Using the 3DSSPP/AutoCAD interface, the evaluation method described above was used to study the
manual converter assembly task and the converter assembly task using the lifting aid. A 133 MHz microcomputer with Pentium processor was used with Windows
95, AutoCAD for Windows, Release 13 and 3DSSPP for
Windows, version 3.06. The designer conducting the
analysis was experienced in performing ergonomic job
analyses and was familiar with the software used. The
designer was providedwith photographs and engineering
drawings of the workstation and parts used in the assembly task, but was not given any information about the
postures that workers utilized while performing the job
and was not aware that a separate evaluation had been
conducted independently. Six speci"c postures within
each taskwere considered: the retrieval posture at each of
the four rack heights, the carrying posture, and the installation posture. Although the worker continually moves
during the tasks, the assumption was made that tasks
could be broken down into a sequence of static postures,
each of which could be analyzed separately.
An independent ergonomic evaluation of this assembly
task was conducted in 1990 as part of a larger evaluation
effort at Ford Motor Company. The analysts observed
the workers performing the task manually and with an
installed lifting aid, performed the tasks themselves, collected postural data and interviewed the workers. Based
on the gathered information, several items including
the required strength capabilities and low back compression forces resulting from the task were analyzed. The
report from the subsequent analysis (Resnick et al, 1990)
included only results for a 95th percentile male and
therefore, to allow comparison between these results
and the predicted results from the proactive
3DSSPP/AutoCAD analysis, only the data for the 95th
percentile male are shown in Figs. 3-6.