. . . .

r
lrlernahonatJourn~lof

Industrial
Ergonomics
ELSEVIER International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 20 (1997) 251-257

Case study

Incorporating ergonomics into the concurrent engineering of a

new warehouse
Michael Parker
Hewlett-Packard Company, Microwave Instruments Division, 1212 Valley House Dr., Rohnert Park, CA 94928, USA

Received 2 February 1996; revised 17 July 1996

Abstract

At Hewlett-Packard's Microwave Instruments Division (HP MID) we are aggressively working toward incorporating
ergonomics into the new product and new process development cycle. The inclusion of an ergonomics engineer on a
development project's concurrent engineering team is an essential part of meeting this goal. This paper presents the
methodology used to integrate ergonomics into the concurrent engineering of a new 100,000 square foot warehouse and
highlights the key issues encountered.

Relevance to industry

The development of techniques to successfully incorporate ergonomic considerations in product and process development
efforts is an essential ingredient towards developing a proactive ergonomics process for industry. Integrating ergonomics into
the concurrent engineering cycle is one of the most cost-effective ways to achieve this goal. © 1997 Elsevier Science B.V.

Keywords: Ergonomics; Concurrent engineering; Warehouse; Solution mapping

I. Introduction exposure to ergonomic related occupational injuries,

Concurrent engineering is the blending of diverse
engineering concerns during the product or process
development cycle. Including an ergonomics engi-
neer on the concurrent engineering team helps ensure
that the critical ergonomic issues are properly blended
with the other diverse engineering concerns. Pope-
Ford et al. (1995) and Joines and Ayoub (1995) have
described the benefits of including an ergonomics
engineer on the concurrent engineering team. Among
other factors, these authors note significantly reduced
improved quality, and improved productivity. Al-
though there is wide acknowledgment of the benefits
of including ergonomics in a concurrent engineering
development, few articles have explored how to do
this most effectively•
This paper presents the methodology used to inte-
grate ergonomics into the concurrent engineering of
a new 100,000 square foot warehouse at HP MID
and highlights the key issues and opportunities en-
countered• The ergonomic design goals of the project
were to significantly reduce our exposure to er-

0169-8141//97//$17.00 © 1997 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

PII S01 69-8141 ( 9 6 ) 0 0 0 5 8 - 3
252 M. Parker/International Journal of lndustrial Ergonomics 20 (1997) 251-257
gonomic related occupational injuries as well as
develop experience incorporating ergonomics into
the concurrent engineering process.
2. Methods
In order to blend the expertise of the ergonomics
engineer on the project in the most effective manner,
the warehouse management team and the concurrent
engineering team jointly developed a list of the key
ergonomic activities for the project. These activities
focused around two main concepts: providing early
input into the design and specification of the ware-
house and providing on-going ergonomics expertise
over the course of the project. A rough project
process diagram is shown in Fig. 1 which includes
the major ergonomic activities in the project.
The specific activities in each phase included: (1)
Development Phase: (a) quantifying the cost and
impact of the ergonomic risks in our existing opera-
tions; (b) setting ergonomic design assumptions for
the new warehouse; (c) conduct preliminary er-
gonomic solution development; and (d) develop an
ergonomic equipment and layout review process for
the warehouse; (2) Outfitting Phase: coordinate the
equipment and layout reviews; (3) Operation Phase:
evaluate the project's ergonomic success.
2.1. Defining the project's ergonomic requirements
The first phase of the project involved a detailed
ergonomic study of our existing warehouse activities
in order to prioritize the ergonomic issues and oppor-
tunities. The study was completed using two primary
tools: (1) ergonomic injury history (from OSHA
reports), and (2) comprehensive ergonomic job anal-
yses. The results of this investigation are summa-
rized below.
] Development~ _ ~ Outfitting ~ Operation
Phase Phase Phase
DefineRequirements EquipmentReviews Evaluate
Ergonomic
SetDesignAssumptions LayoutReviews Results
ErgonomicSolution
Development
DefineReviewProcess
Fig. 1. Projectprocessdiagram showingergonomicprojectphases.
Storeroom(61%)
Admin.(6%)
Receiving(22%)
Deliver),(11%)
Fig. 2. Injuryand illness data classifiedby processcenter.
2.1.1. Ergonomic injury history
Analyzing past ergonomic injuries in our ware-
housing activities was used as a tool to predict the
type and location of future injuries. Data was re-
viewed for a period of one year (July '94-July '95).
The findings showed that over 50% of the injuries
were attributed to materials handling ergonomic risk
factors, 11% computer ergonomic injuries, and the
remaining were attributed to miscellaneous causes
and equipment failures. The data was also broken out
by area where the injury occurred as shown in Fig. 2.
2.1.2. Ergonomic job analyses
Analyzing the presence of the ergonomic risk
factors which can lead to ergonomic injuries in our
warehousing activities was used as a tool to predict
the type and location of future injuries. The risk of
future injuries is predicted from the results of the
Baseline Risk Identification of Ergonomic Factors
(BRIEF TM) from Humantech, Inc. (1995). The
BRIEF TM reports the presence of ergonomic risk
factors (posture, force, frequency, and duration) in
each of nine body parts. A relative risk rating is
assigned based on the number of ergonomic risk
factors acting at any one time on a particular body
part (i.e. repetitively using a hammer would indicate
the presence of force, frequency, and posture risk
factors). Body parts with three or more risk factors
acting at any one time is considered to be High Risk,
two risk factors leads to Medium Risk, and one risk
factor is considered to be Low Risk. The results from
the ergonomic job analyses are presented in Table 1,
sorted by degree of risk.
The results of the ergonomic injury history review
and ergonomic job analyses let us quickly prioritize
the ergonomic issues and opportunities. The injury
history data shows us that ergonomic injuries are
fairly evenly spread throughout the department when
 M. Parker/International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 20 (1997) 251-257 253

Table 1
Future ergonomic injury predictors
Task description Number of employees Risk rank (high, med., low) Process center
Floor putaway 4 High Storeroom
Receiving-unloading 6 High Receiving
Delivery-tug drivers 8 High Delivery
Receiving-processing 12 High Receiving
Floor pulling 10 High Storeroom
Carousel operators 8 Medium Storeroom
Turret truck 4 Medium Storeroom
Collecting 4 Medium Storeroom
Stockpicker 2 Low Storeroom
Delivery-sorting 4 Low Delivery

one looks at the number of employees working in
each department. However, the most telling indicator
is the injury predictor data - in this case the Receiv-
ing area stands out as a key opportunity to signifi-
cantly reduce ergonomic risk factors since both of
the jobs in this area have a high risk rank.
2.2. Assumptions
The next step in the process involved determining
the key ergonomic assumptions for this project. This
included determining the population characteristics
which the new warehouse would be designed for and
the design intent. These assumptions are summarized
below:
• Population percentile: Where ever possible, jobs
will be designed to accommodate the 5th per-
centile female to 95th percentile male population.
• Age: The population age can varies from 18 to
65.
• Exceptions: Jobs which cannot accommodate the
range of population will be noted.
2.3. Ergonomic solution development
The ergonomic solution development process for
the new warehouse included three sections as de-

Table 2
Material handling task requirement recommendations
Material Current materials handling requirements New materials handling requirements
class
Loads Frequency Storage Loads Frequency Storage
heights height
Bins 0-50 lbs. 5/rain 0-72" 0-50 lbs. Mechanical aids used 5/min 20-50"
for all boxes over 15 lbs.

Boxes 0-100 lbs. 5/min 0-72" Dedicated stations for boxes 5/min. 0-50"
(lift equipment)
Pallets 35-1000 lbs. l/rain 0-72" 35-1000 lbs. 1/min 0-60"
(handled via pallet jacks, fork lifts, etc.) (handled via pallet jacks, fork lifts, etc.)
Pallet manually handled 1/rain Automatic pallet recycling 1/min
for recycling system used
Table 3
Sample ergonomic solution mapping matrix - Storeroom operations
Task description Ergonomic issue resolution Action items/reference

Existing warehouse New warehouse

Floor putaway/ 1. Adjustable carts with improved
Floor pulling steering capabilities
2. Ladder (training, mobility,
locking mech.)
3. Bins with hand holds
4. Reduce box weights
1. Elimination of man-to-part shelving 1. Design templates:
resolves issue 1 and 2 • Horizontal carousel
2. Box weights set based on ergonomic • Part cabinets
criteria 2. Designs recs.:
3. Bins with hand holds • Bin d e s i g n /
4. Tasks designed based on ergonomic weight guidelines;
design guidelines • Putaway buffer

Carousel operators 1. Workstation layout Same as above Same as above

2. Use of assists to minimize
lifting/twisting

Stockpicker 1. Adj. height platform 1. Adj, height platform 1. Design templates:

2. Eliminate use of bottom shelves 2. Eliminate use of bottom shelves • Materials handling
3. Method for accessing boxes 3. Method for accessing boxes on pallets template
on pallets 4. Proper lighting 2, Design recs.:
4. Proper lighting • Follow ergonomic
equipment selection guide

,.q
 114.Parker~InternationalJournal of IndustrialErgonomics20 (1997) 251-257
tailed below: manual materials handling task require-
ments, ergonomic task template development via
solution mapping, and the development of ergonomic
guidelines.
2.3.1. Manual materials handling job design
The fundamental concept behind designing man-
ual materials handling tasks, equipment, and pro-
cesses is to ensure that the capabilities of the materi-
als handler are not exceeded. This can be accom-
plished in number of ways, including job design,
training, and employee selection. Most successful
strategies use a combination of two or more of these
strategies. At HP MID we chose to focus on er-
gonomic job design. However, employee training is
also an essential ingredient.
The fundamental concern with materials handling
job design involves the weight of the material to be
handled and the storage height of the materials. In
both cases, the weights and heights should be less
than the ergonomically acceptable limits for the de-
sign population. In the existing warehouse, we found
that these acceptable limits are lower than the current
requirements of the physical processes. In order to
resolve this discrepancy, the material handling task
requirement recommendation matrix was created, as
seen in Table 2. Notably missing from this matrix is
Table 4
Sample environmental ergonomic checklist
Environmental Ergonomic criteria
factor
Lighting • Largeparts carousels, bulk storage: 300 Lux
• Smallparts storage: 750 Lux
Temperature Comfort zone: 20°C-25°C (30% relative humidity)
Action limit: 35°C - management and engineering
controls required above this limit
Noise • Comfort zone: < 60 dBA
• Tolerable zone: 60-75 dBA
• Actionlimit: > 80 dBA
General recommendations:
• Avoid intermittent noise
• Avoidhigh-level repeated noises
• Avoidnoises > 2000 Hz frequency
255
the concept of keeping heavy materials in the 'golden
zone' - the zone where these materials can still be
safely lifted. The design team felt that the complex-
ity of developing administrative controls to ensure
that heavy materials were properly located in the
'golden zone' was more complex than designing a
process to eliminate this requirement.
2.3.2. Ergonomic solution mapping
Solution mapping is a term used to describe the
process of creating a map to help guide the concur-
rent engineering team to the desired solution frame-
work. One of the benefits of this process is that it
defines the end points, in this case ergonomic design
objectives, while leaving the designers free to be
creative in defining the design details.
A solution mapping exercise was used to create a
map of ergonomic solutions needed in the new ware-
house. A comparison of the solutions needed to
resolve the ergonomic issues in the new warehouse
with the old warehouse was also used as a tool to
justify some of the equipment expenses in the new
warehouse. This process was completed for the three
key operations in the warehouse: receiving, stores,
and delivery. A sample of the process used is shown
in Table 3 for the Storeroom Operations. The map
focuses on equipment and job design issues. Infor-
Disposition
Pass Fail Action
256 M. Parker~International Journal of lndustrial Ergonomics 20 (1997) 251-257

marion for the creation of the map came from the gonomic risk factors. The validation will be per-
results of the ergonomic task analyses of each of the formed on a process by process basis through the use
job tasks, as well as input from the concurrent of the BRIEF and employee surveys.
TM

engineering team.

2.3.3. Ergonomic guidelines 3. Conclusions

Ergonomic Guidelines are an effective way of
ensuring that jobs are designed to 'fit the person'.
HP MID has created general guidelines in order to
meet most ergonomic development needs within the
plant. However, two specific guidelines were also
developed specifically for the new warehouse: envi-
ronmental guidelines and manual materials handling
guidelines. A sample of the environmental guidelines
is shown in Table 4.
2.4. Equipment ergonomic selection guidelines
Several sets of ergonomic equipment selection
guidelines were developed for the major equipment
to be purchased. These guidelines would then be
used by the equipment selection committee to iden-
tify the best equipment. Table 5 shows a sample of
the guideline used to specify fork lifts and lift trucks.
2.5. Ergonomic risk reduction validation
A comprehensive study of the progress made
during the warehouse development project will begin
after the warehouse is fully operational (Fall, 1996).
This will be done to document the successes and
failures of the project in terms of eliminating er-
Learning how to successfully incorporate er-
gonomics considerations in product and process de-
velopment efforts is an essential ingredient towards
developing a proactive ergonomics process. This pa-
per explored one approach to achieving this goal.
Key points that have been learned from the process
are detailed in the paragraphs below.
Building ownership and knowledge of ergonomic
risk factors in the other members of the concurrent
engineering team is essential. Analyzing past er-
gonomic injury history and performing ergonomic
risk assessments to predict future injuries was a very
effective way to build this ownership and knowl-
edge. Developing a short ergonomics class for the
concurrent engineering team and the management
team could also be used to build the team's knowl-
edge of ergonomic risk factors.
Concurrent engineering projects are often ex-
tremely fast paced. As a result, many members of the
concurrent engineering team don't have the time to
develop specific ergonomic solutions themselves or
research ergonomic issues. The solution mapping
exercise which identified the general framework for
the ergonomic considerations to include in the devel-
opment of the warehouse was extremely useful. Ad-

Table 5
Sample ergonomic selection guidelines for fork lifts, turret trucks
Design feature Ergonomic guideline Disposition
Pass Fail Action
Vibration characteristics • Upper torso, vertical - avoid 4 - 8 Hz
• H e a d - s h o u l d e r system - avoid 2 0 - 3 0 Hz

Seat • Horizontal and vertical adjustments of seat pan and back rest
• L u m b a r p a d s / s e a t cushions

Standing station • Anti-fatigue mat or cushioned insoles recommended

Visibility • Man-up preferred to increase visibility

• M i n i m u m neck deviations required for normal operation

Safety • Sit: Power cut-off if driver is not seated

• Stand: Power cut-off if driver is not standing
 M. Parker/International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 20 (1997) 251-257
ditionally, the development of tailored ergonomic
checklists for equipment and job designs were also
found to be effective.
Lastly, in order to ensure that the ergonomic
design goals of the project are met, a way of tracking
issue ownership and progress is essential. The er-
gonomic checklists with the 'Disposition' column
were a start towards this end. However, a more
detailed ergonomic project plan would have been
more effective.
4. For further reading
Eastman Kodak Company, Human Factors Sec-
tion (1983), Haslegrave and Holmes (1994), Mital et
al. (1993), Putz-Anderson (1988), Waters et al.
(1993).
References
Eastman Kodak Company, Human Factors Section, 1983. Er-
gonomic Design for People at Work, Vol. 1. Van Nostrand
Reinhold. New York, 406 pp.
257
Haslegrave, C.M. and Holmes, K., 1994. Integrating ergonomics
and engineering in the technical design process. Applied Er-
gonomics, 25(4): 211-220.
Humantech, Inc., 1995. Applied Ergonomics Training Manual
(2nd ed.). Humantech, Ann Arbor, MI, 253 pp.
Joines, S. and Ayoub, M.A., 1995. Design for assembly: An
ergonomic approach. Industrial Engineering, January: 42-46.
Mital, A., Nicholson, A.S. and Ayoub, M.M., 1993. A Guide to
Manual Materials Handling. Taylor and Francis, London, 114
PP.
Pope-Ford, Regina D. et al., 1995. The role of an ergonomist in
concurrent engineering: An analysis of case studies. In: A.C.
Bittner and P.C. Champney (Eds.), Advances in Industrial
Ergonomics and Safety VII. Taylor and Francis, London, pp.
331-338.
Putz-Anderson, V., 1988. Cumulative Trauma Disorders: A Man-
ual for Musculoskeletal Diseases of the Upper Limbs. Taylor
and Francis, London, 149 pp.
Waters, T.R., Putz-Anderson, V., Garg, A. and Fine, L., 1993.
Revised NIOSH equation for the design and evaluation of
manual lifting tasks. Ergonomics, 36: 749-776.