International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 71 (2019) 37–46

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ergon

Guidelines to sewing machine workstation design for improving working T

posture of sewing operator
Somdatta Tondrea,∗, Tushar Deshmukhb
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Dr. Rajendra Gode Institute of Technology and Research, Mardi Road, Ghatkheda, Amravati, Maharashtra, India
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Prof. Ram Meghe Institute of Technology and Research, Anjangaon Bari Road, Badnera, District, Amravati, Maharashtra, India

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: Sewing machine operators suffer from musculoskeletal problems imposed due to constrained restricted body
Sewing operator postures. This study was conducted to investigate the effects of three design parameters (fore/aft sewing dis-
Sewing workstation tance, sewing desk inclination and sewing desk height) of sewing workstation on postural variables and sub-
Working posture jective experience and to develop guidelines for sewing workstation design. At a prototype of adjustable sewing
Workstation arrangement
workstation, ten professional sewing machine operators performed sewing task in nine different workstation
arrangements. Sewing machine operators working posture and perceptions were recorded. It was shown that
trunk, neck and arm postures were influenced by fore/aft sewing distance, sewing desk inclination and sewing
desk height. The determinant factor for sewing machine operators’ perception on the trunk and neck found to be
fore/aft sewing distance, sewing desk inclination. The sewing desk height influences the arm posture sig-
nificantly. Based on the results, the following guidelines were developed: (1) Fore/aft sewing distance should be
adjusted to 140 mm towards the sewing operator; (2) a 10° sewing desk inclination towards sewing should be
used at sewing workstations. (3) Sewing desk height should be adjusted between 762 mm and 787 mm from the
ground.

1. Introduction
The reports from earlier researchers documented that the root cause
of musculoskeletal discomfort among the seated workers are due the
awkward constrained work posture, monotonous and repetitive task
(Corlett, 1981; Bhatnager et al., 1985; Vihma et al., 1982). The pre-
valence of musculoskeletal complaints affecting different body region is
high among sewing machine operators (Vihma et al., 1982; Keyserling
et al., 1982; Punnett et al., 1985; Westgaard and Jansen, 1992). The
nature of work of sewing machine operator requires prolonged hours of
sitting in a forward bending posture. It is highly repetitive in nature,
requiring a combination of both static and rhythmic muscular activity.
The sewing operation involves coordination of feet, hand and eye and
the machine operators maintain a constant sitting posture on a stool
with the body inclined forward. Such stressful awkward postures
adopted for work shift or more than work shift would be regarded as
health hazards (Brider, 2003). This has become a major problem not
only because larger numbers of people are now doing sedentary work,
but also because many work processes are such that these processes
impose a constrained restricted forward bending of the trunk and head
in order to perform the task, which makes the backrests of seats less
effective than main purpose for which it is provided (Guangyan et al.,
1995).
Suitable neutral working posture reduce load on musculoskeletal
system and effective control over work performance. Improperly de-
signed and ill arranged workstation furniture can impose postural
problems (Kroemer, KHE., 1988; Kroemer, KHE.,1997) and the proac-
tive actions are necessary to improve working posture and reduce the
threat of occupational injuries (Mattila, M. et al., 1999). The proper
workstation design minimize the users’ harmful postures and design-
imposed stresses (Das, B. and Sengupta, A.K.,1996). The users of er-
gonomically designed workstations are likely to benefit in terms of task
performance, as well as in terms of less discomfort/fatigue, sick leave,
and disability caused by musculoskeletal load (Delleman, 1999 and
Delleman and Dul, 2002).
1.1. Previous studies of sewing workstations design parameters
Suggestions about the improvement of sewing workstation con-
tributing parameters for posture improvement have been made by
various researchers. As part of their study of sewing operators in the
garment industry, the sewing table in a manner similar to a drafting

∗
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: tondresomdatta@gmail.com (S. Tondre), tushar.d69@gmail.com (T. Deshmukh).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2019.02.002
Received 8 April 2018; Received in revised form 18 November 2018; Accepted 4 February 2019
0169-8141/ © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
S. Tondre and T. Deshmukh
table to can reduce the forward leaning tendency of the operator
(Keyserling et al., 1982). In another study of the sewing workstations
design documented that, the work affect the postures of workers and
suggested changes in the layout of the sewing machine and sewing table
for postural improvement (Haslegrave and Gregg, 1988). A new sewing
table designed at Finland's Reima Clothing Company, the table height
and table tilt adjustment are the major modification which made easy
for the individual operator to match with the task. The redesigned
model of sewing machine shown successful in reducing postural stresses
of the sewing machine operators (Huoviala, 1984), whereas Delleman
and Dul (2002) investigated three design parameters for sewing table
height (relative to elbow height), table slope and pedal positions for
improving postures of sewing operators.
The effects of inclined work surfaces have been investigated for the
seated tasks, which mostly involves reading and writing. The results
showed that the sloped desks promoted more erect back and head
postures and reduced back muscle activity (reduced electromyographic
electrical signal of back muscle) (Eastman and Kamon, 1976; Bendix
and Hagberg, 1984; Bridger, 1988; Wall et al., 1991). The subjects also
reported that sloping desks reduced fatigue and discomfort. Occhipinti
et al. (1985) analyzed biomechanical loading on the lumbar spine while
subjects were in a sitting posture with their upperlimbs fully or partially
supported by a work table and suggested the use of wrist or arm sup-
ports for reducing muscular stress on the trunk, neck and shoulder.
Despite, these improvements to the conventional sewing workstations,
still it was found that sewing machine operators leaned forwards, away
from the lumbar support of the chair, and inclined their head/neck
forwards, so that the magnitude of the postural improvement was not as
large as might have been expected from the change in the sewing
workstation (Wick and Drury, 1986; Delleman, N.J.,1999). Thus, the
redesigns of sewing machines that have been reported have had some
success in improving the operator's posture, but there still appear to be
problems with the static muscle load on the operator's neck and back.
The objective of the present study was to investigate the effect of
modified workstation parameters on postural variables and formulate
ergonomic guidelines for modification in conventional sewing work-
station.
2. Materials and methods
A prototype was built, incorporating the workstation design prin-
ciples in modifications to a traditional lock stitch sewing machine. This
was used in the study to evaluate the effects on posture. The mod-
ifications were provided in the sewing machine independently for im-
proving the working posture.
The main aspects of the design were as follows.
(1) The sewing desk was made adjustable to move in fore/aft direction
(sliding arrangement of desk was provided).
(2) The slope of the sewing table was made adjustable between 0 and
10° from front edge of the sewing desk with reference to the hor-
izontal plane.
(3) The height of sewing desk was made adjustable to move in vertical
direction relative to the floor.
In the laboratory nine sets of experimental conditions were tested.
Working posture and workers’ perceptions under the nine set of ex-
perimental conditions were measured at the designed workstation.
2.1. Subjects
Ten female sewing operators (average age 30 yr, range 22–40;
average stature 1600 mm, range 1550–1650) from the garment industry
participated in the experiments. They were familiar with the sewing
task (average experience 5 year, range 2.5–10). The female subjects
were chosen for experimentation, because the garment manufacturing
38
International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 71 (2019) 37–46
is one of major source of family income for the most of Indian house-
hold women and the selected subjects represent average population of
Indian females. All the subjects were professional sewing operators and
all had normal conditions of health and eyesight. The subjects were
paid as per industrial hourly rate for the work of experimentation.
2.2. Design of experimentation
The quality engineering method proposed by Taguchi was used to
study effect of many factors (variables) on the desired quality char-
acteristic most economically. Instead of studying the effect of individual
factors on the results, the best factor combination can be determined
(Roy, R.K., 2001) with lesser number of experimental trials than other
experimentation techniques. The stepwise design of experimentation
for the above study is presented above.
2.2.1. Selection of the sewing machine workstation parameters/independent
variables and their levels
The ranges of sewing workstation parameters (control factors) were
selected by analyzing the working postures of sewing operators and
studying the design parameters of conventional sewing workstation.
Fore/aft sewing distance, sewing desk inclination and sewing desk
height were selected as the workstation parameters (independent
variables/control factors) and each parameter has three levels for the
experimentation. Firstly fore/aft sewing distance 0 mm, 70 mm and
140 mm was selected the first, second and third level of this parameter
respectively. Secondly sewing desk inclination 0°, 5° and 10° was se-
lected the first, second and third level, thirdly sewing desk height
762 mm, 787 mm and 813 mm was selected the first, second and third
level of this parameter respectively.
2.2.2. Selection of orthogonal array
Taguchi designs experiments uses specially constructed tables
known as “orthogonal array” (OA). The use of these tables makes the
design of experiments very easy and consistent (Roy, R.K., 2001) and it
requires relatively lesser number of experimental trials than other ex-
perimentation techniques. The selection of an appropriate orthogonal
array (OA) depends on the total degrees of freedom of the parameters.
Degrees of freedom are defined as the number of comparisons between
process parameters that need to be made to determine which level is
better and specifically how much better it is. In this study, since each
parameter has three levels and to select an appropriate orthogonal
array for conducting the experiments, the degrees of freedom are to be
computed. The same is given below: Degrees of Freedom: 1 for mean
value, and 8= (2 × 4), two each for the remaining factors, total de-
grees of freedom: 9. The most suitable orthogonal array for experi-
mentation is L9 array as shown in Table 1. Therefore, a total nine ex-
periments are to be carried out.
Table 1
Experimental Plan using Orthogonal Array (OA) L9.
Expt No Control Factors (level)
Fore/aft Sewing Sewing desk Sewing desk height
distance inclination
1 1 1 1
2 1 2 2
3 1 3 3
4 2 1 2
5 2 2 3
6 2 3 1
7 3 1 3
8 3 2 1
9 3 3 2
S. Tondre and T. Deshmukh International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 71 (2019) 37–46

Table 2
Type of Objective function.
Sr.No. Objective function (Dependent Variable) Type

1. Postural Variable
a) Trunk angle Larger the better
b) Neck angle Larger the better
c) Arm angle Smaller the better
2. Perceived Posture
a) Trunk angle Larger the better
b) Neck angle Larger the better
c) Arm angle Larger the better
3. Postural Discomfort
Postural discomfort of trunk, neck and arm region Smaller the better
4. Endurance Time Larger the better
5. Overall Workstation Adjustment Smaller the better

Fig. 1. The marker positions for measurement of working posture. The ortho-
gonal axes shown represent the coordinate system used. The Y-axis is aligned
parallel to the desk front edge. The Z-axis is vertical. The XZ plane corresponds
to the sagittal plane of the operator's body. The YZ-plane corresponds to the
frontal plane of the operator's body (Delleman and Dul, 2002).

2.2.3. Signal to noise ratio (S/N)

The signal to noise ratio (S/N ratio) was used to measure the sen-
sitivity of the quality characteristic being investigated in a controlled
manner. In Taguchi method, the term ‘signal’ represents the desirable
effect (mean) for the output characteristic and the term ‘noise’ re-
presents the undesirable effect (signal disturbance, S. D) for the output
characteristic which influence the outcome due to external factors
namely noise factors. The S/N ratio can be defined as (Roy, R.K., 2001):
n
1
S/N ratio for smaller the better, = 10 Log10 yi2
n i=1 (1) Fig. 2. Measured postural variables in nine experimental conditions (mean S/N
ratio values): a) Trunk Angle b) Neck Angle c) Arm Angle (*Fore/aft sewing
n
1 distance in mm, Sewing desk inclination in degree and Sewing desk height in
S/N ratio for Larger the better, = 10 Log10 1/yi2
n mm).
i=1 (2)

Where, n = Sample Size, and yi = Dependent variable in that run.
The aim of any experiment was always to determine the highest
possible S/N ratio for the result. A high value of S/N implies that the
signal is much higher than the random effects of the noise factors or
minimum variance. As mentioned earlier, there are three categories of
quality characteristics, i.e. the-lower-the-better, the higher-the-better,
and the-nominal-the-better. In the present study the output quality
characteristics were the postural variables ie. trunk angle, neck angle,
arm angle and subjective perceptions of sewing machine operators. The
objective function/dependent variables identified separately in Table 2.
2.3. Experimental procedure
At a designed adjustable sewing machine workstation, the operators
performed their normal sewing task in nine experimental sessions of
30 min followed by breaks of 15 min. The experimental procedure
adopted for the present study referred from the experimental procedure
adopted by the Delleman and Dul (2002) and Alireza Choobineh et al.
(2004), instead of 45 min experimental session, 30 min experimental
session duration found sufficient for the experimental session for this

39
S. Tondre and T. Deshmukh International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 71 (2019) 37–46

Table 3
ANOVA Table for Trunk angle.
Parameter/Factor DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F P-value Percentage contribution

Fore/aft sewing distance 2 198.727 198.727 99.364 64.50 0.015 50.70

Sewing desk inclination 2 93.353 93.353 46.676 30.30 0.032 47.40
Sewing desk height 2 7.427 7.427 3.713 2.41 0.293 1.89
Error 2 3.081 3.081 1.540
Total 8 302.587

S = 1.24116 R-Sq = 98.98% R-Sq(adj) = 95.93%.

Table 4
ANOVA Table for Neck angle.
Parameter/Factor DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F P-value Percentage contribution

Fore/aft sewing distance 2 140.408 140.408 70.204 103.09 0.010 47.23

Sewing desk inclination 2 112.218 112.218 56.109 82.40 0.012 37.75
Sewing desk height 2 44.661 44.661 22.330 32.79 0.030 15.02
Error 2 1.362 1.362 0.681
Total 8 298.649

S = 0.825209 R-Sq = 99.54% R-Sq(adj) = 98.18%.

Table 5
ANOVA Table for Arm angle.
Parameter/Factor DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F P-value Percentage contribution

Fore/aft sewing distance 2 54.32 54.32 27.16 3.41 0.227 7.72

Sewing desk inclination 2 169.10 169.10 84.55 10.61 0.086 24.02
Sewing desk height 2 480.66 480.66 240.33 30.16 0.032 68.27
Error 2 15.94 15.94 7.97
Total 8 720.02

S = 2.82284 R-Sq = 97.79% R-Sq(adj) = 91.15%.

study. In each session one of the nine sets of experimental conditions On the basis of the marker positions (Fig. 1), the following postural
was presented. There are three working sessions each day. The order of variable/dependant variables were measured.
presentation of the sets of experimental conditions was balanced over
subjects, days, and sessions. Prior to the first session each operator 1) Trunk Angle (TA), defined as the angle between the horizontal line
selected pedal position for which operation was comfortable. As the (From marker M3 and parallel to X-axis towards origin) and the line
height of the subjects close to each other hence seat height were con- through the markers at the neck (M2) and the hip (M3) projected in
stant during the sessions of the experiments, but the sewing operators XZ-plane. A larger value means the trunk is inclined backwards.
were free to choose the fore/aft position of the chair with back support. 2) Neck Angle (NA), defined as the angle between the horizontal line
The duration of sewing task was chosen in accordance with their con- (From marker M2 and parallel X-axis towards origin) and the line
tinuous work periods seen during a normal working day, i.e. periods through the markers at the ear (M1) and the neck (M2) projected in
without personal break. XZ-plane. A larger value means the neck is inclined backwards.
3) Arm Angle (AA), defined as the angle between the vertical line
(From marker M4 parallel to y-axis towards origin) and the line
2.4. Dependent variables measurement techniques and methods
through the markers at the shoulder (M4) and the elbow (M5)
projected in XZ-plane. A larger value shows arm extension
2.4.1. Postural variable
(Delleman and Dul, 2002).
Working posture was measured by video based system during
sewing task at each experimental condition. The working postures
adopted under the examination in this study was largely two dimen-
2.4.2. Sewing operators’ perceptions
sional sagittal plane. Working posture was measured by two-dimen-
Sewing operator's perceptions were recorded by a questionnaire,
sional photograph based system for and analyzing sewing posture.
containing four questionnaire modules (scaling-techniques). The mod-
Reflective markers were placed at the ear (tragus), the neck (C7), the
ules ‘Perceived posture’, Localized postural discomfort, ‘Estimated en-
hip (greater trochanter), the shoulder (greater tubercle), the elbow
durance time’ and ‘Judgment on workstation adjustment’ focus on re-
(lateral humeral epicondyle) (Fig. 1). The reflective markers were
sponses of subjects. The modules (1–4) and the dependent variables are
placed on the left side of the body, due to the dominant role of the left
described below.
hand in a moving sewing work piece during sewing operation. The
marking positions were determined during a sewing operation at each
1) Perceived posture
of the experimental conditions as well as while the sewing operators
were in a neutral posture (sitting upright, symmetric with respect to the
The subject was asked to rate her individual's perception about the
sagittal plane, looking straight ahead along the horizontal, arms
posture of the trunk, neck, left upper arm. After each set of experi-
hanging down along the trunk, forearms perpendicular to the upper
mental condition a written response was recorded from the subjects on
arms) (Delleman and Dul, 2002). On the basis of the marker positions
a seven-point scale (7 = very favorable, 5 = favorable, 3 = unfavor-
various postural variables with respect to head–neck–trunk-arm were
able, 1 = very unfavorable) (Delleman and Dul, 2002).
measured.

40
S. Tondre and T. Deshmukh
Fig. 3. Perceived posture in nine experimental conditions (mean S/N ratio
values): a) Trunk Angle b) Neck Angle c) Arm Angle (*Fore/aft sewing distance
in mm, Sewing desk inclination in degree and Sewing desk height in mm).
Table 6
ANOVA Table for Perceived posture of Trunk Angle.
Parameter/Factor
Fore/aft sewing distance
Sewing desk inclination
Sewing desk height
Error
Total
S = 0.133333 R-Sq = 99.85% R-Sq(adj) = 99.39%.
DF Seq SS
2 20.2689
2 1.8822
2 1.0822
2 0.0356
8 23.2689
International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 71 (2019) 37–46
2) Localized postural discomfort
The operator was asked to rate her postural discomfort in three body
regions i.e. trunk (back), neck and arm region, using a scale ranging
from 0 (no discomfort) to 5 (very severe discomfort) (Corlett and
Bishop, 1976). A written response was recorded at the end of each
session. The variable provides reliable results for comparison of con-
ditions in the present study.
3) Estimated endurance time
The operator was asked to estimate, on the basis of her perceptions,
how long subject could operate at the experimental workstation ad-
justment without difficulty during a regular working day. Directly after
the session a written response was given on a five-point scale (5 = more
than 8 h, 4 = 6–8 h, 3 = 4–6 h, 2 = 2–4 h, 1 = less than 2 h) (Delleman
and Dul, 2002). The estimated endurance time was used as a dependent
variable.
4) Judgment on workstation arrangement
Firstly, the operator was asked to judge the individual independent
variables of sewing machines workstation by using five point scales
after every experimental session. Firstly, a written response was re-
corded to judge fore/aft sewing distance on five point scale (1 = much
too close, 2 = a little too close, 3 = right, 4 = a little too far away, and
5 = much too far away). Secondly, the operator was asked to judge the
sewing desk inclination on a five-point scale (1 = much too steep, 2 = a
little too steep, 3 = right, 4 = a little too flat, and 5 = much too flat).
Thirdly, the operator was asked to judge the sewing desk height on five
point scale (1 = much too low, 2 = a little too low, 3 = right, 4 = a
little too high and 5 = much too high). Again the operator was asked to
judge the whole workstation adjustment as compared to her own
workstation arrangement in industry at the end of the session. Directly
after the session a written response was recorded on a five point scale
(1 = much better, 2 = a little better, 3 = equal, 4 = a little worse, and
5 = much worse). The judgment on the whole workstation arrangement
was used as a dependent variable (Delleman and Dul, 2002).
2.5. Data analysis
The observations and recorded responses of the dependent variables
transformed in to S/N ratio by using Minitab-16 software to measure
the output quality characteristics i.e. postural variables and sewing
operator's perception deviating from the desired values. The S/N ratio
for each level of process parameter was computed based on the S/N
analysis. Regardless of the category of the quality characteristics, a
greater S/N ratio corresponds to better quality characteristics.
Therefore, the optimal level of process parameters is the level with
greatest S/N ratio. Furthermore, a statistical analysis of variance
(ANOVA) was performed by using Minitab-16 software to see which
independent variable was statistically significant. Analysis of variance
(ANOVA) was also used to evaluate the response magnitude in per-
centage of each parameter in the orthogonal experiment and hence with
the S/N ratio and ANOVA analyses, the optimal combination of the
Adj SS Adj MS F P-value Percentage contribution
20.2689 10.1344 570.06 0.002 87.23
1.8822 0.9411 52.94 0.019 8.10
1.0822 0.5411 30.44 0.032 4.65
0.0356 0.0178
41
S. Tondre and T. Deshmukh International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 71 (2019) 37–46

Table 7
ANOVA Table for Perceived posture of Neck Angle.
Parameter/Factor DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F P-value Percentage contribution

Fore/aft sewing distance 2 16.5800 16.5800 8.2900 621.75 0.002 88.41

Sewing desk inclination 2 1.3267 1.3267 0.6633 49.75 0.020 7.07
Sewing desk height 2 0.8467 0.8467 0.4233 31.75 0.031 4.51
Error 2 0.0267 0.0267 0.0133
Total 8 18.7800

S = 0.115470 R-Sq = 99.86% R-Sq(adj) = 99.43%.

Table 8
ANOVA Table for Perceived posture of Arm Angle.
Parameter/Factor DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F P-value Percentage contribution

Fore/aft sewing distance 2 1.3400 1.3400 0.6700 2.75 0.266 6.09

Sewing desk inclination 2 3.6867 3.6867 1.8433 7.58 0.117 16.80
Sewing desk height 2 16.9267 16.9267 8.4633 34.78 0.028 77.10
Error 2 0.4867 0.4867 0.2433
Total 8 22.4400

S = 0.493288 R-Sq = 97.83% R-Sq(adj) = 91.33%.

independent variables predicted. The effects of sewing desk height,
sewing desk inclination, fore/aft sewing distance judgment on work-
station adjustment were tested with the Friedman test. The selected
level of significance in all tests was α = 0.05, and where necessary.
3. Results
3.2. Perceived posture
The results of the nine experimental conditions are presented in
Fig. 3. The values of S/N ratio given in Fig. 3 shows the deviation of
each perceived postural angle from the neutral posture in the test
subjects.

3.1. Postural variables 3.2.1. Trunk angle

The results of the measurement of postural angles in the nine ex-
perimental conditions are presented in Fig. 2. The value of S/N ratio
given in Fig. 2 shows the deviation of each postural angle from the
neutral posture in the test subjects.
3.1.1. Trunk angle
Analysis of variance showed that fore/aft sewing distance and
sewing desk inclination had highly significant effect on trunk angle
(p < 0.015, p < 0.032 resp.), while the sewing desk height shows less
significant effect on trunk angle in combination with fore/aft sewing
distance and sewing desk inclination. Fore/aft sewing distance 140 mm,
10° sewing desk inclination with sewing desk height 762 mm and
787 mm causes more upright trunk posture (Fig. 2a). The contribution
by fore/aft sewing distance was 50.70%, sewing desk inclination was
47.40% and sewing desk height was 1.89% (Table 3) for improving
trunk posture among the combination of three independent parameters.
3.1.2. Neck angle
From the results of analysis of variance, fore/aft sewing distance,
sewing desk inclination and sewing desk height had significant effect on
neck inclination (p < 0.010, p < 0.012 and p < 0.030 resp.). Fore/
aft sewing distance 140 mm, 10° sewing desk inclination, sewing desk
height 787 mm cause more neutral neck posture of sewing operator
(Fig. 2b). The contribution by fore/aft sewing distance was 47.23%,
desk inclination was 37.75% and height of desk was 15.02% (Table 4)
for improving neck posture out of three independent parameters.
3.1.3. Arm angle
Analysis of variance showed that sewing desk height had significant
effect (p < 0.032) and sewing desk inclination had less significance on
arm angle. Sewing desk inclination 10° and sewing desk height 762 mm
cause more neutral arm posture of sewing operator (Fig. 2c). The
contribution for improving arm angle out of three independent para-
meters i.e. by fore/aft sewing distance was 7.72%, sewing desk in-
clination was 24.02% and sewing desk height was 68.27% (Table 5).
Analysis of variance showed that fore/aft sewing distance had high
significant effect on trunk perceived posture (p < 0.002), sewing desk
inclination and sewing desk height had significant effect on perceived
trunk posture (p < 0.019, p < 0.032 resp.). Fore/aft sewing distance
140 mm, 10° sewing desk inclination and sewing desk height 787 mm
recorded more neutral trunk posture by sewing operator (Fig. 3a). The
contribution by fore/aft sewing distance was 87.23%, desk inclination
was 8.10% and height of desk was 4.659% (Table 6) for improving
trunk posture among the combination of three independent parameters.
3.2.2. Neck angle
From the results of analysis of variance, fore/aft sewing distance,
sewing desk inclination and sewing desk height had high significant
effect on neck inclination (p < 0.002, p < 0.020 and p < 0.031
resp.). Fore/aft sewing distance 140 mm, 10° sewing desk inclination
and sewing desk height 762 mm & 787 mm cause more neutral neck
posture recorded by sewing operator (Fig. 3b). The contribution by
fore/aft sewing distance was 88.41%, sewing desk inclination was
7.07% and sewing desk height was 4.51% (Table 7) for improving neck
posture out of three independent parameters.
3.2.3. Arm angle
From the results of analysis of variance, the sewing desk height had
highly significant effect on perceived posture of arm (p < 0.002).
Fore/aft sewing distance & sewing desk inclination found less sig-
nificant effect on perceived posture of arm (Fig. 3c). The contribution
for improving arm angle by fore/aft sewing distance was 6.09%, desk
inclination was 16.80% and height of desk was 77.10% (Table 8) out of
three independent parameters.
3.3. Localized postural discomfort
The results of postural discomfort for trunk region, neck region and
arm region under the nine set of experimental condition are shown in
Fig. 4.

42
S. Tondre and T. Deshmukh
Fig. 4. Perceived postural discomfort in nine experimental conditions (mean S/
N ratio values): a) Trunk region b) Neck region c) Arm region (*Fore/aft sewing
distance in mm, Sewing desk inclination in degree and Sewing desk height in
mm).
3.3.1. Trunk region
Analysis of variance showed that fore/aft sewing distance, sewing
desk inclination and sewing desk height had significant effect on pos-
tural discomfort of trunk region (p < 0.012, p < 0.019 and
p < 0.027 resp.). Fore/aft sewing distance 140 mm, 10° sewing desk
inclination and sewing desk height 762 mm found very suitable for
43
International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 71 (2019) 37–46
trunk comfort (Fig. 4a). The contribution of fore/aft sewing distance
was 47.33%, desk inclination was 31.08% and height of desk was
21.59% (Table 9) for postural discomfort of trunk region.
3.3.2. Neck region
From the results of analysis of variance, fore/aft sewing distance,
sewing desk inclination and sewing desk height had significant effect on
postural discomfort of neck (p < 0.001, p < 0.003 and p < 0.004
resp.). At fore/aft sewing distance 140 mm, 10° sewing desk inclination
and sewing desk height 762 mm, the sewing operators found very less
postural discomfort in neck (Fig. 4b). The contribution of fore/aft
sewing distance was 57.48%, desk inclination was 25.16% and sewing
desk height was 17.36% (Table 10) for postural discomfort of neck
region.
3.3.3. Arm region
From the results of analysis of variance it is found that sewing desk
height had high significant effect (p < 0.003), while desk inclination
had less significant effect (p < 0.078) on postural discomfort of arm.
Sewing desk inclination 10° and sewing desk height 762 mm cause
more normal posture of arm (Fig. 3c). The contribution by fore/aft
sewing distance was 5.44%, sewing desk inclination is 27.13% and
sewing desk height was 67.33% (Table 11) for postural discomfort of
arm region.
3.4. Estimated endurance time
From the results of analysis of variance, the sewing desk height had
highly significant effect (p < 0.02) on endurance time. Fore/aft sewing
distance & sewing desk inclination has less significant effect than
sewing desk height. As per results, fore/aft sewing distance 140 mm,
10° sewing desk inclination and sewing desk height 762 mm was most
comfortable to work consistently (Fig. 5). The contribution of the
sewing height was 66.62%, sewing desk inclination is 19.44% and fore/
aft sewing distance is 13.94% (Table 12) for the endurance limit of
sewing operators.
3.5. Workstation arrangement
3.5.1. Sewing desk height
Sewing desk height 787 mm was considered average right. Whereas
sewing desk height 762 mm was almost close to average right and
813 mm was considered as too high (Fig. 6a). Differences found be-
tween the sewing height were significant (p < 0.001).
3.5.2. Sewing desk inclination
Sewing desk inclination 10° was considered average right. Whereas
sewing desk inclination 5° was considered as little too flat and 0° was
considered as average too much flat (Fig. 6b). Differences found be-
tween the sewing desk inclination were significant (p < 0.001).
3.5.3. Fore/aft sewing distance
Fore/aft sewing distance 70 mm and 0 mm was considered little far
and too far respectively. Whereas fore/aft sewing distance 140 mm was
considered as average right (Fig. 6c). Differences found between the
fore/aft sewing distance were significant (p < 0.001).
3.5.4. Whole workstation arrangement
Analysis of variance shows that all three parameters i.e. fore/aft
sewing distance, sewing desk inclination and sewing desk height had
highly significant effect (p < 0.014, p < 0.011 and p < 0.003 resp.)
on overall workstation arrangement. Fig. 6d showed that fore/aft
sewing distance 140 mm, 10° desk inclination desk height 787 mm was
the most convenient and comfortable for working. The contribution by
S. Tondre and T. Deshmukh International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 71 (2019) 37–46

Table 9
ANOVA Table for Postural discomfort of Trunk region.
Parameter/Factor DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F P-value Percentage contribution

Fore/aft sewing distance 2 4.9156 4.9156 2.4578 79.00 0.012 47.33

Sewing desk inclination 2 3.2289 3.2289 1.6144 51.89 0.019 31.08
Sewing desk height 2 2.2422 2.2422 1.1211 36.04 0.027 21.59
Error 2 0.0622 0.0622 0.0311
Total 8 10.4489

S = 0.176383 R-Sq = 99.40% R-Sq(adj) = 97.62%.

Table 10
ANOVA Table for Postural discomfort of Neck region.
Parameter/Factor DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F P-value Percentage contribution

Fore/aft sewing distance 2 44.374 44.374 22.187 783.06 0.001 57.48

Sewing desk inclination 2 19.420 19.420 9.710 342.70 0.003 25.16
Sewing desk height 2 13.398 13.398 6.699 236.44 0.004 17.36
Error 2 0.057 0.057 0.028
Total 8 77.249

S = 0.168327 R-Sq = 99.93% R-Sq(adj) = 99.71%.

Table 11
ANOVA Table for Postural discomfort of Arm region.
Parameter/Factor DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F P-value Percentage contribution

Fore/aft sewing distance 2 10.601 10.601 5.301 2.41 0.293 5.54

Sewing desk inclination 2 51.965 51.965 25.983 11.80 0.078 27.13
Sewing desk height 2 128.954 128.954 64.477 29.28 0.033 67.33
Error 2 4.404 4.404 2.202
Total 8 195.924

S = 1.48387 R-Sq = 97.75% R-Sq(adj) = 91.01%.

4. Discussion

The study has given an insight into the ways in which a sewing
machine operator's posture is influenced by the modification of the
conventional sewing machine workstation particularly reach distance
and view of the work point while performing the sewing task. The re-
sults confirmed the improvement of postures by the modifications in-
corporated in the conventional sewing machine workstation.

4.1. Effect of workstation parameters on postural variables

The major effect of workstation adjustments on postural variables

Fig. 5. Estimated endurance time in nine experimental conditions (*Fore/aft
sewing distance in mm, Sewing desk inclination in degree and Sewing desk
height in mm).
the fore/aft sewing distance was 14.27%, desk inclination was 19.02%
and height of desk had 66.71% (Table 13) for deciding the satisfaction
about overall workstation arrangement.
was shown in Fig. 2. Firstly, as the horizontal fore/aft sewing distance
varies from 0 to 140 mm towards the operator, the reach distance be-
tween the work point and sewing operator for moving the work ma-
terial reduces, and at the same time the viewing distance of sewing
operator to view the task also reduces, the effect of which, the trunk
and neck posture get more upright. To a lesser extent this effect is seen
for the arm posture also. Secondly, the sewing desk inclination had a
significant influence on sewing operator's trunk and neck postures, as
the sewing table inclination vary from 0° to 10°, the sewing operators
move closer to the needle, this reflects the neck and trunk posture be-
came more upright. To a lesser extent, the effect sewing desk inclination

Table 12
ANOVA table for endurance time.
Parameter/Factor DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F P-value Percentage contribution

Fore/aft sewing distance 2 2.1089 2.1089 1.0544 10.43 0.087 13.94

Sewing desk inclination 2 2.9422 2.9422 1.4711 14.55 0.064 19.44
Sewing desk height 2 10.0822 10.0822 5.0411 49.86 0.020 66.62
Error 2 0.2022 0.2022 0.1011
Total 8 15.3356

S = 0.317980 R-Sq = 98.68% R-Sq(adj) = 94.73%.

44
S. Tondre and T. Deshmukh
Fig. 6. Judgment on workstation arrangement in nine experimental conditions (mean SN ratio values): (*Fore/aft sewing distance in mm, Sewing desk inclination in
degree and Sewing desk height in mm).
Table 13
ANOVA Table for Overall workstation arrangement.
Parameter/Factor DF Seq SS Adj SS
Fore/aft sewing distance 2 2.0422 2.0422
Sewing desk inclination 2 2.7222 2.7222
Sewing desk height 2 9.5489 9.5489
Error 2 0.0289 0.0289
Total 8 14.3422
S = 0.120185 R-Sq = 99.80% R-Sq(adj) = 99.19%.
is seen for the arm posture also. This result agrees with the previous
studies by Wick and Drury (1986) and Delleman and Dul (2002).
Thirdly, as weaving height increases, the neck get more upright. This is
in agreement with the results of other studies on the effect of working
height on neck postures (Delleman and Dul, 2002). This effect of sewing
desk height found to be less significant for Trunk posture, the probable
reason may be, as the height of desk increases, the sewing operator find
difficult to rest her lower arm on sewing desk surface, to get proper
support to fore arm properly the sewing operator bend her trunk for-
ward. A sewing height had significant influence on arm posture, as the
sewing desk height increases, the arm posture became extended;
whereas, as sewing desk height decreases the arm posture get closer to
neutral posture. The sewing desk height 762 mm causes more neutral
posture of arms compared to 787 mm and 813 mm. A low visual-
manual target causes head, neck and trunk flexion and a high target
leads to upper arm and elbow flexion. Therefore, it became necessary to
reach a compromise by which the posture of both regions was satisfied.
In a sewing operation, sewing desk height 787 mm, sewing desk in-
clination 10° and fore/aft sewing distance 140 mm could be a suitable
compromise in which the postures of the head, neck, trunk and arm do
not seem to be severely deviated from neutral sitting posture. Some of
the postural effects could not be shown at a significance level of 0.05. A
greater number of test subjects is to be recommended for future re-
search.
45
International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 71 (2019) 37–46
Adj MS F P-value Percentage contribution
1.0211 70.69 0.014 14.27
1.3611 94.23 0.011 19.02
4.7744 330.54 0.003 66.71
0.0144
4.2. Effect of workstation parameters on perceived posture
Fig. 3, clearly demonstrates the effects of workstation parameters on
perceived postures. Firstly as the fore/aft sewing distance varies towards
the sewing operators i.e. from 0 mm to 140 mm, the sewing operators
caused more and more favored posture of neck and trunk. Thus the fore/
aft sewing distance influences the perceived posture of neck and trunk
significantly (Tables 6 and 7). Whereas, the perceived arm posture found
to be less significant for the fore/aft sewing distance (Table 8). Secondly,
as the sewing desk inclined from 0° to 10° from horizontal plane towards
operator, the sewing operators caused more favored posture of neck and
trunk (Fig. 3a and b), whereas arm posture was less significant (Fig. 3c).
The operators reach distance and viewing distance reduced considerably
as fore/aft sewing distance and sewing table inclination increases, hence
the operators caused favored posture of neck and trunk. The results of
variation of sewing height from 762 mm to 813 mm caused significant
influence on arm posture. The sewing operator caused better arm posture
as the sewing height reduces from 813 mm to 762 mm (Fig. 3c), whereas
the neck and trunk posture caused more favored neck and trunk posture
as sewing desk height increases from 762 mm to 813 mm (Fig. 3a and b).
For greater sewing desk height 813 mm the trunk and neck posture be-
came more favored posture but at the same time by lowering the sewing
desk height from 813 mm to 762 mm the arm posture became favored
posture, hence to counterbalance overall posture the sewing desk height
787 mm was favorable.
S. Tondre and T. Deshmukh
4.3. Effect of workstation parameters on localized postural discomfort
The results (Fig. 4) indicated that the determinant factor for the
neck and trunk region discomfort was the fore/aft sewing distance,
sewing desk inclination and sewing desk height (Tables 9 and 10).
Fore/aft sewing distance 0 mm causes more postural discomfort in the
neck and trunk region than 70 mm, whereas 140 mm fore/aft sewing
distance causes very less or no postural discomfort. For 140 mm fore/aft
sewing distance the trunk tends to move in backward direction and
avail low back support from the chair. A 0° degree sewing desk in-
clination causes neck and trunk region postural discomfort compared to
5°, while 10° sewing desk inclinations found to be comfortable for neck
and trunk region. However sewing desk height has a significant influ-
ence on the arm region discomfort (Table 11), sewing desk height
813 mm cause more discomfort of arm, as the sewing desk height re-
duces the arm posture becomes neutral and correspondingly reduces
the arm discomfort significantly (Fig. 4c).
4.4. Effect of workstation parameters on endurance time
From Fig. 5, the sewing desk height significantly influences the
endurance time. As the sewing desk increases from 762 mm to 813 mm,
the arm posture at the higher sewing desk height became awkward
hence it restricts the free motions of arm for movement of work piece
material. Fore/aft sewing distance and sewing desk inclination found to
be less significant for the endurance time (Table 12). From Fig. 5, as the
fore/aft distance increases from 0 mm to 140 mm and sewing desk in-
clination from 0° to 10°, the sewing operators claim that they can work
for more duration without break, because as the workstation para-
meters had significant effect on the postures adopted by the sewing
operators.
4.5. Effect of workstation parameters on judgment on workstation
arrangement
According to judgment of the subjects, the most preferred positions
of three parameters were fore-aft sewing distance 140 mm, sewing desk
inclination 10° and sewing desk height 787 mm (Fig. 6d). The overall
combination of this parameter was rated as much better workstation
than their own workstation. Expanding the time of each experimental
session or increasing the number of test subjects may bring clearer re-
sults. On the basis of the results and with reference to the workstation
parameters studied in this experiment, the three parameters i.e. fore/aft
sewing distance, sewing desk inclination and swing desk height should
be adjustable according to anthropometric dimensions of the subjects.
5. Conclusion
The main conclusions drawn from the study was, the modifications
to the sewing workstation have great potential for improving the op-
erator's neck, trunk and upper arm working postures and performance
of sewing machine operators. Therefore, the new workstation design
would be valuable for garment manufacturing units. Another finding
that emerged from the study was the health problems faced by the
workers during the working time such as musculoskeletal discomforts
which could be solved by introducing ergonomic furniture. The results
lead to conclusion that the determinant factor for improving the pos-
tures of sewing operator was the fore/aft sewing distance, sewing desk
inclination and sewing desk height. The sewing operators showed dis-
tinct preference for sewing desk height between 762 mm and 787 mm
combined with fore/aft sewing distance 140 mm and sewing desk in-
clination 10°, therefore adjustment in this range is recommended.
Concerning the hypothesis and experimental conditions, the
46
International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 71 (2019) 37–46
following guidelines have been developed to improve working posture:
(a) the fore/aft sewing distance should be adjusted at 140 mm towards
the sewing machine; (b) a 10° inclination of sewing desk towards
sewing machine operator; (c) sewing desk height should be adjusted to
762–787 mm. It is expected that a sewing machine workstation ad-
justment based on the above developed guidelines will improve the
working posture and result in reduced postural stress of sewing ma-
chine operators’ and will reduce risk of musculoskeletal disorders.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2019.02.002.
References
Bendix, T., Hagberg, M., 1984. Trunk posture and load on the trapezius muscle whilst
sitting at sloping desks. Ergonomics 27 (8), 873–882.
Bhatnager, V., Drury, C.G., Schiro, S.G., 1985. Posture, postural discomfort, and perfor-
mance. Hum. Factors 27 (2), 189–199.
Brider, R.S., 2003. Introduction to Ergonomics, second ed. Talyor and Francis publication.
Bridger, R.S., 1988. Postural adaptations to a sloping chair and work surface. Hum.
Factors 30 (2), 237–247.
Choobineh, Alireza, Lahmi, Mohammadali, Hosseini, Mostafa, Shahnavaz, Houshang,
Khani Jazani, Reza, 2004. Workstation design in carpet hand-weaving operation:
guidelines for prevention of musculoskeletal disorders. Int. J. Occup. Saf. Ergon. 10
(4), 411–424.
Corlett, E.N., 1981. Pain, posture and performance. In: Corlett, E.N., Richardson, J. (Eds.),
Stress, Work Design and Productivity. John Wiley & Sons, London, pp. 2742.
Corlett, E.N., Bishop, R.B., 1976. A technique for assessing postural discomfort.
Ergonomics 19 (2), 175–182 1976.
Das, B., Sengupta, A.K., 1996. Industrial workstation design: a systematic ergonomics
approach. Appl. Ergon. 27 (3), 157–163.
Delleman, N.J., 1999. Working Postures, Prediction and Evaluation’. TNO Human Factors
Research Institute, Soesterberg, The Netherlands.
Delleman, N.J., Dul, J., 2002. Sewing machine operation: workstation adjustment,
working posture, and workers' perceptions. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 30, 341–353.
Eastman, M.C., Kamon, E., 1976. Posture and subjective evaluation at flat and slanted
desks. Hum. Factors I8 (I), 15–26.
Guangyan, Li’., Haslegrave, Christine M., Corlett, E. Nigel, 1995. Factors affecting posture
for machine sewing tasks - the need for changes in sewing machine design. Appl.
Ergon. 26 (1), 35–46.
Haslegrave, C.M., Gregg, H., 1988. Improving the ergonomics of production sewing tasks'.
In: Worthington, B. (Ed.), Advances in Manufacturing Technology III. Kogan Page
Ltd, London, pp. 284–288.
Huoviala, T., 1984. Turning the tables: design change eases sewing strains. In: Work
Health Safety. Institute of Occupational Health, Finland, pp. 17–18.
Keyserling, W.M., Donoghue, J.L., Punnet &, L., Miller, A.B., 1982. Repetitive Trauma
Disorders in the Garment Industry Report No. 81-3220. Department of Environmental
Health Sciences, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston.
Kroemer, K.H.E., 1988. VDT workstation design. In: Helander, M. (Ed.), Handbook of
Human-Computer Interaction. Amsterdam. The Netherlands. Elsevier Science, North-
Holland 521–39.
Kroemer, K.H.E., 1997. Design of the computer workstation. In: Helander, M., Landauer,
T.K., Prabhu, P. (Eds.), Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction, second ed.
Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, The Netherlands North-Holland 1395–414.
Mattila, M., Vilkki, M., 1999. OWAS methds. In: Karwowski, W., Marras, W.S. (Eds.), The
Occupational Ergonomics Handbook. CRC Press LLC, Boca Raton, FL, USA 447–59.
Occhipinti, E., Colombmi, D., Frigo, C., Pedotti, A., Grieco, A., 1985. Sitting posture:
analysis of lumbar stress with upper limbs supported. Ergonomics 28 (9), 1333–1346.
Punnett, L., Robins, J.M., Wegman, D.H., Keyserling, W.M., 1985. Soft tissue disorders in
the upper limbs of female garment workers. Scand. J. Work. Environ. Health 11,
417–425.
Roy, R.K., 2001. Design of Experiments Using the Taguchi Approach: 16 Steps to Product
and Process Improvement. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Vihma, T., Nurminen, M., Mutanen, P., 1982. Sewing-machine operators' work and
musculo-skeletal complaints. Ergonomics 25 (4) 295-29.
Wall, M. de, Van Riel, M.P.J.M., Sniders, C.J., Van Wingerden, J.P., 1991. The effect on
sitting posture of a desk with a 10 degree inclination for reading and writing.
Ergonomics 34 (5), 575–584.
Westgaard, R.H., Jansen, T., 1992. Individual and work related factors associated with
symptoms of musculoskeletal complaints. II Different risk factors among sewing
machine operators. Br. J. Ind. Med. 49, 154–162.
Wick, J., Drury, C.G., 1986. Postural change due to adaptations of a sewing workstation.
In: Corlett, E.N., Wilson, J.R., Manenica, I. (Eds.), The Ergonomics of Working
Postures. Taylor & Francis, London, pp. 375–379.