Application Of Motion Capture Systems In Ergonomic Analysis
Keywords:Ergonomics, Ergonomic analysis, Motion Capture Technology, Product Development, Work related injuries
Currently different methods are used for ergonomic assessment and analysis. This review tries to show how motion capture technology is applied in the process of ergonomic assessment. The goals of the analysis were to identify the most adequate method for objective assessment of ergonomics. The results show that the optical motion tracking systems with special software can be used to perform digital analysis of body motion. These systems do not require long set up time, majority of them are portable and the sensors are available in the market for a low cost. Movements of the working person are captured without special clothes equipped with markers. Though the optical systems could be acceptable in a wide range of tasks, they have certain limitations in ergonomic analysis. The performance of optical systems depends on a number of variables such as lighting, type of movements, distance from the object and environmental artefacts. The performance of existing systems is not yet completely reliable, but the technology is on the path of improving its accuracy. There are also other mechanical and magnetic technologies used for ergonomic analysis. This review shows that ergonomic simulations using the motion capture technology significantly improves the quality of ergonomic analysis.
2. Eklund, J. (1995). Relationships between ergonomics and quality in assembly work. Applied Ergonomics, 26(1), 15–20. doi:10.1016/0003–6870(95)95747–N
3. Faraway, J. & Reed, M. P. (2007). Statistics for Digital Human Motion Modeling in Ergonomics. Technometrics, 49(2), 277–290. doi:10.1198/004017007000000281
4. Field, M., Pan, Z., Stirling, D. & Naghday, F. (2011). Human motion capture sensors and analysis in robotics. Industrial Robot: An International Journal 38(2) 163–171
5. Fritzsche, L. (2010). Ergonomics Risk Assessment with Digital human Models in Car Assembly: Simulations versus Real Life. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries, 20(4), 287–299. doi:10.1002/hfm.20221
6. Haggag, H., Hossny, M., Haggag, S., Nahavandi, S. & Creighton, D. (2014). Safety applications using Kinect technology. In IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics 2014. San Diego, CA. October 5–8, 2164–2169
7. Hogberg, D., Backstrand, G., Lamkull, D., Hanson, L. & Ortengren, R. (2008). Industrial customisation of digital human modeling tools. Int. J. Services Operations and Informatics 3(1),53–70
8. International Ergonomic Association (2006). What is ergonomics? Retrieved on 2014–12– 12 from: http://www.iea.cc/
9. Jones, D. & Switzer–McIntyre, S. (2003). Falls from trucks: A descriptive study based on a workers compensation database. IOS Press, 20 (2003), 179–185
10. Jung, S–K., Zhou, X., Ramsey, D.K. & Krovi, V.N. (2013). A Comparison Study of Human Motion Capture and Computational Analysis Tools. Buffalo, New York.
11. Klippert, J., Gudehus, T. & Zick, J. (2012). A Software–Based Method for Ergonomic Posture Assessment in Automotive Preproduction Planning: Concordance and Difference in Using Software and Personal Observation for Assessments. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries 22(2) 156–175
12. Pfister A., West, A.W., Bronner, S. & Noah J. A., (2014). Comparative abilities of Microsoft Kinect and Vicon 3D motion capture for gait analysis. Journal of Mecanical Engineering & Technology 38(5), 274–280.
13. The Swedish Work Environment Authority (2014). Transportbranschen. Korta arbetsfakta, Nr 2. The Swedish Work Environment Authority (2004). Last– och langtradarforare. Korta sifferfakta, Nr 3