Ergonomic Evaluation for Right Angle Power Tools

127 Pages·2017·4.09 MB·English

UUnniivveerrssiittyy ooff WWiinnddssoorr
SScchhoollaarrsshhiipp aatt UUWWiinnddssoorr
Electronic Theses and Dissertations Theses, Dissertations, and Major Papers
2017
EErrggoonnoommiicc EEvvaalluuaattiioonn ffoorr RRiigghhtt AAnnggllee PPoowweerr TToooollss:: DDiirreecctt CCuurrrreenntt
PPhhyyssiiccaall DDeemmaannddss CCoommppaarriissoonn –– AA FFooccuuss oonn MMuussccllee AAccttiivviittyy
Danielle DeVries
University of Windsor
Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.uwindsor.ca/etd
RReeccoommmmeennddeedd CCiittaattiioonn
DeVries, Danielle, "Ergonomic Evaluation for Right Angle Power Tools: Direct Current Physical Demands
Comparison – A Focus on Muscle Activity" (2017). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 5975.
https://scholar.uwindsor.ca/etd/5975
This online database contains the full-text of PhD dissertations and Masters’ theses of University of Windsor
students from 1954 forward. These documents are made available for personal study and research purposes only,
in accordance with the Canadian Copyright Act and the Creative Commons license—CC BY-NC-ND (Attribution,
Non-Commercial, No Derivative Works). Under this license, works must always be attributed to the copyright holder
(original author), cannot be used for any commercial purposes, and may not be altered. Any other use would
require the permission of the copyright holder. Students may inquire about withdrawing their dissertation and/or
thesis from this database. For additional inquiries, please contact the repository administrator via email
([email protected]) or by telephone at 519-253-3000ext. 3208.
Ergonomic Evaluation for Right Angle Power Tools: Direct Current
Physical Demands Comparison – A Focus on Muscle Activity

By
Danielle DeVries

A Thesis
Submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies
Through the Faculty of Human Kinetics
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for
The Degree of Master of Human Kinetics at the
University of Windsor

Windsor, Ontario, Canada
2017

© 2017 Danielle DeVries

i
Ergonomic Evaluation for Right Angle Power Tools: Direct Current
Physical Demands Comparison – A Focus on Muscle Activity

By
Danielle DeVries

APPROVED BY:

______________________________________________
J. Urbanic
Department of Mechanical, Automotive & Materials Engineering

______________________________________________
K. Kenno
Department of Kinesiology

______________________________________________
J. Cort, Advisor
Department of Kinesiology

April 13, 2017
ii
DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY

I hereby certify that I am the sole author of these thesis and that no part of this thesis
has been published or submitted for publication.
I certify that, to the best of my knowledge, my thesis does not infringe upon
anyone’s copyright nor violate any proprietary rights and that any ideas, techniques, quotations,
or any other material from the work of other people included in my thesis, published or
otherwise, are fully acknowledged in accordance with the standard referencing practices.
Furthermore, to the extent that I have included copyrighted material that surpasses the bounds
of fair dealing within the meaning of the Canada Copyright Act, I certify that I have obtained a
written permission from the copyright owner(s) to include such material(s) in my thesis and
have included copies of such copyright clearances to my appendix.
I declare that this is a true copy of my thesis, including any final revisions, as approved
by my thesis committee and the Graduate Studies office, and that this thesis has not been
submitted for a higher degree to any other University or Institution.

iii
ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the differences in muscle activation and handle forces
between three direct current right angle power tool fastening strategies: turbo tight, two stage
without soft stop and two stage with soft stop. Thirty-six participants (20-60 yrs) were assigned
to one of two experimental groups: hard-joints or soft-joints. Participants conducted fastenings
at four different postures for three different target torques and muscle sEMG was collected on
16 muscles of the upper body. Data from the muscle sEMG, and forces collected at the handle
were analyzed using repeated measures ANOVA with Tukey’s post hoc test to determine
statistical significance (p<0.05). Results found that the participants sEMG activation impulse
was less for the turbo tight fastening strategy in comparison to the two-stage fastening strategy
with and without soft stop. These findings were not impacted by joint type, posture or target
torque.

iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to thank my friends and family for supporting me throughout this milestone of my
life. I appreciate everything you have all done for me, particularly those willingly being a
participating in my study! Mom & Dad, I greatly appreciate all the motivation and
encouragement you have given me over the years, especially once I started my career and
needed you more than ever. Kefsere and Heather, thank you for letting me claim your couches
for my own, its where I got my best work done. Sara Santarossa, thank you for all the coffee
runs and study dates and stats help, you kept me sane throughout this whole process.

To my committee members, Dr. Kenji Kenno and Dr. Jill Urbanic, thank you for lending me your
time and knowledge to help me complete my thesis, I couldn’t have completed it without you. I
especially want to thank my advisor, Dr. Joel Cort, for his guidance and wisdom along the way.
You have helped me along this entire journey and I wouldn’t have been able to get to this point
without you. Thank you for believing in me and pushing me to finish this thesis after starting my
career, is the was motivation I needed to spend all those extra hours after working completing
this project.

I would also like to thank Tianna Beharriell and all the other graduate and undergraduate
students that have helped me along the way. From trial runs to data collection, I wouldn’t have
gotten to this point without you. Another big thank you to Don Clarke for all his help with the
tools and technology used. You were such a huge help in developing this data collection and
you helped keep things running smoothly along the way.
v
Lastly, I would like to thank Christian Steingraber for all his help in our thesis. I could not have
done it without you, from bouncing idea’s off you or the hours upon hours spent collecting data,
glad you were the one I got to complete this project with. I wish you all the best in your future.

The last couple years have been the most rewarding and the most challenging years of my life,
and I could not have done any of it without any of you. I wouldn’t change anything during the
time it took to get to this place as it has helped me grow into the person I am today.

vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY ......................................................... iii

ABSTRACT ........................................................................................ iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ........................................................................ v

LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................. xi

LIST OF FIGURES .............................................................................. xii

LIST OF APPENDICES ....................................................................... xvi

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................ xvii

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION .............................................................. 1

1.1 BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................. 1
1.2 STATEMENT OF PURPOSE ...................................................................................................... 2
1.3 HYPOTHESES .......................................................................................................................... 2
CHAPTER 2: LITERARTURE REVIEW ..................................................... 4

2.1 POWER TOOL USE IN THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY ............................................................. 4
2.1.1 POWER TOOL VARIETY .................................................................................................... 5
2.1.2 POWER TOOL FASTENING PROCEDURE .......................................................................... 6
2.1.3 PNEUMATIC RIGHT ANGLE POWER TOOLS ..................................................................... 7
2.1.4 DIRECT CURRENT RIGHT ANGLE POWER TOOLS ............................................................. 8
2.1.5 JOINT TYPES .................................................................................................................. 11
2.1.6 POWER TOOL EFFECTS ON THE HUMAN BODY ............................................................ 14
vii
2.2 MECHANICS OF MUSCLE CONTRACTION ............................................................................. 16
2.2.1 MOTOR UNIT ................................................................................................................. 16
2.2.2 MUSCLE FIBER RECRUITMENT ...................................................................................... 20
2.2.3 RESTING MEMBRANE POTENTIAL ................................................................................. 21
2.2.4 ACTION POTENTIAL PROPAGATION .............................................................................. 21
2.2.5 EXCITATION-CONTRACTION COUPLING ........................................................................ 23
2.2.6 SLIDING FILAMENT THEORY .......................................................................................... 25
2.2.7 MUSCLE PROPRIOCEPTORS ........................................................................................... 27
2.3 MUSCLE FORCE PRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 29
2.3.1 CONTRACTIONS ............................................................................................................. 29
2.3.2. TENSION ....................................................................................................................... 30
2.4 MUSCLE RELATIONSHIPS ...................................................................................................... 31
2.4.1 EMG TO FORCE.............................................................................................................. 31
2.4.2 LENGTH-TENSION .......................................................................................................... 31
2.4.3 FORCE-VELOCITY ........................................................................................................... 33
2.5 WORK-RELATED MUSCULOSKELETAL INJURIES OF THE UPPER EXTREMITY ....................... 34
2.5.1 FATIGUE AND MUSCLE DAMAGE .................................................................................. 35
2.5.2 ECCENTRIC STRETCHING DAMAGE ............................................................................... 36
2.5.2.1 SARCOMERE DISRUPTION ...................................................................................... 36
2.5.2.2 EXCITATION-CONTRACTION COUPLING DAMAGE ................................................. 37
2.5.3 CHANGES SEEN AFTER ECCENTRIC EXERCISE ................................................................ 37
2.5.3.1 DECREASE IN FORCE ............................................................................................... 37
2.5.3.2 FALL IN ACTIVE TENSION ........................................................................................ 38
2.5.3.3 SHIFT IN OPTIMAL LENGTH FOR ACTIVE TENSION ................................................ 38
2.5.3.4 RISE IN PASSIVE TENSION ...................................................................................... 39
2.6 EMG ...................................................................................................................................... 39
CHAPTER 3: METHODS ..................................................................... 41

3.1 PARTICIPANTS ...................................................................................................................... 41
3.2 INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENT .......................................................................... 41
3.3 EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN ....................................................................................................... 44
3.4 DATA ANALYSIS .................................................................................................................... 48
3.5 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS ......................................................................................................... 49
viii
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS........................................................................ 50

4.1 HANDLE FORCES ................................................................................................................... 50
4.2 MUSLCE IMPULSE................................................................................................................. 53
4.2.1 RIGHT ANTERIOR DELTOID ............................................................................................ 53
4.2.2 RIGHT BICEP BRACHII .................................................................................................... 56
4.2.3 RIGHT EXTENSOR CARPI ULNARIS ................................................................................. 60
4.2.4 RIGHT FLEXOR CARPI RADIALIS ..................................................................................... 61
4.2.5 RIGHT FLEXOR CARPI ULNARIS...................................................................................... 64
4.2.6 RIGHT PECTORALIS MAJOR ........................................................................................... 66
4.2.7 RIGHT TRICEPS BRACHII ................................................................................................ 67
4.2.8 RIGHT UPPER TRAPEZIUS .............................................................................................. 67
4.3 BORG RATINGS OF PERCIEVED EXERTION ........................................................................... 73
CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION .................................................................. 75

5.1 HANDLE FORCES ................................................................................................................... 78
5.2 MUSCLES OF THE SHOULDER GIRDLE .................................................................................. 79
5.3 MUSCLES OF THE UPPER ARM ............................................................................................. 81
5.4 MUSCLES OF THE FOREARM ................................................................................................ 82
5.5 HYPOTHESES REVISITED ................................................................................................. 83
5.6 LIMITATIONS AND ASSUMPTIONS ................................................................................. 85
CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSIONS .............................................................. 86

6.1 IMPLICATIONS FOR INDUSTRY ............................................................................................. 87
6.2 FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS .......................................................................................... 87
REFERENCES .................................................................................... 89

APPENDIX A ..................................................................................... 95

APPENDIX B ..................................................................................... 97

ix