Ergonomic Australian

ERGONOMICS AUSTRALIA
July 2007
The Official Journal of the Human Factors & Ergonomics Society of Australia Inc
Contents
Editorial 2
From the Internet 3
Article
Overview 4
Robin Burgess-Limerick
1. Equipment Related issues and 4
Controls in the USA
Underground Mining Industry
Lisa Steiner, NIOSH,
Pittsburgh Research Laboratory
Robin Burgess-Limerick,
Burgess-Limerick & Associates
2. Ergonomics in the Design Process 13
Justin O’Sullivan, Ergonomics for Work
3. Ergonomics in Large Machinery Design 22
Barbara McPhee, Jim Knowles Group
Book Review
The Role of Mathematics on Human Structure 26
Swapan Kumar Adhikari, India
Reviewed by Anne Murphy,
The University of Sydney
Noticeboard 27
Obituary (Brian Shackel)
Conference Calendar 28
Information for Contributors 29
Information for Advertisers 29
Ergonomics Australia On-Line (EAOL) 30
Caveats 30
The Official Journal of the HFESA

Human Factors and Ergonomics Society of Australia
Volume 21, Number 2 (July 2007),

ISSN 1033-875
Editor
Dr Shirleyann M Gibbs
Email: shanng@optushome.com.au
National Secretariat
The Human Factors and Ergonomics Society of Australia Inc.
PO Box 7848 Balkham Hills BC NSW 2153
Tel: +612 9680 9026 Fax: +612 9680 9027
Email: secretariat@ergonomics.org.au
Office Hours: 9.00am - 4.30 pm, Tues, Wed and Thursday
HFESA Website: http://ergonomics.org.au
Design and Layout

Acute Concepts Pty Ltd Tel: 03 9381 9696
Printer
Impact Printing
HFESA Mission Statement Promoting systems, space and designs for People
Editorial
The articles in this edition have been sourced as (Australian National University) have examined the
a special mining issue collated by Robin Burgess- various factors and the outcomes that will affect a
Limerick. He has suggested this approach might wide industrial landscape. One group in the editor’s
be followed by other specialist area ergonomists in Master’s class in risk management, chose this scenario
future editions of the journal. While the three articles as their research project in Autumn semester.
included in this issue alert readers to many of the
factors associated with safe or unsafe mining activity, Earlier this year the editor was approached by a
they also highlight concepts that can be readily final year school student who was studying design
adapted to a broad spectrum of industrial ergonomics. technology for her Higher School Certificate. Since
her email contained some strange concepts about the
Ergonomics and mine safety issues have been role of ergonomics in office design — and about
highlighted in recent news and public debates … associated research related to occupational injuries, the
notably prompted by controversial aspects of the headmistress was contacted in an attempt to determine
findings in relation to the Gretley mine disaster in the the basis of this misunderstanding — had it been
Hunter Valley of New South Wales. The debate ranges ignorance … or a hoax email? The outcome was an
far beyond the actual incident to include the legal invitation to give a presentation to the students and
ramifications of recent legislation in relation to staff associated with this subject. It was received with
remote foreseeability and responsibility on the part enthusiasm and all appreciated being shown the video
of corporate employers for ensuring a duty of care in made by HFESA members Jonathan Talbot and Airdrie
their workplace(s). This investigation has highlighted Long, Ergonomics and Design: Matching Products and
the complexity of ensuring 100% safety in any given Tasks with People, along with further discussion of
situation — something which is desirable — but in issues presented in various slides taken from the
practice can only be a best intent rather than an editor’s own files. Finally a selection of past editions
absolute state. of Ergonomics Australia was donated for use in the
school library with advice about obtaining a copy of
While most people would expect the goal of risk the above video, and a list of recommended textbooks.
management to involve a comprehensive risk Judging by the comments in the hand-written thank-
assessment and subsequent provision of maximum you notes from staff and students, this is an approach
workplace security, hindsight can always illuminate that can be recommended to other ergonomists. It is
the gaps following an unwanted incident. In the a very simple promotional opportunity to enhance
Gretley mine disaster, the argument has focused on awareness of ergonomics and the HFESA at a pre-
the allocation of blame and the penalties that were career level. Think of the impact if all members visited
imposed on the companies and selected management their former secondary schools to give similar
personnel as “the legal employer” … while avoiding ergonomics information.
the role of the Department of Mines and the Union
(although the latter was the “legal employer” of some The HFESA Board has been giving considerable
of the workers). From the outset, fellow miners attention to the future of the society and the strategic
regarded the incident as a terrible unforeseen accident outcomes delivered from the workshops conducted
— and did not blame their company management around Australia by Andrea Shaw and Verna Blewett.
for the mistaken locations shown in the maps made While a full report will be made to members later this
available by the government department. Apparently year, there is interim detail to be found on the HFESA
post-incident investigations unearthed an original map website. The website is now offering considerably
which had been lost in the departmental archives for more information and the shift from hard copy to
many years. Meanwhile, misread and redrawn early electronic news distribution is steadily escalating.
copies had been provided and approved for use in the This is a factor for consideration in future content
application to reopen the mine. Various mine inclusions and omissions in this journal. Fortunately
managers were subsequently blamed for not pursuing there seems to be an increase in potential papers being
an adequate departmental search to discover these reviewed for future issues. This is a welcome
forgotten files prior to the incident. development but needs to be sustained over the long
term if the membership hopes to support an Australian
Other errors of omission which led to the disaster are journal publication as well as a highly desirable
(again with hindsight) contributed to the disaster. electronic newsletter and website.
It would seem to represent a classic Reason’s “Swiss
cheese” scenario of complex factors and also The editor would be delighted to hear from any reader
groupthink. Subsequent publications such as Ken who would care to follow the example in this edition
Phillips’ The Politics of a Tragedy (Institute of Public by undertaking to source articles for a particular topic
Affairs Work Reform Unit) and Andrew Hancock’s and issue in the future. The Board is also considering
Lessons from Gretley: Mindful leadership and the law ways and means to enhance state participation in this
2 HFESA Journal, Ergonomics Australia Vol 21, Number 2, July 2007

effort. How many people source the national and

international ergonomics information updates on
From the Internet
the society’s website? Is it desirable or necessary to Management Review Hits the Wrong Note
duplicate any of this information in the journal? Are
the Noticeboard items, Standards Australia delegates’ A managed care company president was given a ticket
updates and Conference Calendar still desirable for a performance of Schubert’s Unfinished Symphony.
components of the journal or can they be left to Since she was unable to go, she passed the invitation
electronic media? The Talking Point Column depends to one of her managed care reviewers. The next
on issues being discussed by readers. The editor would morning, the president asked how he enjoyed it, and,
be grateful for feedback from the general membership instead of a few plausible observations, she was
on these matters. handed a memorandum, which read as follows:
This is just the beginning of a much broader 1. For a considerable period, the oboe players had
transitional stage between paper copy and electronic nothing to do. Their number should be reduced,
provision being experienced by many community and their work spread over the whole orchestra,
and professional societies. The issue of relative cost thus avoiding peaks of inactivity.
is significant; but just as important is the usage and
preference of readers. At the dawn of the World Wide 2. All 12 violins were playing identical notes. This
Web it was anticipated that all paper publications seems unnecessary duplication, and the staff of this
would eventually be superseded — the paperless office section should be drastically cut. If a large volume
of the future — but many people claim they are of sound is really required, this could be obtained
inundated with more, not less, paper since electronic through the use of an amplifier.
files often are (need to be?) printed by the end user.
An early attempt to establish an IEA electronic 3. Much effort was involved in playing the 16th
research journal folded because of the lack of active notes. This seems an excessive refinement, and
involvement by sufficient authors and readers. Perhaps it is recommended that all notes should be rounded
the international community was not yet ready for this up to the nearest 8th note. If this were done, it
technology … certainly the discrepancy between dial- would be possible to use paraprofessionals instead
up and broadband access is still a significant factor — of experienced musicians.
and still critical for off-campus access to the range of
university online/library services. 4. No useful purpose is served by repeating, with
horns, the passage that has already been
The book industry sale of books and journals so far has handled by the strings. If all such redundant
demonstrated a strong preference for continued hard passages were eliminated, the concert could be
copy material. Nevertheless there is an increasing reduced from two hours to thirty minutes.
tendency to use the internet for timely information
distribution. The hard copy journal options involve 5. This symphony has two movements. If Schubert
a range of issues that will take time to resolve. This didn’t achieve his musical goals by the end of the
electronic world is in a state of general transition — first movement, then he should have stopped there.
but it is vitally important that users’ preferences are The second movement is unnecessary and should
understood and subject to informed discussion on be cut.
which to base decisions that will determine the future
6. In light of the above, one can only conclude that
tipping point for any significant cultural change.
had Schubert given attention to these matters,
he would probably have had time to finish his
Shann Gibbs PhD symphony.
Editor
Anonymous
HFESA Journal, Ergonomics Australia Vol 21, Number 2, July 2007 3

Articles
Applying ergonomics to underground
coal mining equipment
Robin Burgess-Limerick PhD CPE
President, HFESA
The three papers which comprise this special issue of

Ergonomics Australia summarise presentations made at
1) Equipment Related Issues
a seminar held in Pokolbin NSW on October 17, 2006. and Controls in the USA
The seminar formed part of a research project funded
by the Australian Coal Association Research Program Underground Mining Industry
(ACARP Project C14016 Reducing injury risks
Lisa Steiner, NIOSH, Pittsburgh Research Laboratory
associated with underground coal mining equipment).
Robin Burgess Limerick, Burgess-Limerick & Associates
The project began in 2004 with an approach from
While the rate of lost-time injuries in the USA has
Xstrata Coal NSW for assistance with reducing injuries
steadily decreased over the past 10 years (from over
associated with equipment across the company’s
10 per 100 FTE in 1995, to 6 in 2004), underground
underground sites. It became apparent that the issues
coal mining remains a hazardous industry
were not confined to any one company, and a project
(www.cdc.gov/niosh/mining/stats). One of the
involving the industry more widely was undertaken
contributors to this injury risk is working with or near
between April 2005 and March 2007. The project
underground coal mining equipment. Roof bolting
involved analyses of narratives describing injuries
machines, and to a lesser extent continuous mining
associated with underground equipment, review of
machines, have been consistently identified as high risk
relevant literature from international research agencies,
equipment, collectively accounting for approximately
and visits by project staff (Robin Burgess-Limerick,
24% of all injuries to underground coal miners.(1)
Gary Dennis, Suzanne Johnson & Jenny Legge) to 14
Load-Haul-Dump vehicles (LHD), shuttle cars (sc) and
Australian underground coal mines. An aim of these
personnel transport are also associated with injuries
visits was to document current best practices in the
in underground coal mines.(2) Continuous mining
control of injury risks. Visits were also undertaken to
machines (CMM) consist of a rotating cutting head
equipment manufacturers in both Australia and the
and a conveyer. The cutting head cuts coal and the
USA. The outcomes of the project include a Handbook
conveyor loads and transfers coal. The SC transports
for the Control of Injury Risks Associated with
the coal away to a conveyer, from where the coal is
Underground Coal Mining Equipment, which
transported to the surface. After a section of the mine
incorporates the information gathered during the
is cut, the CMM is removed and replaced with a bolting
project, regarding risks and controls and contains a
machine from which miners drill holes (using drill
generic risk assessment tool. The handbook is available
steels) and place bolts and/or some other type of
at burgess-limerick.com.
permanent support in the roof to maintain its integrity.
These machines are all electrically powered via a
The Pokolbin seminar aimed to communicate the
trailing cable. LHD and scoop vehicles are general
results of the project to industry, and also brought
purpose diesel or battery powered vehicles used for
together ergonomists with considerable experience in
carrying materials, cleaning up mined areas and
the area (Barbara McPhee, Justin O’Sullivan, and Lisa
towing trailers underground. Personnel transport
Steiner - NIOSH Pittsburgh) to share their views. The
vehicles are predominantly used to transport miners
seminar also included brief presentations by mine staff
underground.
and manufacturers, and was attended by 100 people
from 8 manufacturers and 15 mines as well as
These injury results are consistent with previous
regulators and others. It was a very successful day,
observations(1,3) that roof bolting machines are the
particularly in giving the manufacturers motivation
equipment most frequently involved in underground
and direction for future improvements in equipment
mining injuries, and that being struck by rock falling
design. Much of the information has wider applicability
from supported roof as the most common mechanism.
than mining and will be of interest to Ergonomics
The proportion of injuries associated with bolting
Australia readers.
machines in USA underground coal mines appears to
have remained unchanged since the 1970s (cf., 15%,
in 1977(4); 17% in 1989(1); 16% in 1993(5); 17% in 2004).
Similarly the proportion of injuries associated with
continuous miners (8%) is consistent with that

previously reported for USA mines (7% in 1989(1)). period, it is likely that the change is in part a
The total percentage of injuries associated with the consequence of the introduction of roof screening
equipment considered (37%) is considerably higher in some US mines, which has been demonstrated to
than that reported recently for underground coal mines virtually eliminate injuries of this type.(9) Indeed,
in New South Wales, Australia (23%).(6) The differences injuries due to rock falling from a supported roof were
may be a consequence of different environmental almost non-existent in a similar analysis of equipment
conditions (higher roof heights in Australian mines) related injury narratives from Australian underground
and differences in mining methods (in Australia, coal mines where screens are routinely put in place
bolting is predominantly undertaken by bolters during bolting.(6)
integrated onto continuous mining machines). Perhaps
in part as a consequence of the higher roof heights, While screening is undoubtedly an effective control,
Australian mines have a much higher prevalence of the low seam heights in some USA coal mining areas
the use of screen (wire mesh placed to the roof during make screen installation difficult. Additional hazards
the bolting process) to prevent minor rock fall injuries. are also introduced with the use of a screen,
particularly additional risks of musculoskeletal injury
An analysis of injury narratives for 2004 (MSHA associated with handling the screen, as well as
database) suggests the following hazards as the highest potential exposure to rock fall while setting the screen.
priority for elimination or control (see Appendices A, However, of 959 Australian equipment related injury
B and C): narratives, only 27 mentioned a screen,(6) suggesting
that the additional risks of injury associated with
• rock falling from supported roof; handling and placing a screen are much less than
• rough road while driving or travelling in LHD/scoop, the risk associated with the rock fall hazard being
shuttle cars and personnel transport vehicles; controlled, at least in the relatively high seam
conditions which predominate in Australian mines.
• collisions while driving LHD/scoop, shuttle cars & Improvements in the handling of a screen are also
personnel transport vehicles;
being developed at mines sites and have potential
• inadvertent or incorrect operation of bolting for further reducing the risk associated with handling
controls; and and placing a screen.
• handling continuous miner cable.
The importance of preventing rock fall injuries cannot
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and be overstated. Where low seam heights make screening
Health (NIOSH) Pittsburgh Research Laboratory (PRL) with steel mesh difficult, it may be necessary to
located in Pittsburgh, PA, conducts research to reduce develop alternative means of reducing the risk of
injuries, fatalities and illnesses in the mining industry. minor rock falls such as the use of shotcrete or other
The facility is equipped with state of the art membrane.(10) Preventing minor rock falls, whether
laboratories and technologies to study root causes and through screening or other means, could prevent nearly
solutions to mining hazards. For each of the above 500 injuries per year or 13% of all injuries in US
priority problems, a discussion of root causes based on underground coal mines.
literature and field research will follow, along with the
recent research results or, in some cases, a description One reason mine companies do not screen is due to
of ongoing research studies to resolve the hazards. the extra time and materials cost associated and the
possible increased physical effort required. In an effort
to encourage mines to increase the use of screens, a
Rock falling from supported roof study to understand the physical requirements and
Rock fall data analyses are remarkably consistent with time costs were conducted for the transporting and
previous data, for example Klishis, Althouse & Stobbe installation of roof screens. An intervention consisting
et al(5) analysed 2685 bolting related injury narratives of a dual rail mounted to the roof bolting machine
and found that 911 (34%) involved falls of roof was tested to determine its effectiveness in reducing
material (cf. 33% this report). Similarly, Bise, physical effort and time to install. Muscle activity,
Masutomi, & Chatterjee(7) determined that in 1987, and motion analysis when using two different lifting
57 of 319 continuous miner related injuries (18%) were techniques (side and overhead) from two different
due to falling rock (cf. 21%, this report). The total locations (from the floor / while leaning against the
number of injuries as a consequence of coal or rock rib) for two different seam heights (66” and 84”)
falling from supported roof (477) is reduced from the were noted.
650 reported by Robertson, Molinda & Dolinar(8) as
the annual average from 1995 to 2001, suggesting that
there has been a reduction in overall injuries of this
type in recent years. While this reduction reflects the
overall reduction in injury rate occurring during this

vehicle suspension, and improved seating have

potential to reduce these acute injuries.(11,12) Such
improvements will also reduce exposure to high
amplitude whole body vibration which is strongly
associated with the development of back pain through
cumulative mechanisms.(13)
Fig 1. Dual Rail Intervention for Screening
Results showed that less muscle activity was required

when the screen was lifted from the leaning rib
condition. There was no difference when lifting from
the side or overhead. This suggests that storing the
materials against the rib would lessen the physical
requirements of roof bolter operators. When
transporting screens (carrying the screen overhead, to
the side or dragging) in both 66” and 84” seam heights,
it is not recommended to drag the screen as muscle
activity was significantly greater than the other
conditions. Muscle activity, using EMG technology
and monitored trunk kinematics using the Lumbar Fig 2. NIOSH Design
Motion Monitor developed at The Ohio State Mid-Seam Shuttle Car Seat
University, was collected to determine effectiveness
of screen installation with and without the dual rail
intervention.(34) In both seam heights, muscle activity
was found to be significantly lower when using the
rails. This intervention allows the screen to be glided
easily without materials getting “hung up” on the
supplies and materials on the roof bolting machine.
This intervention is undergoing small improvements

and will be tested further. The specifications will be
made available by the end of 2007.
Rough Roads
Injuries associated with driving or travelling in a
vehicle that encounters a pot hole or other roadway
abnormality accounted for 20% of injuries associated
with scoop/LHD, Shuttle car or transport. This is
somewhat lower than the 34% of injuries associated
with this mechanism in recent Australian data,(6) which
may reflect the greater use of rail transport in USA
mines. Even so, improvements to roadway standards
to avoid potholes and other abnormalities would be
an effective means of preventing injuries of this type. Fig 3. NIOSH Design
Jarring and jolting often caused by these “potholes” Low-Seam Shuttle Car Seat
or other abnormalities is a major contributor averaging
77% of back, neck and head injuries. Provision of

Laboratory studies of foam padding and seat which projects a uniform magnetic field around the
suspension systems for underground low-seam and dangerous area or the equipment. A microprocessor in
mid-seam shuttle car seats were conducted at PRL and the receiver determines when a local alarm should be
at several participating coal mines. Accelerometer data activated and when data need to be conveyed over a
was collected and analyzed both before and after the short-range radio link to enact the alarm and/or shut
proposed seats were installed. The NIOSH developed down the machine. This technology is commercially
seat with lumbar support was preferred by a large available. The system has been applied to CMMs, haul
majority of users and quantitative analyses showed a trucks and conveyor haulage systems but could be
significant reduction in whole body vibration. Joy adapted to shuttle
Mining now includes this improved seat design as part
of its product line and independently tested the new
design and confirmed the results of the NIOSH study.
To date, over 26% of the US low-seam mine shuttle
cars are equipped with this new design and a total
of over 510 seats have been sold.
Vehicle collisions
While vehicle collisions represented a relatively
small proportion (15%) of the injuries associated
with Scoop/LHD, Shuttle car and transport, the
consequences of collisions are frequently severe,
and include fatalities. This figure is also twice the
proportion of “collision” related injuries for these
vehicles found in recent Australian data.(6) The
probability of vehicle collisions is increased
considerably by the restricted visibility inherent in LHD
and shuttle cars, and this is likely to be exacerbated by
the low seam heights in many USA coal mines. This is
not a new observation. Reports by Kingsley, Mason &
Pethick,(14) then Pethick and Mason(15) described the
visibility difficulties associated with the design of free-
steered vehicles. Simpson, Rushworth & von Glehn(16)
suggested that many underground vehicle collisions are
at least in part a consequence of restricted driver
visibility. The visibility restrictions while driving LHD
vehicles is one of the few aspects of mining equipment
design which has been the subject of formal research.
The research has largely been limited to documenting
the extent of the problem and providing methods for Fig 4. Hazard transmitter detail cars
assessing the lack of visibility associated with current and other underground vehicles.
designs.(eg.,14,17,18) Recommendations for LHD redesign
arising from the research include raising the sitting
position where possible and cab redesign to remove
visual obstructions. Physical separation of pedestrians
and vehicles as far as practicable, and vehicle mounted
proximity sensors and cap lamp battery mounted
emitters may also be beneficial in preventing
potentially serious injuries.
NIOSH PRL has conducted studies of proximity

detection systems in an effort to reduce collisions while
operating machinery.(19) This system warns operators or
other mine workers when they are close to equipment.
This magnetic field based system named HASARD
(Hazardous Area Signalling and Ranging Device)
provides remote alerts or machine shut down functions.
The HASARD transmitter signal feeds into a wire loop

Inadvertent or incorrect operation 1. two-handed fast feed;

of bolting controls 2. drill head raise shutoff;
The hazards associated with inadvertent operation of 3. auxiliary controls;
controls, operation of incorrect controls, operating
4. guarding;
controls in an incorrect direction, or whilst a person
is located in a pinch point, have long been recognized. 5. pinch point identification;
Miller and McLellan(20) commented on the “obvious 6. self-centering controls;
need” to redesign roof bolting machines, suggesting,
for example, that of 759 bolting machine related 7. hands-off drilling;
injuries, 72 involved operating the wrong control, 8. insertion/retrieval devices;
while Helander, Krohn & Curtin(3) determined that 5%
of bolting machine accidents were caused by control 9. standardized control layouts; and
activation errors. 10. pre-operational inspection.
Improvements to guarding to prevent accidental Other suggestions included in this report included:
control operation, standardization of mining equipment
• provide industry-wide accepted distinct and
controls, especially drilling and bolting controls, and consistent knob shapes and relative handle lengths
the use of shape and length coding has been suggested to identify corresponding control function.
on numerous occasions over the past 40 years. (3, 5, 21-27)
Hedling and Folley(21) noted (in the context of • standardize machine control lever movement and
continuous miner controls) that the widespread use of corresponding machine function movement.
traditional round control knobs regardless of function MSHA subsequently called for industry comment on
being controlled is another source of error in operation an advance notice of proposed rulemaking titled
and proposed that Each control knob is designed to Safety standards for the use of roof-bolting machines
resemble (at least symbolically) the equipment it in underground mines.(25) that suggested that MSHA
represents. was developing design criteria for underground bolting
machines. On February 12, 1998 the comment period
Similarly, Helander, Conway, and Elliott et al(23) was extended to March 9, 1998, however no related
suggested that poor human factors principles in the rule or design criteria were subsequently released. On
design and placement of controls and inappropriately June 10, 1999, MSHA released a program information
designed workstations contribute to a large percentage bulletin(26) that reported an investigation of a
of the reported injuries (p. 18). In particular, a lack of subsequent fatal accident as having revealed that a
standardization of controls was noted, with more than potential hazard exists on roof bolting machines with
25 different control sequences being identified, machine controls that are not protected against
differences existing even on similar machines produced inadvertent operation. This bulletin recommended
by same manufacturer. Helander, Conway & Elliott et al mines:
also noted the lack of control coding, violation of
direction stereotypes, a mixture mirror image and • relocate controls to a protected position;
left/right arrangements, and the possibility of
• guard controls;
inadvertent operation.
• redesign controls to prevent operation while the
Klishis, Althouse & Stobbe et al(5) in 1993 again noted operator is in a pinch point; and
a lack of standardization of bolting machine controls, • ensure proper storage of supplies and materials to
even among machines from the same manufacturer, prevent falling on controls.
and commented on the potential for injuries due to
incorrect control operation. In a six week period in Analysis of the injury narratives reported to MSHA
1994, three operators of roof-bolting machines in the in 2004 also revealed that the design shortcomings,
USA were killed. Two were crushed between the drill previously identified as increasing the likelihood of
head and machine frame while bolting; the third was inadvertent and incorrect operation of bolting controls,
crushed between the drill head and canopy. A Coal remain, at least to some extent. Bolting machine
Mine Safety and Health Roof-Bolting-Machine controls require guarding to prevent inadvertent
Committee was formed by MSHA to investigate, and operation (while still allowing access for intentional
a report released(24) which determined the causes to be operation). Improvements to bolting machine design
the unintentional operation of controls. The solutions are required to guard pinch points and provide
proposed in this report were: interlocks to reduce the probability and consequences
of intentional or unintentional control operation whilst
the operator or other person is in a hazardous location.

Bolting machine controls also require standardization simulation package called JACK to determine
to an appropriate layout (including shape and length appendage speeds that would not allow operators to
coding) to reduce the probability of operation of the get out of the way. These results are currently being
wrong control, although open questions remain validated and will provide recommendations for
regarding whether control layouts should be mirrored, maximum speeds for appendage movement.(33)
and the relative importance of shape, location and
length coding for the prevention of “wrong control”
type errors. For example, while Helander, Conway Cable Handling
& Elliott et al(23) noted that the mirror arrangement The injury narratives suggest that, in 2004, handling
question was controversial and drew on the results of cable accounted for 76 of the 283 continuous miner
Pigg(28) to conclude that a mirrored control layout was related injuries (27%), somewhat more than the 11%
preferable, a contrary recommendation was made by noted previously(7), but consistent with recent
Muldoon, Ruggieri, & Gore et al.(27) Control Australian data in which 23% of continuous miner
standardization must also consider carefully the related injuries were associated with handling
question of directional control response compatibility cable.(14) Technological changes over the last 10 years
principles to reduce the probability of operation of have resulted in longer cuts. It may be speculated that
controls in the wrong direction. Further research is increases in the length of cable being handled,
required to determine the most appropriate layout and combined with reduction in the number of miner
directional control-response relationships specific to workers and increases in the average age of miners,
bolting machines. Chan, Pethick & Collier et al(29) may in part account for the increased proportion of
suggested that conflicting recommendations and gaps cable handling injuries.
in the literature would need to be resolved before
any standardization of control-response relationships The severity of injuries associated with handling cable
for mining machines was possible. (see also Simpson varies from relatively minor shoulder strains to serious
& Chan (31)) back injuries. While the cumulative nature of most
musculoskeletal injuries implies that other manual
This statement remains true and is the reason for tasks are likely to also have contributed to these
further investigation to clarify the consequences of injuries, there is no doubt that handling continuous
standardization of controls, control orientation and miner cable represents a high risk of injury and is
control response expectations. NIOSH and the consistent with biomechanical analysis of the task.(30,31)
University of Queensland along with ACARP Engineering controls are required to eliminate or
(Australian Coal Association Research Program) and reduce manual cable handling. Integration of cable
in collaboration with roof bolter manufacturers plan and other services with continuous haulage has been
to conduct laboratory and field studies to address the suggested in the context of remote control.(32)
inadvertent or incorrect activation of bolter controls
issues. The studies will help to determine: There is a Monorail cable handling system used in
Australia for the higher seam conditions developed by
• consequences of mirror versus non-mirrored control Macquarie Manufacturing in Australia; it is a monorail
layouts on error and reaction time; system and has been installed in Centennial Coal’s
• relative importance of location coding, shape coding Newstan Mine in New South Wales. This monorail
and length coding; supply system encompasses all services-related
equipment from the face area out-by, to the incoming
• relative strengths of direction control-response
compatibility relationships in different planes; services cut-through. At the face, cables directly
interface with the continuous miner, with no
• consequences for new operators when using different detachment required during the tramming process,
designs and layouts; and making it no longer necessary to install or manage
• consequences for current operators of changing to cables. The main requirement to use this system is
a new design and/or layout. the installation of an easily-managed monorail beam
adjacent to the miner, with a series of traction drive
These studies will be conducted beginning in units located throughout the system, which provide
April 2007. an integrated means of cable management. Macquarie
Manufacturing stated that manual handling of
In response to the crushing and pinning injuries,
equipment has been reduced significantly when using
regardless of the root cause, NIOSH is currently
this monorail system. This system or a similar system
conducting studies regarding reaction time of operators
may be investigated to be used in the USA and adapted
when operating the vertical boom arm, the swing arm
for lower seam conditions. The system is capable of
and the tramming functions of the roof bolting
handling cable and could potentially be engineered to
machine. These studies have used roof bolter operator
move other supplies and materials. This system and
reaction times obtained from mock up laboratory
other systems are being investigated in both Australia
studies and then placed into a virtual human
and the USA.(2)

Summary 5) Robertson, S.B. & Hinshaw, G.E. (2002) Roof

screening: Best practices and Roof Bolting
In general, the 2004 data analysis showed many
Machines. In: Peng SS, Mark C, Khair AW,
equipment related issues of which the top priorities are
Heasley KA, eds. Proceedings of the 21st
either already being addressed and have preliminary
International Conference on Ground Control
results or are slated for research in the near future.
in Mining. Morgantown, WV: West Virginia
NIOSH is currently addressing issues associated with
University, pp. 189-194
small falls of rock through the screening studies and
the dual rail intervention; rough roads through the 6) Pappas, D.M., Barton, T.M. & Weiss, E.S. (2002)
whole body vibration studies; and the new shuttle car Developments in Sealant Support Systems
seat design, and collision with machinery through the for Ground Control. In: Peng SS, Mark C, Khair AW,
HASARD system research. Future studies include the Heasley KA, eds. Proceedings of the 21st
inadvertent and incorrect operation of bolting controls International Conference on Ground Control in
through a joint study with University of Queensland. Mining. Morgantown, WV: West Virginia
NIOSH will continue to study these and other issues University. pp. 344-353.
related to the safety and human factors of machine
design to reduce both acute and cumulative type 7) Mark, C. (2002). The introduction of roof-bolting
injuries. In addition, research to prevent these issues to U.S. underground coal mines (1948-1960): A
also points to the need for equipment manufacturers cautionary tale. 21st International Conference on
to design for a human interface — to consider the Ground Control in Mining. Morgantown, WV:
limitations and capabilities of workers when designing. West Virginia University, pp 150-160.
In this effort, NIOSH is planning to provide original
equipment manufacturers with the training and 8) Miller, W.K. & McLellan, R.R. (1973). Analysis
education to integrate human factors principles into of disabling injuries related to roof bolting in
their design and to their distributors. A new project is underground bituminous coal mines – 1973. US
planned for 2007 which aims to provide this training Dept of the Interior Informational report 1107.
for OEMs. It should enhance communication between
mining operations and OEMs regarding better 9) Hedling, W.G., & Folley, J.D., Jr (1972).
equipment design and educated ordering and Standardization of Continuous Miner Control
retrofitting decisions, and thus introduce human Configurations. USBM report OFR 25-72.
interface problem solving techniques.
10) Grayson, R.L., Layne, L.A., Althouse, R.C., & Klishis,
M.J. (1992). Risk indices for roof bolter injuries.
References Mining Engineering, 44(2) 164-166.
1) Sanders, M.S., & Shaw, B.E. (1989). Research to
determine the contribution of system factors in the 11) Mayton, A.G., Gallagher, S., & Merkel, R. (1997).
occurrence of underground injury accidents. USBM Ergonomic Seat With Viscoelastic Foam Reduces
OFR 26-89. Shock on Underground Mobile Equipment.
Advances in Occupational Ergonomics and Safety
2) Burgess-Limerick, R. (2005). Reducing injury risks II, IOS Press. pp. 177-180.
associated with underground coal mining
equipment. Ergonomics Australia, 19(2), 14-20. 12) Mayton, A.G., Merkel, R. & Gallagher, S. (1999).
Improved Seat Reduces Jarring/Jolting for
3) Klishis, M.J., Althouse, R.C., Stobbe, T.J., Plummer, Operators of Low-Coal Shuttle Cars. Mining Eng
R.W., Grayson, R.L., Layne, L.A., and Lies, G.M. 51(12), 52- 56
(1993). Coal Mine Injury Analysis: A Model for
Reduction Through Training. Volume VIII – 13) McPhee, B. (2001). Bad vibrations. A handbook on
Accident Risks During the Roof Bolting Cycle: whole body vibration exposure in mining. Sydney:
Analysis of Problems and Potential Solutions. NSW Joint Coal Board Health and Safety Trust.
USBM Cooperative agreements C0167023 &
C0178052. 14) Eger, T., Salmoni, A., & Whissell, R. (2004). Factors
influencing load-haul-dump operator line of sight
4) Robertson, S.B., Molinda, G.M., Dolinar, D.R., in underground mining. Applied Ergonomics, 35,
Pappas, D.M., & Hinshaw, G.E. (2003). Best 93-103.
practices and bolting machine innovations for roof
screening. 2003 SME Annual Meeting, Feb 24-26, 15) Tyson, J. (1997). To see or not to see … that is
Cincinnati, Ohio, preprint 03-158. Littleton, CO: the question! Designing to maximize operator
Society for Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration, visibility in LHD equipment. Ergonomics Australia
Inc. pp.1-8. On-Line
(www.uq.edu.au/eaol/oct97/tyson/tyson.html)

16) Gill, P. (2005). LHD operator cab and load 27) Chan, W.L., Pethick, A.J., Collier, S.G., Mason, S.,
monitoring innovations. XCN Health & Safety Graveling, R.A., Rushworth, A.M., & Simpson, G.C.
Forum, 11th November, Pokolbin, NSW. (1985). Ergonomic principles in the design of
underground development machines. Edinburgh:
17) Schiffbauer, W.H. (2001) An Active Proximity Institute of Occupational Medicine TM 85/11.
Warning System for Surface and Underground
Mining Applications. SME Annual Meeting 28) Gallagher, S., Marras, W.S., Davis, K.G., & Kovacs,
(Denver, CO; Feb 26- 28, 2001), Preprint K. (2002). Effects of posture on dynamic back
No. 01-117, SME, Inc., pp. 1-8. loading during a cable lifting task, Ergonomics,
45, 380-398.
18) Grant, D., Dayawansa, D., & Curcio, P. (2005).
Confronting a real underground safety issue — 29) Gallagher, S., Hamrick, C.A., Cornelius, K.M. &
Improving safety and comfort in underground Redfern, M.S. (2001) The Effects of Restricted
personnel transport. In Proceedings of the Workspace on Lumbar Spine Loading. Occupational
Queensland Mining Industry Health and Safety Ergonomics, 2, 201-213.
Conference, Townsville. pp. 149-158.
(www.qrc.org.au) 30) Kingsley, E.C., Mason, S., Pethick, A.J., Simpson,
G.C., Sims, M.T., & Leamon, T.B. (1980). An
19) Pendlebury, W. (2003). Shuttle car cab modification. investigation of underground haulage and transport
Queensland mining industry safety and health systems. Edinburgh: Institute of Occupational
innovation awards. Medicine TM/80/10.
20) Mason, S., Simpson, G.C., Chan, W.L., Graves, R.J., 31) Pethick, A.J. & Mason, S. (1985). Ergonomic
Mabey, M.H., Rhodes, R.C. & Leamon, T.B. (1980). principles in the design of underground free-
An investigation of face end equipment and the steered vehicles. Endinburgh: Institute of
resultant effects on work organization. Final report Occupational Medicince TM/85/5.
on CEC contract 6245-12/8/047. Edinburgh:
Institute of Occupational Medicine. TM/80/11. 32) Simpson, G.C., Rushworth, A.M., Von Glehn, F.H.,
& Lomas, R.H. (1996). Investigation of the causes
21) MSHA (1994) Coal Mine Safety and Health Roof- of transport and tramming accidents on mines
Bolting-Machine Committee. Report of Findings. other than coal, gold and platinum. Vol 1. SIMRAC
July 8, 1994. project report: OTH 202.
22) MSHA (1997). Safety Standards for the Use of 33) Ambrose, D.H., Bartels, J.R., Kwitowski, A.J.,
Roof-Bolting Machines in Underground Coal Helinski, R.F., Gallagher, S., McWilliams,
Mines. Advance notice of proposed rulemaking. L.J., and Battenhouse, T.R. (2005). Mining Roof
Federal Register: Dec 9, 1997 (Vol 62, number 236, Bolting Machine Safety: A Study of the Drill Boom
pp 64789-64790). Vertical Velocity. Information Circular 9477,
www.msha.gov/REGS/FEDREG/PROPOSED/1997PRO Department of Health and Human Services, CDC,
P/97-32203.HTM accessed 12/14/2005 NIOSH, PRL.
23) MSHA (1999) Potential hazard to roof bolting 34) Kotowski S, Gallagher S, Davis K, Baron K,
machine operators due to inadvertent control Compton C (2006). Musculoskeletal Stress on
actuation. Program information bulletin No. P99-10. Miners Performing Roof Screening Operations.
www.msha.gov/regs/complian/PIB/1999/PIB99- Proceedings of the 50th Annual Meeting of
10.htm accessed 2/16/2005 the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, San
Francisco CA (October 16-20, 2006), pp. 1370-1374.
24) Muldoon, T.L., Ruggieri, S., Gore, T., & McDonald,
L.B. (1980). Design and develop
standardized controls in roof bolting machines –
preliminary design. USBM OFR 107-80.
25) Gilbert, V.A. (1990). Research support for the

development of SAE guidelines for
underground operator compartments. USBM OFR
8-91.
26) Pigg, L.D. (1954). Orientation of controls in bilateral

transfer of learning. MA Thesis. Ohio State
University.

Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C

2) Ergonomics in the In my experience ergonomists also have other goals,

particularly in regard to assisting with design:
Design Process • find and apply data on human performance relevant
Justin O'Sullivan CPE to the design and demands;
Principal, Ergonomics for Work
• assist the designer/engineer by way of ergonomics
ergowork@bigpond.net.au specifications;
• assess risk quantitatively, comparing current and
Introduction intended designs;
Given the type and nature of injuries in underground • set clear solution goals and specifications which
mining, the key roles and necessary independence of can act as a design standard; and
operators and the very difficult environment,
• often provide a neutral or objective opinion utilizing
ergonomics plays a fundamental role in the design of ergonomics data.
underground mining equipment. It is clear that optimal
performance, minimal fatigue and minimisation of Examples of ergonomics data and their application
errors are crucial to a productive and safe process. are discussed below.
Ergonomics plays a key role in all of these areas by
ensuring that the dimensions, clearances, space, layout, Anthropometry
efforts, visibility and other factors, incorporated in the
equipment design, are matched to human capabilities Anthropometry is the science which deals with the size
and limitations. and shape of people within a population (Standards
Australia Handbook 59-1994). The application of
Engineers work hard to ensure that the equipment is anthropometry, in design, is to incorporate the relevant
designed for the purpose, is capable of withstanding human dimensions, aiming to accommodate at least
the stresses, and is productive and cost effective. 90% of potential users, taking account of both static
However, in many cases, the design is a slight and dynamic factors. Static factors are such things as
modification or progression of existing designs and height of a lumbar support on a seat backrest, the seat
without a significant focus on the human factor. In my pan depth, the doorway size for access. Dynamic
experience engineers often see the human as the weak factors relate to movements of the body, reach
link in a good design and an element which is difficult distances, movement patterns, viewing angles (where a
to control and can involve unpredictable outcomes. person has to move their head to view from one point
to another as part of the process).
Ergonomics data, about humans and their interactions
with tasks, can help take some of the mystery out of
the human factor and provide engineers with useful
specifications to be incorporated in the equipment
design. This presentation discusses the types of
contributions ergonomics can make to the design of
underground equipment, along with some examples.
Ergonomists and Ergonomics Data

According to the International Ergonomics Association
ergonomists contribute to the design and evaluation
of tasks, jobs, products, environments and systems in
order to make them compatible with the needs, abilities
and limitations of people. Ergonomists, in practice,
have to address real world problems and seek the best
compromise under difficult circumstances while aiming
to provide cost effective solutions, according to Photo 1: Roof Bolting
Stanton et al.

A critical example of anthropometry, in this case, is An example of a particularly non-ergonomics situation,

viewing and reaching angles in roof bolting. In this where there appears to be little account taken of
case a miner was suffering chronic neck pain (Photo 1). biomechanical stresses, is the changing of rollers on
Analysis of the work revealed typical neck extension gate road conveyors (Photo 3). Here the problems relate
in the order of 40-45° as well as maximum reaching to to limited space, unpredictable forces, tight deadlines,
insert the bolt and resin. The height of the floor of the awkward postures, poor visibility and inability to use
continuous miner was found to be such that most both hands comfortably in the circumstances.
people would need to adopt near to 40° neck extension
to view the bolt hole as well as significant reach in
order to reach forwards and upwards when inserting
bolts and resin. The solution involved determining the
appropriate floor heights, and forward reach distances
to the bolters, in order achieve a suitable degree of
neck extension based on typical frequency and
duration. The ergonomics data included eye movements
v neck movements, the part of the neck involved in the
neck extension, human dimensions for eye height and
reach capacity, likely forces applied, and other factors.
The result was a recommendation to raise the floor of
the miner 100-200mm and extend the floor forwards
200mm toward the bolters (Photo 2).
Photo 3: Changing rollers
A further example is shuttle car design where there

are common problems with seat heights, pedal reach
distances, viewing angles and other factors (Photo 4-6).
Shorter workers may be required to half stand up
whilst driving or lean outside the confines of the
vehicle to see. Even tall workers can have problems
with the viewing angles as well as problems fitting
their knees between the two opposing seats.
Photo 2: Refurbished Miner – raised and

extended floor to assist roof bolting
Biomechanical Stress Analysis

Biomechanical factors take in all factors related to
musculoskeletal stress, including postures, movements,
forces, durations and frequencies. There is relevance
to all aspects of underground mining even the walking
demands placed on Deputies.
Ergonomics data is available in relation to muscle

strength, joint range of motion, movement patterns,
endurance, repetition and speed; for example, a rapid
movement can be perhaps 30% weaker than a slow
movement. Photo 4: Shorter worker operating the
shuttle car

Figure 1: Shuttle car layout
Photo 5: Shorter worker leaning out to see ahead
Figure 2: Shuttle car steering wheel position
Photo 6: Taller worker operating a shuttle car

still with obstructed viewing angles and limited
knee room
The ergonomics advice given, included detailed

dimensional specifications, with an adjustment range
to accommodate 90% of operators and to allow for
appropriate viewing angles, good lumbar support (most
T backrests available do not have a good lumbar
support), raising of the floor to improve heights of the
seat, and repositioning the seat relative to the pedals Figure 3: Shuttle car seat profile
(Figures 1, 2, 3).

A new miner being constructed is being designed to

include a swivel seat, swivel through 180°, with toggle
controls on the armrests which would have a switching
mechanism built in so that tilting the toggle lever to
the left steers the machine left while tilting to the right
steers the machine to the right no matter which way
the operator is facing. An important ergonomic factor
here is the armrests must move up and down with the
suspension seat so that support of the forearms is
maintained in order to maintain control of the toggle
levers and prevent sudden and uncontrolled
movements during operation.
Slip and Fall Prevention

A significant area of ergonomics is the analysis and Photo 8: Refurbished CM access steps prior
control of slip/fall risks including slips and falls on a to fitting of slip-resistant nosing strips
level surface and the design of access ways and ladders
etc. An example is the access on a continuous miner
where the analysis found significant problems related Analysis of incident data among the development
to the step heights, lack of poor slip resistance, a crews found that 20% of incidents arose from
significant step across distance to the tail and lack of access/egress on and off the miner. A more detailed
slip resistance on the platform around the edge of the analysis by Burgess-Limerick has found an even
tail (Photo 7). greater percentage of the incidents are related to
access and egress. The ergonomics specifications for
a refurbished miner included altered dimensions on
the access steps, a lower bottom step height, and
application of slip-resistant nosing strips on the steps
and on the tail.
Control Room Ergonomics

In the control room situation there is a mixture of
office and visual ergonomics as well as cognitive and
computer-human interaction. The ergonomist has the
role of assessing and providing specifications for the
layout, the heights, the viewing angles and distances,
character heights and contrasts on the screen as well
as various other factors. An important issue, shown
by research, is the need to support the whole forearm
when using the mouse in order to greatly reduce
musculoskeletal efforts in the forearm, shoulder
and neck.
Photo 7: CM access/egress
In this example, at a hard rock mining situation
(Photo 9), the control room had been designed in a
rudimentary fashion resulting quite inappropriate
dimensions, poor postures, poor viewing angles and
other problems. Solution specifications included the
designing of a new three-person console, a new layout
for the existing room, a layout allowing easy viewing
to the outside to rest the eyes and full forearm support
(Figure 4, Photos 10, 11).

Figure 4: Drawing of new control console
Photo 11: Secondary controllers Position
Photo 9: Old Control Room
Photo 10: Main controllers Position

(prior to completion)

New Miner Project • roof bolting;

Ergonomics specifications were requested for a new • rib bolting;
ABM 25 Miner for BMA Crinum Mine with the aim • access/egress; and
of assisting the engineer, Alan Bruce, in determining
suitable dimensions, forces, layout factors and other • guarding and mechanical safety issues.
aspects of the design. Specifications were provided In regard to working height, the intended floor height
in regard to the following: was 993mm, with the floor to roof height being
2300mm. Analysis of various tasks, such as roof bolt
• floor height;
insertion, viewing angles for roof bolts, and monorail
• monorail storage and handling; installation indicated that most males would find the
• mesh handling; reach distance difficult and neck extension would be
excessive. Basic arthrometry data was extrapolated to
• cassette storage and handling; allow consideration of the effect of the roof height.
Some examples are shown in the figures below.
Vertical Reach Capacity for Vertical Height of Males with Vertical Reach Capacity
Gripping Standing on Tip-Toes Shoes and Helmet Worn for Gripping
5th percentile: 2055mm 5th percentile: 1720mm 5th percentile: 1980mm
Figs. 5–7: Examples of basic anthropometry data
Conclusions reached included the fact that the roof Viewing angles were also considered, allowing for
would be out of reach of 5th and 50th percentile males bolt holes to be 500mm forwards of the eyes and the
(if having to reach to the mesh itself in order to hook 2300mm height resulting in 39-53° upward viewing
on monorail brackets), the method for monorails angles for small to large males. In allowing for some
needed to extend reach by 250mm for small males. upward movement of the eyes themselves it was
The force applied would determine the actual reach considered that neck extension would be 38° or more
distance limitations. Practical guidelines given included for small males. The specification given was to limit
the capacity to reach forwards from the chest and to neck extension to 25° maximum for all workers.
reach forwards in front of the toes (allowing for the
front edge of the platform for roof bolting). The overall result was a recommendation to raise
the floor height by 200mm which was achieved by
In regard to roof bolting, the original design included installing the first adjustable floor on a continuous
a 550mm forward reach to the bolters which was taken miner.
into account in determining the reach capacity for
males at 550mm forwards of the shoulders. This Installation of monorail was examined to consider the
showed a reach capacity (vertically) of 1635mm for 5th force to slide one piece of monorail into another at a
percentile and 2052mm for 95th percentile (tall) males. maximum reach distance. The strength capacities were
The required reach was a nominal 2000mm, allowing provided for movements across overhead or in a fore —
for a need to reach to 300mm the roof for easy aft direction for this type of action, using one arm as
insertion for bolts and resin etc. well as considering the weight of the monorail sections
themselves.

Another key issue was the need to slide mesh from a

pack on top of the machine forwards and over above
the roof bolters. (Figure 8) On the original design it
was found that the height of the top of the pack would
be 1925mm which exceeded the reach capacity of
small males at 300mm forwards of the shoulders,
and was near to the reach capacity of average males.
Figure 8: Continuous Miner (ABM25) with pack of mesh on top
The forward reach distance was also found to be a In summary, some of the particularly helpful features
problem. The recommendation included raising the of the miner are as follows:
floor height 200mm and limiting any sliding force to
10kg. A further improvement was achieved by having • an adjustable floor height to accommodate a larger
the platform for the mesh designed to swivel toward range of users;
the right side of the machine in the most forward • handrails to minimise the risk off falling of the side;
position to allow the right side worker easier reach
to commence the sliding motion and slide the mesh • a stairway style access way with good dimensions
for easy access/egress and slip-resistant nosings;
across to the right side first with assistance then
provided by the worker on the left side. • a mesh tray which swivels around to the right for
easier reach, also assisted by the raised floor;
Access/egress issues were also considered where it was • rib mesh holders, just outside the guardrail;
recommended that the miner have a stairway style
configuration with a handrail and slip-resistant • a 450mm forward distance between the platform
nosings, ensuring that the rises were consistent and and roof bolters;
within a suitable range, based on AS1657, and the • push button miner bolter controls; and
bottom step height would be no more than 400mm
• improved space in and around the bolter console.
above ground level. The latter specification was
achieved by having the steps able to be folded up
for the flitting phase.
Photo 12. The new specifications

The Design Process and System • perform in depth task analysis and workflow;
In order to effectively apply ergonomic specifications • identify relevant human performance data, outlining
to the design of equipment underground or in any specific limitations and capacities;
situation, it is necessary to have good consultation • lay down design specifications based on human
with users and operators, a good working relationship performance and Ergonomics Criteria;
with engineering personnel and an effective process.
• determine the viability or feasibility of ensuring
Such a process can be simplified as below:
design meets specifications; if not
• determine Objectives/Purpose; • reallocate functions and revise design.
• determine all functions to be performed (by machine, Various parties have a role in the process which is
human software); illustrated in the ergonomics loop, including an
• identify functions to be allocated to humans; Ergonomics Task Force made up of operators and
hopefully engineering and safety personnel (ETF).
The Ergonomics Loop
Acknowledgments: Alan Bruce, Engineer, BMA Crinum and the design team at ABM/Sandvik.

3) Ergonomics in large In New South Wales the Mine Safety Division of the
Department of Primary Industries (DPI) has developed
Machinery Design a number of Mining Design Guidelines (MDGs) that
contain specific design guidance for underground
machinery and these are currently being updated (MDG
Barbara McPhee 1 1995). Purchasers are now asking for improved
Jim Knowles Group guidance because OHS legislation requires that they be
Kurri Kurri, NSW, Australia more accountable for the purchase and design of
equipment.
Abstract
The new Australian Standard on Safety of Machinery
Until recently in Australia it has been difficult to (AS AS4024.1 2006) has gone a long way in addressing
convince machinery manufacturers that ergonomics the deficiencies of previous Standards. It specifies such
was worthy of their attention and action. Ergonomics aspects as safety principles, design parameters and
evaluation of a range of machinery has been hampered ergonomics in line with the National Standard.
by a lack of accessible, useable design criteria. Formal However, it is too early to determine how influential
Standards, such as the new Australian Standard on it will be in reducing accidents, injuries and errors.
Safety of Machinery give design guidelines on safety,
design parameters and ergonomics but do not cover the Another issue is the manufacturers’ willingness and
full range of issues associated with useability and ability to comply with the Standard and the purchasers’
design of large mobile machines. Most other Standards ability to make informed choices with respect to the
are out-of-date or are inconsistent with current Standard.
practice in Australia. By necessity most occupational
health and safety regulations and standards for heavy
equipment define their design in terms of broad Current Design and Purchasing Criteria
principles to reduce risks to health and safety. Many large international machinery manufacturers
have developed sets of design criteria and these are
To assist designers, purchasers and users of heavy jealously guarded as commercially sensitive material.
machinery in the application of ergonomics principles The better their designs, the greater their market edge.
it may be worth developing useability standards such However, this does not provide guidance for purchasers
as those used for computer systems. These may be who are often left with a confusing array of conflicting
applied to generate more specific design and design features when trying to select a machine
performance specifications using the consultative suitable for their needs and budgets. The machine’s
risk assessment process. price; its capabilities in terms of power; running costs;
availability/costs of spares and replacement parts; and
Introduction its reliability are the most important features to most
purchasers.
The safe design and operation of industrial plant
has been the focus of Standards and Regulations in In some cases brand loyalty may be a factor. Rarely is
Australia for the past five to ten years. In that time a ergonomics included in the list of criteria. Even when
National Standard for Plant (1994, 1995a, 1995b) has ergonomics is considered important finding the general
been developed and is an integral part of Occupational criteria by which a machine should be selected is
Health and Safety (OHS) legislation throughout complex and confusing. Some information relevant
Australia. The National Standard provides for a process to the ergonomics design of machinery is contained
of health and safety risk management including the in a variety of large ergonomics textbooks, Standards,
process of identification, assessment and control of codes and guidance notes. However, the information
risks. However, it gives no material guidance with is incomplete and some specifications must be
respect to general design. interpolated from this range of sources. Other
information may be contradictory or in a form
For instance, the Standard specifies that design for that makes it difficult for engineers to interpret.
high-risk plant such as boilers, cranes, lifts, escalators
and moving walkways must comply with strict design While it is difficult to specify detailed design for each
criteria to prevent catastrophic injuries. However, it is piece of equipment there is a range of questions that
far less helpful on design for large mobile machinery could be asked and there are some generic guidelines
to reduce the risks of lesser injuries (especially sprains that could be applied.
and strains) and operator errors.

Operator performance as the basic Are there handrails and handholds where necessary?
for better machinery design Are doorways wide and high enough?
Useability standards 2. Does the equipment allow safe and efficient

For the last 15 to 20 years ergonomists have been operation?
determining design standards through useability trials.
A good case in point was the development of standards Can the operator see and hear?
for computer equipment (Lindgaard 1991, Stewart
Can s/he understand and act appropriately when
1991). The user performance standards that are derived
given information?
from these trials have lead to the design of more user-
friendly computer systems and have become a method Can s/he manipulate controls easily and without
for re-evaluating the design as needs and technologies confusion?
changes. They allow some flexibility in the
development of a product and take into account Cans/he work in reasonable comfort without
variables such as age, experience, education and unnecessary or excessive physical and/or mental
stereotypical behaviours in users. stress or fatigue?
Useability standards for large vehicles 3 Do the environmental conditions in the cab
allow for comfort, communication and adequate
To apply user performance standards to the design protection from noise, vibration, dust and other
of large pieces of equipment we need to understand risks to health?
something about the range of people who would be
operating the machine, where they will be working and Can the cab be kept at a reasonable temperature for
what they would be doing with it. If these questions sedentary work (20 –25o C) i.e. is adequate heating,
are not answered correctly the design is likely to fail. cooling or air conditioning provided where necessary?
In any user trial the following questions should be Can the operator communicate easily and without
asked: misunderstanding with people outside the cab?
What is the age range of the users/operators? Can doors and windows be closed and are seals
adequate to prevent the ingress of unwanted,
How big, how strong are they? distracting or dangerous noise, dust, fumes or other
environmental contaminants?
What are they expected to do with the machine?
i.e. what is the nature of the work? Is whole-body vibration reduced to an acceptable
level? Does it meet the Australian Standard for WBV
Where will they be working? i.e. type of industry,
(AS 2670-2001: Evaluation of human exposure to
country, climate
whole-body vibration – General requirements)?
(McPhee, Foster & Long 2001)
When do they do the work? i.e. time of day, seasons,
weather etc
4. Are operators aware of all features on the vehicle,
how to use them optimally and why it is important
What is their experience with similar machines?
that they do?
In addition to these questions about the operator and
5. Is there suitable competency training available
job requirements the designer needs to know about
for operators and maintenance personnel?
the operator/maintenance personnel interface with
the machine.
6. Is there easy access to machine parts or areas
requiring attention, and are there suitable tools
1. Is there safe and easy access to the machine
readily available in maintenance and servicing
by the operator?
of equipment?
Are steps, stairs ladders, walkways and access
7. Are the demands of maintenance tasks within the
platforms provided where necessary and are they safe
capabilities of all maintenance personnel?
to use under all foreseeable conditions? i.e. the risks
of slips, trips and falls are minimised
Maintenance does not require undue force, awkward
postures or dangerous practices.

If the answers to questions 1 to 7 are ‘yes’ then the or repaired. Recommendations on regular and timely
machine can be said to be well designed from an maintenance of the seat should be provided. Seat belts
ergonomics point of view. should be provided where required
However, rarely, if ever, is this, the case. Some Controls. These should be laid out and designed for
machines are designed for a particular task with little easy and safe operation. Their location, layout, spacing
input about its operator’s capabilities and limitations and grouping, shape, type, size, feel and feedback,
or for ease of maintenance. Some are designed for force and resistance, and direction of movement and
abilities quite different from those of the average travel should enhance the operators’ abilities to do
operator and for conditions that bear no relationship their job. There should be safeguards against accidental
to those that may be encountered. operation of controls. Where appropriate control force
and function need to comply with conventions, and
Maintenance personnel often have problems movements should be consistent with the natural
particularly with access to the machine itself and to movements of the arms or legs. Controls should be
specific parts. labelled or be identifiable in some other way.
Instruments and displays. The design of information

Developing generic useability standards for
displays and instruments should enhance the operator’s
large vehicles
capacity to determine the state of the machine
These generic questions may then be used in accurately, easily and when it is needed. The aim is
conjunction with consultative/participative risk to minimise errors, operator fatigue and wear and tear
assessments to generate a set of machine-specific on machinery. The location and layout of displayed
design guidelines (McPhee 2005). The generic areas information should allow easy reading and
requiring consideration should include: interpretation. Displays should be grouped and/or
located according to their function, the critical nature
Ingress/egress from the cabin. This includes the design of the information and the frequency of usage.
of steps, stairs walkways, handholds and doorways. Displays that are used infrequently may be out of the
direct line of sight but all information needs to be
Operator’s space. This must allow for freedom of large and clear enough to be seen under sub-optimal
movement and comfortable operating postures for the conditions. Do not provide unnecessary information
operator. Any manoeuvres necessary for the operation that may clutter the visual field and/or confuse. The
of the machine should be able to be performed safely purpose and location of all displays should be clear.
and without unnecessary fatigue or discomfort. There The design of warning lights should be consistent with
should be adequate headroom especially if occupants ergonomics guidelines and/or convention. They should
are wearing protective headgear. Controls should be be located directly in front of the operator and should
within a 1800 radius of the operator and within easy be clearly visible. Redundancy should be provided
reach. There should be good access to the seat and when further information on the status of the system
tripping hazards and obstructions should be eliminated is required.
or modified. Corners should be rounded, protrusions
padded and/or recessed where appropriate. Other warning signals. Auditory alarms may be
used to bring the operator’s attention to a problem
Seating. Unimpeded access in and out of the seat is immediately. They should not be used simply to
required. The operator must be able to sit at the right indicate the status of the system. Auditory alarms
height for comfort, visibility and operation of the should be able to be heard and identified either
controls. Height adjustment of the seat may be through pitch or frequency or both. Extremely loud
necessary so operators can reach controls and see signals are not acceptable. They may startle listeners,
displays comfortably and easily. The seat should be may distract them in an emergency or a critical task
able to accommodate about 97% of all operators and it and may cause temporary deafness.
should be designed for the job and conditions, as well
as the type of machine being operated. The longer an The cab environment. Noise generated by the vehicle
operator is required to sit without a break the more should not expose the driver or passengers to levels
closely the seat should meet sound ergonomics that exceed 85dB(A) for an eight-hour equivalent.
specifications. Adjustments should be easy to achieve Noise generated by the vehicle shall not expose the
from the seated position and recommendations for driver to peak levels that exceed relevant Standards.
adjustment should be provided, preferably attached Whole-body vibration levels transmitted to the
to seat. The seat should be robust and not have operator should not exceed relevant Standards. Cabin
components that are easily broken, torn or damaged. temperature should be in the range of 20 to 25oC.
Seat and backrest covers should be easily changed Controls for air conditioning should be located with

primary or secondary controls. The function of each Conclusions

control should be identified in some way and should be While the new Safety of Machinery Standard covers a
easy and simple to use. Displays of information on the range of safety, design and ergonomics issues there is
status of the air conditioning unit should be clear and still a lack of detailed, useable ergonomics guidelines
unambiguous requiring minimum instruction to for designers, purchasers and operators of mobile
understand. Noise from air conditioning units should heavy machinery in mining in Australia.
be minimal. Airflow should be adjustable and able to
be directed away from the operator. Outlets should be User performance standards, in conjunction with the
spread around the cab to ensure an even temperature consultative risk assessment process, may be valuable
in all areas. Temperature of the air flowing into the in generating these useable ergonomics machine-
cabin should be able to be controlled by the operator. specific design specifications.
Visibility inside and from the cab. Specular reflections
should be reduced by ensuring that all surfaces are References
matt and non-reflective. Blind spots should be reduced Australian Standard AS 2670-2001: Evaluation of
to a minimum and brought to the attention of the human exposure to whole-body vibration – General
operator and others in the area. Line of sight should requirements
not be blocked in any critical function by controls,
displays or other parts of the cab. Mirrors must be Australian Standard AS4024.1- 2006: Safety of
large enough and correctly positioned to enable the machinery.
operator to see behind and to the sides of the vehicle.
Distortions created by curved mirrors should be Lindgaard G. (1991). Adapting your tools to fit the task.
brought to the attention of the operator. Extremities of The HCI business case. Proceedings of the Annual
the vehicle should be visible at all times from the cab. Conference of the Ergonomics Society of Australia
Mirrors and other methods may be used to enhance (Popovic V and Walker M eds). Coolum, pp21-30.
visibility for difficult areas.
McPhee B, Foster G and Long A. (2001). Bad
Accessibility of fluid level gauges/sight glasses for Vibrations. A Handbook of Whole-body Vibration
operators. Ease of viewing enables regular checks to be Exposure in Mining. Coal Services (formerly Joint Coal
made without difficulty or error. Each glass or gauge Board) Health and Safety Trust, Sydney.
should be easily visible by the operator from the
ground or in the cab. Misinterpretation of information McPhee B. (2005), Practical Ergonomics: Application
should be minimised by the design of the sight of ergonomics principles in the workplace. Coal
glass/gauge. Cleaning the sight glass or gauge should Services Health and Safety Trust, Sydney.
be easy.
Stewart T. (1991). Who sets the video in your house?
Accessibility for servicing by operators. Access to filling or Why do older have problems with machines?
and grease lubrication points, batteries and the toolbox Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the
should be from the ground. The toolbox should be Ergonomics Society of Australia (Popovic
lockable.
Barbara McPhee V and Walker M eds). Coolum, pp11-
Accessibility to regularly replaced or serviced 20.
components for maintenance personnel. Access to
components for regular repair and maintenance should NSW Department of Primary Industries (1995). MDG 1
require minimal equipment and effort. Free-steered vehicles.
Training. Programs are needed to raise awareness of Worksafe Australia (1994). National Standard for Plant.
safety and health issues in design; and to communicate Canberra.
the why as well as the what of good design.
Worksafe Australia (1995). Plant Design. Making It
Safe. Canberra.
Worksafe Australia (1995). Plant in the Workplace.

Making It Safe Canberra.

Book Review
The Role of Mathematics Further biomechanics is presented in Chapters 9 and
11. The former examines the transmission of forces
on Human Structure through the bony pelvis. The latter considers weight
distribution through the femur.
Swapan Kumar Adhikari
Chapter 10 discusses the trabecular geometry of the
Dipali Publication, West Bengal, India, 2003, 156 proximal femur in relation to weight distribution.
pages, paperback, ISBN 8190164309. There is an error in line 27 on page 104 — “osteoblasts”
should read “osteocytes”.
Many Australian undergraduates studying Functional
Anatomy in the 1970s were mesmerised by Dr. I.A. Chapter 12 examines the geometry of the femoral head
Kapandji’s three-volume work: The Physiology of the and the acetabulum. The role of the ligaments of the
Joints. The interrelationship between form, function hip joint is considered in Chapter 13. In an
and mathematics was so elegantly demonstrated in its examination of articular cartilage (pages 146 to 149),
text and illustrations that young minds grasped it with it is surprising to this reviewer that the author did not
eagerness and acclamation. mention the difference in arrangement of collagen
fibres in the lamina splendens and the transitional zone
More than three decades later, Professor Adhikari’s of the cartilage, given its importance in load-bearing.
book explores the same significant nexus with
enthusiasm and awe, and often cites Kapandji’s work. It is disappointing that the prose was often difficult
It was reassuring to this reviewer that the Preface to interpret. Unless readers are already acolytes of
contained Leonardo da Vinci’s famous statement: An the interrelationship between form, function and
investigation cannot be strictly called scientific unless Mathematics, they will remain unmoved by the
it admits mathematical deductions. author’s enthusiasm.
This book contains 14 Chapters (including a Preface The fonts utilised are not always effective and would
and an Index), each of which considers a specific topic. have benefited from editorial intervention. The
Chapter 2 examines some of da Vinci’s contributions to abundant artwork throughout this book is rendered in
anatomical knowledge. Given that this legacy has been black line or halftone. The majority of the illustrations
the subject of several touring art exhibitions (Australia are from other sources. Unfortunately, many of these
and Britain) in recent years, it is disappointing that this have not reproduced well, particularly those which
chapter consists almost entirely of quotations from da were colour originals, radiographic images or clinical
Vinci himself and his contemporaries. Chapter 3 covers photographs.
the contributions of René Descartes to Anatomy and
Physiology in a similar manner. Overall, this volume offers detailed content to a
select audience with a strong background in both
In Chapter 4, the author presents a mathematical Mathematics and Anatomy.
explanation of Descartes’ views on the embryological
development of the pineal gland. Chapter 5 covers the
mathematics of the cardiac cycle. Ann Murphy PhD
Anatomist
In Chapter 6, the biomechanics of the cervical vertebral Discipline of Biomedical Science
column is considered, as are injuries to the region. Faculty of Medicine
This chapter concludes with a useful tabulation of The University of Sydney
recommended traction weights for injuries at each
level of the cervical column. Correspondence to: Dr. Ann Murphy, Discipline
of Biomedical Sciences, Cumberland Campus,
Mathematical analysis of movements of the shoulder The University of Sydney, PO Box 170, Lidcombe,
joint is undertaken in Chapter 7. One of the issues NSW 1825
discussed is the optimal position for arthrodesis of the Email: A.Murphy@usyd.edu.au
joint, with the author defining different positions for
males and females.
Chapter 8 considers the biomechanics of the vertebral

column as a whole. There is an error in the label of
Figure 7.14 on page 91 - “Circulation” should read
“Circumduction”. There is a similar error in line 16
on page 92.

Noticeboard
Obituary (Brian Shackel 1927-2007) Department of Human Sciences and, in a 10 year
tenure, oversaw its growth to include major
Roger Hall writes: undergraduate programmes in Ergonomics, Human
Biology and Psychology in addition to the well
I was advised of the death of Brian Shackel on 9 May established MSc in Ergonomics. During this time Brian
by his daughter Francesca. Brian was an also became the Dean of the School of Human and
internationally, highly esteemed and influential Environmental Studies.
ergonomist and hci academic and professional. I had
the privilege of being his friend and colleague for 30 Brian was a true English gentleman with a mission to
years, having first met in the late 70s and worked establish solid foundations for ergonomics and human-
together on the International Ergonomics Association computer interaction so they could be successful and
Council in 80s, and later when I was on two lasting disciplines. He possessed enormous energy,
sabbaticals in the Department of Human Sciences at great tenacity and a capacity for attention to detail and
Loughborough University. these enabled him to help create many of the
institutional forms for these disciplines that are so
Brian was well ahead of his time - he was doing paper important to us as professionals today. In addition to
prototyping (of display & control panels) as early as developing HUSAT and the Department of Human
1959. His ergonomics research on problems users had Sciences at Loughborough and the EMIE Ergonomics
with computer systems, mostly mainframes, covered Laboratory, he helped launch Applied Ergonomics and
design, implementation and usability aspects. The was its first editor.
substance of his operational definitions of usability and
user-centred design can be seen in International He was the Chairman of the Council of the Ergonomics
Standards like ISO Standard 9241 - Ergonomics Society, Treasurer of the International Ergonomics
Requirements for Office Work with VDTs. Association and instrumental in the early development
of ergonomic standards.
Brian was a gentleman and mentor to me both in the
ways of international diplomacy (on the IEA Council) In the development of human-computer interaction he
and human-computer interaction research. However created IFIP (the International Federation of
the many other outstanding things about Brian are best Information Processing) Technical Committee 13 in
said by his friend and colleague Ken Eason from Human-Computer Interaction and he chaired the
Loughborough University. committee for many years. Under the auspices of IFIP,
in 1984, he launched the INTERACT series of
Ken writes on The Ergonomics Society website: international conferences on human-computer
interaction, and this conference, a major, international
Brian Shackel, who died on May 9th at the age of 80, feature of the human-computer interaction calendar,
was one of the most important figures in the shaping now offers the Brian Shackel Award for the best paper
of ergonomics and human-computer interaction in the in the conference.
second half of the twentieth century. Born in 1927, he
was educated in classics and, after service in the Navy Brian‚s vision and energy has left a legacy that will
and the completion of a MA, degree he joined the MRC last for many years and an indelible mark on the
Applied Psychology Unit in Cambridge. careers of the many of us he helped along the way. We
send our deepest sympathy to his wife Penni and to
In 1954 he started the Ergonomics Laboratory at EMI their three children Nick, Julian and Francesca.
Electronics, a laboratory that still exists today as part
of Quintec which celebrated the 50th anniversary of its
founding in 2004. In 1970 Brian moved to Ken Eason
Loughborough University as Professor of Applied 11 May 2007
Ergonomics and set up the HUSAT (Human Sciences
and Advanced Technology) Research Institute which for
over three decades, was at the centre of the
development of human-computer interaction.
In the process Brian became a father figure in the

emergence of usability and user-centred design and,
amongst many pioneering ventures, led BLEND one of
the first major projects to evaluate the promise of
electronic journals. Within a few years of arriving in
Loughborough he was Head of what is now the

Conference Calendar
2007 Contact:
Conference Secretariat
23–24 August 2007 — International conference on Damai Sciences Sdn Bhd
slips, trips, and falls 2007: from research to practice at Email: contact@aedec2007.org
Liberty Mutual Research Institute for Safety, Tel: +603 2282 9005
Hopkinton, MA, USA. sponsored by: International Fax:+603 2282 9004
Ergonomics Association, The Ergonomics Society, U.K.,
and Liberty Mutual Research Institute for Safety, USA.
Detailed conference information will be posted at
http://www.slipstripsfalls.org.
Contact: Dr. Chien-Chi (Max) Chang, Communication,
2008
IEA Technical Committee on Slips, Trips and Falls, 19–21 March 2008 — Organizational Design and
E-mail: chien-chi.chang@libertymutual.com. Management Symposium
Tel: 1-508-497-0260 IEA Technical Committee on Organisational Design and
Fax: 1-508-435-8136 Management (ODAM)
Guarujá, São Paulo, Brazil (a top spot by the beach!)
27–30 August 2007 — Sixth International Scientific The website for the symposium is:
Conference on Prevention of Work-Related http://www.pro.poli.usp.br/pro/odam2008/
Musculoskeletal Disorders (PREMUS 2007) Contact: Patricia Monteiro
Boston, USA Depto. de Engenharia de Produção - POLI/USP
Pre-Conference Workshops: 26 August 2007 Tel: (11) 3091-5363 - Ramal 434
PREMUS 2007 is the first time the conference will be Fax: (11) 3091-5399
held in the United States. Horário: 08h00 às 14h00
For more information about this program, visit: Email: patricia.monteiro@vanzolini.org.br
www.premus2007.org or
Email: premus@premus2007.org. 14–17 July 2008 —2nd International Conference on
Applied Ergonomics (AE International 2008)
17–19 October, 2007 — Eighth Pan-Pacific Conference Jointly with 12th International Conference on Human
on Occupational Ergonomics (PPCOE 2007) Aspects of Advanced Manufacturing (HAAMAHA)
Sofitel Central Plaza Hotel, Bangkok, Thailand Caesars Palace • Las Vegas, Nevada USA
Hosted by the Ergonomics Society of Thailand (EST) Under the auspices of 7 distinguished international
For more information on PPCOE 2007 and the abstract boards of 167 members from 29 countries
submission, please visit the conference web site: Conference Chair: Gavriel Salvendy
http://www.est.or.th/ppcoe2007. Abstracts can be salvendy@purdue.edu
submitted to the Conference Secretariat at Program Chair: Waldemar Karwowski
ppcoe2007@est.or.th. karwowski@louisville.edu
Conference Administrator: Laura Abell
11–14 November 2007 — International Graphonomics laurajere@peoplepc.com
Society Fax: + 1 502 852 7397
Communication & Exhibition Chair : Abbas Moallem
13th biennial conference, Melbourne, Australia Abbas.Moallem@sjsu.edu
Contact: Dr Jim Phillips URL: www.AEI2008.org
Conference Co-Chair & Organizer IGS 2007
Email: jim.phillips@med.monash.edu.au
http://www.graphonomics.org/igs2007/)
26–28 November 2007— 43rd Annual Conference of

the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society of
Australia
A Healthy Society: Safe, Satisfied and Productive
Perth, Western Australia
Please register your interest with the secretariat at
enquiries@keynotewa.com
Jenni Miller and Ian Gibson
Co-chairs
26-29 November 2007 - AEDeC 2007

International Conference on Agriculture Ergonomics in
Developing Countries

Information Information
for Contributors for Advertisers
Articles published in Ergonomics Australia are subject Inquiries
to peer review.
All advertising inquiries should be directed to the
National Secretariat of the Society.
Editor
Dr Shirleyann M Gibbs Contact
Gibbs + Associates Pty Ltd
The Human Factors and Ergonomics Society of
25 Melaleuca Drive St Ives NSW 2075 Australia
Australia Inc
Tel: +612 9983 9855 Fax: +612 9402 5295
E-mail: shanng@optushome.com.au
Tel: +612 9680 9026 Fax: +612 9680 9027
The intended deadline for issues in 2007: Email: secretariat@ ergonomics.org.au
March edition February 1 Size

June edition May 1
September edition August 1 The finished page size of the Newsletter is A4
December edition November 1 (210mm x 297mm)
Printed column sizes are 165mm x 225mm (double)

Contributions or 80mm x 225mm (single)
Any inquiries about contributions should be directed
in the first instance to the Editor. Advertising Copy
Must be camera ready and must arrive at the HFESA
Federal Office by the Copy Deadline Submission Date
for the Edition in question.
A professional advertising service is available for

producing camera ready copy if required. For further
inquiries regarding this service contact:
Mr Goro Jankulovski, Acute Concepts Pty Ltd

Tel: 03 9381 9696
Mobile: 0414 605 414
E-mail: goro@acuteconcepts.com.au
Rates for Advertising

These rates are inclusive of GST
Full page 1/2 page 1/4 page 1/8 page

Single issue $ 330.00 165.00 82.50 41.80
2 issues $ 297.00 148.50 74.80 37.40
3 issues $ 264.00 132.00 66.00 33.00
4 or more $ 231.00 115.50 58.30 29.70
Enclosures
Pre-printed enclosures (leaflets, brochures) etc are
welcome for inclusion with the Journal.
Enclosures should be pre-folded to fit inside the

finished Journal.
Rates for enclosures

Enclosure not requiring folding $ 412.50
Enclosure requiring folding $ 462.00

These rates may increase if the enclosure weighs more Circulation

than the equivalent of 2 standard weight A4 pages.
The Journal is published four times a year and is
These rates are inclusive of GST
received by approximately 620 professional’s Australia
640 copies should be sent to arrive at the ESA Federal wide working in the areas of ergonomics, occupational
Office by the Copy Deadline Submission Date for the health and safety, and design.
Edition in question.
Ergonomics Australia On-Line (EAOL)
Address for mailing Advertising copy Advertising and sponsorship opportunities also exist in
and/or enclosures the electronic version of this journal (EAOL) which is
managed by Dr Robin Burgess-Limerick at Department
National Secretariat of Human Movement at Queensland University. It is
The Human Factors and Ergonomics Society downloaded by more than 100 Australian and
of Australia Inc. International readers each week.
To view EAOL: http://www.uq.edu.au or enter
Advertising copy and enclosure submission deadlines via the HFESA website.
for 2007 are the same as for Contributions — 1st of
month prior to publication
Caveats
Edition Submission Deadline The views expressed in the Journal are those of the
individual authors and contributors and are not
March February 1
necessarily those of the Society.
June May 1
September August 1 The HFESA Inc reserves the right to refuse any
December November 1 advertising inconsistent with the Aims and Objectives
of the Society and Journal Editorial Policy.
The appearance of an advertisement in the Journal

does not imply endorsement by the Society of the
product and or service advertised.
The Society takes no responsibility for products or

services advertised therein.
Editor
Shirleyann M Gibbs PhD
E-mail: shanng@optushome.com.au

Notes


Ergonomic Australian

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ergonomic Australian

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ERGONOMICS AUSTRALIA

The Official Journal of the HFESA

Volume 21, Number 2 (July 2007),

HFESA Website: http://ergonomics.org.au

Design and Layout

2 HFESA Journal, Ergonomics Australia Vol 21, Number 2, July 2007

effort. How many people source the national and

HFESA Journal, Ergonomics Australia Vol 21, Number 2, July 2007 3

The three papers which comprise this special issue of

4 HFESA Journal, Ergonomics Australia Vol 21, Number 2, July 2007

HFESA Journal, Ergonomics Australia Vol 21, Number 2, July 2007 5

vehicle suspension, and improved seating have

Fig 1. Dual Rail Intervention for Screening

Results showed that less muscle activity was required

This intervention is undergoing small improvements

6 HFESA Journal, Ergonomics Australia Vol 21, Number 2, July 2007

NIOSH PRL has conducted studies of proximity

HFESA Journal, Ergonomics Australia Vol 21, Number 2, July 2007 7

Inadvertent or incorrect operation 1. two-handed fast feed;

8 HFESA Journal, Ergonomics Australia Vol 21, Number 2, July 2007

HFESA Journal, Ergonomics Australia Vol 21, Number 2, July 2007 9

Summary 5) Robertson, S.B. & Hinshaw, G.E. (2002) Roof

10 HFESA Journal, Ergonomics Australia Vol 21, Number 2, July 2007

25) Gilbert, V.A. (1990). Research support for the

26) Pigg, L.D. (1954). Orientation of controls in bilateral

HFESA Journal, Ergonomics Australia Vol 21, Number 2, July 2007 11

12 HFESA Journal, Ergonomics Australia Vol 21, Number 2, July 2007

2) Ergonomics in the In my experience ergonomists also have other goals,

Ergonomists and Ergonomics Data

HFESA Journal, Ergonomics Australia Vol 21, Number 2, July 2007 13

A critical example of anthropometry, in this case, is An example of a particularly non-ergonomics situation,

Photo 3: Changing rollers

A further example is shuttle car design where there

Photo 2: Refurbished Miner – raised and

Biomechanical Stress Analysis

Ergonomics data is available in relation to muscle

14 HFESA Journal, Ergonomics Australia Vol 21, Number 2, July 2007

Figure 1: Shuttle car layout

Photo 5: Shorter worker leaning out to see ahead

Figure 2: Shuttle car steering wheel position

Photo 6: Taller worker operating a shuttle car

The ergonomics advice given, included detailed

HFESA Journal, Ergonomics Australia Vol 21, Number 2, July 2007 15

A new miner being constructed is being designed to

Slip and Fall Prevention

Control Room Ergonomics

16 HFESA Journal, Ergonomics Australia Vol 21, Number 2, July 2007

Figure 4: Drawing of new control console

Photo 11: Secondary controllers Position

Photo 9: Old Control Room

Photo 10: Main controllers Position

HFESA Journal, Ergonomics Australia Vol 21, Number 2, July 2007 17

New Miner Project • roof bolting;

Figs. 5–7: Examples of basic anthropometry data

18 HFESA Journal, Ergonomics Australia Vol 21, Number 2, July 2007

Another key issue was the need to slide mesh from a

Figure 8: Continuous Miner (ABM25) with pack of mesh on top

Photo 12. The new specifications

HFESA Journal, Ergonomics Australia Vol 21, Number 2, July 2007 19

The Ergonomics Loop

20 HFESA Journal, Ergonomics Australia Vol 21, Number 2, July 2007

22 HFESA Journal, Ergonomics Australia Vol 21, Number 2, July 2007

Useability standards 2. Does the equipment allow safe and efficient