Human strength capabilities during one-handed maximum voluntary exertions in the fore and aft plane

Maximal static strengths were determined for one-handed exertions in all directions in the fore and aft plane. Data from 12 males and 10 females (mean age 30.7 yrs, standard deviation (SD) = 8.9 yrs, n = 22) were obtained with handle heights of 1.0 and 1.75 m. Twelve of the subjects also performed two-handed exertions at the same handle heights. The ratio of mean strengths of females to that of males ranged from 0.50 to 0.83 (for absolute forces) and from 0.63 to 1.00 for forces normalized to body weight. The ratios of one-handed to two-handed strengths ranged from 0.64 to 1.04. Two-handed strengths commonly exceeded one-handed strengths at the lower handle height, but showed fewer significant strength differences (p less than 0.05) according to direction at 1.75 m. Both female/male and one-handed/two-handed strength ratios were found to be dependent on direction of exertion and handle height. The observed strength dependencies upon number of hands (one or two-handed), direction of exertion, handle height and sex are discussed. The strength data have implications for use in biomechanical models and task analysis.     

Acclimatization to Severe Dry Heat by Brief Exposures to Humid Heat

Abstract

Maximal static strengths were determined for one-handed exertions in all directions in the fore and aft plane. Data from 12 males and 10 females (mean age 30·7 yrs, standard deviation (SD)=8·9 yrs, n=22) were obtained with handle heights of 1·0 and 1·75 m. Twelve of the subjects also performed two-handed exertions at the same handle heights. The ratio of mean strengths of females to that of males ranged from 0·50 to 0·83 (for absolute forces) and from 0·63 to 1·00 for forces normalized to body weight. The ratios of one-handed to two-handed strengths ranged from 0·64 to 1·04. Two-handed strengths commonly exceeded one-handed strengths at the lower handle height, but showed fewer significant strength differences (p<0·05) according to direction at l·75m. Both female/male and one-handed/two-handed strength ratios were found to be dependent on direction of exertion and handle height. The observed strength dependencies upon number of hands (one or two-handed), direction of exertion, handle height and sex are discussed. The strength data have implications for use in biomechanical models and task analysis.     

Static and dynamic lifting strength at different reach distances in symmetrical and asymmetrical planes.

Postural and therefore biomechanical standardization in strength testing has not been rigorously and consistently applied. To develop a quantitative relationship between strength and posture (body position, symmetry, and reach) 30 normal subjects (18 male and 12 females) were required to stoop and squat lift or exert in the relevant posture against a standardized instrumented handle. The isometric lifting efforts and isokinetic lifts were studied. The isokinetic lifts were done at a linear velocity of 50cm/s of the hand displacement from the floor to the knuckle heights of the respective subjects in stoop and squat postures. The isometric stoop lifting efforts were exerted in two standardized postures: (a) with 60 degrees hip flexion; and (b) with 90 degrees hip flexion. The isometric squat lifting efforts were also exerted in two standardized postures: (a) with 90 degrees knee flexion; and (b) with 135 degrees knee flexion. All isometric lifting efforts and isokinetic lifts were performed at half, three-quarters, and full horizontal reach in sagitally symmetrical, 30 degrees left lateral, and 60 degrees left lateral planes. Isometric stoop and squat lifting efforts were also measured in self-selected optimal postures. These 56 conditions were tested in random order. The analysis of variance revealed that the gender, the mode of lifting, the postural asymmetry and reach of lifting affected the strength significantly (p less than 0.0001). Most two-way and three-way interactions were significant (p less than 0.01). Of 108 prediction regression equations, 103 were significant with up to 90% of the variation explained by anthropometric variables and sagittal plane strength. The reach affected the strength most profoundly followed by postural asymmetry and the mode of lifting.     

The effect of upper-extremity posture on maximum grip strength

The objective of this study was to determine and document the position of peak grip strength in different shoulder, elbow, and wrist posture combinations. Fifteen (15) male subjects performed maximal exertions with their dominant hands in nine wrist postures, three elbow postures, and two shoulder postures. Analysis of the data revealed that shoulder and elbow angles had significant effect upon the grip strength. Similarly, it was seen that grip strength at elbow at 135 degrees flexion was significantly different from those with elbow at 90 and 180 degrees. Further, the results revealed that peak grip strength occurred at a combined posture of shoulder abducted 0 degrees, elbow flexed 135 degrees, and the wrist in the neutral posture. Decrements of up to 42% in grip strength could be seen as elbow and wrist angles deviated. This means that use of handtools at deviated postures of shoulder, elbow, and wrist would decrease the percent of MVC at which a worker operated. Hence, the implementation of the finding of this study might be a reduction in the risk of injury, increase in productivity, and well-being of the workers.     

Arm lift strength in work space

This study was conducted to determine arm strength values for isometric and isokinetic efforts around the human trunk. Thirty-eight normal young adults (20 male and 18 female) performed a total of 19 tasks. These consisted of one self-selected optimum posture with upright stance and elbows bent at 90 degrees , designated as standard posture for isometric test. In addition, isometric testing was done sagittally symmetrical 30 degrees and 60 degrees lateral planes at half-, three-quarters- and full-reach distances at knuckle height. The isokinetic tests were done between knuckle height and shoulder height in postures identical to isometric tests. The sequence of these tasks was randomised. The peak strength in standard posture was invariably lower than the peak strength at half-reach in isometric condition in all three planes for both sexes with the exception of one condition among females (60 degrees lateral plane, half-reach isometric). Peak and average arm lift strengths of males were significantly higher than those of females (p < 0.01) and ranged between 44% and 71%. For both sexes isometric strength was significantly higher than isokinetic strength (p < 0.01). The peak and average strengths in the sagittal plane were invariably higher than those of asymmetric postures, with one exception among females. With increasing reach distance the strength declined significantly for all conditions among both genders (p < 0.01). The ANOVA showed that the gender, mode of lifting, postural symmetry and reach of lifting, in addition to affecting the peak and average strength individually (p < 0.01), had significant 2-way and 3-way interactions (p < 0.01). All strength values were inter-correlated (p < 0.01). The regressions predicting peak and average strengths from anthropometric characteristics and sagittal plane strengths accounted for 63% to 89% of all variance and were highly significant (p < 0.01).     

Trunk kinematics of one-handed lifting,and the effects of asymmetry and load weight

Abstract

This study investigated trunk kinematic differences between lifts performed using either one hand (unsupported) or two hands. These effects were studied while beginning the lifts from different asymmetric starting positions and while lifting different load weights. Each subject lifted a box from a lower to an upper platform under one- and two-handed lifting conditions. Subjects wore a lumbar spine electrogoniometer, from which relative motion components were calculated in the trunk's three cardinal planes. Results of this study showed that one-handed lifting resulted in significantly higher ranges of motion in the lateral and transverse planes and greater flexion in the sagittal plane. Back motion characteristics previously found to be associated with low back disorders were all significantly higher for one-handed lifts. The two-handed lift technique, on the other hand, produced overall faster trunk motions in the sagittal plane and equal or larger acceleration and deceleration magnitudes in all planes of motion. Increases in load asymmetry affected trunk kinematics, in that magnitude values for range of motion, velocity and acceleration became much greater with increasingly asymmetric load positions. Increasing the load weight appeared to have less of an effect on trunk kinematics, with increases in position mostly occurring during sagittal and lateral bending. These results suggest that unsupported one-handed lifting loads the spine more than two-handed lifts, due to the added coupling. Applying these results to a previously developed model, one-handed lifting was also found to increase one's risk of suffering a low back disorder.     

Design of optimum grip and control area for one-handed manual control devices

The objective of this paper was to make a design specification of the control area in dual tasks of the hand grip and manual control. The grip postures were analyzed for three types of hand tools. An experiment was performed to measure the position of the fingers and the maximum finger forces at 4 different postures for nine subjects. It was found out that the finger forces were significantly affected by the subjects, the fingers, and the grip postures. The maximum force of women was 62% of men's. From the experiment, the primary control area was defined as 10–13cm and the secondary control area as 8–12cm from the wrist origin. The preferred hand posture of the index and the middle fingers was found to be 3045 degrees at metacarpophalangeal joint and 4050 degrees at proximal interphalangeal joint. It was also found out that the design of one-handed manual control devices should include the characteristics of the user, grip posture, finger force, and the control arrangement.     

Static and dynamic lifting strength at different reach distances in symmetrica] and asymmetrical planes

Postural and therefore biomechanical standardization in strength testing has not been rigorously and consistently applied. To develop a quantitative relationship between strength and posture (body position, symmetry, and reach) 30 normal subjects (18 male and 12 females) were required to stoop and squat lift or exert in the relevant posture against a standardized instrumented handle. The isometric lifting efforts and isokinetic lifts were studied. The isokinetic lifts were done at a linear velocity of 50cm/s of the hand displacement from the floor to the knuckle heights of the respective subjects in stoop and squat postures. The isometric stoop lifting efforts were exerted in two standardized postures: (a) with 60° hip flexion; and (b) with 90° hip flexion. The isometric squat lifting efforts were also exerted in two standardized postures: (a) with 90° knee flexion; and (b) with 135° knee flexion. All isometric lifting efforts and isokinetic lifts were performed at half, three-quarters, and full horizontal reach in sagitally symmetrical, 30° left lateral, and 60° left lateral planes. Isometric stoop and squat lifting efforts were also measured in self-selected optimal postures. These 56 conditions were tested in random order. The analysis of variance revealed that the gender, the mode of lifting, the postural asymmetry and reach of lifting affected the strength significantly (p<0·0001). Most two-way and three-way interactions were significant (p<0·01). Of 108 prediction regression equations, 103 were significant with up to 90% of the variation explained by anthropometric variables and sagittal plane strength. The reach affected the strength most profoundly followed by postural asymmetry and the mode of lifting.     

Interfering effects of the task demands of grip force and mental processing on isometric shoulder strength and muscle activity

The purpose of this study was to examine the interfering effects of physical and mental tasks on shoulder isometric strength in different postures. Fifteen volunteers (seven women, eight men) performed a series of isometric shoulder exertions at 30 degrees , 60 degrees and 90 degrees of both shoulder flexion and abduction alone and with the addition of a 30% grip force, a mental task (Stroop test) and both additional tasks simultaneously. The shoulder tasks were completed either at maximal intensity, or while maintaining a shoulder posture without any additional effort. Surface electromyography (EMG) from seven muscles of the shoulder girdle and shoulder moment were collected for each 6 s shoulder exertion. When normalized to maximum exertion, no differences were found between genders and no differences existed between conditions when subjects maintained each posture without exerted force. In the maximal shoulder exertion trials, an increase in shoulder angle (in either plane) resulted in an increase in EMG in most muscles, while shoulder moment decreased in flexion and remained constant in abduction. Shoulder moments and muscle activation were greatest in the shoulder exertion alone condition followed by adding a 30% grip and the Stroop test, with the addition of both tasks further reducing the exerted shoulder moment and EMG. However, muscle activity did not always decrease with shoulder strength and remained elevated, indicating a complex coactivation pattern produced by an interfering role of the tasks. Overall, it was found that a mental task can have the same or greater effect as a concurrent grip and should be considered when assessing muscular loading in the workplace, as typical biomechanical modelling may underestimate internal loads. The results not only provide valuable shoulder strength data but also practical strength values, depending on additional tasks.     

The spatial dependency of shoulder muscular demands during upward and downward exertions

Lifting and lowering are common occupational tasks contributing to shoulder injury risk. Quantifying task interaction with physical demand can precipitate better workstation designs. Nineteen university-aged males performed one-handed, submaximal upward/downward manual force exertions at 70 hand locations; unilateral electromyography (EMG) of 14 muscles was recorded. EMG across planes was evaluated with ANOVA. Predictive equations for muscle activity throughout the reach envelope were developed with stepwise regression. Total muscle activity (sum of individual muscle activity) was most sensitive to vertical hand location for upward exertions, where activation at superior locations was 192% of values for inferior locations. For upward exertions, activation differences for hand location occurred along all anatomical axes, and along anterior/posterior and superior/inferior axes for downward exertions. Predictive equations were non-linear, reflecting complex muscular demand with three-dimensional hand location. This work details foundational exposure data for lifting/lowering exertions. Results are applicable to workstation design to minimise occupational shoulder muscular demands.

Practitioner Summary: Lifting and lowering in the workplace contribute to shoulder injury risk. Shoulder muscle activity magnitudes revealed a dependence on three-dimensional hand location in the reach envelope for a defined hand force. This information can inform evidence-based workstation designs that reduce shoulder muscular demands for numerous materials handling scenarios.     

Development of predictive equations for lifting strengths

The purpose of the study was to determine relationship between lifting strengths of male and female subjects and body posture, type of lift (stoop or squat) and velocity of lift. Thirty normal young adults (18 males and 12 females) volunteered for the study. All subjects were required to perform a total of 56 tasks. Of these, 28 were stoop lifts and 28 were squat lifts. In each of the categories of stoop and squat lifts, the strengths were tested in standard posture, isokinetic (linear velocity of 500 mm/s), and isometric modes at half, three-quarters and full horizontal individual reach distances in sagittal, 30 degrees lateral and 60 degrees lateral planes. The strengths were measured using a static dynamic strength tester with a load cell and an IBM microcomputer with an A/D card. The peak and average strength values were extracted and statistically compared across conditions and gender (ANOVA). Finally a multiple regression analysis was carried out to predict strength as a function of reach, posture and velocity of lift. The ANOVA revealed a highly significant effect of gender, reach, plane and velocity (p < 0.01). All regression equations (108) were significant (p < 0.01), and more than 70% of variance in lifting strength was accounted for by the anthropometric variables and sagittal plane strength values. Such an established relationship allows one to predict the human lifting strength capabilities for industrial application based on simple anthropometric and strength characteristics.     

Maximum isometric lifting strengths of men in teamwork

This study reexamined the additivity of maximum isometric teamwork lifting strength using experienced and height-matched young male participants. The maximum isometric lifting strength was measured for four exertion heights (45, 75, 105, and 140 cm) and four lifting styles (one-, two, three-, and four-person exertions). The results showed that actual teamwork strength could be greater or lower than the sum of individual strengths. If it was greater, the difference between the two could be either significant or nonsignificant, but if it was lower, there was no significant difference between the two. Actual teamwork strength ranged from 90.0% to 134.8% of the sum of individual strengths, indicating that experienced and height-matched participants could overcome the problem of lack of coordination in isometric teamwork lifting. The results also showed that some teamwork members, especially weaker members, might be forced to exert strengths higher than their maximum individual voluntary strengths in teamwork lifting. To avoid such overexertion in teamwork, it is recommended that the weight of the handled load be controlled and lower than the sum of all members' strengths. Additionally, members with significantly different strength abilities should not be assigned to the same team. Actual or potential applications of this research include designing member assignments in teamwork lifting tasks.     

Static lifting strength in different lifting postures among Malaysian adults

This laboratory‐based study aims to evaluate maximum static lifting strengths for one‐handed (left hand or right hand) and two‐handed exertions in four lifting types (back lifting, upper‐body lifting, arm lifting, and shoulder lifting) across three horizontal distances (toes were anterior to, aligned with, and posterior to the exerted handle). This study recruited 48 men and 48 women, right‐handed undergraduates aged 18 to 25 years. The results showed that the static lifting strength ratio of one‐handed lifting to two‐handed lifting ranged from 61% to 71%. No significant difference (p > 0.05) was observed between right‐handed (dominant) and left‐handed lifting strengths. This study showed a significant difference (p < 0.001) in men's and women's lifting strengths in all lifting conditions. This study also showed a significant difference (p < 0.05) in respondents with normal body mass index (BMI; <25) and abnormal BMI (BMI ≥ 25) in all lifting types. The lifting strengths in four lifting types across three horizontal distances were significantly different. The results showed that upper‐body lifting with near horizontal distance (toes anterior to the exerted handle) has the highest reading of lifting strength. The results encouraged two‐handed lifting due to higher lifting strength and less strain. The results also indicated the need to account for differences between the genders and BMI categories when disseminating lifting tasks. This study recommends that practitioners not overlook the effects of the lifting types and horizontal distances when evaluating one's lifting strength for screening purposes. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Measurement of prehensile grasp capabilities by a force and moment wrench: methodological development and assessment of manual workers

Prehensile grasp capability is typically quantified by pinch and grasp forces. This work was undertaken to develop a methodology to assess complex, multi-axis hand exertions through the measurement of forces and moments exerted by the hand along and about three orthogonal axes originating at the grip centre; termed an external wrench. Instrumentation consisting of a modified pinch/grip dynamometer affixed to a 6 df force cube was developed to simultaneously measure three forces, three moments and the pinch/grip force about the centre of the grip. Twenty right hand dominant manual workers (10 male and 10 female), free of hand or wrist disorders, completed a variety of maximal strength tasks. The randomized block design involved three separate grips--power grip, lateral pinch and pulp pinch. Randomized within each block were three non-concurrent repetitions of isolated maximal force and moment generations along and about the three principle orthogonal axes and a maximal grip force exertion. Trials were completed while standing, with the arm abducted and elbow flexed to 90 degrees with a wrist posture near neutral. Where comparable protocols existed in the literature, forces and moments exerted were found to be of similar magnitude to those reported previously. Female and male grip strengths on a Jamar dynamometer were 302.6 N and 450.5 N, respectively. Moment exertions in a power grip (female and male) were 4.7 Nm and 8.1 Nm for pronator, 4.9 Nm and 8.0 Nm for supinator, 6.2 Nm and 10.3 Nm for radial deviator, 7.7 Nm and 13.0 Nm for ulnar deviator, 6.2 Nm and 8.2 Nm for extensor, and 7.1 Nm and 9.3 Nm for flexor moments. Correlations with and between maximal force and moment exertions were only moderate. This paper describes instrumentation that allows comprehensive characterization of prehensile force and moment capability.     

Manual materials handling capabilities in non-standard postures

Research efforts to establish manual materials handling (MMH) capabilities of individuals and populations have been conducted for many years. Most of the previous efforts have explored ‘standard postures’, utilizing two-handed, symmetric, sagittal plane MMH using unrestricted postures. Recognizing that many industrial MMH activities do not utilize ‘standard postures’, recent research projects have explored psychophysicaly determined MMH capacities in a variety of non-standard postures. Among the non-standard postures examined were: twisting while lifting or lowering, lifting and lowering from lying, sitting, kneeling, and squatting positions, and carrying loads under conditions of constricted ceiling heights. This paper presents the results of a series of previous research efforts at Texas Tech University. The results are presented in the form of population capabilities of both males and females for 99 MMH tasks using ‘non-standard postures’. The data tables contain means and standard deviations of the data, as well as percentile distributions for the subject populations. Sample sizes for the experimental populations ranged from 45 to 50 subjects of each sex in the first three experiments to 20 subjects of each sex in the fourth set of experiments.     

The effects of posture on forearm muscle loading during gripping

The purpose of this study was to quantify the response of the forearm musculature to combinations of wrist and forearm posture and grip force. Ten healthy individuals performed five relative handgrip efforts (5%, 50%, 70% and 100% of maximum, and 50 N) for combinations of three wrist postures (flexed, neutral and extended) and three forearm postures (pronated, neutral and supinated). ‘Baseline’ extensor muscle activity (associated with holding the dynamometer without exerting grip force) was greatest with the forearm pronated and the wrist extended, while flexor activity was largest in supination when the wrist was flexed. Extensor activity was generally larger than that of flexors during low to mid-range target force levels, and was always greater when the forearm was pronated. Flexor activation only exceeded the extensor activation at the 70% and 100% target force levels in some postures. A flexed wrist reduced maximum grip force by 40-50%, but EMG amplitude remained elevated. Women produced 60-65% of the grip strength of men, and required 5-10% more of both relative force and extensor activation to produce a 50 N grip. However, this appeared to be due to strength rather than gender. Forearm rotation affected grip force generation only when the wrist was flexed, with force decreasing from supination to pronation (p<0.005). The levels of extensor activation observed, especially during baseline and low level grip exertions, suggest a possible contributing mechanism to the development of lateral forearm muscle pain in the workplace.     

The effects of posture on forearm muscle loading during gripping

The purpose of this study was to quantify the response of the forearm musculature to combinations of wrist and forearm posture and grip force. Ten healthy individuals performed five relative handgrip efforts (5%, 50%, 70% and 100% of maximum, and 50 N) for combinations of three wrist postures (flexed, neutral and extended) and three forearm postures (pronated, neutral and supinated). 'Baseline' extensor muscle activity (associated with holding the dynamometer without exerting grip force) was greatest with the forearm pronated and the wrist extended, while flexor activity was largest in supination when the wrist was flexed. Extensor activity was generally larger than that of flexors during low to mid-range target force levels, and was always greater when the forearm was pronated. Flexor activation only exceeded the extensor activation at the 70% and 100% target force levels in some postures. A flexed wrist reduced maximum grip force by 40-50%, but EMG amplitude remained elevated. Women produced 60-65% of the grip strength of men, and required 5-10% more of both relative force and extensor activation to produce a 50 N grip. However, this appeared to be due to strength rather than gender. Forearm rotation affected grip force generation only when the wrist was flexed, with force decreasing from supination to pronation (p < 0.005). The levels of extensor activation observed, especially during baseline and low level grip exertions, suggest a possible contributing mechanism to the development of lateral forearm muscle pain in the workplace.     

One-handed dynamic pulling strength with special application to lawn mowers

A laboratory study was conducted to determine one-handed dynamic and static pulling strengths of 50 males and 49 females from 14 to 71 years of age. The dynamic strength for a 11m pull was measured to simulate the act of starting a lawn mower engine for four different starting-rope handle locations: on the engine, in the middle, on the right and on the left side of the frame. The last three were located at the back of the lawn mower at a vertical height of 63 cm from the floor and the handle on the engine was located at 42 cm. Static strength was measured for the handle in the middle. Ratings of perceived exertion were recorded for different body parts.

Peak and average dynamic pulling strengths were 55% and 34% of static pulling strengths. Dynamic pulling strengths were highly correlated with peak velocity (r = 0·84). Men in the age group 21-34 years had the highest strength and women in the age group 51-71 years the least strength. Dynamic pulling strengths for women were 62% of strengths for men. Women took 10% longer to pull, had a lower peak velocity (16%), reached peak force faster (17%) and took a longer time (6%) to reach peak velocity than men.

The starting handle located on the engine resulted in the maximum pulling strength and on the left side in the minimum strength. However, two out of three subjects preferred the handle either on the right side or in the middle. Fifty-five percent of the subjects indicated they would prefer a height higher than 63 cm.

Maximum stresses were perceived on the shoulder and upper arm with a mean rating between fairly light and somewhat hard. Graphs of cumulative frequency distributions of average and peak dynamic pulling strengths are presented to aid in the determining forces required to start a lawn mower engine in order to satisfy a desired percentage of the population.     

Interfering effects of the task demands of grip force and mental processing on isometric shoulder strength and muscle activity

The purpose of this study was to examine the interfering effects of physical and mental tasks on shoulder isometric strength in different postures. Fifteen volunteers (seven women, eight men) performed a series of isometric shoulder exertions at 30°, 60° and 90° of both shoulder flexion and abduction alone and with the addition of a 30% grip force, a mental task (Stroop test) and both additional tasks simultaneously. The shoulder tasks were completed either at maximal intensity, or while maintaining a shoulder posture without any additional effort. Surface electromyography (EMG) from seven muscles of the shoulder girdle and shoulder moment were collected for each 6 s shoulder exertion. When normalized to maximum exertion, no differences were found between genders and no differences existed between conditions when subjects maintained each posture without exerted force. In the maximal shoulder exertion trials, an increase in shoulder angle (in either plane) resulted in an increase in EMG in most muscles, while shoulder moment decreased in flexion and remained constant in abduction. Shoulder moments and muscle activation were greatest in the shoulder exertion alone condition followed by adding a 30% grip and the Stroop test, with the addition of both tasks further reducing the exerted shoulder moment and EMG. However, muscle activity did not always decrease with shoulder strength and remained elevated, indicating a complex coactivation pattern produced by an interfering role of the tasks. Overall, it was found that a mental task can have the same or greater effect as a concurrent grip and should be considered when assessing muscular loading in the workplace, as typical biomechanical modelling may underestimate internal loads. The results not only provide valuable shoulder strength data but also practical strength values, depending on additional tasks.     

Differences in lifting strength profiles between experienced workers and novices at various exertion heights

This study compared lifting strength patterns between experienced workers and novices at various exertion heights. Twenty-one experienced workers and 21 novices were recruited to determine their static-lifting strength under various heights (10-150 cm in increments of 10 cm) using two exertion methods (vertically upward lifting, VUL, and toward body lifting, TBL). Testing posture was also recorded by a motion analysis system for comparing with the corresponding strength values.Results showed that strength during VUL were much higher than strength during TBL at 15 height positions (p < 0.001). Strength in all 30 task combinations showed no difference between the two groups except for the VUL at heights of 100-120 cm. On the average, strength exerted by novices during VUL was 4.57-7.61 kg lower than that of workers while lifting at 100-120 cm heights (all p < 0.05). The strength during TBL consistently decreased with increased heights of lifting. When workers performed VUL, the strength surprisingly remained nearly unchanged throughout the heights of interest. The postures adopted by workers during VUL were also highly differentiated from novices while performing near-floor positions, but the strength was equivalent to each other. This study demonstrated that the static-lifting strength of novices were significantly lower than those of experienced workers while upward lifting near the participant’s elbow height. It was concluded that workers tend to adopt a safer (i.e., more flexed knees) and more skillful technique than novices to generate forces, resulting in lower spinal loads during both methods of lifting.

Relevance to Industry

Many studies have established the human strength data based on student participants who do not have experience in manual materials handling. The present findings clearly suggest that lifting strength data collected on novices (e.g., on students) should be carefully applied in the task (re)design at the workplace as their strength profiles and the postures adopted during lifting differ from workers.