Comparison of active and passive back-support exoskeletons for construction work: range of motion, discomfort, usability, exertion and cognitive load assessments

IF 3.5 Q3 GREEN & SUSTAINABLE SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY Smart and Sustainable Built Environment Pub Date : 2023-11-21 DOI:10.1108/sasbe-06-2023-0147
Akinwale Okunola, A. Akanmu, A. Yusuf
{"title":"Comparison of active and passive back-support exoskeletons for construction work: range of motion, discomfort, usability, exertion and cognitive load assessments","authors":"Akinwale Okunola, A. Akanmu, A. Yusuf","doi":"10.1108/sasbe-06-2023-0147","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeLow back disorders are more predominant among construction trade workers than their counterparts in other industry sectors. Floor layers are among the top artisans that are severely affected by low back disorders. Exoskeletons are increasingly being perceived as ergonomic solutions. This study aims to compare the efficacy of passive and active back-support exoskeletons by measuring range of motion, perceived discomfort, usability, perceived rate of exertion and cognitive load during a simulated flooring task experiment.Design/methodology/approachIn this study eight participants were engaged in a repetitive timber flooring task performed with passive and active back-support exoskeletons. Subjective and objective data were collected to assess the risks associated with using both exoskeletons. Descriptive statistics were used for analysis. Scheirer-Ray-Hare test and Wilcoxon signed-rank test were adopted to compare the exoskeleton conditions.FindingsThe results show no significant differences in the range of motion (except for a lifting cycle), perceived level of discomfort and perceived level of exertion between the two exoskeletons. Significant difference in overall cognitive load was observed. The usability results show that the active back-support exoskeleton made task execution easier with less restriction on movement.Research limitations/implicationsThe flooring task is simulated in a laboratory environment with only eight male participants.Originality/valueThis study contributes to the scarce body of knowledge on the usage comparison of passive and active exoskeletons for construction work.","PeriodicalId":45779,"journal":{"name":"Smart and Sustainable Built Environment","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Smart and Sustainable Built Environment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/sasbe-06-2023-0147","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GREEN & SUSTAINABLE SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

PurposeLow back disorders are more predominant among construction trade workers than their counterparts in other industry sectors. Floor layers are among the top artisans that are severely affected by low back disorders. Exoskeletons are increasingly being perceived as ergonomic solutions. This study aims to compare the efficacy of passive and active back-support exoskeletons by measuring range of motion, perceived discomfort, usability, perceived rate of exertion and cognitive load during a simulated flooring task experiment.Design/methodology/approachIn this study eight participants were engaged in a repetitive timber flooring task performed with passive and active back-support exoskeletons. Subjective and objective data were collected to assess the risks associated with using both exoskeletons. Descriptive statistics were used for analysis. Scheirer-Ray-Hare test and Wilcoxon signed-rank test were adopted to compare the exoskeleton conditions.FindingsThe results show no significant differences in the range of motion (except for a lifting cycle), perceived level of discomfort and perceived level of exertion between the two exoskeletons. Significant difference in overall cognitive load was observed. The usability results show that the active back-support exoskeleton made task execution easier with less restriction on movement.Research limitations/implicationsThe flooring task is simulated in a laboratory environment with only eight male participants.Originality/valueThis study contributes to the scarce body of knowledge on the usage comparison of passive and active exoskeletons for construction work.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
用于建筑工作的主动式和被动式背部支撑外骨骼的比较:运动范围、不适感、可用性、体力和认知负荷评估
目的与其他行业的工人相比,建筑行业的工人更容易患腰背疾病。地板铺设工是受腰背疾病严重影响的顶级工匠之一。外骨骼越来越多地被视为符合人体工程学的解决方案。本研究旨在通过在模拟地板铺设任务实验中测量运动范围、感知不适、可用性、感知消耗率和认知负荷,来比较被动式和主动式背部支撑外骨骼的功效。研究人员收集了主观和客观数据,以评估使用这两种外骨骼的相关风险。分析采用了描述性统计方法。结果表明,两种外骨骼在运动范围(除升降循环外)、感知到的不适程度和感知到的劳累程度上没有显著差异。但在总体认知负荷方面存在明显差异。可用性结果表明,主动式背部支撑外骨骼使任务执行更容易,对运动的限制更少。研究局限性/影响在实验室环境中模拟了铺设地板的任务,只有八名男性参与者参加。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Smart and Sustainable Built Environment
Smart and Sustainable Built Environment GREEN & SUSTAINABLE SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY-
CiteScore
9.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
53
期刊最新文献
Towards promoting circular building adaptability in adaptive reuse projects: a co-developed framework Sources of occupational stress in UK construction projects: an empirical investigation and agenda for future research Nudge or mandate: an exploration into the constraints of volumetric modular construction in Australia Structural determinants of the uptake of cyber-physical systems for facilities management – a confirmatory factor analysis approach Public toilets for accessible and inclusive cities: disability, design and maintenance from the perspective of wheelchair users
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1