• Journal of the Ergonomics Society of Korea
• /
• v.31 no.1
• /
• pp.185-189
• /
• 2012

Objective: The aim of this paper is to introduces Hyundai Heavy Industry's ergonomic risk assessment tool, H-OWAS, which is considering work load and frequency compared to the OWAS. Background: As prevalence of work-related musculoskeletal disorders(WMSDs) in ship building industries has been much higher than that in other industries, most of the large scaled corporations have implemented their own prevention program since legislation on the prevention of WMSDs had introduced in 2003. Method: This paper introduces WMSDs prevention program, HEMP(HHI Ergonomics Management Program) which consists of risk assessment, improvement efforts of working environments, medical treatment and training/evaluation and describes how to operate the program. We also describe application of OWAS method considering work load and frequency for risk factor analysis(H-OWAS) and shows methodology for assessing the ergonomic risk factor. And comparison of the assessment results between OWAS and H-OWAS is carried out by statistical analysis. Result: There was statistically significant difference in the assessment results between OWAS and H-OWAS, and regression shows H-OWAS explains the borg's scale of perceived exertion more clearly than OWAS. Conclusion: H-OWAS has been proved more effective tool than OWAS to evaluate ergonomic risk factor under real working condition. Application: H-OWAS can be widely applied to the many other companies when implementing the ergonomics risk assessment.

• Journal of the Ergonomics Society of Korea
• /
• v.31 no.1
• /
• pp.165-170
• /
• 2012

Objective: The aim of this study is to develop new K-OWAS on the basis of the anthropometry of Koreans considering works in shipbuilding and heavy industry for evaluation whole-body working postures. Background: Work Related Musculoskeletal Disorders(WMSDs) were a leading cause of sick leaves and injuries in the industries of our country. Especially, awkward working postures and handling of heavy weight are known as a main cause of WMSDs. OWAS, RULA and REBA are much used as the method for evaluating the awkward working postures. OWAS is the working postures evaluation method that can be used for the evaluation of whole-body working postures. OWAS was the method made based on the anthropometry of the foreigner, working postures and weight does not fit our work state. Method: This method was evaluated considering the anthropometry of the Koreans, working postures and weight in shipbuilding and heavy industry work state in Korea. Results: Correlation of action level of OWAS and subjective discomfort for each body parts were not statistically significant($p{\geq}0.1$). But correlation of action level of K-OWAS and subjective discomfort for torso and waist were statistically significant($p{\leq}0.1$). Conclusion: K-OWAS was suitable in the evaluation of upper body including torso and waist. Application: New method for whole-body working postures from this study prevent WMSDs and help improvement of working environment and design of working method.

• Journal of Fisheries and Marine Sciences Education
• /
• v.23 no.1
• /
• pp.67-74
• /
• 2011

The study was constructed an analysis of postures of a expert diver's wearing and taking off with skinscuba equipment using ergonomics tools(REBA, RULA, OWAS) for prevention of Musculoskeletal injuries. This survey is consisted of 4 postures in terms of wearing and taking off : Crouching(alone), Standing(alone), Helping of assistance, Using of stanchion. Their rate of injuries is getting higher due to instability postures, exposed dangers and excessive physical actions. So this study provides basic and educational information for prevention of that. The result is as follows : The result of crouching postures of wearing alone was REBA 9(Ac Level 3), RULA 7(Ac Level 4), OWAS AC 2, and crouching postures of taking off alone was REBA 12(Ac Level 4), RULA 7(Ac Level 4), OWAS AC 4. The result of standing postures of wearing alone was REBA 8(Ac Level 3), RULA 7(Ac Level 4), OWAS AC 3, and standing postures of taking off alone was REBA 8(Ac Level 3), RULA 7(Ac Level 4), OWAS AC 3. The result of helping of assistance postures of wearing was REBA 4(Ac Level 2), RULA 3(Ac Level 2), OWAS AC 2, and standing postures of taking off alone was REBA 4(Ac Level 2), RULA 4(Ac Level 2), OWAS AC 1. The result of using of stanchion postures of wearing was REBA 3(Ac Level 1), RULA 3(Ac Level 2), OWAS AC 1, and standing postures of taking off alone was REBA 3(Ac Level 1), RULA 3(Ac Level 2), OWAS AC 1. Especially both postures of wearing and taking off alone showed high results in the analysis of postures using ergonomics tools(REBA, RULA, OWAS).

• Journal of the Korean Society of Safety
• /
• v.20 no.2 s.70
• /
• pp.127-132
• /
• 2005

The purpose of this study is to compare representative posture classification schemes of OWAS, RULA and REBA in terms of correctness for postural load. The comparison was based on the evaluation results by the three methods for 224 working postures sampled from steel, electronics, automotive, and chemical industries. The results showed that OWAS and REBA generally underestimated postural stress than RULA irrespective of industry type, work performed and whether or not leg posture is balanced. While about $71\%\;and\;73\%$ of the 224 posture were evaluated with the action category/level 1 or 2 by OWAS and REBA respectively, about $60\%$ of the postures were classified into the action level of 3 or 4 by RULA. The coincidence rate of postural stress category between OWAS and RULA was just $33.5\%$, while the rate between RULA and REBA was $46.0\%$. It is concluded from the findings of this study and the previous research that compared to OWAS and REBA, RULA more precisely evaluates postural stress.

• Journal of the Korea Safety Management & Science
• /
• v.22 no.2
• /
• pp.31-38
• /
• 2020

The study evaluated the accuracy and intra-rater reliability for OWAS (Ovako Working posture Analysing System), RULA (Rapid Upper Limb Assessment), REBA (Rapid Entire Body Assessment) to improve their evaluation accuracy and reliability. Participants (n = 163) with undergraduate degree were recruited in this study and trained for 6 hours about the ergonomic assessment methods. Ergonomic assessments were conducted using OWAS, RULA, and REBA for a representative work with dynamic posture found in manufacturing industries. The study compared action categories (overall level) and detailed evaluation scores for individual body part. Action categories of the participants significantly differed from the golden reference defined by ergonomic experts. The participants underrated or omitted scores for truck (37.4% of the participants) and legs (52.8%) in OWAS. Similarly, the participants underrated or omitted additional scores for all body parts except the hand and wrist in RULA (53.5%) and REBA (54.8%). On the other hand, the participants overrated scores for the hand and wrist in RULA (55.2%) and REBA (39.9%). The results found in this study can help of selecting focus points and parts during assessment and education to improve accuracy and reliability of the ergonomic assessment methods.

• Korean Journal of Agricultural Science
• /
• v.42 no.2
• /
• pp.117-124
• /
• 2015

In forest work, working conditions are very hard to improve. The good posture is believed to bring about direct improvements such as accident prevention. Therefore, this research carried on analysis of working posture in forest work (construct in stepping-stone) using OWAS analysis system. According to the analytical results provided by OWAS, the ratio of category III (Work posture has a distinctly harmful effect on the musculoskeletal system) has shawn that worker 2 was 32.2%, worker 1 was 25.2% and worker 3 was 15.5%. Furthermore, the ratio of category IV (Work posture with an extremely harmful effect on the musculoskeletal system) has shown that worker 2 was 9.8%, worker 3 was 1.4% and worker 1 was 1.2%. According to the OWAS method, percentage of OWAS action categories III and IV in the worker 2 was higher than another workers.

• Journal of Korean Society of Forest Science
• /
• v.90 no.3
• /
• pp.388-397
• /
• 2001

In forestry, where improvement of labor environment is quite impossible, improved posture would result in direct effects by preventing waste of physical strength, prevention of accidental injury caused by fatigue accumulated on certain body parts, and prevention of human error by inattentiveness due to weakened body. Therefore, this research carried on analysis of working posture in manual forest work(thinning using chain-saw, salvage cutting using chain-saw, clearing using hand saw, clearance of twiner using sickle, pruning using saw with a long handle, and tending of young growth using sickle) using OWAS analysis system. According to the OWAS method, percentage of OWAS action categories III and IV in the tasks using chain-saw and sickle was higher than another tasks. For the compared middle skillful worker group and low skillful worker group at felling work using chain-saw, percentage of OWAS action categories IV in middle skillful worker group was 5.1%, and low skillful worker group was 14.1%.

• The Korean Journal of Emergency Medical Services
• /
• v.27 no.3
• /
• pp.33-46
• /
• 2023

Purpose: This study aims to evaluate the risk of work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs) in 119 EMT during patient-carrying tasks using a long backboard (LBB) and a variable stretcher. Methods: Manikins were used as patients, and 45 new 119 EMT from K Fire Academy were filmed performing patient-carrying tasks on stairs. The tasks were analyzed using Ovako working posture analysis system (OWAS) and Rapid entire body assessment (REBA). Results: In using LBB, the OWAS score was Mode 3(Mean 2.37, Maximum 3), requiring as soon as possible corrective action, the REBA score was Mode 11(Mean 9.16, Maximum 11), requiring immediate improvement. In using variable stretcher, the OWAS score was Mode 1(Mean 2.33, Maximum 3), non-necessity for corrective action, the REBA score was Mode 9(Mean 8.0, Maximum 11), requiring as soon as possible. Conclusion: In conclusion, improvement was needed in one task (carrying a patient using a LBB) in the OWAS and in two tasks (carrying a patient using a LBB, carrying a patient using a variable stretcher) in the REBA. Thereby, required attention and management of WMSDs during training. In addition, it is essential to carry out objective and quantitative assessments through ergonomic analysis by occupational health professionals when designing future training programs to prevent WMSDs.

• Journal of Korean Society of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene
• /
• v.19 no.2
• /
• pp.88-95
• /
• 2009

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.

• International Journal of Quality Innovation
• /
• v.9 no.1
• /
• pp.22-40
• /
• 2008

Unnatural working postures usually cause musculoskeletal problems for workers in work field, especially in traditional industry. Many analysis and survey methodologies have been developed to identify unnatural postures and disorder risks in workplaces. The Ovako Working Posture Analyzing System (OWAS) and Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire (NMQ) are the representative methods and applied widely. This study applied the both tools to investigate the work field of a manufacturing factory of the water heater's case. We divided the manufacturing process into nine workshops, took the pictures of working motions by DV camera and analyzed the postures on OWAS. From the OW AS results, we could identify the risks level of musculoskeletal symptoms as four Action Categories (AC). And from the comparison of OWAS and NMQ results, we could provide the suggestions to improve the working methods and environment. From the results of OWAS, we found that the operators' head/neck and back were above AC3 in some workshops. If the situation continued in long period, the operators might have the risk to get musculoskeletal symptoms. From the investigation of NMQ, we also found that the percentage of aches on neck, shoulders and lower back were higher than other parts of body. The correlation between aches and jobs was more than 75%. So we provided some suggestions to improve: work rotation and adjustment of work surface/height to fit in with Ergonomics. Then the risks of musculoskeletal symptoms would be reduced.