Gatti, U C (2012) Measuring and evaluating physical strain to improve construction workforce productivity. PhD thesis, University of New Mexico, USA.
Abstract
Anecdotal evidence suggests that there is a reciprocal relationship between physical strain and workforce productivity and safety performance. Hence, a monitoring technology able to assess physical strain through the analysis of workers' physiological parameters may be an important step in improving safety and productivity. However, clear relationships between physical strain, safety, and productivity have yet to be determined. Moreover, previous studies showed limitations regarding the monitoring of physiological parameters. Innovative monitoring devices, called Physiological Status Monitors (PSMs), have overcome the past limitations enabling real-time monitoring of workers' physiological parameters. Thus, this research evaluated PSM suitability for construction workforce monitoring by investigating the construction industry's perspective through a questionnaire survey. Moreover, three off-the-shelf PSMs were tested to assess their validity in monitoring physiological parameters during dynamic activities similar to construction workforce's routine activities. Ten subjects participated in the experiments for a total of over 35 hours of recorded data. This research also analyzed the physical strain vs. productivity relationship by adopting heart rate and breathing rate as predictors of physical strain. Thus, productivity, heart rate, and breathing rate data of nine subjects performing a four-hour, simulated construction task (i.e. , over 30 hours of recorded data with sampling frequency of 1 Hz) were used to generate 160 regression models. The analysis of the regression models showed that breathing rate is not a significant predictor while heart rate is a significant predictor with a strong parabolic relationship with productivity. Therefore, this research provides evidence of the physical strain vs. productivity relationship and, for the first time, proposes a mathematical formulation of such a relationship. This research project significantly contributes to the advancement of knowledge about physiological monitoring of workers. The methods and results proposed in this research coupled with concepts of ergonomics at the work place can foster not only enhancements in productivity management, but also improve construction workers' wellbeing and safety.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Migliaccio, G C and Halter, S B |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | wellbeing; workforce; monitoring; productivity; safety; construction worker; ergonomics; experiment; questionnaire survey |
| Index terms: | regression model, validity, productivity, sampling, monitoring, construction worker, heart, construction industry, routine, survey, experiment, evidence, questionnaire, well-being, ergonomics, safety performance, suitability |
| Subjects: | practitioner, evaluation and assessment methods, medical science and clinical practice, control systems, data collection methods, mental health and wellbeing, industry analysis, design criteria, statistical analysis, occupational health and safety management, sociology, management |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Organizational Design, Site Management, Design Practice, Roles and Professions, Business Strategy, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here