belt and one session without a belt. The order of the belt sessions was counterbalanced. Each session was comprised of two psychophysical lifting tests varying only in the initial weight of the box. Repeated measures ANOVA showed no difference between the MAWL between belt sessions or between the two tests within a given session. Following the test, subjective evaluations of the belt were measured via a questionnaire. The psychophysical test results showed no change as a function of the belt condition. Thus, these results do not support the hypothesis that lifting belts increase trunk strength or motivate individuals to select a greater MAWL. Therefore, it must be concluded that belts do not offer a biomechanical or motivational advantage to the user.     

Relation between spinal load factors and the high-risk probability of occupational low-back disorder

Spinal compression is traditionally assumed the principal biomechanical mechanism associated with occupationally related low-back disorders (LBD). However, there is little conclusive evidence demonstrating that compression is related to occupational LBD. The objective of this research was to examine whether axial compression in the lumbar spine can predict the probability that a lifting task should be classified as high risk for LBD. Furthermore, the improvement in predictive ability was examined when analyses include 3-D, dynamic biomechanical factors. Ten experienced warehouse workers transferred 12 pallet loads of boxes in a simulation of warehouse working conditions. Biomechanical estimates of 2-D static and 3-D dynamic spinal compression, shear loads and tissue strains were achieved from the subjects during each lifting exertion. Each lift was also assessed for probability of high LBD risk classification. Regression analyses were performed to examine the relationship between biomechanical and epidemiological factors. Results indicate 2-D static estimates of spinal compression describe ? 13% of the probability of high LBD risk variability. Dynamic estimates of spinal compression describe >44% of the variability. A multifactor regression model including 3-D spinal loads and tissue strains further improved the predictive ability, but the improvement was not statistically significant. This research demonstrates the biomechanical source of low-back pain is dynamic, multifaceted and multidimensional. Significant improvements in ergonomics assessments can be achieved by examining interactions of dynamic biomechanical factors. Unfortunately, this improved predictive ability is generated at the high cost of computational complexity. However, less realistic biomechanical representations may ignore the injury mechanisms associated with the greater number of workplace injuries. Thus, improved understanding of the dynamic biomechanical interactions influencing the tolerance and injury mechanisms of the spine may permit more accurate assessments of workplace injury factors associated with LBD and reduced incidence of occupationally related low-back pain.     

Relation between spinal load factors and the high-risk probability of occupational low-back disorder.

Spinal compression is traditionally assumed the principal biomechanical mechanism associated with occupationally related low-back disorders (LBD). However, there is little conclusive evidence demonstrating that compression is related to occupational LBD. The objective of this research was to examine whether axial compression in the lumbar spine can predict the probability that a lifting task should be classified as high risk for LBD. Furthermore, the improvement in predictive ability was examined when analyses include 3-D, dynamic biomechanical factors. Ten experienced warehouse workers transferred 12 pallet loads of boxes in a simulation of warehouse working conditions. Biomechanical estimates of 2-D static and 3-D dynamic spinal compression, shear loads and tissue strains were achieved from the subjects during each lifting exertion. Each lift was also assessed for probability of high LBD risk classification. Regression analyses were performed to examine the relationship between biomechanical and epidemiological factors. Results indicate 2-D static estimates of spinal compression describe approximately 13% of the probability of high LBD risk variability. Dynamic estimates of spinal compression describe > 44% of the variability. A multifactor regression model including 3-D spinal loads and tissue strains further improved the predictive ability, but the improvement was not statistically significant. This research demonstrates the biomechanical source of low-back pain is dynamic, multifaceted and multidimensional. Significant improvements in ergonomics assessments can be achieved by examining interactions of dynamic biomechanical factors. Unfortunately, this improved predictive ability is generated at the high cost of computational complexity. However, less realistic biomechanical representations may ignore the injury mechanisms associated with the greater number of workplace injuries. Thus, improved understanding of the dynamic biomechanical interactions influencing the tolerance and injury mechanisms of the spine may permit more accurate assessments of workplace injury factors associated with LBD and reduced incidence of occupationally related low-back pain.     

Psychophysical acceptability and perception of load heaviness by females

The objective of the study was to evaluate subjective perceptions of load heaviness, and relate these perceptions to the maximal acceptable weights of lift. Ten female college students experienced in manual lifting participated in the study. In the first experiment, subjects were asked to select one of the seven linguistic values of load heaviness (very light, light, less-than-medium, medium, more-than-medium, heavy, and very heavy), which would best describe the lifted loads. Seven boxes, ranging in weight between 2.3 kg and 22.7 kg, were used for that purpose. In the second experiment, subjects were asked to fill empty boxes to the level they felt would best reflect a given load heaviness category. In the third experiment, the psychophysical methodology was used to determine the maximal acceptable weight of lift for an 8-hour day. The results showed that 50% of the subjects considered a 20.4 kg box (45 lbs) as very heavy, while another 50% believed that such a load was heavy. The average load selected as maximal acceptable weight of lift (MAWL) for an 8-hour day was 16.4 kg (standard deviation (SD) = 5.3 kg). When asked to determine the weights that would best describe a given category of load heaviness, the subjects selected 22.5 kg (SD = 3.7 kg) and 18.4 kg (SD = 2.7 kg) for very heavy and heavy categories, respectively. Further analysis revealed that only 30% of the subjects selected MAWL values that were larger than the pre-weighted boxes independently judged by them as very heavy or heavy categories. Also, 10% and 30% of the subjects selected MAWL values that were larger than the weights chosen during the self-classification procedure as representative of heavy or very heavy categories of load heaviness, respectively. It was shown that the loads selected as the maximum acceptable weights for an 8 h shift were independently judged by the female subjects as being in the more-than-moderate or heavy weight categories. Comparison of the results for females and males led to a conclusion that female subjects were more realistic, with respect to subjective perception of load heaviness, in selecting the MAWL values than were male subjects.     

Association between spinal loads and the psychophysical determination of maximum acceptable force during pushing tasks

The objective of this study was to investigate potential associations between an individual's psychophysical maximum acceptable force (MAF) during pushing tasks and biomechanical tissue loads within the lumbar spine. Ten subjects (eight males, two females) pushed a cart with an unknown weight at one push every two minute for a distance of 3.9 m. Two independent variables were investigated, cart control and handle orientation while evaluating their association with the MAF. Dependent variables of hand force and tissue loads for each MAF determination and preceding push trial were assessed using a validated, electromyography-assisted biomechanical model that calculated spinal load distribution throughout the lumbar spine. Results showed no association between spinal loads and the MAF. Only hand forces were associated with the MAF. Therefore, MAFs may be dependent upon tactile sensations from the hands, not the loads on the spine and thus may be unrelated to risk of low back injury.

Practitioner Summary: Pushing tasks have become common in manual materials handling (MMH) and these tasks impose different tissue loads compared to lifting tasks. Industry has commonly used the psychophysical tables for job assent and decision of MMH tasks. However, due to the biomechanical complexity of pushing tasks, psychophysics may be misinterpreting risk.     

Prediction of the maximum acceptable weight of lift from the frequency of lift

It is known that maximum acceptable weight of lift (MAWL) decreases as the frequency of lifting increases. The purpose of this study was to quantify the relationship between lifting frequency and the MAWL, and to generate models for predicting the mean MAWLs for males and females from frequency of lifting. Published experimental studies that have reported the MAWL at different lifting frequencies were identified and regression methods were used to evaluate the relationship between the frequency of lifting and the MAWL. The best fitting models were logarithmic but they accounted for less than 50% of the variance. This reflects the heterogeneity of the experiments included. Normalising the MAWL to the MAWL at one lift per minute improved the predictive power of the models, accounting for more than 80% of the variance. Linear and power models for predicting work rate in kg/min showed even higher levels of accuracy.     

A comprehensive analysis of low-back disorder risk and spinal loading during the transferring and repositioning of patients using different techniques.

Although patient handlers suffer from low-back injuries at an alarming rate worldwide, there has been limited research quantifying the risk for the specific tasks performed by the patient handlers. The current study used both a comprehensive evaluation system (low-back disorder risk model) and theoretical model (biomechanical spinal loading model) to evaluate risk of LBD of 17 participants (12 experienced and five inexperienced) performing several patient handling tasks. Eight of the participants were female and nine were male. Several patient transfers were evaluated as well as repositioning of the patient in bed; these were performed with one and two people. The patient transfers were between bed and wheelchair (fixed and removable arms) and between commode chair and hospital chair. A 'standard' patient (a 50 kg co-operative female; non-weight bearing but had use of upper body) was used in all patient handling tasks. Overall, patient handling was found to be an extremely hazardous job that had substantial risk of causing a low-back injury whether with one or two patient handlers. The greatest risk was associated with the one-person transferring techniques with the actual task being performed having a limited effect. The repositioning techniques were found to have significant risk of LBD associated with them with the single hook method having the highest LBD risk and spinal loads that exceeded the tolerance limits (worst patient handling job). The two-person draw sheet repositioning technique had the lowest LBD risk and spinal loads but still had relatively high spinal loads and LBD risk. Thus, even the safest of tasks (of the tasks evaluated in this study) had significant risk. Additionally, the current study represented a 'best' case scenario since the patient was relatively light and co-operative. Thus, patient handling in real situations such as in a nursing home, would be expected to be worse. Therefore, to have an impact on LBD, it is necessary to provide mechanical lift assist devices.     

Maximum acceptable weight of lift reflects peak lumbosacral extension moments in a functional capacity evaluation test using free style, stoop and squat lifting

It is unclear whether the maximum acceptable weight of lift (MAWL), a common psychophysical method, reflects joint kinetics when different lifting techniques are employed. In a within-participants study (n = 12), participants performed three lifting techniques--free style, stoop and squat lifting from knee to waist level--using the same dynamic functional capacity evaluation lifting test to assess MAWL and to calculate low back and knee kinetics. We assessed which knee and back kinetic parameters increased with the load mass lifted, and whether the magnitudes of the kinetic parameters were consistent across techniques when lifting MAWL. MAWL was significantly different between techniques (p = 0.03). The peak lumbosacral extension moment met both criteria: it had the highest association with the load masses lifted (r > 0.9) and was most consistent between the three techniques when lifting MAWL (ICC = 0.87). In conclusion, MAWL reflects the lumbosacral extension moment across free style, stoop and squat lifting in healthy young males, but the relation between the load mass lifted and lumbosacral extension moment is different between techniques. PRACTITIONER SUMMARY: Tests of maximum acceptable weight of lift (MAWL) from knee to waist height are used to assess work capacity of individuals with low-back disorders. This article shows that the MAWL reflects the lumbosacral extension moment across free style, stoop and squat lifting in healthy young males, but the relation between the load mass lifted and lumbosacral extension moment is different between techniques. This suggests that standardisation of lifting technique used in tests of the MAWL would be indicated if the aim is to assess the capacity of the low back.     

Psychophysically determined infrequent lifting capacity of Chinese participants.

The aim of this study was to investigate the psychophysical infrequent lifting capacity (maximum acceptable weight of lift, MAWL) for a Chinese population. A nested-factorial experimental design with a participant factor nested within gender was employed. Forty-one Chinese participants (29 males, 12 females) participated in the study. Two frequencies (one lift every 8 h and one lift every 5 min) and six lifting heights (floor to knuckle, floor to shoulder, floor to reach, knuckle to shoulder, knuckle to reach, shoulder to reach) were evaluated. The results are compared with prior studies and they lead to the following conclusions. (1) The MAWLs were significantly affected by both the lifting frequency and lifting height. For lifting frequency, the MAWLs decreased markedly by nearly 30% from one lift every 8 h to one lift every 5 min. For lifting height, the MAWLs of the F-K was the greatest of all six lifting heights, followed by F-S, K-S, F-R, K-R and S-R was the smallest. (2) The MAWLs for Chinese females are significantly lower, but proportionately similar, to the MAWLs for Chinese males. (3) The Chinese participants had smaller capacities compared with the Occidental participants, and the rate of decrease in MAWL for the Chinese participants was much sharper than that of Occidental participants. (4) The MAWL of Chinese females was about 54-58% of the Chinese males, it is somewhat lower than those of 60-70% of the Occidental participants.     

Maximum acceptable weights for asymmetric lifting of Chinese females

This study used the psychophysical approach to evaluate the effects of asymmetric lifting on the maximum acceptable weight of lift (MAWL) and the resulting heart rate, oxygen uptake and rating of perceived exertion (RPE). A randomized complete block factorial design was employed. Twelve female college students lifted weights at three different lifting frequencies (one-time maximum, 1 and 4 lifts/min) in the sagittal plane and at three different asymmetric angles (30 degrees, 60 degrees, and 90 degrees ) from the floor to a 68-cm height pallet. This lifting experiment was conducted for a 1-h work period using a free-style lifting technique. The MAWLs for asymmetric lifting were significantly lower than those for symmetric lifting in the sagittal plane. The MAWL decreased with the increase in the angle of asymmetry. However, the heart rate, oxygen uptake and RPE remained unchanged. Though the MAWL decreased significantly with lifting frequency, both the physiological costs (heart rate and oxygen uptake) and rating of perceived exertion increased with the increase in lift frequency. The most stressed body part was the arm. Lifting frequency had no significant effect on the percentage decrease in MAWL from the sagittal plane values. On average, decreases of 5%, 9% and 14% for MAWL at 30 degrees, 60 degrees and 90 degrees asymmetric lifting, respectively, were revealed. This result was in agreement with the findings of Chinese males studied by Wu [Int. J. Ind. Ergonom. 25 (2000) 675]. The percentage decrease in MAWL with twisting angle for the Chinese participants was somewhat lower than those for Occidental participants. In addition, even though there was an increase in heart rate and RPE with the increase in the symmetrical lift angle for Occidental participants, it was different from the Chinese participants. Lastly, the 1991 NIOSH equation asymmetry multiplier is more conservative in comparison with the results of the present study.     

Lifting in stooped and kneeling postures: Effects on lifting capacity,metabolic costs,and electromyography of eight trunk muscles

Twelve healthy, experienced underground coal miners performed lifting capacity tests in stooped and kneeling postures using a modified psychophysical, procedure. Subjects adjusted weight in a lifting box to the maximum they could handle without undue fatigue in an asymmetric lifting task. Lifting periods were 20 min in duration and the frequency was 10 lifts/min. Tests were performed under a 48-in. roof that restricted the subject's posture. Psychophysical, physiological, and biomechanical dependent measures included the maximum acceptable weight of lift (MAWL), heart rate (HR), rate of oxygen consumption (V̇O₂), ventilation volume rate (V̇_E), respiratory exchange ratio (R), and integrated electromyography (EMG) of eight trunk muscles. Results indicated that the MAWL was significantly lower when kneeling than when stooped (p < 0.05). Furthermore, metabolic demands were greater in terms of HR (p < 0.005) and VO₂ (p < 0.05) when kneeling. Left and right erectores spinae muscles exhibited increased EMG activity in the kneeling posture (p < 0.001). It was concluded that psychophysical lifting capacity is decreased, while the metabolic stress and internal load on the spine are increased, in the kneeling posture. Results of this Bureau of Mines study indicate that it may be advisable to reduce the weight of materials that are handled repetitively in the kneeling posture.     

Biomechanical evaluation of assistive devices for transferring residents.

This is the first of two articles to report a biomechanical evaluation and psychophysical assessment of nine battery-powered lifts, a sliding board, a walking belt, and a baseline manual method for transferring nursing home residents from a bed to a chair. The objectives of the biomechanical evaluation were: (1) to investigate the effects of transfer method and resident weight on the biomechanical stress to nursing assistants performing the transferring task, and (2) to identify resident-transferring methods that could reduce the biomechanical stress to the nursing assistants. Nine nursing assistants served as test subjects; two elderly persons participated as residents. A four-camera motion analysis system, two force platforms, and a three-dimensional biomechanical model were used to measure biomechanical load. The results indicate that transfer method and resident weight affect a nursing assistant's low-back loading. The basket-sling and overhead lift devices significantly reduced the nursing assistants' back-compressive forces during the preparation phase of a resident transfer. In addition, the use of basket-sling, overhead, and stand-up lifts removed about two-thirds of the exposure to low-back stress (lifting activities per transfer) as compared to the baseline manual method. Thus, the use of these devices reduces biomechanical stress, and thereby will decrease the occurrence of resident-handling-related low-back injuries. Furthermore, lifting device maneuvering forces were found to be significantly different and a number of design/use problems were identified with various assistive devices. The second article will detail the psychophysical assessment of the same resident-transferring methods.     

Psychophysical modelling of lifting capacity of Chinese males using strength variables

This study used the psychophysical approach to determine the maximum acceptable weight of lift (MAWL) for 12 young Chinese male subjects, and used strength variables as predictors to develop prediction models. Each subject performed 12 different lifting tasks involving three lifting heights and four lifting frequencies. The results showed that both the dynamic and static models developed in this study could predict the MAWL with a reasonable degree of accuracy. However, a comparison of the models revealed that the use of the dynamic model resulted in less PRESS (PRediction Error Sum of Squares) statistics and higher [Formula: see text] values than the static model. Isoinertial 1.83 m maximum strength (T1) and the isoinertial elbow-height strength, tested on an incremental weightlifting machine, were found to be the best screening test. This was different from a previous study that recommended T1 as the most promising single screening test for Occidentals.     

Review of:“Sex Differences in Human PerformanceEdited by M. A. BAKER (Chichester,England: John Wiley, 1987.) [Pp. xvi + 202.] £22·00. ISBN 0-471-91119-4.

An experiment was conducted to examine the role that maximal lifting power has in predicting maximum acceptable weight of lift (MAWL) for a frequency of one lift per 8 h. The secondary aim of the study was to compare the ability of power to predict MAWL to previously used measures of capacity including two measures of isometric strength, five measures of isokinetic strength, and isoinertial capacity on an incremental lifting test. Twenty-five male subjects volunteered to participate in the experiment. The isometric tests involved maximum voluntary contractions for composite lifting strength at vertical heights of 15 and 75 cm. Peak isokinetic strength was measured at velocities of 0.1, 0.2, 0.4, 0.6 and 0.8 m s^?1 using a modified CYBEX® II isokinetic dynamometer. Isoinertial lifting capactity was measured on the X-factor incremental lifting machine and peak power was measured on the incremental lifting machine by having subjects lift a 25 kg load as quickly as possible. The results indicate that peak isoinertial power is significantly correlated with MAWL, and this correlation was higher than any of the correlations between the other predictor variables and MAWL. The relationships between the isokinetic strength measures and MAWL were stronger than the relationships between the isometric measures and MAWL. Overall, the results suggest that tests used to predict MAWL should be dynamic rather than static.     

The psychophysical lifting capacities of Chinese subjects

The psychophysical lifting capacity (MAWL) of twelve subjects was determined in this study. The subjects were all young Chinese males who performed lifting tasks in three lifting ranges (floor to knuckle, floor to shoulder, and knuckle to shoulder) and four lifting frequencies (one-time maximum, 1 lift/min, 4 lifts/min, and 6 lifts/min). The oxygen uptake (1/min) and heart rate (beats/min) were recorded while subjects were lifting. Upon completion of each lifting task, the subjects were required to rate their perceived exertion levels. The statistical analyses results indicated the following. Chinese subjects have smaller body size and MAWLs compared with past studies using the US population. The MAWLs decreased with an increase in lifting frequencies. The decrements of MAWL due to lifting frequencies were in agreement with the results of past studies. However, there were larger decreases due to lifting ranges. The MAWLs of the floor to knuckle height lift were the largest, followed by the MAWLs of the floor to shoulder height lift, and the MAWLs of the knuckle to shoulder height lift. The measured physiological responses were considered similar to those obtained in past studies. Subjects' perceived stress levels increased with the lifting frequency and the upper extremities received the most stress for the total range of lifting tasks. The comparisons of the Chinese MAWLs with the NIOSH lifting guidelines for limits (AL and MPL) indicated that the vertical discounting factor in the guidelines should be modified before the NIOSH limits can be applied to non-Western populations.     

Evaluating lifting tasks using subjective and biomechanical estimates of stress at the lower back

The objective of this study was to evaluate five different lifting tasks based on subjective and biomechanical estimates of stress at the lower back. Subjective estimates were obtained immediately after the subjects performed the lifting tasks. Rankings for different tasks were obtained according to the perceived level of stress at the lower back. A biomechanical model was used to predict the compressive force at the L5/S1 disc for the weight lifted considering link angles for the particular posture. The tasks were also ranked according to the compressive force loading at the L5/S1 disc. The weight lifted in these tasks for obtaining the subjective estimate of stress was the maximum acceptable weight of lift (MAWOL). This was determined separately for each subject using a psychophysical approach. Subjective estimates of stress were obtained for infrequent lifting, specifically for a single lift, as well as for lifting at a frequency of four lifts per min. The results showed that a lifting task acceptable from the biomechanical point of view may not be judged as a safe or acceptable task by the worker based on his subjective perception. This may result in a risk of the worker not performing the recommended task or not following the recommended method.     

Acceptable workloads for three common mining materials

A series of psychophysical lifting studies was conducted to establish maximum acceptable weights of lift (MAWL) for three supply items commonly handled in underground coal mines (rock dust bags, ventilation stopping blocks, and crib blocks). Each study utilized 12 subjects, all of whom had considerable experience working in underground coal mines. Effects of lifting in four postures (standing, stooping under a 1·5m ceiling, stooping under a l·2m ceiling, and kneeling) were investigated together with four lifting conditions (combinations of lifting symmetry and lifting height). The frequency of lifting was set at four per min, and the task duration was 15?min. Posture significantly affected the MAWL for the rock dust bag (standing MAWL was 7% greater than restricted postures and kneeling MAWL was 6·4% less than stooped); however, posture interacted with lifting conditions for both of the other materials. Physiological costs were found to be significantly greater in the stooped postures compared with kneeling for all materials. Other contrasts (standing versus restricted postures, stooping under 1·5?m ceiling versus stooping under l·2?m ceiling) did not exhibit significantly different levels of energy expenditure. Energy expenditure was significantly affected by vertical lifting height; however, the plane of lifting had little influence on metabolic cost. Recommended acceptable workloads for the three materials are 20·0?kg for the rock dust bag, 16·5?kg for the ventilation stopping block, and 14·7?kg for the crib block. These results suggest that miners are often required to lift supplies that are substantially heavier than psychophysically acceptable lifting limits.