Understanding how vibration affects discomfort is an important factor for improving work and travelling experience. Methods of evaluating health effects from whole-body vibration are closely linked to those for evaluating discomfort in ISO 2631-1. The standard includes a method to evaluate discomfort using twelve axes of vibration with a similar approach to that for evaluating health effects; thus using all twelve axes gives a possibility to evaluate both health and discomfort. The full 12-axis method has not been widely used in practice or validated in a multi-axis environment. The standard guidance is not explicit, thus different interpretations are possible especially when determining the method of comparing or combining vibration in different axes. Furthermore there are not enough studies conducted in multi-axis environments to suggest the optimal combination of axes. In this study ISO 2631-1 method was tested and optimised using a multi-axis test bench at Loughborough University, UK. Subjects were exposed to stimuli which represented vibration characteristics from field measurements. Each stimulus, lasting 15 s, was judged using a continuous judgement, cross-modal matching method. The seat translational and rotational and the backrest translational axes were used in the analyses. There was no vibration at the floor, in order to constrain the number of independent variables. Results showed that correlation for discomfort improved with more complex analysis procedures. However a good correlation was also achieved using just seat translational axes with optimised multiplying factors. The results showed that frequency weightings and r.m.s. averaging improved correlation between vibration and subjective ratings of discomfort. Multiplying factors specified in ISO 2631-1 degraded the correlation between objective and subjective measures of discomfort, therefore an improved set of factors were determined. The new factors showed improvement by placing more emphasis on seat fore-and-aft and lateral axes.
The European Union Physical Agents Directive (vibration) sets vibration exposure limits for an employer. The measured values from different work phases should be time weighted and summed together to represent a daily 8-hour exposure value. The directive has two limit values, the daily exposure action value and the daily exposure limit value. For the employer the greatest concern is to comply with the exposure limit value, but also exceeding the action value will cause implications. To calculate the daily 8-hour value is not a simple task, because there are normally several different work phases that the worker does in a normal day. Also the assessment of measurements of the vibration levels have to be made in real working environments. The work phases need to be calculated correctly to get the representative daily value. Also breaks and other non-work operations need to be included. This will make the complete assessment very difficult without proper knowledge. In this study a large number of measurements from different mobile work machines were made to establish whether the daily values would exceed the limit values. Analyses were made using three examples to show how the employer can use the standard and directive to assess the daily exposure values or times. The results were largely dependent on the work pattern and the dominant levels.
Exposure to whole-body vibration (WBV) presents an occupational health risk and several safety standards obligate to measure WBV. The high cost of direct measurements in large epidemiological studies raises the question of the optimal sampling for estimating WBV exposures given by a large variation in exposure levels in real worksites. This paper presents a new approach to addressing this problem. A daily exposure to WBV was recorded for 9-24 days among 48 all-terrain vehicle drivers. Four data-sets based on root mean squared recordings were obtained from the measurement. The data were modelled using semi-variogram with spectrum analysis and the optimal sampling scheme was derived. The optimum sampling period was 140 min apart. The result was verified and validated in terms of its accuracy and statistical power. Recordings of two to three hours are probably needed to get a sufficiently unbiased daily WBV exposure estimate in real worksites. The developed model is general enough that is applicable to other cumulative exposures or biosignals. Practitioner Summary: Exposure to whole-body vibration (WBV) presents an occupational health risk and safety standards obligate to measure WBV. However, direct measurements can be expensive. This paper presents a new approach to addressing this problem. The developed model is general enough that is applicable to other cumulative exposures or biosignals.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.