Abstract
There are many assessment techniques used for occupational risk factors of MSDs in the workplaces. However, because all ergonomic assesment techniques or tools are based on theoretical background derived from workphysiology, biomechanics, psychophysics, industrial hygiene, work system, and etc, it is impossible to compare the assessment techniques. This study was conducted to compare the excess rates of risk factors among ergonomic assessment techniques and to make alternative methods. Site-visits to 6 automobile products and parts company provided data for process repeated work where the produced data was examined for evaluating the relationship between workplace lay-out and work posture by using ergonomic assessment techniques. We evaluated 157 jobs for simple repeated work and 37 jobs for manual materials handling (MMH). In simple repeated work, the exceeded rates of AC were 36.3% in OWAS method and 93.0% in RULA method. The exceeded rate for RULA method was significantly higher than those for OWAS method (p<0.05). In MMH, the exceeded rates of AC were 80.0% in NLE method and 76.5% in WAC method. Statistically significant differences were not identified in the exceeded rates for NLE and MAC methods (p<0.05). The analyzed results among ergonomic assessment techniques (OWAS, RULA, NLE/WAC) were applied to the same work places performing simple repeated work and manual materials handling simultaneously. The applied results showed statistically significant differences (p<0.05) among ergonomic assessment techniques (OWAS, RULA, NLE/WAC). Exceeded rates of four ergonomic assessment techniques in decreasing order was "RULA>NLE>WAC>OWAS". The RULA method was the strongest assessment technique for automobile products and parts company. We discovered that the results could easily be overestimated or underestimated when the ergonomic assessment techniques were not applied correctly during the evaluation process. Therefore, we recommend using at least 2 methods when evaluating and analysing the results.
