Gonsalves, N J; Yusuf, A; Ogunseiju, O and Akanmu, A (2024) Evaluation of concrete workers' interaction with a passive back-support exoskeleton. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 31(11), pp. 4585-4601. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: Concrete workers perform physically demanding work in awkward postures, exposing their backs to musculoskeletal disorders. Back-support exoskeletons are promising ergonomic interventions designed to reduce the risks of back disorders. However, the suitability of exoskeletons for enhancing performance of concrete workers has not been largely explored. This study aims to assess a passive back-support exoskeleton for concrete work in terms of the impact on the body, usability and benefits of the exoskeleton, and potential design modifications. Design/methodology/approach: Concrete workers performed work with a passive back-support exoskeleton. Subjective and qualitative measures were employed to capture their perception of the exoskeleton, at the middle and end of the work, in terms of discomfort to their body parts, ease of use, comfort, performance and safety of the exoskeleton, and their experience using the exoskeleton. These were analyzed using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. Findings: The exoskeleton reduced stress on the lower back but caused discomfort to other body parts. Significant correlations were observed between perceived discomfort and usability measures. Design modifications are needed to improve the compatibility of the exoskeleton with the existing safety gears, reduce discomfort at chest and thigh, and improve ease of use of the exoskeleton. Research limitations/implications: The study was conducted with eight concrete workers who used the exoskeleton for four hours. Originality/value: This study contributes to existing knowledge on human-wearable robot interaction and provides suggestions for adapting exoskeleton designs for construction work.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | back disorders; concrete workers; construction; exoskeleton; overexertion |
| Index terms: | statistics, interaction, construction work, comfort, discomfort, design modification, suitability, methodology, thematic analysis, usability |
| Subjects: | operations management, behavioral psychology, design changes, research methods, user-centered design, mathematical modelling, design criteria, occupational health and safety management, methods and analysis, health risk and incident analysis |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Research Practice, Project Management, Health and Safety |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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