Dixit - 2006 - ERGONOMIC STUDIES ON AGRICULTURAL WORKERS PERFORMING SELECTED FARM OPERATIONS IN COTTON CROPS PDF

ERGONOMIC STUDIES ON AGRICULTURAL WORKERS
PERFORMING SELECTED FARM OPERATIONS

IN COTTON CROP
Dissertation )
Submitted to the Punjab Agricultural University

in partial fulfilment of the requirements
for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
in
FARM POWER AND MACHINERY
(Minor Subject: Computer Science and Engineering)
By
Anoop Kumar Dixit

(L-2002-AE-78-D)
Department of Farm Power and Machinery

College of Agricultural Engineering
PUNJAB AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY
LUDHIANA-141 004
2006
to
CERTIFICATE I
This is to certify that the dissertation entitled, "Ergonomic studies on
agricultural workers performing selected farm operations in cotton crop"
submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, in the subject of Farm Power and
Machinery (Minor subject: Computer Science and Engineering) of the Punjab
Agricultural University, Ludhiana, is a bonafide research work carried out by Anoop
Kumar Dixit (L-2002-AE-78-D) under my supervision and no part of this
dissertation has been submitted for any other degree.
The assistance and help received during the course of investigation have been
fully acknowledged.
(Dr. Surendra Smgh)

Major Advisor
Senior Research Engineer
Dept. of Farm Power and Machinery
Punjab Agricultural University
Ludhiana-141004
CERTIFICATE II
This is to certify that the dissertation entitled, "Ergonomic studies on
agricultural workers performing selected farm operations in cotton crop"
submitted by Anoop Kumar Dixit (L-2002-AE-78-D) to the Punjab Agricuhural
University, Ludhiana in partial fulfillment of the requirement: for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy, in the subject of Farm Power and Machinery (Minor
subject: Computer Science and Engineering) has been approved by the Student's
Advisory Committee after an oral examination of the same^ - ^ cjsM^^ôyixhiP^ v^'wh
^11 'I
d^'
(Dr. Surendra Singh) External Examiner

Major Advisor
Dr. N P S Sirohi
In-charge Indo-Israel Project,
Pusa, lARI Campus
New Delhi-110012
(Dr. S S Ahuja)
Head of the Department
U /^/VM
(Dr. Darshan Singh)
Dean, Post-graduate Studies
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
/ express my deep sense of gratitude and indebtedness to Dn Surendra
Singh, my advisor for his valuable and dedicated guidance, keen interest,
incessant help, invaluable suggestions and l<ind encouragement throughout the
course of this study. I shall always remain indebt to him for giving me insight into
the subject
I am sincerely grateful to Prof Santokh Singh, Professor (Dean PGS
Nominee) for his invaluable help and constructive suggestions, I am extremely
grateful to Dr I S Dhaliwal, and a member of my advisory committee for his
sincere advice in the course of this investigation. I am thankful to Dn R K Jindal,
Inchrge Computer Centre and Dn Dinesh Grover, Professor cum fêad,
Department of Computer Science and Engineering for their critical suggestions
throughout the study period. I shall remain indebted to Dr S S Ahuja, IHead of
Department for his help during study. I am grateful to Dn L N. ShukIa Ex,
Coordinator of Research (Engg.) and Dn M.P Kaushal, Head, Deptt. of SWE for
valuable suggestions and constant encouragements throughout the research
work.
I cannot forget to render my heartfelt thanks to Dn Rohinish Khurana, En
J P Sinha, Dn Sashi K.Singh, Dn Jaskarn Singh, Dn CJS. Pannu, Dn Gursahib
Singh, En Jugraj Singh, En H S Dingra, En R A Gupta, and my other friends who
kept lifting my spirits through their exhilarating enthusiasm, active help and
indelible encouragement all through the work. I am thankful to Abhaya Dixit, my
wife for helping me in biomechanical study and developing the equations for
different linkages of human body while working in the field.
Sincere thanks are extended to Sh Avtar Singh, ASI, Jaswinder Singh,
' Kesher Singh, Balbir Singh, Sandeep, Suraj Lai, Baldev Singh and Thakur Singh
for their involvement and help in execution of the experimental work.
No words can express my sense of gratitude to my family members
especially to my mother, father, and mother-in-law, brother, sisters and my son
Akshaj whose love and affection has always stood by me and provided constant
encouragement during the course of my investigation.
I wish to extent my gratitude for all those persons, my memory had failed
to recall to rendered their support and services in various capacities throughout
the tenure Of his studies.
(Anoop Kumar Dixit)
Title of the Dissertation : Ergonomic Studies on Agricultural Workers Performing
Selected Farm Operations in Cotton Crop.
Name of the student : Anoop Kumar Dixit
Admission No. : L-2002-AE-78-D
Major Subject : Farm Power and Machinery
Minor Subject : Computer Science and Engineering

Name and Designation of : Dr Surendra Singh, Senior Research Engineer
Major Advisor Dept. of Farm Power and Machinery
Degree to be Awarded : Ph. D.
Year of Award of Degree : 2006
Total pages in Dissertation : 176 + xvi
Name of University : Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana-141004
ABSTRACT
The ergonomic studies were carried out on agricultural workers performing selected farm operations
such as weeding by power weeder, spraying by manual and power knapsack sprayer and picking of
cotton bolls in standing and bending postures in cotton crop. Ergonomic evaluation of
machines/activities with respect to physiological parameters like heart-rate, body discomfort, postural
configuration and vibrations had been carried out. Mathematical equations were developed for all five
machines/operations under static conditions. These equations were developed to determine the
muscular forces acting on body segments of the workers while working on these machines/operations.
The web page based programme using FORTRAN 77 language was designed and was executed in
DOS mode. The independent parameters selected were three subjects of different age groups, 3
forward speeds (1.0, 1.5 and 2.0 km/h) and 2 time durations (40 and 50 min) for power weeder,
number of strokes/min (11, 16 and 21) for manual knapsack sprayer and 3 engine rpm (4000, 5000
and 6000) for power knapsack sprayer and 3 time durations each (40, 50 and 60 min) in standing and
(30,40 and 50 min) bending postures. The heart rate varied between 93 and 125 bpm and energy
expenditure between 12.76 and 26.91 kJ/min for all forward speeds and time durations in weeding
operation. Over all discomfort rating (ODR) varied from 2.70 to 6.50, vertical vibration from 0.90 to
2.55 m/s^ and postural configuration from 3.8 to 11 degrees. The heart rate varied from 96 to 111
bpm, ODR between 2.83 - 4.50 and postural configuration between 4.33 and 11 degree while
operating knapsack sprayers. For cotton bolls picking in standing and bending postures the heart rate
varied from 90-111 bpm, ODR from 1.67-6.67 and net bending angle between -2.00 and 5.67 degrees.
Mathematical equations developed were validated only for manually operated knapsack sprayer and
resuhs were same as reported by the subjects. It can be concluded from the experiments that power
weeder should be operated at forward speed of 1.5 km/h for 40 min time duration, manual knapsack
sprayer should be operated at 16 strokes/min with 24 lit of spray and power knapsack sprayer at
5000 rpm. Cotton bolls should be picked for 40-50 min, in both bending and standing posture.
Key Words ; Biomechanical analysis, body posture, cotton picking, ergonomics, postural
configuration, power weeder, sprayer, vibration & noise.
(Signature of Major Advisor) ' ^ ^ (Signature of the Student)

CONTENTS
Chapter Topic Page

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii
List of Tables x
List of Figures xiii
List of Abbreviations xvi
I INTRODUCTION 1-5
II REVIEW OF LITERATURE 6-30
2.1 Selection of Subjects 6
2.LI Age of Subject 6
2.1.2 WeightofBody 7
2.2 Physiological Responses 8
2.2.1 Heart Rate 8
2.2.2 Oxygen Consumption (VO2) and Pulmonary Ventilation 11
Rate (PVR)
2.2.3 Effect of Environment on Physiological Response 13
2.2.4 Energy Cost of Physical Activities 14
2.3 Body Working Posture and Subjective Rating Scale 15
2.3.1 Working Posture 15
2.3.2 Overall Discomfort Rating (ODR) 16
2.3.3 Body Part-Discomfort Score (BPDS) 17
2.4 Effect of Vibration on Human Performance 19
2.5 Effect of Noise on Human Performance 24
2.6 Bio Mechanical Analysis 26
2.7 Salient Findings from the Review 30
III THEORETICAL CONSIDERATIONS 31-76
3.1 Development of Mathematical Equations for Forces Acting 31
on Body Segments
3.1.1 Forces Acting on Subject during Weeding Operation 32
3.1.1.1 Forces Acting on Forearm (1^^ link) during Weeding 33
Operation
3.1.1.2 Forces Acting on Upper Arm (2"^link) during Weeding 35
Operation
3.1.1.3 Forces Acting on Trunk & Head (3*^^ link) during Weeding 36
Operation
3.1.1.4 Forces Acting on Upper Leg (4^^ link) during Weeding 37
Operation
3.1.1.5 Forces Acting on Lowêr Leg (5^ link) during Weeding 38
Operation
3.1.2 Forces Acting on Subject While Operating Knapsack Sprayer 38
3.1.2.1 Forces Acting on Forearm (1^^ Link) while Operating 38
Knapsack Sprayer
3.1.2.2 Forces Acting on Upper Arm (2'^^^ link) while Operating 44
Knapsack Sprayer
3.L2.3 Forces Acting on Trunk & Head (3"^^ link) while Operating 44
Knapsack Sprayer
3.1.2.4 Forces Acting on IUpper Leg (4 link) while Operating 45
Knapsack Sprayer
3.1.2.5 Forces Acting on Lower Leg (5 link) while Operating 46
Knapsack Sprayer
3.1.3 Forces Acting on Subject while Operating Power Knapsack 50
Sprayer
3.1.3.1 Forces Acting on Forearm (T^ link) while Operating Power 50
Knapsack Sprayer
3.1.3.2 Forces Acting on Upper Arm (2"^* link) while Operating 52
Power Knapsack Sprayer
3.1.3.3 Forces Acting on Trunk & Head (3^^^ link) while Operating 53
3.1.3.4 Forces Acting on Upper Leg (4^ link) while Operating 54
3.1.3.5 Forces Acting on Lower Leg (5^ link) while Operating 55
3.1.4 Forces Acting on Subject while Picking Cotton Bolls in 59
Standing Posture
3.1.4.1 Forces Acting on Forearm (1^^ link) while Picking Cotton 59
Bolls in Standing Posture
3.1.4.2 Forces Acting on Upper Arm (2"^ link) while Picking Cotton 61
3.1.4.3 Forces Acting on Trunk & Head (3^*^ link) while Picking 62
Cotton Bolls in Standing Posture
3.1.4.4 Forces Acting on Upper Leg (4*^ link) while Picking Cotton 63
3.1.4.5 Forces Acting on Lower Leg (5^ link) while Picking Cotton 64
3.1.5 Forces Acting on Subject while Picking Cotton Bolls in 68
Bending Posture
3.1.5.1 Forces Acting on Forearm (P^ link) while Picking Cotton 68
Bolls in Bending Posture
3.1.5.2 Forces Acting on Upper Arm (2"^* link) while Picking Cotton 70
3.1.5.3 Forces Acting on Trunk & Head (3'"'* link) while Picking 71
Cotton Bolls in Bending Posture
3.1.5.4 Forces Acting on Upper Leg (4*^^ link) while Picking Cotton 72
3.1.5.5 Forces Acting on Lower Leg (5^ link) while Picking Cotton 73
IV MATERIALS AND METHODS 77-106
4.1 Selection of Dependent and Independent Variables 77
4.1.1 Dependent Variables 77
4.LL1 Heart Rate (HR) 77
4.1.1.2 Postural Configuration 78
V!
4.1.1.3 Overall Discomfort Rate (ODR) 78
4.1.1.4 Body Part Discomfort Score (BPDS) 78
4.1.1.5 Vibration 78
4.1.2 Independent Variables 79
4.2 Instrument Used in the Study 81
4.2.1 Anthropometer 81
4.2.2 Treadmill 81
4.2.3 Computerized Heart Rate Monitor 82
4.2.4 Oxylog2 84
4.2.5 Anemometer 85
4.2.6 Pressure Gauge 85
4.2.7 Wet and Dry Bulb Thermometer 85
4.2.8 Flexicurve 85
4.2.9 Body Discomfort Rating Chart 85
4.2.10 Overall Discomfort Rating Scale 85
4.2.11 Tachometer 86
4.2.12 PULSE Multi Analyzer System 86
4.2.13 Novatech Force Transducer 89
4.3 Measurement of Variables 89
4.3.1 Heart Rate 89
4.3.2 Oxygen Consumption 91
4.3.3 Body Discomfort 93
4.3.3.1 Overall Discomfort Rating (ODR) 93
4.3.3.2 Body Part Discomfort Score 93
4.3.4 Postural Configuration 94
4.3.5 Vibration 95
4.3.6 Noise 97
4.3.7 Force Measurement on the Knapsack Sprayer Handle 97
4.4 Field Experiments 98
4.4.1 Calibration of Subject 99
4.4.2 Field Evaluation 101
4.5 Statistical Design of Experiments 105
V RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 107-152
5.1 Calibration of Subjects 107
5.2 Calibration of Force Measurement Transducer 107
5.3 Weeding by Power Weeder 109
5.3.1 Effect of Time Duration, Subject and Forward Speed on 109
Heart Rate
Oxygen Consumption
Workload and Energy Expenditure
Body Part Discomfort Score
Overall Discomfort Rating
Vll
Posture Configuration (PC) and Vibration of Power Weeder
5.4 Spraying by Manual Knapsack Sprayer 120
5.4.1 Effect of Subject and number of Strokes on Heart Rate 120
while Spraying by Knapsack Sprayer
5.4.2 Effect of Subject and number of Strokes on Oxygen 121
Consumption while Spraying by Knapsack Sprayer
5.4.3 Effect of Subject and Number of Strokes on Work Load and 123
Energy Expenditure while Spraying by Knapsack Sprayer
5.4.4 Effect of Subject and number of Stroke on Body Part 124
Discomfort Score while Spraying by Knapsack Sprayer
5.4.5 Effect of Subject and number of Strokes on Overall 124
Discomfort Rating while Spraying by Knapsack Sprayer
5.4.6 Effect of Subject and number of Stroke on Postural 126
Configuration while Spraying by Knapsack Sprayer
5.5 Spraying by Power Knapsack Sprayer 127
5.5.1 Effect of Subject and Engine Speed on Heart Rate 127
while Spraying by Power Knapsack Sprayer
5.5.2 Effect of Subject and Engine Speed on Oxygen 128
Consumption
5.5.3 Effect of Subject and Engine Speed on Work Load 129
5.5.4 Effect of Subject and Engine Speed on Energy 130
Expenditure
5.5.5 Effect of Subject and Engine Speed on Body Part 130
Discomfort Score
5.5.6 Effect of Subjects and Engine Speed on Overall 131
Discomfort
5.5.7 Effect of Subject and Engine Speed on Postural 132
Configuration
5.5.8 Effect of Subject and Engine Speed on Vibration 133
5.6 Picking of Cotton Bolls in Standing Posture 134
5.6.1 Effect of Subjects and Time Durations on Heart Rate 134
while Picking Cotton Bolls in Standing Posture
5.6.2 Effect of Subjects and Time Durations on Oxygen 134
Consumption while Picking Cotton Bolls in Standing
Posture
5.6.3 Effect of Subjects and Time Durations on Workload 136
and Energy Expenditure while Picking Cotton Bolls in
Standing Posture
5.6.4 Effect of Subject and Time Duration on Body Part 137
Discomfort Score while Picking Cotton Bolls in
Standing Posture
5.6.5 Effect of Subject and Time Duration on Overall 137
Discomfort Rating while Picking Cotton Bolls in
Standing Posture
5.6.6 Effect of Subject and Time Duration on Postural 139
vm
Configuration (Net Bending Angle) while Picking
5.7 Picking of Cotton Bolls in Bending Postures 140
5.7.1 Effect of Subjects and Time Duration on Heart Rate 140
while Picking Cotton Bolls in Bending Posture
5.7.2 Effect of Subject and Time Duration on Oxygen 140
Consumption while Picking Cotton Bolls in Bending
Posture
5.7.3 Effect of Subject and Time duration on Workload and 141
Energy Expenditure while Picking Cotton Bolls in
Bending Posture
5.7.4 Effect of Subject and Time Duration on Body Part 142
Discomfort Score while Picking Cotton Bolls in
Bending Posture
5.7.5 Effect of Subject and Time Duration on Overall 143
Discomfort Rating while Picking Cotton Bolls in
Bending Posture
5.8 Noise at Operator's Ear in Stationary Mode 144
5.9 Vibration Characteristics of Power weeder in 146
Stationary Mode
5.10 Vibration Characteristics of Power Knapsack Sprayer 146
5.11 Development of Computer Programme for Verification 147
of Mathematical Equations
5.12 Optimum Values of Independent Variables 150
VI SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 153-157
VII SUGGESTION FOR FUTURE WORKS 158
REFERENCES 159-163
APPENDICES 164-175
A Specification of instrument used in the study 164
B Specification of the equipment used during study 166
C Heart rate and oxygen consumption at different 167
workload on treadmill
D Computer Programme of Bio-Mechanical analysis in 168
FORTRAN-77
E Verification of mathematical equation for knapsack 174
sprayer
VITA 176
IX
LIST OF TABLES
Table Title Page
2.1 Heart rate and oxygen consumption of individuals of age 20 to 15
30 years classified as workload and physiological response.
2.2 Frequency range and resonance of the body parts. 23
2.3 Centre of mass of body segments and segmental mass ratio. 27
2.4 Mass of body segments as a percentage of the whole body mass 28
2.5 Empirical equations for estimating the segmental mass from 30
total body weight.
4.1 Anthropometric data and other physiological characteristics of 80
the subjects
4.2 Description of human reaction as per British Standard 96
5.1 Effect of time duration, subject and forward speed on heart rate 110
and oxygen consumption while operating power weeder
5.2 Analysis of variance for heart rate (bpm) while operating power 111
weeder
5.3 Analysis of variance for oxygen consumption (1/min) while 113
operating power weeder
5.4 Effect of time duration, subject and forward speed on body part 116
discomfort score, overall discomfort rating, postural
configuration and vertical vibration while operating power
weeder
5.5 Analysis of variance for Body Part Discomfort Score while 117
operating Power Weeder
5.6 Analysis of variance for Overall Discomfort Rating while 117
operating Power Weeder
5.7 Analysis of variance for postural configuration (PC) or net 118
bending angle while operating power weeder
5.8 Analysis of variance for vertical vibration while operating power 121
weeder
5.9 Effect of subject and number of strokes on heart rate and oxygen 122
consumption while operating manually operated knapsack
sprayer
5.10 Analysis of variance for effect of number of strokes/min on heart 122
rate while operating knapsack sprayer
5.11 Analysis of variance for effect of number of strokes/min on 123
oxygen consumption while operating knapsack sprayer
5.12 Effect of subject and number of strokes on body part discomfort 125
score, over all discomfort rating and postural configuration (net
bending angle) while operating manual knapsack sprayer
5.13 Analysis of variance for effect of number of strokes on body part 125
discomfort score (BPDS) while operating knap sack sprayer
5.14 Analysis of variance for effect of number of strokes on overall 126
discomfort rating (ODR) while operating knap sack sprayer
5.15 Analysis of variance for effect of number of strokes on postural 127
configuration or net bending angle while operating knapsack
sprayer
5.16 Effect of subject and engine rpm on heart rate and oxygen 128
consumption while operating power knapsack sprayer
5.17 Analysis of variance for effect of engine rpm on heart rate while 128
operating power operated knapsack sprayer
5.18 Analysis of variance for effect of engine rpm on oxygen 129
consumption while operating power knapsack sprayer
5.19 Effect of subject and engine rpm on body part discomfort score, 131
overall discomfort rating, postural configuration (net bending
angle) and vertical vibration while operating power knapsack
sprayer
5.20 Analysis of variance for effect of engine rpm on body part 131
discomfort score while operating power knapsack sprayer
5.21 Analysis of variance for effect of engine rpm on overall 132
discomfort rating while operating power operated knapsack
sprayer
5.22 Analysis of variance for effect of engine rpm on postural 133
configuration (PC) or net bending angle while operating power
operated knapsack sprayer
5.23 Analysis of variance for effect of engine rpm on vertical 134
vibration while operating power knap sack sprayer
5.24 Effect of subject and on heart rate and oxygen consumption 13 5
while picking cotton bolls in standing posture
5.25 Analysis of variance for effect of time duration on heart rate 135
while picking cotton bolls in standing posture
5.26 Analysis of variance for effect of time duration on oxygen 136
consumption while picking cotton bolls in standing posture
5.27 Effect of subject and time duration on body part discomfort 138
score, over all discomfort rating and postural configuration (net
bending angle) while picking cotton bolls in standing posture.
5.28 Analysis of variance for effect of time duration on body part 138
discomfort score while picking cotton bolls in standing posture
5.29 Analysis of variance for effect of time duration on overall 139
discomfort rating while picking cotton bolls in standing posture
5.30 Analysis of variance for effect of time duration on postural 140
configuration (or net bending angle) while picking cotton bolls
in standing posture
5.31 Effect of subject and time duration on heart rate, oxygen 141
consumption, and body part discomfort score and overall
XI
discomfort rating, while picking cotton bolls in bending posture
5.32 Analysis of variance for effect of time duration on heart rate of 142
while picking cotton bolls in bending posture
5.33 Analysis of variance for effect of time duration on oxygen 142
consumption while picking cotton bolls in bending posture
5.34 Analysis of variance for effect of time duration on body part 143
discomfort score while picking cotton bolls in bending posture
535 Analysis of variance for effect of time duration on overall 144
discomfort rating while picking cotton bolls in bending posture
5.36 Noise at operator's ear level while running power weeder in 145
stationary mode.
5.37 Noise at operator's ear level while operating power knapsack 145
sprayer in stationary mode
5.38 Optimum Value of Independent Variables 152
Xli
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Title Page
_No,
2.1 Muscle power with respect to age and sex 7
2.2 Decline of maximum heart rate with respect to age (men) 8
2.3 Sub categories of postures(Portable observation on method) 20
2A The segmental body masses as a percentage of the whole body 29
mass.
2.5 Kinematics chain of human body as mechanical system. 29
3.1 (a) Subject operating the weeder 33
3.1(b) Free body diagram of the subject showing forces acting on the 39
different body segments/links during weeding operation
3.2 Forces acting on forearm (1^^ link) during weeding operation 40
3.3 Forces acting on upper arm (2"^ link) during weeding operation) 40
3.4 Forces acting on trunk & head (3^^ link) during weeding 40
operation
3.5 Forces acting on upper leg (4^ link) during weeding operation 41
3.6 Forces acting on lower leg (5^ link) during weeding operation 41
3.7(a) Subject operating the knapsack sprayer 42
3.7 (b) Free body diagram of the subject showing forces acting on the 47
different body parts while operating knapsack sprayer
3.8 Forces acting on forearm (1^^ link) while operating knapsack 48
sprayer
3.9 Forces acting on upper arm (2"^ link) while operating knapsack 48
sprayer
3.10 Forces acting on trunk & head (3^^ link) while operating 48
knapsack sprayer
3.11 Forces acting on upper leg (4* link) while operating knapsack 49
sprayer
3.12 Forces acting on lower leg (5^ link) while operating knapsack 49
sprayer
3.13(a) Subject operating the power knapsack sprayer 50
3.13(b) Free body diagram of the subject showing forces acting on the 56
different body parts while operating power knapsack sprayer
3.14 Forces acting on forearm (1^* link) while operating power 57
knapsack sprayer
3.15 Forces acting on upper arm (2"*^ link) while operating power 57
knapsack sprayer
3.16 Forces acting on trunk & head (3^*^ link) while operating power 58
knapsack sprayer
3.17 Forces acting on upper leg (4^ link) while operating power 58
xui
knapsack sprayer
3.18 Forces acting on lower leg (5^ link) while operating power 58
knapsack sprayer
3.19 (a) Subject picking the cotton bolls in standing posture 59
different body parts while picking cotton bolls in standing
posture
3.20 Forces acting on forearm (1^^ link) while picking cotton bolls in 66
standing posture
3.21 Forces acting on upper arm (2"^ link) while picking cotton bolls 66
in standing posture
3.22 Forces acting on trunk & head (3^^ link) while picking cotton 66
bolls in standing posture
3.23 Forces acting on upper leg (4^ link) while picking cotton bolls 67
in standing posture
3.24 Forces acting on lower leg (5^ link) while picking cotton bolls 67
in standing posture
3.25 (a) Subject picking the cotton bolls in bending posture 68
different body parts while picking cotton bolls in bending
posture
3.26 Forces acting on forearm (1^* link) while picking cotton bolls in 75
bending posture
3.27 Forces acting on upper arm (2"^ link) while picking cotton bolls 75
in bending posture
3.28 Forces acting on trunk & head (3*^^ link) while picking cotton 75
bolls in bending posture
3.29 Forces acting on upper leg (4^ link) while picking cotton bolls 76
in bending posture
3.30 Forces acting on lower leg (5^ link) while picking cotton bolls 76
in bending posture
4.1 Complete set up of polar heart rate monitor 83
4.2 The polar heart rate monitor fitted on the subject 83
4.3 Complete set up of Oxylog2 84
4.4 The chart showing body diagram used for body part discomfort 87
score
4.5 A scale used to measure overall discomfort rating 87
4.6a Sowing hand arm vibration measuring set up 90
4.6b Complete set up of PULSE multi analyzer system. 90
4.7 Measurement of postural configuration during picking using 95
flexicurve
4.8 Measurement of noise at operator's ear level under stationary 98
XIV
mode on power weeder
4.9 Occupational noise exposure standard curve (IS 12207, 1987) 99
4.10 Laboratory set up for the calibration of force transducer 100
4.11 Laboratory set up for force measurement on handle of knap sack 100
sprayer
4.12 Laboratory set up for the calibration of subject on computerized 102
treadmill
4.13 Operation of power weeder by the subject during field 103
experiment
4.14 A view of manual knap sack sprayer operated by the subject in 104
the field
4.15 A view of power knap sack sprayer operated by the subject 105
4.16 Picking of cotton under two positions of the subject 106
5.1 Subject calibration curve between heart rate and work load on 108
treadmill for all three subjects
5.2 Calibration curve between heart rate and oxygen consumption 108
on treadmill for all three subjects
5.3 Calibration curves for force transducers in loading and 109
unloading
5.4 Effect of time duration, subject and forward speed on heart rate 112
& oxygen consumption while operating power weeder
5.5 Effect of time duration, subject and forward speed on body parts 115
discomfort score (BPDS) & overall discomfort rating (ODR)
while operating power weeder
5.6 Effect of time duration, subject and forward speed on postural 119
configuration and vertical vibration while operating power
weeder
5.7 Vertical vibration on different part of power weeder in stationary 146
mode
5.8 Vertical vibration on different part of power knapsack sprayer in 147
stationary mode
5.9 Computer screen of the menu frame of the programme showing 149
different farm operation in cotton crop
XV
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
% : Percentage
o
: degree
°c : Degree centigrade
Avg. : Average
bpm : beats per minute
CD. : Critical Diflference
cm : centimeter
CV : Coefficient of Variation
Deg. : Degree
e.g. : example
etc : etceteras
ha : hectare
Km/h : kilometer/hour
i.e. : that is
Kg ; kilogram
kJ : Kilo joule
No. : Number
PAU : Punjab Agricultural University
PVR : Pulmonary Ventilation Rate
Res. : respectively
V02 max : Maximum Oxygen Consmnption
HR : Heart rate
NBA : Net bending angle
BPDS : Body part Discomfort Score
ODR : Over all Discomfort Rating
mis : Root Mean Square
mv : milli volt
w.r.t. : with respect to
min : Minute
kcal : Kilo calorie
hp^ : horse power
m/s" : meter per second square
mm : millimeter
Hz : hertz
AMP : amplitude
D.F. : Degree of freedom
P : Pressure
@ ; At the rate of
Agril. Agricultural
cc : cubic centimeter
Fig. : Figure
g : gramme
h :hour
1 '.liter
Kgf :kilogram force
rpm Tevolutions per minute
sq : square
dB :decible
XVI
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Cotton, the 'white gold', enjoys a predominant position amongst all cash crops
in India. Cotton is an important raw material for the Indian textile industry,
constituting about 65% of its requirements. The Indian textile industry occupies a
significant place in the country's economy with over 1500 mills, 4 million handlooms,
1.7 million power looms and thousands of garment, hosiery and processing units,
providing employment directly or indirectly to around 35 million people (Shivagaje et
ah 2004).
Major cotton-producing states in India are Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, Haryana,
Kamataka, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Orissa, Punjab, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu and
Uttax Pradesh. The data available for the period from 1950-51 to 2003-2004 reveal
that there is no improvement in production in these states, as a result of which cotton
production in India has declined significantly (Anonymous, 2005a). Despite having
the largest area under cotton, India ranks third in cotton production in the world.
Production of cotton in India has gone up from 3.044 million bales (of 170 kg
each) in 1950-51 to an all-time high of 14.231 million bales in 1996-97 (Singhal,
2003). It declined to 9.651 million bales in 2000-01 and 10.090 million bales in 2001-
02. The area under cotton was 7.64 million hectares in 2003-04 against 5.882 million
hectares in 1950-51. The average yield of cotton in India was 88 kg/ha in 1950-51 and
rose to 307 kg/ha in 2003-04 with a production of 13,79 million bales (Anonymous,
2005a).
The Punjab state being major producer of cotton has suffered yield losses.
During 2003-04 the area under cotton was 4, 52,000 ha with productivity of 556 kg
lint/ha and the total production 1478 thousand bales (Anonymous, 2005b). However,
in 1992-93; 6, 25,000 ha area was imder American cotton and the productivity was
591 kg lint/ha and the area under 'desi' cotton was 65,000 ha and productivity was
369 kg lint/ha (Anonymous, 1994).
The high incidence of pests weeds and diseases in crop raised by using inputs
like high yielding varieties of seeds, fertilizer and irrigation on which considerable
investments are made by the farmers, do not enable them to obtain maximum yield.
Therefore, for obtaining maximum benefits from the intensive farming, it becomes
necessary to use pesticides and plant protection and weeding equipment.
With the introduction of modem technology, ergonomics becomes essential
for its successful application. It is important to maintain a safe healthy and productive
environment for the farm worker. Having recognized that the social costs due to ill
health and injuries are real and substantial, it has been viewed that ergonomics by
helping to provide improvements in farming can serve as a dominant scientific
discipline for socio-technical development.
Ergonomics is an applied science and plays an important role in design of
agriculture machines in the light of anatomy, physical and psychology of farm labour.
It aims to enhance the effectiveness productivity and efficiency, with which work is
carried out, and to maintain or enhance such human values as health safety and job
satisfaction. It is the scientific discipline concerned with the understanding of
interaction among himian and other elements of a system, and the profession that
applies data and methods to design in order to optimize human well being and overall
system performance. Ergonomics contributes to design and evaluation of tasks, job
products, environments and systems in order to make them compatible with the needs,
abilities and limitations of people.

Comfort, physical welfare and performances of agricultural workers are
influenced by the farm implements in terms of relevant features of human body such
as body dimensions and body movements. More and more hand tools and implements
are being developed, manufactured and used for various farming operations. All of
them are either operated or controlled by human workers. Hence to achieve better
efficiency of performance with more human comfort, it is necessary to design the
agricultural machine/implements, keeping in consideration the operators capabilities
and limitation. Ergonomical evaluation is necessary to assess the energy expenditures
of farmers, their physiological cost and suitability of the method for farm workers and
how long they can work continuously without getting fatigue. The method which
gives better field capacity, less power consumption, low energy expenditure rate and
more safety will be recommended to be used in the agricultural operations.
Farm mechanization contributes to raising farm productivity. For achieving
this, the productivity of land and labour needs to be increased substantially. It is vital
element and important determinant towards the development and design of a suitable
food security system of the country by performing the function of food production,
productivity of the farming input, timely application of farming inputs, managerial
capabilities of farmers and growth environment supported by educational
infi-astructure and government policy.

a-
Nowadays, Indian agriculture is getting modernized very rapidly. More and
more hand tools, implements and machine are being developed, manufactured and
used for performing various agricultural operations. The demand for food grains may
rise to 325 million tonnes by the year 2020, Therefore accelerated growing of
mechanization is required in order to increase food production to keep pace with the
rising population with the high degree of mechanization of farm along with increasing
size and complexity of farm machinery (Mehta, 2000). A safe comfortable working
environment for the operator becomes an important consideration, if productivity and
customer satisfaction are to be enhanced (Gerke and Hoag, 1981). Mechanization and
automation have made job easier and harder, easier in terms of physical work
involved but harder in term of mental loads (Knapp and Parks, 1970).
Most of the operations in cotton crop production like weeding, spraying and
picking are done manually. Khurpi, kasola, wheel hand hoe, power weeders and
tractor operated weeders are used for intercultural operation whereas the spraying is
done by knapsack sprayer, power operated knapsack sprayer, tractor operated sprayer
or self-propelled sprayer. Picking of cotton is done manually and uprooting of cotton
sticks is done either manually or by cotton stalk uprooter. Ease of performing an
operation affects the output of worker. A proper approach to find the job according to
capability of the worker instead of fitting the worker according to job requirement is
significant. Various farm activities in which the agricultural workers are involved are
to be appraised in physiological and biomechanical perspective. These operations are
physically demanding through their energy and postural requirements or more often
both. Work related body pain and fatigue due to force and reaction acting on body
links and joints of the workers are to be analyzed.
In our country, greater part of population working on farms use work methods
which depend upon human muscle power. Muscular power and mechanical efficiency
of the body together with the conditions which modify md control these parameters
are the topics that appeal to individuals fiôm different point of view. From this
knowledge one can design equipment to get better mechanical efficiency of the
human worker, one can compare different work methods/equipment, one can suggest
a proper work rest schedule for optimum performance.

Efficient use of implements/tools could reduce the cost of operation by
enhancing the work output and also reduces the drudgery imposed on the operator. In
cotton crop weeding (96.5 man-h/ha), spraying (22 man-h/ha), picking (141 man-
h/ha), and uprooting of cotton sticks are major labour intensive operations (Singh and
Singh, 2002). Mittal et al (1996) conducted a study on agriculture machinery
accidents and concluded that maximum accidents occur due to spraying (47%). Power
weeder and power sprayer transmit vibrations to human body parts, which results in
early fatigue and hence reduce work output of the worker. In picking operation,
different body postures like bending; stretching etc is to be studies to find the
discomforts of different body parts. Therefore it is necessary to evaluate the
performance of implements used in these operations from ergonomic point of view.
Considering above facts the present study was undertaken with the following
objectives.
1. To develop mathematical equations for muscular force acting on body
segment of the workers while performing selected farm operations involved in
cotton production.
2. To assess the energy expenditure of different field operations performed by
fann labour.
3. Ergonomic evaluation of implements/tools w.r.t. physiological parameters like
heart rate, over all discomfort, postural configurations and vibrations.
4. To suggest the optimum working time of the operator (with out fatigue) on
implements/tools studied in objective 3.

CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Any working system in ergonomics consists of the three components such as the
man (the operator), machine and the working environment. The present study is
concerned with ergonomic studies on agricultural workers performing selected form
operations in cotton crop. Therefore, an attempt has been made to review the literatures
related to the topic. The brief review of the studies relevant to the topic has been
presented in the following sections:
2.1 Selection of Subjects
The subject has an important role in ergonomic studies. He should be medically
fit. The subjects are selected on the basis of a detailed anamnesis, a general clinical state
and ECG test (Seidel et al 1980). The subject should be a real representative of the user
population in operation of the selected machinery. The subjects are selected on the basis
of the age and weight.
2.1,1 Age of Subject
The maxknum force a muscle or group of muscles can exert depends upon the
age. Grandjean (1982) stated that the peak of muscle strength for both men and women is
reached between the age of 15 and 35 (Fig. 2.1). The workers aged between 50 and 60
years can exert only about 75-85 percent of muscular strength. Rodahl (1989) quoted the
maximum heart rate declining with the age (Fig. 2,2).
Mc Ardle et al (1994) reported that the body functions generally improve rapidly
during childhood and reach to a maximum between 20-30 years of age. Thereafter, there
is a gradual decline in functional capacity with advancing years,
Gite and Singh (1997) found that the maximum strength can be expected from the
age group of 25 to 35 years. Nigg and Herzog (1999) reported that maximum muscle
strength and the cross sectional area of muscle is greatest for the age group of 25 to 35
years.
2.1.2 Weight of Body
Body weight has great impact on all activities in which the worker has to move
his body. Morrison and Harrington (1962) found that the ischial tuberosities (lower most
projections of the pelvis) normally carry the weight of the upper part of the body and
these projections spaced only 108 to 114 mm apart in the human adult and are capable of
transmitting large force directly and tiniformly into spinal column.
Griffin (1982) conducted study on sound and vibration and reported that both
male and female subjects in seated posture, with more weight tend to be relatively less
sensitive to low frequencies (less than 6.3 Hz) and more sensitive to high frequency of
vertical vibration.
100 Men
U 90
g,8Q
3
E 60
3 SO
•N
S. J
20 30 40 50 60
Age, years
Fig 2.1: Muscle power with respect to age and sex (Grandjean, 1982)
— " t-* 1-
• 1
1 1 ^ ,
200 ^Vw,_^
*->
u
d 100
'
4-1
.^.
10 20 30
Age, years
1\
^0 50 60
.
Fig 2.2: Decline of maximum heart rate with respect to age (men) (Rodahl, 1989)
2.2 Physiological Responses
When any work or activity is done, it gives physical exertion to the body and is
characterized by high energy consumption and stress on the heart and lungs. So
physiological response, in any work or operation is expressed in terms of cardio-
respiratory response. The parameters measured are the heart rate and pulmonary
ventilation rate or oxygen consumption rate. The heart rate indicates the total stress on the
body.
2.2.1 Hear Rate
Morehouse and Miller (1963) stated that a period of 3-5 minutes is suitable for
pulse rate to stabilize depending on the nature of exercise.
Pawar (1978) conducted study on power tiller operator during seedbed
preparation. He reported that the heart rate was in the range of 105 to 114 beats/min. The
corresponding human energy requirement was in the range of 13.22 to 20.52 kJ/min. The
heart rate was measured as an index of strain.
Sanchez et al (1979) conducted study on effect of dynamic, static and combined
work on heart rate and oxygen consumption. The dynamic work consisted of walking on
a horizontal treadmill on four different speeds i.e. 0.56, 0.83, 1.11 and 1.39 m/s. The
static work consisted of pushing against, pulling and holding 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 kg
weight. A significant difference in oxygen consumption and heart rate was observed for
all the walking-pushing tests. Linear relationship was obtained between cardiac cost and
load when walking at 0.56 or 0.83 m/s, with correlation coefficients statistically
significant for pushing and pulling but not found significant for holding weight. It was
concluded that when static work was combined with walking, the physiological cost
varied with the type of static work.
Verma et al (1979) compared two methods of indirect measurement of energy
output at work viz, minute ventilation and heart recording. They evolved multiple linear
regression equation for estimating energy expenditure from minute ventilation rate and
heart rate during grade of sub maximal work on a bicycle ergometer for 55 human
subjects involving 165 observations. The product moment correlation of minute
ventilation and heart rate with energy expenditure were 0.74 and 0.59 respectively and
multiple correlation coefficients between observed energy expenditure and both minute
ventilation and heart rate was 0.8. It was concluded that the multiple correlation
coefficient between observed energy expenditure and both minute ventilation and heart
rate was a better predictor of energy expenditure than the use of either of the two
variables singly.
Evans et al (1983) conducted study on physiological response to load holding and
load carriage on heart rate of the seven young male subjects. Experiments were carried
out on 15, 20, 25, 30, and 40 kg load. It was found that heart rate increase (AHR) at
exhaustion was linearly related to the load, and was greater when the load was carried
rather than simply held. It happened because electromyographic activity in the forearm
flexor muscles increased when the load was carried and appeared in the form of marked
fluctuations synchronous with stepping frequency. In the holding case the contractions are
essentially static and isometric, whereas when the subject carries the load and the load
undergoes vertical accelerations with respect to the subject's trunk, the contractions are
dynamic and are alternately concentric and eccentric.
Datta et al (1985) conducted study on the energy cost of pulling hand carts
('thela') by ten healthy subjects in the age group of 20-45 years. During experiments the
environmental temperature varied between 31 to 33 °C. The subject was to pull the
unloaded hand cord (190 kg weight), then successively with loads of 185 and 370 kg.
During pulling operation, the speed was maintained at 5 km/h. The pulmonary ventilation
rate, heart rate and energy expenditure increased in an almost linear fashion with
increasing work load. The mean heart rate at no load was 107 beats/min. The mean heart
rate at 185 kg and 370 kg load was 133.7 and 155,5 beats/min respectively. Energy
expenditure and heart rates under different operational conditions showed that pulling a
loaded cart represents very heavy work.
Mass et al (1989) studied the validity of the use of heart rate in estimating oxygen
consumption in static and in combined static/dynamic exercise. The experiment was
conducted on eight healthy subjects. Heart rate and oxygen consumption of subjects were
measured in weight holding task (static exercise) and weight carrying task (combined
static and dynamic exercise with varying weight from 4 to 12 kg. From the test, they
concluded that it was not accurate to use measured heart rate in static work for prediction
of oxygen consumption in dynamic task. However in combined exercise i.e. static and
dynamic work a simple dynamic task could accurately be used to predict oxygen
consumption from measured heart rate while carrying small weights (4, 8 and 10 kg).
2.2.2 Oxygen Consumption (VO2) and Pulmonary Ventilation Rate (PVR)
The oxygen consumption represents an individual capacity to utilize oxygen. It
states that a point is reached where increase in work rate is no longer accompanied by
increase in oxygen uptake and the individual is assumed to have reached her or his
maximum level of oxygen uptake.
Singh (1972) conducted an experiment on various agricultural operations like
spading, spraying and some manual methods of load transport to find out human energy
requirements. He concluded that there is a linear relationship between PVR and intensity
of physical exercise. In the tasks studied, spraying was least energy demanding with O2
not exceeding 0.71 1/min while for spading O2 requirement was 1.60 1/min. Pulling facing
the direction of travel demanded O2 of 2.14 1/min. Load carried in lap of hands at chest
level demanded O2 of 1.81 1/min.
Astrand and Rodahl (1977) found that running on the treadmill at > 3° incHnation
could bring the oxygen consumption to the maximum whereas running horizontally or at
a slight inclination may result in somewhat lower O2 uptake. It was observed that higher
oxygen uptake was obtained when running uphill as compared to that of bicycle
ergometer. It was caused by the activation of a larger muscle mass during running uphill,
since simultaneous work with both arm and legs did not increase maximal aerobic effect
when compared to the work with legs only.
Saha et al (1979) determined an acceptable work loads for Indian workers. To
determine it for sustained physical activity, five physically active young, healthy workers
aged 20-24 years, were subjected to run on tread mill at different loads. It was found that
acceptable work load for average workers was between 30 to 40 percent of individual's
iTiaximum aerobic power. The corresponding energy expenditure and heart rate were 18
kJ/min and 110 beats/min respectively. Energy expenditure rate for male operators from
heart rate response can be estimated using the formula mentioned below:
Energy expenditure rate (kcal/min) = {Heart rate (beats/min) - 66}/(2.4 x 4.187)
Nag et al (1980) conducted experiments on 13 agricultural workers performing
thirty different operations like nursery sowing, water supply, transplanting, weeding,
threshing etc during the actual working season. During these operations oxygen
consumption varied from 28.6 to 41.5 cm /min kg with maximum of 34.8 cm /min kg.
PVR varied from 14 to 41 liter/min only for water lifting, but bund trimming in dry land
and pedal threshing operations were found as heaviest and jobs demanded more than 30
1/min PVR. They concluded that 29 percent of total men were involved in light work, 64
percent in moderate work and only 6 percent in heavy work.
Astrand and Rodhal (1986) suggested that there is a linear relationship between
heart rate and oxygen consumption of the subject. The heart rate under standardized
condition may be used as an index of oxygen uptake for a given task. By comparing the
pulse rate obtained at different ergometer workloads with the pulse rate obtained during
work, severity of the work could be estimated. It was recommended that the heart rate
should be measured to assess the workload. However, it was pointed out that pulse rate
may be significantly affected by other external factors like environment factors, work
position, emotional stress, size of working muscle groups, static work components and
stress and dehydration.
Verma (1994) developed nomograms based on cardio respiratory stress, body
weight and time for 3.2 km run for predicting maximal aerobic power. If these
nomograms are used, sophisticated laboratory facilities are not required for predicting the
aerobic capacity.
Gite and Singh (1997) compared the activity of ergonomics in agricultural and
allied activities in hidia. They summarized the findings of different scientists on
maximum aerobic capacity. The maximum aerobic capacity (VO2) of Indian male
agricultxiral workers varied from 1,95 to 2.24 1/min.
Bot and Hollander (2000) investigated the heart rate (HR) response to oxygen
uptake (VO2) under varying non-steady state activities. Dynamic and static exercise
engaging large and small muscle masses were studied in different experiments.
Simultaneous heart rate and VO2 measurement were made. Linear regression analyses
revealed high correlation between heart rate and VO2. It has been concluded that VO2
may be estimated from individual Heart Rate-V02 regression lines for non-steady state
exercise during both the interval test and field test,
2.2.3 Effect of Environment on Physiological Response
Suggs and Splinter (1961) conducted study on the effect of environment on the
allowable workload of man. A subject exposed to a mean radiant temperature (MRT) of
158 ^F experienced a heart rate increase, due to the radiation, of 8 to 9 beats per minute
above base values taken at a mean radiant temperature of 88 *^F, whether working or not.
On the basis of subject's normal response to bicycle ergometer work, this increase was
equal to a work load of 53.7 kg-m/min. It was also reported that at a low relative humidity
(about 30%) the allowable workload was not affected by the temperature. Also at a
moderate temperature (about 21 ^C), the allowable workload was also not affected by
relative humidity. At temperature above this level, higher hxmiidity depressed the
allowable workload, whereas below this level it increased the allowable workload. It was
specially mentioned that pulse rate and work out linearity was not disturbed under
constant environmental conditions.

Gupta et al (1977) studied the effect on metabolic responses during sub-maximal
and maximal workload in dry and humid heat. It was reported that there was no
significant increase in the heart rate with increase in the temperature (29 to 40 ^C) and
relative humidity (50 to 55%) for fixed workload of 600 kg-m/min (98.03 watt). But
maximum oxygen consumption showed a significant fall in very hot and extremely hot
conditions with greater fall in humid condition than in dry environment.
ThakuT and Das (1978) investigated the effect of environment and modes of
operation on rate and limitations of manual work output inside and outside the laboratory.
Leg and hand cranking modes of operation were selected on the bicycle ergometer and
PVR, heart rate and oxygen consumption rate were measured at various workload. It was
found that all the physiological parameters increased linearly with workload. They also
found that subject felt uncomfortable and showed early sign of fatigue in hot condition
than in cool condition. It was concluded that heart rate of 98 to 120 beats/min was more
reliable physiological index for measurement of stress in environmental conditions for
comparing the subjects at different modes of operation. The variation was found to be
mainly due to temperature variation rather than subject variation.
2.2,4 Energy Cost of Physical Activities
Samanta and Chatterjee (1981) investigated the physiological aspects of manual
load lifting by Indian subjects. Major factors affecting the physiological loading were
identified as weight to be lifted, height to which it had to be lifted and the frequency at
which the load was being lifted. It was found that most of these operations fell in unduly
heavy category of workload.
Astrand and Rodahl (1986) classified the severity of work load in terms of oxygen
uptake and heart rate (Table 2.1). It is used as a general guide line in view of the vast
individual variations in ability to perform physical work.

Table 2.1: Heart rate and oxygen consumption of individuals of age 20 to 30 years
classified as workload and physiological response.
s. Work category Physiological response

No Oxygen consumption (1/min) Heart rate (beats/min)
1 Light work <0.5 Up to 90
2 Moderate work 0.5-1.0 90-110
3 Heavy work 1.0-1.5 110-130
4 Very Heavy work 1.5-2.0 130-150
5 Extremely heavy work >2.0 150-170
Terrier et al (2001) studied the validity of activity monitors based on body
acceleration measurement to assess the energy cost of the human locomotion. The body
accelerations were recorded using tri-axial accelerometer attached to the low back. Large
relative errors occurred when predicted VO2 (from level walking) was compared with
measured VO2 for different inclines. It was concluded that without an external
measurement of the slope, the standard method of analysis of body accelerations could
not accurately predict the energy cost of uphill or down hill walking.
2.3 Body Working Posture and Subjective Rating Scale
Body posture is one of the major factor which causes muscular fatigue and
discomfort in the body. Uncomfortable body posture in different activities reduces work
efficiency, capacity and safety of operator.
2.3.1 Working Posture
Posture may be defined as "the quasi static bio mechanic alignment" or in more
simple terms "The configuration of body's head, trunk and limbs in space" (Haslegrave,
1994). Comfortable working posture is an essential requirement in all the efficient
working systems. It is widely agreed that awkward working postures are the principle risk
factor associated with muscolo-skeletal injuries and disorders during occupational
activities. Most of the manual field operations performed in developing countries
demands complex and undesirable body posture.

Vos (1973) conducted an experiment to find a physical load on different working
posture while working near to and below ground level. The postures considered were
bending, kneeling^ squatting and sitting on low stool Energy expenditure, heart rate and
the increase in heart rate were recorded for five minute period. A remarkable increase in
the workload in the bending position was observed when the working level was lower
than the level of the feet. When the work was carried out at ground level, then squatting
posture appeared the most suitable position.
Herberts et al (1980) studied the importance of working level and shoulder joint
position in manual task. They carried out experiment on localized muscle fatigue in three
different working levels viz shoulder level, the handle height at waist level and overhead
level corresponding to three different degrees of flexion. Increase in localized muscle
fatigue was noticed with the increase in the working level from waist to shoulder and
overhead positions.
Tewari and Geeta (2003) carried out an investigation to evaluate the work
situation of female agricultural workers in India. Twenty four female subjects from
different part of the region working in paddy fields were selected randomly for the study.
Postures adopted by the workers while performing various operations involved in paddy
cultivation were recorded.
2.3.2 Overall Discomfort Rating (ODR)
Borg (1962) developed a "category scale" for the rating of perceived exertions
(RPE). The scale range from 6-20 (to match heart rate from 6 to 200 beats/min), with
every second number anchored by verbal expression. In addition to this, a 15 point graded
category scale was also developed to increase the linearity between the ratings and
workload. Stamford and Noble (1974) developed a nine point scale and values obtained
from this scale had been shown to correlate on the 15 point 'Borg' scale.
Gite (1991) carried out an experiment to know the postural discomfort
experienced by the subjects while operating mould board plough with the different handle
height. Overall discomfort was measured on eight point scale (0 - no-discomfort, 8 -
extreme discomfort).
Tiwari and Gite (2000) conducted study on power tiller with and without seating
attachment. They reported that over all discomfort rating on a 10 point visual analogue
discomfort scale varied from 1.0 to 3.5 for a power tiller with seating attachment and
from 2.0 to 5.0 without seating attachment for an operation of 20 minutes duration
2.3.3 Body Part-Discomfort Score (BPDS)
Corlett and Bishop (1976) developed a technique to record distribution of
discomfort in body in the form of "overall discomfort rating" and "body part discomfort
score". To measure overall discomfort rating, a seven-point scale was developed with
'extremely comfortable' and 'extremely uncomfortable' marked at its left and right-hand
ends, respectively. After completion of work subject was asked to indicate the point on
the scale of current level of overall discomfort. To measure body part discomfort score,
several numbered body diagram was produced. After operation, operators were asked to
indicate on the diagram the body area, which was most painftil. Having noted this, the
next most painful areas were asked for, and so on until no further area was offered.
Corlett et al (1979) described a technique for recording whole body posture by
making ten marks on a chart. This technique of posture targeting was tested on a group of
32 subjects and found that it was easy to learn, highly repeatable and accurate except
where postures were held in short periods and not repeated.

Keyserling (1986) developed a method for analyzing and describing the posture of
the trunk and shoulders. In this method videotape was used to create a permanent record
of the job and personal computer was used to perform the clerical and time-keeping tasks
associated with posture analysis. The classification system for standard postures of trunk
and shoulder was used for analysis of videotapes. To perform analysis, the videotape was
played back at the same speed as recorded iê. posture analyst observes the job in
simulated real time. After analysis, data was entered to the computer and then it generated
posture profile for each joint i.e. trunk and both shoulder (left and right). This posture
profile gave total time m each posture, average time in each posture, number of times the
posture was entered and duration of the complete work cycle.
Legg and Mahanty (1985) compared five modes of carrying a load close to the
trunk. During experiment subject was asked for any discomfort. The subject was asked to
describe the extent of discomfort by giving a rating between 1 to 10 point scale (1 - no
discomfort, 10 - extreme discomfort).
Lusted et al (1994) developed a body area chart discomfort checklist. It was used
to rate the discomfort under dynamic condition to identify body area feeling discomfort.
One checklist was filled at the start of the experiment and second was filled after a long
period sitting on seat. The ratings were then compared to estimate the level of discomfort,
Thompson and Bales (1994) compared utility of inclinometer and flexi curve for
measurement of curvature of spine. These devices were compared by measuring the
curvature of known curve whose angle of curvature at marked points has been calculated
mathematically. The angle of curvature measured by flexi curve was close to the actual
angle of curvature than that of the inclinometer. The additional advantages of the flexi-
curve over use of the inclinometer included cheapness, ease of use, better accuracy and
better reliability.
Charlotte et al (1995) presented a portable ergonomic observation method (PEO) for
computerized on line recording of posture and manual handling. In this method data was
collected and stored directly at work place. Observations were made continuously in real
time. When subject ttimed into a posttire or began an activity, the observer hit the
predefined keys (Fig. 2.3) and the software had recorded the start time of the event. When
posture changed or when activity terminated the observer again hit the same keys. This
triggers the software to calculate and store the duration for this event. This data was
accessible for immediate analysis and presentation. Video recording was done for this
method, ft showed acceptable validity for some type of physical exposure and high intra
and inter observer reliability.
Kumar et al (2002) evaluated performance of manual weeders in respect of the
area coverage, overall discomfort and body part discomfort. The higher capacity was
observed in wheel hand hoe. The overall discomfort score i.e. "very tired" in all the cases
was found. Body part discomfort score was 29.5, 26.22 and 23.22 for wheel hand hoe,
crescent hoe and kasola respectively.
2.4 Effect of Vibration on Human Performance
The vibration is defined as oscillatory motion about a fixed point. A vibration is
called periodic when the oscillation repeats itself, ft affects the human performance, ft is
defined usually by itsfi-equency,amplitude, velocity, acceleration and direction, ft affects
the whole body and fts parts such as hands etc.
Sanders and McCormick (1987) defined that the vibration is of two types. The
body continues to vibrate at the same frequency over a considerable period of time, this is
a sinusoidal motion. This is the first type of vibration and called periodic vibration. The
other type of vibration is that of one time shocks and impacts called non-periodic
vibrations.
Trunk/neck rotation > 45°
N450
Tnmk/neck rotation > 45^
(a) Definition sketch of neck and trunk rotation
N<fV n<:>ion > J 0 '
X
f h o u M ^ / level
TrwnJ* r]r*(urt 2o''-60-
60*
r r u r » k n c * J a n ><>o'
(b) Definition sketch of hand position, neck and trunk bending
Fig. 2,3: Sub categories of postures (Portable observation method), Charlotte et al 1995
Bawa and Kaul (1974) conducted study on knapsack power sprayer. They
reported that the vibration levels transmitted to selected parts of the operator besides
causing discomfort could be a source of long-term health hazards. Right hand was
reported going numb and inactive and someone else had to help the subject to get sprayer
off the shoulders after completion of the work.
Pawar (1978) conducted a study on power tiller and concluded that the vibrations
observed at power tiller handle during field operation were considerable (vertical
acceleration 2.366 - 3.467 'G' rms and horizontal acceleration 1.142 - 1.417 'G' rms) at
frequency 125 Hz. It is necessary to reduce the transmission of vibrations to arm either by
isolation from source or reduction in exposure time. It was concluded that excessive noise
level, vibrations, uncomfortable bent posture were an important ergonomic shortcoming
in the power tiller design.
Gupta (1979) conducted a study on power knapsacks sprayer and reported that the
heart rate increased with the vibration to the human body. The heart rate was influenced
both by the frequency of vibration and pad thickness. The heart rate decreased as the
frequency or pad thickness increased. Minimum vibration transmission was reported in
transverse direction. At the head maximum vibrations were recorded in vertical direction
and in the chest region in longitudinal direction. The range of frequencies studied was 40
to 80 Hz. The transmission of vibration decreased with increase in frequency. The
maximum vibration was recorded in vertical direction and minimum in transverse
direction.
Griffin et al (1982) studied the effect of hand grip force on the transmission of
vibration from the handle to the hand and found that an increase in grip force increased
^he vibration level transmitted to the handle.

A study was carried out by Seidel et al (1980) on human response to prolonged
repeated whole body vibration where the subjects were exposed to 3 hours of sinusoidal
whole body vibration in the z-axis with the frequency 4 to 8 Hz, at a constant acceleration
level of Im/s rms. The result showed that the transmissibility decreased during exposure
time at 4 Hz and increased at 8 Hz when a controlled posture was maintained. The result
also showed that at certain frequencies the vibration caused the muscles to produce a
compressive load on the spine at the minimum amplitude of vibration cycle.
Carsloo (1982) reviewed the effect of vibration on the skeleton, joints and
muscles. The vibration damage took place mainly in the joints. Owing to the elasticity
and plasticity of the skeletoh, joints and muscles, the musculo-skeleton system was
capable of absorbing and damping vibration without damage.
Guignard (1985) found that moderate to high magnitude of vertical vibration of
about 2 to 20 Hz produced a cardiovascular response in which heart rate, respiration rate,
pulmonary ventilation rate, oxygen up take, mean arterial blood pressure and cardiac
output increased.
Mehta et al (1997) conducted study on power tiller under different field
conditions. They compared the vibration specified under ISO 2631 (1985) in relation to
the safety of driver. The SUM (overall ride vibration value or vector sum) acceleration
level varied from 0.6 to L4 m/s^ during roto-tilling under different operating conditions
and recommended that exposure time should not exceed 2.5 h. Increase in exposure time
increased severe discomfort, injury and pain.
Kumar et al (1999) conducted survey on the effect of whole body vibration on the
low back of tractor driving farmers in northern India, They concluded that the tractor
driving farmers report backache more often than non4ractor driving farmers but no
^^gnificant objective difference on clinical or magnetic resonance imaging evaluation

were found between the two groups. Regular work related backache was more common
among tractor driving fanners (40%) than among non-tractor driving farmers (18%).
Anthropometrics evaluation showed abdominal girth and weight to be significantly higher
in tractor driving farmers (P == 0.006 and 0.046 respectively).
Griefahn et al (2000) assumed retinal resolution and oculomotor alignment
parallel to vibration axis was impaired by the whole body vibrations transmitted through
the seat. The results based on this study have proved that vertical vibrations solely affect
the visual performance at the same frequency and magnitude. At large amplitudes of
vibrations, speech can be modulated at the exposure frequency. The human movement
control, especially the perception of the state of contraction and tension in the arm and leg
muscles is especially distorted. The Table 2.2 summarizes the findings of different
scientists indicating the resonance occurring at various range of frequency of vibration.
Table 2.2: Frequency range and resonance of the body Parts.
S.No. Frequency Body parts resonating

range (Hz)
1 3-6 Thorax-abdomen system
2 4-5 Over ventilation of lungs, respiratory alkalosis and associated
drowsiness, loss of hand co-ordination, foot pedal control,
reaction time, visual acuity and tracking
3 5-8 Abdominal wall
4 7-11 Anterior chest wall
5 2-20 Heart rate, respiration rate, cardiac output, mean arterial blood
pressure, pulmonary ventilation and oxygen uptake all
increases
6 20-30 Head-neck-shoulder system
7 60-90 Eyeball
8 100-200 Jaw-skull
(Source: Griefahn et al (2000))
Kromer and Grandjean (2000) concluded from the studies conducted for vertical
oscillation applied to seated people that the most intense subjective sensitivity lies in the
frequency range 4 to 8 Hz.

Mehta et al (2000) conducted study on ride vibrations of tractor implement
system. The measured vibration levels under different operating conditions were
evaluated as per ISO 2631 code and found that the SUM vibration levels increased as
forward speed of travel increased under most of the operating conditions. A study
conducted on 2 power tillers found that reducing vibrations by providing isolators
increased comfort of the operator (Anonymous, 2000-02).
2.5 Effect of Noise on Human Performance
Noise has physical, physiological and psychological forms. Physically it is a
complex sound having little or no periodicity. Physiologically it is a signal that bears no
information and whose intensity varies randomly with time. Psychologically it is any
sound irrespective of wave which is unpleasant. The characteristics of noise can vary
widely over an impulsive, intermittent or continuous and composed of low, high or mixed
frequencies. Sound is a form of energy and we can measure its power, pressure etc. To
accommodate the large range of pressure variations that human ear can sense, log scale is
used. The SPL (Sound pressure level) is measured in decibels represented as dB.
SPL = 20 log Po/Pr

Where,
SPL = Sound pressure level
Po = Root mean square acoustic pressure at point of consideration
Pf = Reference pressure, 0.0002 n/m^
Barger et al (1963) reported that more noise required more energy to perform a
task. Noise will decrease the quality and precision of work. Excessive noise gives some
undesirable psychological reaction such as instability, nervousness and fatigue.
Huang and Suggs (1968) conducted study on tractor noise with the human
performance and reported that tractor noise on full load was generally in the range of 101
^^ 109dB (A) at operators ear level and was predominantly at low and medium frequency
^^th a conventional muffler on the exhaust.

Bansal (1983) reported that in India the noise levels of agricultural machines like
tractor, combine harvester and crop protection equipment ranged from 90 to 98 dB (A).
The operators are exposed to these noise levels for duration more than 8 hours a day.
Combustion in engine, cooling and other fans/blowers are major sources of noise in
agricultural machinery. The noise level for tractors ranged from 90 to 98 dB (A), for
threshers and combines, 90 to 96 dB (A) and for power operated knapsack sprayer 93 dB
(A). It was suggested that noisy machine should not be operated for more than 4 h/day.
Monnich (1985) re-examined 402 tractor drivers, already examined in 1974 for
hearing loss and compared the result of hearing loss as indicated by group of an
audiograms. Changes in machinery type and design were also compared. Graphs
indicated the pattern of loss of hearing and the result showed that group of operations
suffered a more severe hearing loss.
Gupta and Jain (1988) conducted the audiometric examination of 8 thresher
operators, before and after a day of work to find out the TTS (Temporary Threshold
Sluff) at frequencies 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 8 kHz on both the ears. It was found that
TTS existed at almost all the frequencies and higher at higher fi*equencies.
Bansal and Dhir (1994) conducted study on the NIHL (Noise Induced Hearing
Loss) among the operators belonging to some villages near Ludhiana District. They
reported that the tractor noise contribute a lot to NIHL among the operators having 5-10
years exposure.
Gayatri (2000) observed that in addition to hearing damage continuous noise can
induce non-auditory physiological efforts. Noise pollution can interfere with speech
communication, sleep, acoustic privacy and cause annoyance thus affecting human
health, comfort and efficiency. Noise pollution also increases the heart rate. The world
health organization (WHO) has recommended 75 dB as the explosive limit for industrial
noise. The Bureau of Indian Standard (BIS) has recommended acceptable noise level in
an industrial area between 45 to 60 dB. The Threshold limit universally accepted under
the Occupation Safety and Health Act (OSHA) is 90 dB for 9 hours, 95 dB for 4 hours,
100 dB for 2 hours and 115 dB for 15 minutes per day. Above 115 dB sound level, it
crosses the threshold of pains.
IS 12207 (1987) recommended that maximum ambient noise emitted by the
tractor and maximum noise at operator's ear level should not exceed 90 dB (A) for 8 h
duration. The Intemational Organization for Standardization (ISO) has considered the
safe limit of exposure to noise for an eight hour working day to be 90 dB(A), for a 30
year working life (Bhattacharya 1999).
2.6 Bio Mechanical Analysis
Biomechamcs is a very powerful tool available to the ergonomist. A
Biomechanical analysis is typically utilized for conditions involving large forces (push,
lifting, holding etc) or work postures that impose stress on the body. In Biomechanical
analysis, the body segments are assumed to be rigid links that rotates about joint centers.
Rigid body mechanism is based on Nevôn's law and deal with the interrelationship
among the forces acting upon rigid bodies. Static analysis involves the calculation of
compression and resolution of forces, moments and torque, such that the body remains in
static equilibrium.
If sum of horizontal and vertical forces and moments are equal to zero, then there
are no forces to result in motion and the system is in a static equilibrium. In static model
the activity can be represented as a two dimensioned task. For static analysis the
information must be obtained are external forces acting on the body and their directions,
body posture and body segment parameters. Once above data identified, simple
trieonometry can be utilize to resolve the external and internal forces into horizontal and
vertical components (Tayyari and Smith, 1997).
Rebuck et al (1975) estimated the segmental mass ratio and location of centre of
nriass of body segments, which are useful in biomechanical analysis (Table 2.3).
Table 2.3: Centre of mass of body segments and segmental mass ratio.
S.No. Body segment Location of the centre of Segmental mass ratio

mass of body segment (%) (percent of body weight)
1 Head 46.6 7.8
LZXZ Trunk 38.0 47.2
3 Total Arm 41.3 5.4
4 Upper Arm 51.3 2.9
5 Fore Arm & Hand 62.6 2.5
r6 Forearm 39.0 1.8
7 Hand 18 0.8
8 Total leg 38.2 17.1
9 Thigh 37.2 10.8
10 Calf and foot 47.5 6.3
11 Calf 37.1 4.6
12 Foot 44.9 1.7
1 13 Total Body 41.2 100
(Source: Rebuck et al (1975))
Winter (1990) estimated the mass of body segments as a percentage of whole
body mass which are useful in biomechanical analysis. Data on the masses of body
segments (Table 2.4) as a percentage of the total body mass were obtained from published
literature (NASA, 1978), Fig 2.4.
Mittal and Malik (1991) conducted study on biomechanical evaluation of lift
postures in adult Koli female laborers. They selected 100 labourers and three lift postures
i-e. squatting, back bent and knee straight and back straight and knee bent and concluded
*^hat the squatting was the best pasture for lifting load. The physical strain in terms of
'ônient and moment-ratio was the least for squatting posture in adult female labourers.
Table 2.4: Mass of body segments as a percentage of the whole body mass.
S.No. Group body segments as a Individual body segment mass as a

percentage of percentage of
Body main part Total body Part of body Group Total body
mass (%) segment mass (%)
mass (%)
r Head & Neck 8.4 Head 73.8 6.2
Neck 26.2 2.2
2 Trunk 50.0 Thorax 43.8 21.9
Lumbar 29.4 14.7
Pelvis 26.8 13.4
3 Total Arm 10.2 Upper Arm 54.9 2.8
Fore Arm 33.3 1.7
4 Total Leg 31.4 Hand 11.8 0.6
Thigh 63.7 10.0
Lower Leg 27.4 27.4
Foot 8.9 1.4
(Source: Winter (1990))
Kroemer et al (1994) described the 'stick person approach' as the basis of
biomechanical models (Fig 2.5). They considered the human body as a mechanical
system disregarding the mental functions. They described the human body as a skeleton
consisting of series of links joined in their articulations and powered by muscles bridging
the articulation in their model.
Delooze et al (1994) proposed a practical biomechanical model to estimate the
lumber moments in occupational activities. They proposed static strength prediction
model (SSPM) to estimate the mechanical load on the low back in manual material
handling. This model needs only a small number of input variables i.e. five body
segment, angles, standing height, total body mass and external load on the hands. On the
above input data base, the model computed the moment of lumbo-sacral intervertebral
joint.
Kroemer et al (1997) developed empirical equations for estimating the mass of
body segments from the total body weight (Table 2,5).

2.8 y.W 1.7%W 0.6%W
10D%W
Fig. 2.4: The segmental body masses as a percentage of the whole body mass.
(Winter, 1990)
T^-,, T..„ r
^'^g- 2.5: Kinematics chain of human body as mechanical system.a

(Kroemer et al, 1994)
Table 2.5: Empirical equations for estimating the segmental mass from total body
weight.
rjNoT" Segment Empirical equation Correlation coefficient

__- Head 0.3060 W+2.46 0.626
2 Head and neck 0.0534 W+2.33 0.726
3 Neck 0.0146W+0.60 0.666
4 Head, neck and torso 0.5940 W-2.20 0.949
5 Neck & torso 0.5582 W-4.26 0.958
6 Total Arm 0.0505 W +0.01 0.829
7 Upper Arm 0.0274 W-0.01 0.826
Fore arm and hand 0.0233 W-0.01 0.762
_"_J^— ! Fore arm 0.0189 W-0.01 0.783
10 Hand 0.0055 W +0.07 0.605
11 Total leg 0.1582 W +0.05 0.847
12 Thigh 0.1159 W-1.02 0.859
13 Shank and foot 0.0452 W + 0.82 0.75
14 Shank 0.0375 W +0.38 0.763
15 Foot 0.0069 W + 0.47 0.552
W = weight of subject
(Source: Kroemer et al (1997))
2.7 Salient Findings from the Review
The perusal of the literature in this chapter thus reveals the following:
1. Heart rate and oxygen consumption are the most important physiological
parameters in the study of human energy expenditure.
2. Body posture, postural configuration, body discomfort and environment affect the
performance of any man-machine system.
3. A technique developed by Corlett and Bishop (1976) for measurement of body
discomfort is simple, easy, cheap and suitable for agricultural workers than the
other techniques which are costly, complicated and include more instrumentation.
4. The low frequency vibrations transmitted to the operator may result in gross
damage to the body and they may be hazardous to health. Noise affects the
performance of operator and decreases the quality and precision of work.
5. Human performance greatly affects the overall performance of the man-machine
system. Ergonomics studies need to be conducted on the machine to improve the
efficiency of the man-machine system without causing any excessive fatigue to
the operator.
CHAPTER III
THEORETICAL CONSIDERATIONS
This chapter deals with the mathematical equations developed for the biomechanical
analysis of selected work situations of agricultural farm workers in the cotton crop.
Biomechanics is the combination of mechanics, anthropometry and basic medical science.
Biomechanics principles are used to study the responses of the human body to loads and
stresses placed on the body in the work place. Biomechanical models are used to analyze the
forces and moments on segments of the body and to compare those forces to muscle strength
limitations to predict stressful work postures and conditions.
3.1 Development of Mathematical Equations for Forces Acting on Body Segments
For the development of mathematical equations, the human body was assumed to be
made up of five major links (1^^ link - Fore arm, 2" link - Upper arm, 3''^ link - Head &
trunk, 4^'^ link - Upper leg, 5^*^ link - Lower leg) joined together to form a kinematics link.
Following assumptions were made for the development of equations:
1. The body is symmetric, with the external load evenly distributed between the right
and left hand.
2. The analysis was made under static conditions.
3. Centre of mass remains constant and can be represented by single point.
4. Body is symmetrical about its sagittal plane.
5. All body parts have uniform density. The weight of body parts was assumed to be
distributed equally throughout each link length.
With the above assumptions mathematical equations were developed for selected
operations like weeding by power weeder, spraying by manually operated knapsack sprayer
31
and power operated knapsack sprayer and picking of cotton in standing and bending postures
in cotton crop. While developing the equations forces acting on various body segments were
resolved in vertical and horizontal planes. For the condition of static equilibrium the sum of
all the horizontal forces, all the vertical forces as well as the sum of moments were separately
taken as zero i.e. X Fx = 0 (the sum of forces in the X - direction == 0), ^ Fy = 0 (the sum of
forces in the Y- direction - 0), ^ M = 0 (the sum of moments about a fixed point = 0).
The following force direction conventions were considered in this manuscript:
1. Forces acting towards gravity were taken as +ve
2. Forces acting against gravity were taken as -ve
3. Forces acting towards ~^ direction were taken as +ve
4. Forces acting towards ^ direction were taken as -ve
5. Moments taken in clock-wise O direction were taken as +ve
6. Moments taken in anti clock-wise O direction were taken as -ve
3.1,1 Forces Acting on Subject during Weeding Operation
This is very important operation in cotton crop. This operation is carried out either by
•khurpa, khosala and wheel hand hoe or by power weeder. The weeding operation performed
hy power weeder by the subject in cotton crop is shown in Fig.3.1 (a). The weeder is
Operated by 5.5 hp diesel engine. The operator steers and pushes the weeder in forward
^direction and walks over the ploughed field. Fig 3.1(b) show the free body diagram of subject
;Qperating the weeder and various forces acting on the body segments/links of the subject.
32
«UBv.
1". *
Fig. 3.1(a): Subject operating the self propelled power weeder.
3«U.l Forces Acting on Forearm (1^* link) during Weeding Operation
Forces acting on forearm (1^^ link) with length \\, and weight Wi in the horizontal and
vertical planes are shown in Fig. 3.2.
Horizontal resolution of forces,
F^ cos 0^ + Fp^y + Ry sin 0i - F^ cos 6^-0 ...(3.1)
Vertical resolution of forces,
F, sin<9^ +W,-F^ sind^-R^ cosî - 0 ...(3.2)
Taking moments about point A^
1
/";,„.. !, sin(9, ~7?, I, +H\ .-^-cos6', = 0
From above equations Ri can be calculated as
W
R^ -—^cosGj "Fp^^ sin9j (3.3)
33
From equation (3.2), we get
F^ sin6^, = i?, 0036*1 + F^ sin(92 ~W^
Kcosa + F . s i n a - ) ^
F =1:1 L_J^ 2 L ... (3.4)
sin 6,
Substituting the value of Fi from equation (3.4) in equation (3.1).
î?i 003^1 +F^sin02 ~W^^
003 6*1 + F/,^ + i?, sin 6*1 - F2 cos ^ 2 = 0
sinî
i?i cos^ 6^ + F2 003 6*1 sin 6*2 -W^ 0036*, + Fp^ sin 6*1 + i?, sin^ 6*1 - F^ sin 6^ cosO^ = 0
i?i(cos^ 6*1 + sin^ 6*1) + ^2(cos6*1 sin$2 ~sin6^ cos62)"^] ^^^^1 "^ ^)^^K în0^=0
R^ +7^2 sin(^2 - ^ i ) = îC0Sî -F^j^sin^,
F2 sin (6*2 - 6*1) = ffj cos 0^ - F^^ sin (9, - i?,
F2 sin (^2 - î) = ~(Ppw sin ^1 + i?i) + ffj cos 0^
Substituting the value of Ri from equation (3.3) gives,
W
F2 sin (02 -0,) = ^cosî +PFj cos^,
W
F2 sin {02 -6*1) = —^003^1
—^COSt'l
F2=-2 ....(3.5)
' sin (^2-^1)
Where,
Fi = force exerted on forearm (1^* link) from upper arm (2"^ link)
F2 = force exerted on upper arm (2"^ link) from forearm (1^^ link)
Fpw = force required for pushing the power weeder in forward direction
Ri = reaction force on fore arm
11 = length of forearm (1 ^^ link)
Wi == weight of fore arm (1^^ link)
01 = minimum angle that forearm (1'^ link) makes with horizontal
02 ^- minimum angle that upper arm (2"^ link) makes with horizontal
34
5.1.1.2 Forces Acting on Upper Arm (2"^ link) during Weeding Operation
Force acting on the upper arm (2"^* link) with length I2 and weight W2 are shown in
pig. 3.3. Applying conditions of equilibrium, we get,
F, COS01 +F3 COS62 -F2 cosGj -F4 cos93 =0 ... (3.6)
F,sinei+W2+F3sine2+F4sin03-F2sinG2 =0 ... (3.7)
Taking moments about point A,
-W,,^cos0^~F,.l, sin[;r-(^2+^3)]^0 ••• O-S)
W
F,sin(02+e3)-"-^cose2
W2 .
^cos92
F , = ^ ...(3.9)
' sin (02+83)
From equation. (3.6), we get
F3 cos 02 = F4 cos ^3 + F^ cos 6^2 - i^ cos 6^
p ^ ^4 gQS^3 + -^2 ^^^^2 --^1 gQsî p 10)

cos (92
Where,
F3 = force exerted on upper arm (2"*^ link) from trunk (3*^^ link)
F4 = force exerted on trunk {^^ link) from upper arm (2"^ link)
03 = minimum angle that trunk & head (3^^ link) makes with horizontal
W2 ™ weight of upper arm (2"^ link)
I2 = length of upper arm (2"^ link)
35
3.1.1.3 Forces Acting on Trunk & Head (3^^ link) during Weeding Operation
Details of forces acting on trunk and head of length I3 and weight W3 are given in
pig. 3.4. Applying conditions of equilibrium, we get,
Horizontal resolution offerees,
F3COS62 4-F5 cos03 +F^cosG4 -F4COS03 = 0 ... (3.11)
F3sine2-hF4sine3 + W 3 + F ^ s i n e 4 - F 5 s i n e 3 - 0 ... (3.12)
Taking moments about point C,
-W^,^-^cosd,~F,.\^ sin[;r-(^3+^4)] = 0 ,..(3.13)
:.e. —- cos 63 + F. sin (63 + 9,) = 0
W3^cos03
n
F6 - . ^^ ^ , ...(3.14)
sm(03+0J
From equation, (3.11), we get,
F5COS03 =¥^ cos 03 -F3COS02 -F^ cos 04
„ F4COS03"F3COS02-F6COS04 ,^ . ^ .
^5 = ^ ••• y^-^^)
COS 03
Where,
F5 ^ force exerted on trunk (3^^^ link) from upper leg (4^*^ link)
F6 = force exerted on upper leg (4^^ link) from trunk (3""^ link)
W3 - weight of trunk & head (3'^ link)
I3 - length of trunk & head (3''^ link)
04 " minimum angle that upper leg (4^^ link) makes with horizontal
36
3 1,1.4 Forces Acting on Upper Leg (4^** link) during Weeding Operation
Details of forces acting on upper leg with length U and weight W4 are given in Fi^
3.5. Applying conditions of equilibrium, we get,
F5 00363 + F^cos04 -F7 003 04 -Fg cos65 ==0 ... (3.16)
F^sine,+F8sine5 + W4-F5sine3-F,sine4=:0 ...(3,17)
Taking moments about point D,
W4 .-^cose4+F8./4sin[Tr-(e4-f65)1 = 0
W
—^cos04+F8sin(e4+65) = O
^00364
R-—2 ,..(3.18)
' sin(e4+e3)
From equation (3.16), we get,
F7 cos 64 =F5COS03 +FgCOS04 -F8COS65
p ^F3C0393+F6COSe4-F8COSe5 ^^ ^ ^^
COS0.
Where.
F7 ^ force exerted on upper leg (4*^ link) from lower leg (5* link)
Fg ™ force exerted on lower leg (5^*^ link) from upper leg (4^*^ link)
W4 = weight of upper leg (4^'^ link)
I4 == length of upper leg (4*^ link)
05 = minimum angle that lower leg (5^^ link) makes with horizontal
3.1.1*5 Forces Acting on Lower Leg (5*^ link) during Weeding Operation
Details offerees acting on lower leg of length I5 and weight W5 are given in Fig.3.6.
Applying conditions of equilibrium, we get,
Where,
R2 = reaction force oh lower leg

W5 = weight of lower leg (5*^ link)
;. Reaction force on lower leg from the ground is,
R^=F^sme^-F^s\ne^'{-Ws ... (3.20)
3.1.2 Forces Acting on Subject While Operating Knapsack Sprayer
The subject performing spraying operation by manually operated knapsack sprayer is
shown in Fig. 3.7(a). The sprayer (approximately 17 kg weight with filled water tank) was
mounted on the back of the subject. One hand of the subject was engaged in pushing and
pulling of the sprayer lever and other was used in handling the boom for spraying on the
plant. This operation demands the subject to walk through the field. The body weight of the
Subject was also partially utilized in this operafion. Fig. 3.7 (b) gives the free body diagram
of the subject operating manual knapsack sprayer and forces acting on different linkages.
3.1.2,1 Forces Acting on Forearm (1^^ Link) while Operating Knapsack Sprayer
Forces acting on forearm with length li and weight Wi in the horizontal and vertical
planes are shown in Fig. 3.8.
Ri sin Gi + Fi cos Bi-Fa cos 62 = 0 ... (3.21)
38
Upp^r leg
(4*^ link)
*S' 3.1 (b )» Yree body diagram of the subject showing forces acting on the different body
parts during weeding operation
Forearm
(1'^ hnk)
Fig. 3.2: Forces acting on fore arm (!'* link) during weeding operation
Trunk &He<Ki
(3^[irxk) Forearm
Fig. 3.3: Forces acting on upper arm (2"''Unit) during weeding operation
Trunk &Head
(3^^ link)
(K^^3"^4) - - ^
Fig. 3.4; Forces acting on trunk & head (S***'link) during weeding operation
upper leg
(4*^ iitik)
Fig .3.5 Forces acting on upper leg (4"" link) during weeding operation
te ^ H M ^ M U
Lower leg
Fig. 3.6: Forces acting on lower leg (S*"" link) during weeding operation
TSRT
Fig. 3.7(a): Subject operating the knapsack sprayer.
Vertical resolution of forces.
Fsp + Wi + Fi sin e 1 ~ Ri cos 91 - Fa sin 62 = 0 . (3.22)
F,u. I, §0§J9, ^ ,I^J, + Wy^-^m^0, :^ 0
W
i.e.
From above equations R\ can be calculated as
W
Rj ~—'-cosBj +FspCos9i (3.23)
From equation (3.21), We get
FjCOsBj -F2COSG2 -R^sinB^
42
_ Fj 00302 - R i S i n 9 ,
(3.24)
COS0,
Substituting the value of Fi from equation (3.24) in equation (3.22),
F2 00302 ~ R | sinGj
Fsp +W, +sinG, Rj COS0, -F2 3in02 = 0
COS0,
FgpCOsG] + WjCOS0i +F2 3in0;cos02 - R j sin 0i - R j cos Gj - F j sin02 0030, = 0
F^^j, cos 0^ ~\-W^cos0^ 4-F2 (sin 6*1 0036*2 "^036*, 3ini92)-i?i(sin^ 6*, 4-cos^ '9,)==0
Fspoos0,+W, 0030,+F2 s i n ( 0 , - 0 2 ) - R , = 0
W.
FspOos0, + W| 003 0, +F2sin(0i - 0 2 ) ' 003 01 +Fsp ^*^sQ
W
F2sin(0i-02) + ^ o o s 0 , - 0
W.
OOS0
F,= (3.25)
sin(e,-e,)
Where.
Fi force exerted on forearm (1^^ link) from upper arm (2'^^ link)
F2 force exerted on upper arm (2"^ link) from forearm (1^^ link)
Fsp force required for pushing & pulling of the lever of knapsack sprayer
and boom weight
Ri reaction force on fore arm
li length of forearm (1^^ link)
Wi weight of fore arm (1^^ link)
0] minimum angle that fore arm (1^^ link) makes with horizontal
62 minimum angle that upper arm (2"^ link) makes with horizontal
43
3.1.2.2 Forces Acting on Upper Arm (2"^ link) while Operating Knapsack Sprayer
Force acting on the upper arm with length I2 and weight W2 are shown in Fig 3.9

Fi COS0, +F3COS02 -F2COS92 -F4COS93 - 0 ... (3.26)

FiSinGj +W2 +Rjsine2 +F4sine3 -F2sine2 = 0 ... (3.27)
Taking moments about point A
'-W^hcos0,-F,,l^sm[7r-{e^-^0^)] =O ... (3.28)
F,sin(e2+e3)- ^cose2
W2 .
^cosB2
v=—2 (3 29)
' sin (02+63)
F3 cos 02 = FA ^^S ^3 + ^2 ^^^ ^2 "" P\ ^^S 6',
^ F^ cos (93 -i- F2 cos 6*2 ~ F^ cos 6^1 .^ _ ,

cos6'2
V Where,
F3 = force exerted on upper arm (2"^ link) from trunk (3"^^' link)
F4 = force exerted on trunk (3^^ link) from upper arm (2'^^ link)
W2 == weight of upper arm (2nd link)
03 = minimum angle that trunk & head (3^^*^ link) makes with horizontal
g3.1.23 Forces Acting on Trunk & Head (3"^^ link) while Operating Knapsack Sprayer
Details of forces acting on trunk and head with length I3 and weight W3 are given in
% . 3.10. Applying conditions of equilibrium, we get,
Horizontal resolution of forces^
44
FjCosej+FsCosej+FgCOse^-F^cosejÔ ... (3.31)
ygitical resolution of forces,
F3sine2+F4sine3 + FK+W3+FgSine4-F5sine3=0 ...(3.32)
faking moments about point C,
-)^3.^cos^3-F^.-^cos^3-F<i.l3sin[;r-(^3+^4)] = 0 ... (3.33)
W F
- ^ cos 6*3 + - ^ cos G^ + Fg sin [9^-{-6^) = Q
F,sin(e3+ej COS0
V2 4y
00803
2 4
F^ :^ " , ^ , ••• (3.34)
' sin (e,+9 J
from equation (3.31), we get,
F5 cos 63 = F^ cos 63 - F(3 cos 9^ - F3 cos 92
F ^F,cos93-F6Cos9,-F3Cos92 ^^
cos 93
Where,
F5 = force exerted on trunk (3*^^ link) from upper leg (4^*^ link)
F6 = force exerted on upper leg (4^'^ link) from trunk (3'^'^' link)
Fk == load (weight of knapsack sprayer) canied by trunk of the subject
W3 = weight of trunk & head (3'"'' link)
I3 - length of trunk & head (3'^ link)
O4 = minimum angle that upper leg (4^^ link) makes with horizontal
'1.2.4 Forces Acting on Upper Leg (4^'' link) while Operating Knapsack Sprayer
Details of forces acting on upper leg (4^ link) with length U and weight W4 are given
^ Fig. 3.11. Applying conditions of equilibrium, we get,
'horizontal resolution offerees,
45
F5COS63 •fF^cos94 ~î cosG^ -Fgcos03 =0 ... (3.36)
F^sine^+FgSine^ + W,-F5sin03-F7sin04 - 0 ... (3.37)
W
— ^ cos (94
Fg-—2 (338)
' sin (^4+^5)
F7 cos 04 = F5 cos 03 + Fg cos 04 - Fg cos 05
p ^ F3COS03+F6COS04-F3COS03 ^2 ^^^
cos ©4
Where,
F7 = force exerted on upper leg (4^'^ link) from lower leg (5^'^ link)
Fg = force exerted on lower leg (5^*^ link) from upper leg (4^'^ link)
I4 = length of upper leg (4^"^ link)
05 = minimum angle that lower leg (5^^ link) makes with horizontal
3.1.2,5 Forces Acting on Lower Leg (5^*^ link) while Operating Knapsack Sprayer
Details of forces acting on lower leg (5^*^ link) of length I5 and weight W5 are given in
Fig.3,12. Applying conditions of equilibrium, we get,
~/?2 - Pi sin^4 + ^5 + Fg sin^5 - 0
Where,
R2 = reaction force on lower leg

W5 = weight of lower leg (5^'^ link)
•'. Reaction force on lower leg from the ground is,
R2-F8sin05-F,sln04+W5 ... (3.40)
46
Forearm
Tmnk & Head
Upper Leg
Fig. 3.7 (b ): Free body diagram of the subject showing forces acting on the different body
parts while operating knapsac sprayer
Forearm
Fig. 3.8: Forces acting on fore arm (P* link) while operating knapsack sprayer
Upper arm
Fig. 3.9: Forces acting on upper arm (2"^' link) while operating loiapsack sprayer
Taink & Head
..nHnnnMH
l^'ig. 3.10; Forces acting on Trunk & Head (3'^'link) while operating knapsack sprayer
Upper leg
(4^ lirik)
Fig. 3.11: Forces acting on upper leg (4*'' link) while operating knapsack sprayer
Lower Ug
Fig. 3.12: Forces acting on lower teg (5"' link) while operating knapsack sprayer
4-9
3.1.3 Forces Acting on Subject while Operating Power Knapsack Sprayer
The power operated knapsack sprayer (approximately 22 kg weight with filled water
tank) was mounted on the back of the subject. The body weight of the subject was also
partially being utilized in this operation. The sprayer hose was handled by the subject and
was moved over the plant for spraying. The spraying operation performed by the Power
operated knapsack sprayer is shown in Fig 3.13 (a). The details of free body diagram of
subject operating power knapsack sprayer and forces acting in various linkages are shown in
Fig.3J3(b).
«v
«^»
- w *
Fig. 3.13(a): Subject operating the power knapsack sprayer.
3;L3.1 Forces Acting on Forearm (1^^ link) while Operating Power Knapsack Sprayer
Forces acting on forearm with length \\ and weight Wi in the horizontal and vertical
planes are shown in Fig. 3.14.
50
•R^ sin 9^ - F2 cos Oj-^-F^ cos ^j = 0 ...(3.41)
-F^ sin 0^ - R, cos^, - F^ sin^2 + )>)^ + F^ = 0 (3.42)
F ^ . / i C o s e , + W , . ^ c o s e , - R j / , =0
W
i.e. Fp,. cos9| 4-—^cosG, - R j =0
From above equations R\ can be calculated as
W
(3^43)
R, =Fi^ . cosBj +—^cos01
F^ cos (9, = F2 cos 02 + 7?i sin (9i
F^ cos9^ +RiI sin9

^..^^^
F,= (3.44)
COS0,
Substituting the value of Fi from equation (3,44) in equation (3.42),
sin6'. F2 cos ^2 +-^1 si^î i?, c o s ^ , - F 2 s i n ^ 2 + ^ +^// ^ 0

cos^,
FT COS 0-^ sin 6*1 - i?, sin" 0. - 7?, cos^ 0. - F, sin (9^ cos(9, + )^, cos 0, + F,, cos ^, = 0
-^2 (sin (9| cos 6^2 4- cos ^, sin d^J'^ ^\ (^^^^ *î + "^^^^ ^1) ^ ~ ^ ^'^^ î " ^// ^*^^ î
F, sin (6^1 + 6^2) == )^ cos ^1 + F^^ cos (9, - 7?,
^tibstituting the value of Ri from equation (3.43) gives,
51
w
/s sin(6', +6*2) ^ Wj cos9, 4-Ff^ cosG) ~F,^ cos9j ^cosG
W,
F2sin(^,+^2)--^cose,
—'-cosB,
F,--V~^ •..(3.45)
sin(0i +62)
Where,
Fi = force exerted on forearm (1^^ link) from upper arm (2'^^ link)
F2 = force exerted on upper arm (2"*^' link) from forearm (1^^ link)
FH = weight (spraying boom) can'ied by the forearm of the subject
Rt == reaction force on fore arm
li = length of forearm (1^^ link)
Wi = weight of fore arm (1^^ link)
9i = minimum angle that fore arm (1^^ link) makes with horizontal
02 = minimum angle that upper arm (2" link) makes with horizontal
3,1.3.2 Forces Acting on Upper Arm (2"^ link) while Operating Power Knapsack
Sprayer
Force acting on the upper arm with length I2 and its weight W2 are shown in Fig 3.15.
F, COS0, -fF3COs92 -F2 cos02 -F^ cos83 = 0 ~ ... (3.46)
F,sin02+F4sine3 + W2-F;sine,-F^sine2 - 0 ,.. (3.47)
~W, hcosd,-F, A, sin[;r -(^2 +^3)] ^ 0 ••' (3-48)
52
w
F, s i n ( 0 2 + 6 3 ) - ^cosG,
^ 0 0 8 02
F4=—^ ... (3.49)
Fj COS0] +F3 cos 02 = F2COS02 + F4 cos 03
F3COS02 = F2 cos 02 +F4 COS 03 - F j COS0,
F^ COS 9^ + F^ COS 0^-F. cos 0^ ,. ^^^

F^^— ^ —z;r ...(3.50)
cos6'2
Where,
F3 = force exerted on upper arm (2"^ link) from trunk (3' link)
F4 == force exerted on trunk (3*^^ link) from upper arm (2'^^ link)
03 = m i n i m u m angle that trunk & head (3^^ link) makes with horizontal
W2 == weight of upper arm (2nd link)
I2 = length of upper arm (2"^^ link)
3,1.3.3 Forces Acting on T r u n k & Head (3"* link) while Operating Power K n a p s a c k
Sprayer
Details of forces acting on trunk and head of length I3 and weight W3 are given in
Fig. 3.16. Applying condition of equilibrium, w e get,
Horizontal resolution of forces
F3COS02 H-Fg cos03 +F^ COS04 -F4 cos03 ^ 0 ... (3.51)
^Vertical resolution of forces,
F3sin02+F4sin03+Fps + W3+F6sin04-F5sin03 - 0 ... (3.52)
53
- l ^ , . - ^ c o s ^ 3 - ^ / ' . s ^ ' - c o s ^ , - F , A,sm[n-{e^ + 0,)] = 0 ... (3.53)
^cosG,+-^cose,+Rsin(G3+ej =0
- W F
Ffi sin (9, + 9,) = '- cos B, — ^ cos 9,
^W3^Fp3^
COS 63
F6- ^ ^ , / ' , , ...•(3-54)
5111(93+94)
F3 cos 92 + F5 cos 93 + F^ cos 94 - F4 cos 93 = 0
F5COS93 =F4 COS 93 - F ^ COS 94 -F3COS92
^F4Cos93-ficos94-F3COs93
cos 93
;:Where,
F5 = force exerted on trunk {3^^ link) from upper leg (4^'^ link)
F6 = force exerted on upper leg (4^'^ link) from trunk (3"^^ link)
Fps = load (weight of power sprayer) carried by trunk of the subject
W3 - weight of trunk & head (3'"^ link)
I3 = length of trunk & head (3'^ link)
64. === minimum angle that upper leg (4^^ Hnk) makes with horizontal
3.1.3,4 Forces Acting on Upper Leg (4*** link) while Operating Power Knapsack Sprayer
Details offerees acting on upper leg (4*'^ link) with length I4 and weight W4 are given
in Fig. 3.17. Applying conditions of equilibrium, we get.
F5COS93 -f F6Cos94 -F7 cos94 -FgCos95 ~ 0 ... (3,56)
54
Vertical resolution offerees,
F6sine,+F8sine5H-W4-F5sine3-F7sine, =0 ... (3.57)
W4.^cose4-fFg./,sin[7i-(e4+05)] = O
-^cose.+Fo since,+65) = 0
W
-^^cose^
R-—2 ....(3.58)
' sin (9, 4-63)
F, cosB^ =F5Cos03 +F6 00304 -FgCOsGj
F5 COS 303 +
F^ ^ - 5
F^ cos 04-8- Fg cos5 05
-6——4 (3 5 9 )
cos 04
Wiiere,
F7 = force exerted on upper leg (4^*^ link) from lower leg (5^^ link)
Fg = force exerted on lower leg (5**^ link) from upper leg (4^'^ link)
I4 = length of upper leg (4^'^ link)
65 = minimum angle that lower leg (5^'^ link) makes with horizontal
3.1.3,5 Forces Acting on Lower Leg (5^*^ link) while Operating Power Knapsack Sprayer
Details of forces acting on lower leg (5^'^ link) of length I5 and weight W5 are given in
Fig.3.18. Applying conditions of equilibrium, we get,
Where,
R2 =^ reaction force on lower leg
W5 = weight of lower leg (5^*^ link)
Reaction force on lower leg from the ground is,

R, - Fg sin^5 - F) sin^4 + ff^ .... (3.60)
55
Upper arm
(2^^ lii^.)
Trunk & Head
Upper kg
(4* link)
(S'^lmk)
% 3.13 ( b ) : Free body diagram of the subject showing forces acting on the different body
parts while operating power knapsac sprayer
f\
56
Upper aiTn
(2'^ link)
Forearm
(r* linlc)
Fig. 3.14: Forces acting on fore arm (P* link) while operating power knapsac sprayer
Upper arm
(2*^ link)
Fig, 3.15: Forces acting on upper arm (Z""* link) while operating power laiapsac^sprayer
57
Trunk & Head
Fig .3.16; Forces acting on trunk&head(3'''link) while operating power knapsac^sprayer
Ti
D V^4
Upper leg
4(\
Fig .3.17: Forces acting on upper leg (4*^ link) while operating power knapsac sprayer
Lower leg
^'*g. 3.18 :Forces acting on lower leg (5*Mink) while operating power knapsac^sprayer
58
3.1.4 Forces Acting on Subject while Picking Cotton Bolls in Standing Posture
The subject carried bag for collection of picked cotton bolls. The subject picked the
cotton bolls from plant and put them into the bag. Some picking force was required during
picking of cotton bolls from the plant. The subject moved forward while picking the bolls
and putting them in bag. The subject picking cotton bolls from the plant in standing position
is shown in Fig 3.19 (a). The details of free body diagram of subject while picking the cotton
bolls in standing posture and forces acting on different linkages are shown in Fig. 3.19 (b).
4/ * -'
3 » -* \ ^ .
Fig. 3.19(a): Subject picking the cotton bolls in standing posture.
3J.4.1 Forces Acting on Forearm (1^^ link) while Picking Cotton Bolls in Standing
Posture
Forces acting on forearm (1^^ link) with length li, and weight Wi in the
horizontal and vertical planes are shown in Fig, 3.20.
Fy cos 6^ - /?, sin 6y - Fp^^ cos (p^^ - F^ cos 6*2 = 0 ..,(3.61)
59
-i^ sin 9^ ~ i?, cos 6^ - F^,,^, sin ^^,^ - F^ sin 6*2 + ff, == 0 (3.62)
from above equations Ri can be calculated as
W
i?, - ^ c o s ^ , -iv,,,sin((9, +^^,,0 (3.63)
F^ cos 0^ = R^ sin 0^ + F,,.^ cos (^j,,. + F2 cos 6*2
_ i?j sin 6^1 + Fp.^. cos ^^,y + F2 cos 6*2

F= ...(3.64)
COSî
Substituting the value of Fi from equation (3,64) in equation (3.62).
^ i?i sin 6', + Fy,.^. COS {zJ^,. + F2 cos 02

-sin6', - i?i cos (9| - Fy,.^. sin ^^^^ - F-^ sin OÂ-W^ =0
COS 6*,
-i?, sin" (9, - Ff,.^ sin (9, cos (p^^^ ~ ^2 siri (9, cos 0^ - i?, cos^ (9, - 7^/,,.^, cosfi*!sin ^^,^, - F2 cos d^ sin 6*^ + )?j cos i9| = 0
-Rîshv 0^ + c o s ' ^ , ) - F^,^.^,(sin6', cos^/,^^. + 0036*, sin^/,_^.) ~ F2(sin6*, 0086*2 +cos6'| sini92)+ 1^ cosfi", ~ 0
W
-[-F/,,^ sin(6?i + (f>j,^^) 4-"J-cos6^,] - F^,^, sin(0^ + ^^,.,) - F2 sin(0^+0j)-^W^ cos^1 ^ 0
W
•F,sm(0^+0,)-\-~^cos0^ =0
W.
cos 6,
F.= ..(3,65)
sin (9, +62)
60
Where,
Fi = force exerted on forearm (1^^ link) from upper arm (2"^ link)
F2 = force exerted on upper arm (2" link) from forearm (1^^ link)
Epic = force required for picking of cotton bolls from the plants in
standing posture
li = length of forearm (1^^ link)
01 = minimum angle that fore arm (1^^ link) makes with horizontal
02 = minimum angle that upper arm (2"^ link) makes with horizontal
0 PS = minimum angle which Fpic makes with the horizontal
3,1,4.2 Forces Acting on Upper Arm (2"*^ link) while Picking Cotton Bolls in Standing
Posture
Force acting on the upper arm (2"^ link) with length I2 and its weight W2 are shown in
Fig 3.21. Applying conditions of equilibrium, we get,
F, cos9, +F3COS02 -F2COSG2 -F4COS03 = 0 ... (3.66)
F3sin92+F4sin63 +W2 - F , sinG, -•F2sin02 - 0 ... (3.67)
ffaking moments about point A,
-^W^hoosd^'-F^,l^sm[7r-{0^-\'O^) =O ...(3.68)
-W
F,sini0^+0,):=—^cos^2
—^ cos 02
F , - ^ ,..(3.69)
^ sin(02+03)
Prom equation (3.66), we get.
61
F^ cos 9j + F3 cos 03 = F2 cos B^ + F^ cos 63
F3 cos02 ~ F2 cos 02 +F,( cos03 ~ F, cos0|
F2 cos©2 + F^ cos63 -Fi cos9,

F3- COS02 •••(3-70)
Where,
F3 = force exerted on upper arm (2 link) from trunk (3'^' link^

F4 = force exerted on trunk (3^^ link) from upper arm (2"^' link")
W2 = weight of upper arm (2"^ link)
63 - minimum angle that trunk & head (3^^ link) makes with horizontal
3.1.4.3 Forces Acting on Trunk i& Head (3 link) while Picking Cotton Bolls in
Standing Posture
Details of forces acting on trunk & head of length I3 and weight W3 are given in Fig
F3COS02 H-F5COS03 +F6COS64 - F ^ COS03 = 0

(3.71)
F3 sin 02 + F4 sin 63 + W3 + F^^ sin 64 - F5 sin 63 - 0 ,..(3.72)
-ff3.-^cos^3-F,.l3sin[;r-(^3+0,)]-O ...(3.73)
W
~icose3+F(iSin(e3+e4)=:0
^cosi9,
62
From equation (3.71), we get
F5COSG3 = F4 00863-F^ cos O4 -F3COS92
F ^F4^Qse3-F^cos94-F3CQs92 ^
008 03
Where,
F5 - force exerted on trunk (3'"'^ link) from upper leg (4^*^ link)
F6 = force exerted on upper leg (4^^ link) from trunk (3^^ link)
W3 - weight of trunk & head (3'"* link)
I3 = length of trunk & head (3'^ link)
64 = minimum angle that upper leg (4^'^ link) makes with horizontal
3,1.4,4 Forces Acting on Upper Leg (4**^ link) while Picking Cotton Bolls in Standing
Posture
Details of forces acting on upper leg with length U and weight W4 are given in Fig.
F5COS63 +F^cos04 ~F^ cosG^ -Fg00305 - 0 ...(3.76)
F6sine4+F8sine5 + W4-F5sine3-F^sine4=0 ... (3.77)
W,.^cose^+Fg./4sin[Tc~(e,+e5)] = 0
w
~^cose4+F8sin(e4+es) = 0
w
R=—-2 ..,(3.78)
' sin (9,+65)
63
^ /^'niT
Fj 00303 ^F^ 00804 -F^cosG^ -Fgcos05 ^ 0
F^ cos 6^ = F^ cos 6*3 + F^ cos 0^ - Fg cos 6^
P ^ ficos03+F6Cos0,~F8CosG3 ^^^^
cos 04
Where,
F7 = force exerted on upper leg (4^^ link) from lower leg (5^'^ link)
Fs = force exerted on lower leg (5^'^ link) from upper leg (4^'^ link)
W4 = weight of upper leg (4^*^ link)
I4 = length of upper leg (4^*^ link)
05 = minimum angle that lower leg (5^'^ link) makes with horizontal
3,1.4,5 Forces Acting on Lower Leg (5-th link) wliile Picking Cotton Bolls in Standing
Posture
Details offerees acting on lower leg of length I5 and weight W5 are given in Fig.3.24.
-R, - F, sin 9^^W^^ F^ sin ^5=0
Where,

W5 = weight of lower leg (5^'^ link)
A Reaction force on lower leg from the ground is,
R2-Fssin05-F,sin04 + W5 ... (3.80)
64
upper arm
(2^ link)
Trunk & Head
Upper leg
(4^^* Unk)
Lower leg
(5^^ link)
*'^g» 3.19 ( b ) : Free body diagram of the subject showing forces acting on the different body
parts while picking cotton bolls in standing posture
6^
upper aim
(2"^ Imk)
AorB
Foreai-m
Fig3.20 Forces acting on fore arm (P4ink) while picking cotton bolls in standing posture
Upper aiTn
Foreami.
Fig 3.21: Forces acting on upper arm (2"''link) while picking cotton bolls in standing posture
Tivrk & Head

(f^ link)
^^8' 3„22: Forces acting on trunk & head (3'"'' link) while picking cotton bolls in standing postiin
upper leg
(4*^ link)
Fig. 3.23: Forces acting on upper (leg 4'" link) while picking cotton bolls in standing posture
Lower leg
(5* link)
1st m m fs, ea ea ta m tn » « p ^ ^ ^Si e» m m i^-m st
li<.
V - .24: Forces acting on lower leg (S*" link) while picking cotton bolls in standing posture
3.L5 Forces Acting on Subject while Picking Cotton Bolls in Bending Posture
The subject performs picking operation in bending posture is shown in Fig 3.25(a). An
extremely stooping posture has to be adopted for this operation since finger of the subject has
to reach the lower part of the plant for picking of the cotton bolls. Also the subject has to
move forward while picking the cotton bolls from the plant along with collecting them in the
bago The details of free body diagram of subject while picking the cotton bolls in bending
posture and forces acting on different linkages are shown in Fig. 3.25 (b).
tf ^fj^
'r r /*->^^ '\ ^ i v ^
Fig. 3.25 (a): Subject picking the cotton bolls in bending posture.
3;1.5ol Forces Acting on Forearm (1^* link) while Picking Cotton Bolls in Bending
Posture
Forces acting on forearm (1^^ link) with length li, and weight Wi in the
horizontal and vertical planes are shown in Fig. 3.26.
Horizontal resolution offerees.
68
-F^ cos O^-F^ cos 6^ + Fp^ cos (l)p^ ~ 0 (3.81)
-i?i - Fjî^ sin (zi;,/^ - F^ sin ^2 + 'î + -^ sin 6^, = 0 (3.82)
Taking moments about point A^
i?i. 1, cosî ~W^ , ^ c o s ^ i -F/,^ 1, sin(^, -^^,^) = 0
From above equations Ri can be calculated as
W.
cos(9i +F^>^sin(6'i -(/)y,^)
R^ = (3.83)
cos<9,
F^ cos 6^1 = Fj,f^ cos (/>p^ - F2 cos 6-^
Fpf^ cos ^p^ - F2 cos 6*2

F = ...(3.84)
cos^,
Substituting the value of Fi from equation (3.84) in equation (3.82).
Fy,^ cos (z^p;^ - F^ cos 6^2

•R^ ~ Fpj^ sin (l)pi^ - F2 sin (92 + (^1 + sin (9, -0
003 6*,
-i?i cos (9j - Fp^ sin ^^^ cos ^j - F2 cos ^, sin 0^ + )^, cos (9j 4- Fpj^ sin 6^j cos (p^^ - F2 sin 6*, cos O-^-Q
:v~i?, cos 6^j + Fp^ (sin 6*^ cos ^^^ - cos 6^1 sin (Zi^,^) - F2 (cos 6*, sin 6^2 + sin 9^ cos (92) + ^, cos 6^, = 0
|~/?(Cos6^ 4-i^./jSin(^ - ^ ; , ^ ) ] - i ^ s i n ( 6 ^ + ^ ) + f]>^cos^ - 0
W
—Lcos^,-F2sin(^,+^2) + ^ c o s ^ , - 0
69
•F,sm(0, +^2) + - ^ c o s ^ , = 0
2
—^cos9j
F _ _ 2 L ... (3.85)
sin (01 +92)
Where,
Fj = force exerted on forearm (1^^ link) from upper arm (2 li^^^)

F2 == force exerted on upper arm (2"^^ link) from forearm (1 ^^^^)
FpB = force required for picking of cotton bolls from the plants m
bending posture
li = length of forearm (1^* link)
01 -= minimum angle that fore arm (1'^ link) makes with horizontal
02 = minimum angle that upper arm (2"^ link) makes with horizontal
0 PB ^ minimum angle which Fpo makes with the horizontal
3.1.5.2 Forces Acting on Upper Arm (2"^ link) while Picking Cotton Bolls in Bendmg
Posture
Force acting on the upper arm (2"^^ link) with length I2 and weight W2 are shown m
Fig 3.27. Applying conditions of equilibrium, we get,
-F,cos0^ -F^cosOj + / ^ c o s ^ +i^^cos^ - 0 ••' ^^'^^^
F;sinei+W2+FiSine2+F;sine3-I^sine2=0 ...(3.87)
faking moments about point A,
-P^.^cos^-fi^,l2sin(^~^)-0 ....(3.88)
70
F4 sm(02 - 6 3 ) = —^cos02
^ COS 02
F , - .^,„ ,, ...(3.89)
sm(92 - 6 3 )
From equation (3.86),
F^cos6'2 = F^ cos^j H-F2C0S^2 "F^ô^d-i

F ^FigQse,+F2Cose2-F,cose3 ^^ g^^
cosG,
'Where,
F3 = force exerted on upper arm (2" link) from trunk (3"^ link)
F4 = force exerted on trunk (3^*^ link) from upper arm (2" link)
W2 = weight of upper arm (2nd link)
B3 = minimum angle that trunk & head (3^^^ link) makes with horizontal
3,1.5,3 Forces Acting on Trunk & Head (3'^ link) while Picking Cotton Bolls in Bending
Posture
Details of forces acting on trunk and head (3rd link) of length I3 and weight W3 are
s;|iven in Fig. 3.28. Applying conditions of equilibrium, we get,
>Horizontal resolution offerees,
F3COS02 +F4 cos03 -F5COS03 -F^ cos9^ =0 ... (3.91)
F3sin92+F^sin03 4-W3+F6sine4-F5sine3-O ... (3.92)
faking moments about point C,
W3.^cos03+F,./3sin[7c-(03+0J]-O ... (3.93)
71
w
F6sin(e3+ej--—^00363
^ cos 63
¥,^-^ ^ ...(3.94)
sin (83+94)
F5 cos 63 = F3 COS 02 4- F4 COS 63 - F^ COS 9^
F3COS02 +F4COS93 -F(3COS94 /o QCN

F
COS 93
Where,
F5 = force exerted on trunk (3'^ link) from upper leg (4^^ link)
F6 = force exerted on upper leg (4^'^ link) from trunk (3*^ link)
W3 = weight of trunk & head (3'^ link)
I3 - length of trunk & head (3'^ link)
84 = m i n i m u m angle that upper leg (4*'^ link) m a k e s with horizontal
3J.5.4 Forces Acting on Upper Leg (4^'' link) while Picking Cotton Bolls in Bending
Posture
Details of forces acting on upper leg (4^'' link) with length I4 and weight W4 are given
in Fig. 3.29. Applying conditions of equilibrium, we get,
- i ^ c o s ^ -T^cos^ + i ^ c o s ^ +/^cos^ =0 ... (3.96)
F;3sin94+W4+F8sin95~F;sin93-F;sine4=0 ,.,(3.97)
72
w
W4 A
—^cosG^
F7 cos 64 =F5Cos93 +F^cos94 -FgCosBs
F ^F5^Qs63+F6Cose4-FgCOse3
^ cosB^
Where,
F7 = force exerted on upper leg (4^*^ link) from lower leg (5^'^ link)
Fg = force exerted on lower leg (5^^ link) from upper leg (4^'^ link)
W4 = weight of upper leg (4**^ link)
I4 = length of upper leg (4^'^ link)
05 = m i n i m u m angle that lower leg (5^^ link) makes with horizontal
3.1.5,5 Forces Acting on L o w e r Leg (5*'^ link) while Picking Cotton Bolls in Bending
Posture
Details of forces acting on lower leg (5^^ link) of length I5 and weight W5 are given in
Fig.3.30. Applying conditions of equilibrium, we get,
~i?2 - ^7 sin ^4 + H^5 4- Fg sin ^ 5 - 0
:;Where,
W5 "= weight of lower leg i.e. 5^'^ link
: •*• Reaction force on lower leg from the ground is,
R^-W^+FgSinGs^F^sine^ .., (3,100)
73
Upper arm
Foreann
Upper Leg
Fj-B Tp^^
Fig. 3.25 ( b ) : Free body diagram of tlie subject showing forces acting on the different body
parts while picking cotton bolls in bending posture
14"
Forearm
0PB
Fig. 3.26: Forces acting on fore arm (1'^ link) while picking cotton bolls in bending posture
pper ai*m p
Hg. 3.27: Forces acting on upper arm (2"'' link) while picking cotton bolls in bending posture
Tnmk & i4ead
'^•g. 3.28: Forces acting on trunk & head (3''^'link) while picking cotton bolls in bending
posture.
Upper Leg
Fig .3.29: Forces acting on upper leg (4*^ link) while picldng cotton bolls in bending posture
Lower Leg
âh vxa msa «ra ^ her -43^ sm 8b â is^ ga v^ ^ <^ - ^ ^
^% 330: Forces acting on lower leg (5^'' link) while picking cotton bolls in bending posture
•v^
CHAPTER IV
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The ergonomic study on power weeder, knapsack sprayer, and power operated
knapsack sprayer and picking of cotton In bending and standing position were carried out to
study the human physiological response, body posture, body discomfort and effect of
vibrations. The field experiments were carried out at Department Research Farm, Punjab
Agricultural University, Ludhiana, in years 2004 and 2005 on cotton crop. The details of
selection of variables for investigation are explained. The procedure followed for calibration
of the subjects, equipment and instruments used, experimental procedure and statistical
design of experiments have been discussed in this chapter under different headings.
4,1 Selection of Dependent and Independent Variables
4.1.1 Dependent Variables
Five dependent variables such as heart rate, postural configuration, overall
discomfort, body part discomfort and vibration were taken to find out the effect of selected
independent variable on them.
4.1,1.1 Heart Rate (HR)
It was measured in terms of heart beats/min. Workload on the subjects working on the
machine was determined by using subject characteristic curve obtained through subject
calibration on computerized treadmill. Exerting of human energy in any form will cause an
increase in heart rate. It is chosen because it could be monitored continuously with the help
of heart rate monitor without stopping the activity and disturbing the subject in the field.
e^f^
4.M-2 Postural Configuration
It basically includes the curve position of spine (trunk). Improper work posture can
cause mild to severe fatigue in human body. Inclination of spine during weeding, spraying
and picking operation are different. Hence postural configuration was selected and it was
recorded on the sheet by measuring the deviation or deflection of spine from its normal
position using flexi curve.
4.1.1.3 Overall Discomfort Rate (ODR)
The discomfort is the body pain/unrest arising as a result of working posture and
excessive stress on muscles due to various agricultural activities performed by the subjects.
For the assessment of ODR a 7- point scale (0 = no discomfort, 7 = extreme discomfort) was
used (Corlett and Bishop, 1976).
4.1.1.4 Body Part Discomfort Score (BPDS)
The body part discomfort score (BPDS) is the measure of localized discomfort which
may restrict the duration of work depending upon the static load involved and the technique
suggested by Corlett and Bishop (1976) was used to assess it. Intensity of pain experienced
by the subject along with its location was identified under this analysis by using the pain
intensity scale.
4J.L5 Vibration
The vibration experienced by the operator is generally complex. The low frequency
vibration transmitted to the operator may affect vision, reaction time and physiological
response. The vibration may resuh in gross damage to the spine which lead to pain and
discomfort in the back. The magnitude of vibration could be expressed in terms of peak to
peak acceleration, The root mean square (rms) value of vibration was taken as it is used in
78
engineering. This is the square root of the mean value of the square of the acceleration
recorded. The root mean square acceleration value is the root relevant measure of amplitude
because it takes the time history of the wave into account and gives an amplitude value which
is directly related to the energy content, and therefore the destructive abilities of the
vibration. The vertical vibration or longitudinal direction (foot or buttocks to head) is most
sensitive to vibration in the frequency range from 4 to 8 Hz. Human response to vibrations in
the X-direction (back to chest) and the Y- direction (right side to left side) do not differ and
in this lateral (transverse) plane, human response is greatest in the frequency range from 1 to
2 Hz (ISO 2631).
4,1.2 Independent Variables
Subjects: Three subjects of different age groups and body dimension were selected for the
experiments. The various body dimensions/anthropometric data of the subjects are given in
Table 4.1.
Type of Machine/Activities: The machine/activities considered for the studies are as
follows:
• Power weeder
• Manual knapsack sprayer
• Power knapsack sprayer
• Cotton bolls picking in standing posture
• Cotton bolls picking in bending posture
Power weeder
Duration of experiments (D) = 40, 50 minutes
Forward speeds (F) - LO, 1,5, 2.0 km/h
Manual Knapsack Sprayer
Noofstrokes/min(L) - 11±1, 16±1, 21±1
79
power Knapsack Sprayer
Engine Speeds/RPM (E) 4000, 5000, 6000 rpm
Cotton Bolls Picking in Standing Posture
Duration of picking (S) = 40, 50, 60 minute
Cotton Bolls Picking in Bending Posture
Duration of picking (B) 30,40, 50 minute
Table 4.1: Anthropometric data and other physiological characteristics of the subjects.
;S.No Particulars Subjects

Al A2 A3
(Baldev Singh) (Suraj Lai) (Thakur Singh)
1 Age 33 42 49
2 Weight ,Kg 78 74 62
3 Stature 164.9 169.7 163.4
4 Vertical reach 212.2 213 211
:5 Eye height 154.6 160.6 153.9
6 Acromial height 143.3 144.6 139.6
: 7 Elbow height 106.4 109.9 103.2
8 Olecranon height 104.3 108.1 102.2
9 Knee height 48.7 50.8 48.3
:^ 10 Span 174.1 179.1 179.5
- 11 Arm reach from the wall 82.3 82.4 84.9
:;: 12 Waist back length 47.4 43.4 41.2
prA3 Hand length 18.7 19.1 18.1
L; 14 Grip diameter(outside) 10.9 10.1 10.1
IT 15 Biacromial breadth 38.8 38.9 36.1
::: 16 Inter scye breadth 38.4 34.7 32.3
1 17 Foot length 26.3 26.1 25.7
%:\ 18 Sitting height 81.6 80.6 82.2
l::/:i9 Sitting acromion height 60.4 53.2 60.1
s; •" 20 Knee height sitting 53.2 53.4 51.8
>• '^:2l Functional leg length 94.9 94.4 94.1
I T 22 Buttock Knee length 56.8 56.7 54.5
11-23 Buttock popliteal length 43.7 44.7 40.7
¥ui^24 Shoulder grip length 70.6 71.3 73.5
§^-25 Elbow grip length 35.7 34.3 34.6
T^_26_ Forearm hand length 47.6 47.4 47.8
5:--iI_ Hip breadth sitting 33.5 32.6 29.8
TF^8~ Elbow -elbow breadth 48.7 46.5 45.7
sitting
''"ElEI Resting heart rate (bpm) 74 78 76
- *all d mensions are in cm otherwis e soecified
80
4.2 Instrument Used in the Study
4.2.1 Anthropometer
Anthropometer was used to measure the dimensions of various body parts of the
subject. It consists of a platform which carries a vertical graduated rod and number of small
size graduated rods to measure the height of the subject and other horizontal distances. The
rods can also be rotated about their axes and can be locked in any position with the help of
wing nuts.
4.2.2 Treadmill
A CAT EYE computerized treadmill was used for subject calibration in the
laboratory. It consists of control unit, handle and main body. The main frame consists of
endless belt, side rails, motor and power switch. The side rail was used while selecting a
programme or in case of emergency. During walking on the endless belt the operator can take
support of handle. The control unit consists of liquid crystal digital displays (LCD) for time,
speed, distance, inclination. There are four inbuilt programmes. The +/- button is provided to
change the speed and inclination.
An endless belt of 51 cm width was moved by 2,5 hp variable speeds D.C. motor
which has 1 to 18 km/h speed options. The inclination of running belt is changed from 0 to
12 % slope. The specification of tread mill is given in Appendix - A. The workload (WL) of
the subject on the treadmill was calculated by using the formula:
WL (hp) - WV Sine/4500
WL (Watts) = 0.1657 WV S i n e
Where,
WL = work load
81
W = weight of the subject (kg)
V = speed of running belt (m/min)
0 = inclination of running belt with horizontal (degree)
4.2.3 Computerized Heart Rate Monitor
Heart rate of the subject was monitored using POLAR heart rate monitor (Polar
vantage NV). The machine consists of chest belt transmitter, elastic strap, receiver unit and
interface. The complete setup of the machine is shown in Fig. 4.1. The electrodes in the
transmitter sense the beats of heart and transmits these signals to wrist receiver without any
physical contact with it. The receiver displays these signals in digital form or beats per
minute (bpm). The specifications of heart rate monitor are given in Appendix - A. For
wearing the transmitter the backside of transmitter was made wet with water and attached to
the chest belt and worn around the chest of the subject just centre of the lungs. The chest belt
was fitted around the chest of the subject as shown in Fig. 4.2.
Polar receiver receives the signal from belt transmitter and display the heart rate of
the subject in beats per minutes (bpm). It has ability to record up to 134 hours data with
different interval of 5, 15 and 60 seconds. The receiver unit must be placed within the one
meter range of transmitter belt. The receiver has provision to setup high and low target zone
limits. When the subject reached the limits of heart beat it indicated through alarm. The
receiver is water resistant to 20 meter water column. Polar interface unit is used to down load
the heart rate data from the receiver to the computer. The heart rate values on the computer
can be displayed in graphical form representing time vs. heart rate values, maximum heart
âte, minimum heart rate and average heart rate. Polar Precision Software facilitate in
82
transferring data from wrist receiver to computer when interfacing was done. It acted as
instrument media for transferring the data.
Fig. 4.1: Complete set up of polar heart rate monitor.
Transro.+te''
:)
/* >* ^»
Fig, 4.2: The polar heart rate monitor fitted on the subject.
83
4.2.4 Oxylog2
The oxylog2 is a portable instrument which was used for measurement of oxygen
consumption (VO2) during subject calibration in the laboratory. The subject wears a face
mask with inspiratory and expiratory valve to which was attached a turbine type flow meter
to measure inspiratory volume. Expired air passed through a flexible tube connected to the
instrument. The difference between the inspired and expired air can be measured in the
instrument and the value of oxygen extracted from the breath can be calculated and displayed
both as minute oxygen consumption and as cumulative or total oxygen consumption. Data
can be stored internally every minute during use and could be retrieved by serial link, when
the instrument is connected to computer. Up to 16 individual tests could be recorded, within
the total inclusive storage time of 2000 minutes. The detailed specification of oxylog2 is
given in Appendix - A and shown in Fig. 4.3.
aiibration
ocket
Fig. 4.3: Complete setup of Oxylog2
84
4.2.5 Anemometer
A digital van type (L.T. butron AM-4201) was used to measure the velocity of air
through sprayer hose of power knapsack sprayer. The anemometer had 18 mm liquid crystal
display. It had facility to measure velocity in m/s, km/s, ft/s and knots (nautical miles per
hour). It required a DC, 9 V batteries for power supply and consumed approximately 9 mA.
The detailed specification is given in Appendix - A.
4.2.6 Pressure Gauge
This was used to measure the operating pressure of the knapsack sprayer at the
nozzle. It carried divisions from 0-10 kg/cm with a least count of 0.5 kg/cm .
4.2.7 Wet and Dry Bulb Thermometer
An ordinary wet and dry bulb thermometer was used to measure the temperature at
the time of experiments. The temperature was also measured at the time of subject calibration
in the laboratory.
4.2.8 Flexicurve
Flexi curve was used to measure the deviation of the spine from its normal position
at the time of work. The dimensions of Flexicurve are 300 x 10 x 10 mm.
4.2.9 Body Discomfort Rating Chart
It was used to measure body part discomfort score. It was drawn on the drawing sheet
showing body diagram divided in to 18 numbers of regions, on the basis of Corlett and
Bishop Technique, Fig. 4.4 shows the body diagram chart used during the experiments.
4.2.10 Overall Discomfort Rating Scale
The scale was used to indicate the level of overall discomfort of the subject after the
completion of experiments. A wooden scale of about 70 cm length was fabricated having 0 to
85
7 digits marked on it at equal distance. The scale is shown in Fig. 4.5. A movable pointer was
provided to indicate the rating of overall discomfort.
4.2.11 Tachometer
The tachometer was used to measure the rpm of engine of power knapsack sprayer
and power weeder. The least count of tachometer was 10 rpm.
4.2.12 PULSE Multi Analyzer System
The machine vibration, human vibration and noise of the power weeder and
power operated knapsack sprayer were measured by PULSE multi analyzer system (Bruel &
Kajer Type 3560C). The transducer used for vibration measurements was the piezoelectric
accelerometer. The machine is a versatile, task oriented analysis system for vibration and
noise analysis. It provides the platform for range of PC-based measurement solution. Type
3560 C is a portable system powered by internal batteries or an external DC supply. The base
software for a PULSE system is vibration and noise analysis type 7700. A view of equipment
with all accessories is shown in Fig. 4.6. The detailed specification of the machine is given in
Appendix A. The PULSE system uses a portable data acquisition front-end type 2827 with an
input/output conditioning module performing pre-processing and digitizing the transducer
signals. Type 2827 can either be powered by two nickel-metal hydride batteries or from a 10-
32V DC power supply. An external 190-240 V AC supply unit is included for powering of
mains. In a PULSE system, type 2827 is used for powering and interconnecting an interface
module and an input/output module. The interface module handles communications with the
PC while the input/output module handles measurement inputs. The modules are a 6/1-
channel input/output module type 30324 and LAN interface module type 7533. A 6/1 -
channel input/output module type 30324 was used for multi-channel acoustic and vibration
86
1. Neck
2. Left Shoulder
3. Right Shoulder
4. Left Upper Arm
5. B.ight Upper Arm
6. Left Forearm
7. Right Forearm
8. Left Wrist Palm
9. Right Wrist Palm
10. Upper Back
11. Lower Back
12. Buttack
13. Left Thigh
14. Right Thigh
15. Left Lower Leg
16. Right Loviêr Leg
17. Left Foot
18. Right Foot
Fig 4.4: The chart showing body diagram used for body part discomfort score.
Scale for crveraif dmcomfort rati-iis
0 = No discomfort 4 - .MocicraTc c'uvcomtort

1 - Verv verv lidu disconnoM ".^ Ik-'aw di-..-v'nirort
\%v iidit discomfort ••> • \erv lieaxv vhsconitbrt
-?._-
=• I..iaht discomfort Ixtlc'i ort ! •>•-.
Fig. 4.5: A scale used to measure overall discomfort rating.
87
nieasurements. Each input channel has independent CCLD/direct and preamplifier input
connectors allowing any combination of transducers. It had overload detection for out-of-
band frequencies. Out of 6 input channels, 4 channels were used for measuring whole body
vibration and hand transmitted vibration simultaneously since whole body vibration was
measured in three axis (x, y and z) and hand transmitted vibration in one axis (x or y or z).
LAN Interface Module type 7533 was used for interfacing portable data acquisition front-end
to a PULSE system via LAN (Local Area Network), It controls and routes all communication
between the PC and the input/output module. It provides sampling clock for the input
module, synchronization interface for system with multiple front ends and connection of
remote control for sound intensity measurements.
Vibration and Noise Analysis Software Type 7700 provides Fast Fourier Transform
(FFT). The front-end hardware and transducers are automatically detected and data can be
exported in a variety of formats with advanced graphical display for use with external
applications. Vibration and noise analysis software includes an analysis engine.
Hand Arm Transducer Type 4392 set includes one miniature accelerometer, hand
adapter and the integral cable. The accelerometer is mounted on the adapter which transmits
the vibration from the hand to the accelerometer directly. This avoids the problem of
mounting of accelerometers on tool handles. Hand adapter is mounted on the hand so that the
mounting block sits over the first knuckle of the middle finger and its base plate is positioned
very close to the centre of the hand. On the right hand it fits between the middle and ring
fingers. On the left hand it fits between the middle and index fingers.
ENDEVCO Istron Accelerometer 751-10 is a low cost lightweight piezoelectric
accelerometer with integral electronics designed specifically for measuring machine
88
vibration. It has high output sensitivity, high signal-to-noise ratio and wide bandwidth. It is
used either with an insulated mounting stud or with a magnet or a tape.
Microphone Type 2669 gives precision acoustic measurements and operates over a
wide range of humidity, temperature and other environmental conditions. The preamplifier
has very high input impedance presenting virtually no load to the microphone. The high
output voltage together with an extremely low inherent noise level gives a wide dynamic
range.
4.2.13 Novatech Force Transducer
The F 201 range of force transducer was used for tension and compression force
measurement. It consists of a precious machined cylinder operating as the strain element.
Bonded foil strain gauge was mounted on the cylinder in a compensating bridge network.
The load cell was designed to produce the optimum amount of measuring element strain
relating to total signal output of high linearity and low hysteresis. It has female end treads
and can be easily fitted as a force link in measuring system. The 40 kgf transducer was used
for this study.
43 Measurement of Variables
4.3.1 Heart Rate
The measurement of heart rate was done with POLAR heart rate monitor because it
allows the heart rate measurement without any hindrance to the subject, The POLAR heart
rate monitor setting was done before the start of experiments. The settings of the functions
like time^ date, recording interval, threshold values, reception distance and memory deletion
were done as per instruction given in the manual.
89
Fig. 4.6a: Sowing hand arm vibration measuring set up.
Portable Data
Accfuisition NOtO B o o l c
ront End
i Hand Arm
m^
mph^ne EMOOVOC Isimn
Fig. 4.6b: Complete set up of PULSE multi analyzer system.
90
For recording the heart rate data, the transmitter was wet first at the electrodes and
fixed on the subject's right hand or left hand wrist. Subject was asked to bring the transmitter
at a distance of 1 meter from the object. The select button of the receiver was pressed twice,
and heart rate reading appeared on the screen. Now set/start/stop switch was pressed once to
start the recording of heart-rate. When the experiments finished then the set/start/stop switch
was once again pressed and the recording of heart rate stopped. After completion of one day
experiments, the recorded data was downloaded in the computer with the help of interface.
The heart rate was recorded continuously with an interval of 60 s in all the experiments. It
was found that initially heart rate increased and it took five minutes to stabilize at a specific
level depending upon the workload. Thus in all the experiments the average heart rate was
taken excluding initial five minute data.
4.3.2 Oxygen Consumption
Before the measurement of the oxygen consumpfion, the calibration of the oxygen
sensors and the volume measuring turbine was done as follow:
1. Volume turbine was connected to the main instrument by plugging its lead into the
socket leveled "turbine/ charger".
2. To check & access the "calibration mode", the left hand * button was pressed and kept
it depressed and momentarily pressed the R button.
3. Pressed the * button in order to proceed with the next stage this showed the status of the
battery.
Battery : 5.1 Volt
Bar Pressure : 746 mm hg.
Temp
Next
Pressing the * button once more advanced the programme to the menu asking
recalibration. The screen displayed
Oa Mask : 20,9%
O2 Air : 22,9%
Calibrate
No Yes
5. In order to calibrate the oxygen cells, the # button was pressed to generate the display.
Fit Absorbent Tube
Press when ready
5. It was made sure that the two tubes of drying agent were in position and that neither
was connected to the SAMPLE nipple. The # button was pressed once more to produce
the display showing:
PUMPING AIR
PLEASE WAIT
7. The machine again displayed after completion of the oxygen cell calibration:
O2 Mask : 20.9%
O2 Air : 20.9%
Calibrate
No Yes
8. Since both O2 was 20.9% so * button was pressed again.

9. The volume calibration was invoked
Check Turbine
Press Known Volume
Next Calibrate
In two stage the current volume was checked by using the Syringe or go to next.
10. The * (Next) button was pressed once again to revert to previous display. The next
display on the screen was:
START NEW TEST
No Yes
11. Maximum time data that could be stored is 2000 minutes subjected to a maximum of 16
individual tests. When YES was pressed all the previous stored data was deleted and it
displayed.
2000 Minute Remain
12. When No was pressed the Machine displayed the following:
1556 Minute remain
Reset Data Stored
Data will be Lost
No Yes
92
13. Pressing the * button displayed the following:
Suppress Display
No Yes
14. Selecting * button in the machine the screen displayed the following format;
A 0 Minute Total
BREATH 0 0
VOL. LTR. 0 0 0
VO2 LTR. 0 0 0
15 With the help of this machine the information could be obtained during the experiments
are number of breath, volume of breath (liters), volume of oxygen consumed (litres) per
minute and also their total consumption.
16. The stored data was down loaded in the computer with the help of software.
4.3.3 Body Discomfort
4.3.3.1 Overall Discomfort Rating (ODR)
For the assessment of over all discomfort rating a 7 point psychophysical rating scale
was used. At the end of each trails subject was asked to indicate his overall discomfort rating
on the scale with the help of pointer. The 7- point scale was:
0 == No discomfort
1 == Very very light discomfort
2 = Very light discomfort
3 == Light discomfort
4 - Moderate discomfort
5 ™ Heavy discomfort
6 = Very heavy discomfort
7 = Extreme discomfort
4.3.3,2 Body Part Discomfort Score
A body mapping was made on a chart paper. After the completion of each experiment
^he subject was asked to indicate the most painftil region of his body part on the chart shown
93
with the help of a pointer. After this he was asked to indicate the next most painful part and
this process was followed till no further pain/discomfort was reported. The intensity level of
pain was assigned to each of body parts groups, which were identified before 'No pain' in
descending order. It means body part with highest intensity of pain was assigned the first
group and the lowest one, the last group. Thus the pain intensity level of each reported body
part decided the score of each individual group calculated by multiplying the number of body
parts involved in it and its respective level of pain intensity. Then total body part discomfort
score was calculated by adding all these individuals' scores.
4.3,4 Postural Configuration
For each experiment bending angle in normal body posture and in working posture
were measured for each subject using flexicurve. Flexicurve was placed on the spine of the
subject and was pressed in such a way that the shape of curvature of spine as shown in Fig.
4.7 was obtained. It was then removed carefully and was placed on the chart paper and its
underside was traced on the paper to get the curvature of spine. Two tangent were drawn at
both the ends of curve obtained and the inner angle of the intersection of there two tangents
was taken as the bending angle. This process was followed in both normal body posture and
working body posture. Hence normal bending angle and working bending angle were
obtained. Net bending angle was obtained by the following formula.
Net bending angle (NBA) = W - N
Where,
N = normal bending angle = 180 - Z X
W ~ working bending angle = 180 - Z Y
ZX ~ bending angle of spine in normal posture
Z Y == bending angle of spine in working posture
94
"J.V'JI
K'§
'• * ^
i 7*
Fig. 4.7: Measurement of postural configuration during picking using flexicurve.
4.33 Vibration
The power weeder and power knapsack sprayer were kept in stationary mode. The
accelerometer was mounted on engine top, chassis, gearbox, root of handle bar and handle
for power weeder where as for sprayer the accelerometer was mounted on engine exhaust and
body frame. The machine vibration was measured using ENDEVCO Istron model 751-10
accelerometer of the B & K instrument. Vibration signals in the vertical mode were recorded
by employing Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) technique using the FFT analyzer built in the
PULSE multi-analyzer system. The trial was conducted at different engine speeds for both
the machines. Each trial was repeated for three times with an acquisition period of 30 s and
the peak value arrived from the spectrum was averaged for each engine speed.
The power weeder was put in proper test conditions before starting the experiments.
The vibration was transmitted to the hand from the handle of the power weeder and to the
arm of the subject from the palm of his hand. The hand transmitted vibration was measured
at handle grip level using the Piezoelectric accelerometer (B&K, type 4392) transducer. It
95
was inserted between the middle and index fingers of left iiand of each subject by a tape
since the force output from index and middle finger was larger than that from ring and little
finger. The right hand was used for operating the controls. This was carried as per instruction
manual. Measurement of vibration of power weeder was carried out at selected levels of
forward speeds (1, 1.5, 2.0 km/h). The PULSE programme was activated after the power
weeder was started for the experiments and the measurement were recorded with an
acquisition period of one minute after an interval of five minute between two readings.
The power knapsack sprayer was put on the back of the subject. The transducer was
fixed on the shoulder girdle of the subject by a tape. Measurement of vertical vibration of
power sprayer was carried out at selected levels of engine rpm i.e. 4000, 5000, 6000 rpm.
The PULSE programme was activated after the sprayer was started for the experiment and
the measurements were recorded with in acquisition period of 60s within an interval of 3
minute between two readings. The overall weighted acceleration values for different
operating conditions were compared with the values of Table 4.2 and the human reactions
for all the operation of power weeder & power knapsack sprayer were determined.
Table 4.2: Description of human reaction as per British Standard (6841, 1987).
_>_ Weighted rms acceleration ms"^ Description of human reactions

^ < 0.315 Not Comfortable
0.315-0,630 A little uncomfortable
__^ 0.500-1.000 Fairly uncomfortable
^__ 0.800-L600 Uncomfortable
,,_ 1.250-2.500 Very uncomfortable
L_ > 2.000 Extremely Uncomfortable
96
4.3.6 Noise
The noise was measured for power weeder and power knapsack sprayer under
stationary conditions (Fig. 4.8) using portable PULSE multi-analyzer system for
measurement of vibration and noise TYPE 3560C with 12.5 mm microphone pre amplifier.
Pre-amplified noise signals were recorded by PULSE multi analyzer system and were then
analyzed by a real time frequency analyzer in one third octave band. A-weighting filter was
used to measure noise levels for simulating the response of ear to noise. The background
noise level was 10 dB below the level which was measured during the test. No obstacle like
building, solid fence, tree or other vehicle was present to reflect the significant sound (IS:
12180, 1987). For the determination of safe exposure level of the operator, the observed
values were plotted in the occupational noise exposure standard curve (Fig. 4.9), Emerson
1975 and IS 12207, 1987.
4.3.7 Force Measurement on the Knapsack Sprayer Handle
The force applied by the subject on the handle of knapsack sprayer was measured by
using 40 kg capacity Nova Tech Transducer in the laboratory. A laboratory setup was
developed for the calibration of the force transducer (Fig. 4.10). A rigid end of transducer
was fixed to the frame of the stand. At another end of transducer, hook was attached to apply
load on the transducer. Input terminal of transducer was connected with the display unit. The
amplification factor was determined by putting maximum expected load on the transducer
and the load indicated on the screen was noted. The AF (amplification factor) was calculated
by using the formula:
AF = Load applied on force transducer/Load indicated by display unit
97
Then the transducer was calibrated by applying load 0 - 18 kg. The corresponding
indicated load for loading and unloading were recorded. Three replications were recorded for
calibration of the transducer. For the measurement of force, the lever of the handle was cut
and transducer was fixed on the handle using L-shaped iron rod (Fig. 4.11). The force applied
by the arm on the handle of knapsack sprayer was measured in the laboratory for different
combinations of number of strokes on all the subjects.
4^
Mioit^^Kmef
Fig. 4,8: Measurement of noise at operator's ear level under stationary mode on power
weeder.
4„4 Field Experiments
The field experiments were conducted on power weeder, knapsack sprayer, power
knapsack sprayer (detail specifications are given in Appendix B) and picking of cotton in
bending and standing posture in the cotton field for various combinations of independent
variables. Both laboratory and field experiments are explained in the following sub sections.
98
Fig. 4.9: Occupational noise exposure standard curve (IS12207, 1987).
4.41 Calibration of Subject
To evaluate physiological workload using heart rate, the relationship between heart
rate and oxygen intake for each subject was determined. Both the variables were measured
simultaneously in the laboratory at a number of different workloads. This process is known
as calibrating the heart rate - O2 relationship for subject. Since the relationship between the
two variables is linear, a subject's heart rate, when it is subsequently measured in the field
can be converted into oxygen intake by using reference of the laboratory data, estimates of
energy expenditure during work can than be calculated from oxygen consumption data.
The subjects were briefed about procedure to be adopted for calibration. The
metrological data (temperature & humidity) were also recorded. The minimum temperature
was 22.5 *^C and maximum 26,1 ^C with an average of 24 J "C during subject calibration in
99
the laboratory. The calibration charts obtained were used to determine the workload and
energy expenditure on the subject during the field experiments.
Fig. 4.10: Laboratory set up for the calibration offeree transducer.
Fig, 4.11: Laboratory set up for force measurement on handle of knap sack sprayer.
100
A CATEYE computerized treadmill was used for subject calibration (Fig. 4.12). For
calibration the initial programme 'quick starts' was used. The initial trails on the treadmill
showed that 6% inclination and speed upto 6 km/h was sufficient to get the desired level of
heart rate and oxygen consumption for all the subjects. Therefore 6% inclination was kept
constant throughout the calibration and workload was varied by changing the speed of
treadmill. The following steps were involved in subject calibration.
1. Before the start of calibration, subject was allowed to rest for a minimum of 30 minutes.
2. Oxylog2 turbine transducer was fixed on the mouth and nose of the subject and the
turbine pipe and lead was fixed with the oxylog2 turbine socket.
3. Polar heart rate transmitter belt was affixed on the chest of the subject and wrist receiver
was fixed on the hand of the subject.
4. The speed and inclination of the treadmill was adjusted at 1 km/h and 6% respectively by
selecting +/- sia^
5. The subject was asked to walk on the endless belt of the treadmill for 15 minutes. The
heart rate and oxygen consumption per minute were recorded.
6. Then the speed was increased to 1.5 km/h, keeping slope constant at 6%.
7. After 30 minute rest or when the subject heart rate was in normal range or rest range, the
subject was asked to walk on the treadmill for increased speed i.e. 1.5 km/h with 6%
slope and step 5 was followed.
8. The above procedure was followed for all the speeds upto 6 km/h with the step of 0.5
km/h for all the three subjects.
9. Three replications were taken for each speed.
4.4.2 Field Evaluation
The experiment was conducted at different time interval of the day between 8 AM to
5.00 PM in the field as the effect of environmental condition causes change in heart rate. To
minimize the effect of variation in environmental factors, the treatments were given in
101
randomized order. All the three subjects were equally trained in all the operations. The
subjects were given information about the experimental requirements so as to join up their
full support during the experiments. They were given 30 minutes rest before starting the
experiments. After resting, subject was asked to operate the machine/operation for the given
duration. The duration of experiments was fixed on the basis of preliminary trials.
Fig. 4.12: Laboratory set up for the calibration of subject on computerized treadmill.
The study was divided in three phases: weeding by using power weeder, spraying by
using manual knapsack sprayer and power knapsack sprayer and picking. The picking
operation was evaluated in two body positions i.e. bending and standing. The evaluation of
power weeder was carried out on two time duration (40 and 50 min) with three speeds (1.0,
1.5 and 2.0 km/h), Fig. 4.13. It was carried out on all the subjects with three replications. The
dependent variable viz. heart rate, postural configuration, vibration, body discomfort were
measured during the machine operation.
102
^«vt U p
a) A view of power weeder in operation.
Vibration
MeasurcrriL'nt
Set Up
-' ^ ^ Transducer
•*3
î^
b) Another view of power weeder in operation with complete vibration setup,
Fig. 4.13: Operation of power weeder by the subject during field experiment.
103
The manual knapsack sprayer was operated by the subjects in the cotton field (Fig.
4.14). The number of strokes taken was i.e. 11, 16 and 21. Three replications were made on
all the combinations of experiment. The dependent variable viz. heart rate, body discomfort
and postural configuration were recorded. The power knapsack sprayer was evaluated on
three subjects with three engine speeds i.e. 4000, 5000 and 6000 rpm (Fig. 4.15). The
dependent parameters like, heart rate, body discomfort, postural configuration and vibration
were recorded. Three replications on each treatment were taken.
The picking done by the subject was evaluated in two postures i.e. standing with
three time duration - 40, 50, 60 min and bending posture with three time duration - 30, 40, 50
min (Fig. 4.16). The three replications for each experiment were taken. The dependent
parameters like heart rate, postural configuration and body discomfort were recorded.
^
p''5S5'^rsMea3-^9"ê''.;
Fig. 4.14: A view of manual knap sack sprayer operated by the subject in the field.
104
Fig. 4.15: A view of power knap sack sprayer operated by the subject.
4.5 Statistical Design of Experiments
Various experiments on different machines/operations (power weeder, knapsack
sprayer, power operated knapsack sprayer and picking in both positions i.e. standing and
bending) were designed as RBD (Random Block Design). RBD was selected to reduce the
effect of field parameters on the dependent variables, within the replications. Each replication
for all the experiments was carried out in separate block of the field. Each block was divided
in to the required number of plots of equal size. Different combinations of the experiments
were carried out in the randomly selected plots within the block. The data of all dependent
vaxiables were analyzed by using CPCSl, software.
105
^v
•r<-*j
rr-sd'. .'<«•*
? •-•
a) A view of picking of cotton by the subject in standing position.
- '\^,
ffm^ '^r •• • • -
-^ ••f>?«i
. * • t . •••'
4.
^ ' ' ^ *-<?

b) A view of picking of cotton by the subject in bending position.
Fig. 4 J 6: Picking of cotton under two positions of the subject.
106
CHAPTER V
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
This chapter deals with the results and discussion of ergonomic studies carried out
on agricultural workers performing selected farm operations such as weeding by power
weeder, spraying by knapsack sprayer and power knapsack sprayer and picking in
standing and bending postures in cotton crops.
5.1 Calibration of Subjects
Three selected subjects were calibrated for heart rate and workload and heart rate
and oxygen consumption on treadmill under the laboratory conditions. The calibration
charts are presented in Figs. 5.1 and 5.2 (Appendix C). The relationship between heart
rate and oxygen consumption of the subjects was linear at all speeds of treadmill. The
linear relationship differed from one subject to other due to physiological differences.
The regression line reveals that for one watt workload the increase in heart rate was by
0.79 beats/min for subject Al, 0.86 beats/min for subject A2 and 0.65 beats/min for
subject A3. These regression coefficients were statistically significant at 5% level of
significance. Similar relations were observed for oxygen consumption and heart rate. The
R value was maximum for subject A3 (0.99) and for subject Al and A2 it was 0.97.
5.2 Calibration of Force Measurement Transducer
The Nova Tech 40 kg capacity transducer was calibrated in the laboratory for
different loads keeping amplification factor 3,1 (Fig, 5,3). The calibration curve for
loading and unloading was almost overlapping which showed the linearity and absence of
creep in transducer's response. The graph obtained was a straight line passing through the
107
140
y = 0.7973X + 72.478
130 R^ = 0.98
y = 0.645X + 75.487 • Subject A1
_ 120 n « Subject A2
R^ = 0.9! A Subject A3
E
I 100 J y = 0.7385X + 68.99

90 R^ = 0.96
80
70
60
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Workload (watts)
Fig. 5.1: Subject calibration curve between heart rate and work load on treadmill for all
three subjects.
y = 60.731x +47.056
R^ = 0.99
• Subject A1
• Subject A2
A Subject A3
y = 49.893X + 62.326
R2 = 0.98
0.3 0.5 0.7 0.9 1.1 1.3 1.5 1.7

Oxygen consumption (i/min)
Fig. 5.2 :Calibration curve between heart rate and oxygen consumption on treadmill for
all three subjects.
108
6.00 6.00
y = 0.3153x+0.01
o> 5.00 -•— Loading 5.00 it
O) Unloading
4.00 4.00 I
(0
C3
_o 3.00
"O 3.00 I
<1>
4-»
(0 2.00 2.00 «
o
(S
1.00 1.00 =5
0.00 0.00
0 10 15 20
Applied load (kg)
Fig. 5.3: Calibration curves for force transducers in loading and unloading.
origin having coefficient of regression, R as 1 and was used for interpretation of the
force data applied on the knapsack sprayer handle by the subject.
The sprayer was operated in the laboratory at all the combinations of strokes i.e.
11,16 and 21stroks/min by the subject. The value displayed in the display unit was noted.
The force applied on the handle of knapsack sprayer varied between 2.9 to 5.63 kgf
When subject operated sprayer at 11 strokes/min, the force was 2.98 to 3.61 kgf, at 16
strokes/min, the force at the handle varied from 3.8 to 4.23 kgf and at 21 strokes/min the
force ranged from 4.14 to 5.63 kgf.
5.3 Weeding by Power Weeder
5.3.1 Effect of Time Duration, Subject and Forward Speed on Heart Rate
The heart rate of subject Al was 98, 101 and 107 bpm respectively for 40 min
time duration at three forward speeds i.e. 1.0, 1.5, 2.0 km/h (Table 5.1). The heart rate for
subject A2 at 40 min time duration was 103, 110 and 116 bpm and for subject A3 it was
109
93, 97 and 101 bpm respectively at 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 km/h forward speed. The heart rate
for all the subjects for 50 min time duration increased with increase in forward speed
(Fig. 5.4). The effect of time duration, subjects and forward speed on heart rate was
highly significant at 5% level of significance (Table 5.2). Interaction between time
durations and subjects was significant whereas other interactions were non-significant.
The heart rate of all the subjects at 1,5 km/h was within acceptable limit and 40 min time
duration has come under moderate work category. The increase in heart rate with increase
in speed and time duration was mainly due to increase in work load on the subject.
Table 5.1: Effect of time duration, subject and forward speed on heart rate and oxygen
consumption while operating power weeder.
Time Subject Forward Heart rate Oxygen Workload Energy

Duration speed (bpm) consumption (watt) Expenditure
(min) (km/h) (1/min) (kJ/min)
Mean S.D. Mean S.D.
40 Al 1.0 98 1.50 0.72 0.03 39.33 14.94
1.5 101 3.11 0.78 0.06 43.59 16.26
2.0 107 3.06 0.89 0.06 51.11 18.58
A2 1.0 103 0.53 0.92 0.01 37.84 19.11
1.5 110 3.57 1.04 0.06 47.24 21.69
2.0 116 3.40 1.14 0.06 55.01 23.82
A3 l.O 93 2.89 0.61 0.06 27.70 12.76
1.5 97 2.67 0.68 0.06 33.20 14.30
2.0 101 2.23 0.77 0.05 39.79 16.15
50 Al 1.0 100 0.93 0.76 0.02 42.38 15.89
1.5 105 3.44 0.85 0.07 48.27 17.71
2.0 112 2.82 1.00 0.06 58.44 20.85
A2 1.0 110 3.86 1.03 0.06 46.60 21.51
1.3 115 4.91 1.13 0.08 53.96 23.53
2.0 125 4.73 * <n&l^0.08 66.28 26.91
A3 1.0 100 1.47 0.76 0.03 38.43 15.77
1.5 106 2.41 0.87 0.05 47.06 18.19
2.0 X i. ^ 2.91 0.99 0.06 56.08 20.72
110
Table 5.2: Analysis of variance for heart rate (bpm) while operating power weeder.
FACTOR MEAN
f l m e Duration (D) 102.94(D1) 109.47(D2)
Subiect(A) 103.83(A1) 113.26(A2) 101.53(A3)
Forward speed(F) 100.70 (Fl) 105.70 (F2) 112.22(F3)
ANOVA TABLE
Source d.f. M.S. F-Ratio C D . (5%) C.V.
Replication 4 1.6267360 .17
D 1 960.21810 99.99 1.30497
A 2 1159.3980 120.73 1.59825
DA 2 50.324340 5.24 2.26027
F 2 1001.2310 104.26 1.59825
DF 2 18.224300 1.90 NS
AF 4 20.326020 2.12 NS
DAF 4 2.2460630 .23 NS
Error 68 9.6030250 2.92
5,3.2 Effect of Time Duration, Subject and Forward Speed on Oxygen

Consumption
The oxygen consumption by subject Al at forward speed of LO, 1.5 and 2.0 km/h
was 0.72, 0,78 and 0.89 1/min respectively for 40 min time duration (Table 5.1). For
subject A2 and A3 the oxygen consumption was 0.92, L04, 1.14 and 0.61, 0.68, 0.77
1/min respectively for the same time duration and forward speeds (Fig. 5.4). The oxygen
consumption increased with increase in forward speed and time duration. The effect of
time durations, subjects and forward speeds on oxygen consumption was significant at
5% level of significance (Table 5.3). The effect of interaction between time durations and
subjects was significant however that of the other interactions were non-significant. The
oxygen consumption of the subjects increased with increase in forward speed because of
the increase in respiration rate.
Ill
Subject A1 -•—40 min Subject A1
c
«—50 min o
140 . S 1-4
E
? §|l-0
a I o E
£ 120 i
J 100 j § 0.6
X 80 ^ 5*
O 0.2
1 1.5 2
1 1.5 2
Speed (km/h)
Speed (km/h)
Subject A2 Subject A2
1.4
140
a.
f
S" 120 I ^ 1-0
§1
100 ^ ^ 0.6
o
o>
X
80 0.2
O
1.5 2 1 1.5 2
Speed (km/h) Speed (km/h)
1.4
140
? a.
Q. 1^1.0
a 120 (0 C
5 § 1 0-6
^ 100 H c
S m
X 80 O 0.2
1 1.5 2 1 1.5 2
Fig. 5.4: Effect of time duration, subject and forward speed on heart rate & oxygen
consumption while operating power weeder
12
Table 5.3: Analysis of variance for oxygen consumption (1/min) while operating power
weeder.
f FACTOR MEAN
Time Duration (D) .83844450 (Dl) .96311100 (D2)
Subiect(A) .83200000 (Al) 1.0896670 (A2) .78066660 (A3)
Forward speed(F) .79766670 (Fl) .89033340(F2) 1.0143330 (F3)
ANOVA TABLE
Source d.f. M.S. F-Ratio CD. (5%) C.V.
Replication 4 .48043990E-03 .15
D 1 .34970410 106.71 .241072E-01
A 2 .82254360 250.99 .29525 lE-01
DA 2 .22901890E-01 6.99 .417549E-01
F 2 .35454230 108.18 .29525 lE-01
DF 2 .66461270E-02 2.03 NS
AF 4 .18955620E-02 .58 NS
DAF 4 .73571500E-03 .22 NS
Error 68 .32771950E-02 6.36
5.3.3 Effect of Time Duration, Subject and Forward Speed on Workload and
Energy Expenditure
The work load on subject Al was 39.33, 43.59 and 51.11 watt at forward speeds of
1.0, 1.5 and 2.0 km/h respectively for the time duration of 40 minute (Table 5.1). For the
same time duration and forward speeds the workload on subjects A2 and A3 was 37.84,
47.24, 55.01 and 27.70, 33.20, 39,79 watt respectively. The workload on all the three
subjects for all three forward speeds increased linearly for 50 minute time duration also.
This increase in workload reduces the work output of the operator proportionately due to
faster muscular fatigue. The explanation for linear increase in workload could be given
through the findings of Dutta et al (1985) and Even et, al. (1983) who reported that the
heart rate increased almost linearly with increase in work load. The energy expenditure
varied for 12.76 to 26.91 kJ/min for different time durations and forward speeds (Table
5.1).
113
5.3.4 Effect of Time Duration, Subject and Forward Speed on Body Part
Discomfort Score
The body part discomfort score ( BPDS ) for 40 min time duration was 22.20,
26.64 and 22.20 for subjects Al, A2 and A3 respectively at forward speed of 1.0 Icm/h,
25.44, 34.64 and 29.68 at forward speed of 1.5 km/h and 31.68, 40.52 and 35.32 at
forward speed of 2.0 km/h (Table 5.4), The body part discomfort score on all the three
subjects for all three speeds increased linearly even for 50 minutes time duration because
the stress in the human body increased with increase in time of work. (Fig. 5.5). The
effect of time durations, subjects and forward speeds on body part discomfort score was
highly significant at 5% level of significance (Table 5.5). The effect of interactions
among these was non-significant except for the time and speed. It was observed that body
part discomfort score was maximum for subject A2 reason being that the maximum
strength of human body varies fi'om individual to individual. The body part discomfort
score discomfort experience by the subjects was in following decreasing order:- left and
right wrist palm, left and right fore arm, upper back and left and right shoulder.
5.3.5 Effect of Time Duration, Subject and Forward Speed on Overall Discomfort
Rating
The overall discomfort rating (ODR) of subject Al at forward speeds of 1.0, 1.5 and
2.0 km/h was 2.70, 3,00 and 4.30 respectively for 40 minutes time duration (Table 5.4). It
was 3.40, 3.70 and 4.90 and 2.70, 3.10 and 4,70 respectively for subjects A2 and A3 (Fig
5.5). For 50 minutes duration overall discomfort rating was 2.80, 3.70 and 5.40 for
subject Al, 3.30, 4.20 and 6.50 for subject A2 and 3.70, 4.30 and 5.50 for subject A3 at
l.Q, L5 and 2,0 km/h speed respectively. The effect of time durations, subjects and
forward speed on overall discomfort rating was significant at 5% level of significance
114
Subject A1 -•—40min Subject A1
*-"50min
70
7
50
5
30 \ 3 i
10 ^ 1
1.5 1 1.5
70
(0 50
Q DC
Q. o
"» 30
o
10
1.5 1.5
Speed (km/h)
Speed (km/h)
70
7.
i
W 50
Q IT
5
a. Q
" 30 O
•:
10
1 1.5 1.5
Pig. 5.5: Effect of time duration, subject and forward speed on body parts discomfort score
(BPDS) & overall discomfort rating (ODR) while operating power weeder
15
Table 5.4: Effect of time duration, subject and forward speed on body part discomfort
score, overall discomfort rating, postural configuration and vertical vibration
while operating power weeder.
Time Subject Forward Body part Overall Postural Acceleration

Duration speed discomfort discomfort configuration (r.m.s.)
(min) (km/h) score rating (degrees) (m/s^)
Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Mean S.D.
40 Al 1.0 22.20 1.96 2.70 0.45 -3.80 1.64 1.29 0.36
1.5 25.44 1.56 3.00 0.35 1.60 2.07 0.90 0.18
2.0 31.68 2.49 4.30 0.45 5.20 2.17 2.32 0.67
A2 1.0 26.64 1.00 3.40 0.42 -1.60 2.19 1.07 0.06
1.5 34.64 0.92 3.70 0.45 4.80 1.30 1.01 0.14
2.0 40.52 0.86 4.90 0.22 10.80 1.48 2.26 0.50
A3 1.0 22.20 1.96 2.70 0.45 2.40 1.14 1.19 0.16
1.5 29.68 1.63 3.10 0.55 4.40 1.52 1.01 0.10
2.0 35.32 2.26 4.70 0.67 7.60 2.07 2.30 0.81
50 Al 1.0 23.04 3.05 2.80 0.27 -1.60 2.19 1.28 0.40
1.5 32.14 4.30 3.70 0.97 4.80 1.30 0.98 0.14
2.0 49.96 5.93 5.40 0.55 11.00 1.58 2.31 0.66
A2 1.0 30.40 1.14 3.30 0.45 3.40 1.14 1.05 0.14
1.5 40.80 2.71 4.20 0.45 7.00 1.58 1.21 0.30
2.0 60.40 2.07 6.50 0.50 10.20 1.48 2.47 0.40
A3 1.0 25.20 2.72 3.70 0.45 -3.80 1.64 1.20 0.15
1.5 33.70 1.20 4.30 0.45 3.00 1.58 1.14 0.41
2.0 51.28 3.24 5.50 0.50 6.00 1.58 2.55 0.52
(Table 5.6). The effect of interactions of these variables was also significant except for
the interaction of time duration and subject and subject and speed. The overall discomfort
rating increased for 50 minute time duration for all the subjects and forward speeds
mainly due to the increase in stress in the human body with increase in time of work. The
overall discomfort rating for the time duration of 40 and 50 min for all the subjects at 1.0
km/h forward speed was in the category of "light discomfort", "moderate discomfort" at
'.5 km/h forward speed, and "heavy to very heavy" discomfort when forward speed was
increased to 2.0 km/h.
116
Table 5.5: Analysis of variance for Body Part Discomfort Score while operating Power
Weeder.
FACTOR MEAN
Time Duration (D) 29.813330 (Dl) 38.546670 (D2)
Subject (A) 30.743330 (Al) 38.900000 (A2) 32.896670 (A3)
Forward speed (F) 24.946670 (Fl) 32.733330 (F2) 44.860000 (F3)
ANOVA TABLE
Replication 4 12.019310 1.86
D 1 1716.1190 265.57 1.07049
A 2 536.05390 82.95 1.3110
DA 2 9.7697140 1.51 NS
F 2 3021.1540 467.52 1.31107
DF 2 505.13620 78.17 1.85414
AF 4 10.366820 1.60 NS
DAF 4 5.3516850 .83 NS
Error 68 6.4620700 7.44
Table 5.6: Analysis of variance for Overall Discomfort Rating while operating Power
Weeder.
FACTOR MEAN
Time Duration (D) 3.6111110(D1) 4.3777780 (D2)
Subject(A) 3.6500000 (A 1) 4.3333330 (A2) 4.0000000 (A3)
Forward speed(F) 3.1000000 (Fl) 3.6666670 (F2) 5.2166670 (F3)
ANOVA TABLE
Replication 4 .69027030 3.06
D 1 13.224970 58.63 .200004
A 2 3.5027630 15.53 .244954
DA 2 .30834870 1.37 NS
F 2 36.019430 159.68 .244954
DF 2 1.3083500 5.80 .346417
AF 4 .14445300 .64 NS
DAF 4 .64165880 2.84 .600011
Error 68 ,22557230 11.89
S-3.6 Effect of Time Duration, Subject and Forward Speed on Posture

Configuration (PC) and vibration of Power Weeder
The postural configuration was -3.80, 1,60 and 5.20 degrees for subject Al, -1.60,
4.80 and 10.80 degrees for subject A2 and 2,40, 4.40 and 7.60 degrees for subject A3 at
117
forward speed of 1.0, 1.5 and 2,0 km/h respectively for 40 min time duration (Table 5.4).
For the time duration of 50 minutes it was -1.60, 4.80 and 11.00 degrees for subject Al,
3.40, 7.00 and 10.20 degrees for subject A2 and -3.80, 3.00 and 6.00 degrees for subject
A3 (Fig. 5.6). The effect of time durations, subjects and forward speed on postural
configuration was highly significant at 5% level of significance (Table 5.7). The effect
was also significant for interaction of these variables except for the interaction of time
duration and forward speed of operation and subject and forward speed. The net bending
angel of spine was minimum and negative for forward speed 1.0 km/h because of the
force exerted by the subject on the handle of the weeder which enables him to bend his
spine backwards. The net bending angle of spine (postural configuration) was maximum
at the speed of 2.0 km/h because the subject tried to maintain the equilibrium of his body.
Table 5.7: Analysis of variance for postural configuration (PC) or net bending angle
while operating power weeder.
FACTOR MEAN
Subject(A) 2.8666670 (Al) 5.7666670 (A2) 3.2666670 (A3)
Forward speed(F) -.83333330 (Fl) 4.2666670 (F2) 8.4666660 (F3)
ANOVA TABLE
Replication 4 .51667280 .17
D 1 20.544470 6.92 .725679
A 2 74.100010 24.95 .888772
DA 2 95.411090 32.13 1.25691
F 2 650.70000 219.12 .888772
DF 2 2.2111210 .74 NS
AF 4 7,1499940 2.41 NS
DAF 4 22.227780 7.49 2.17704
Error 68 2.9696080 43.44
118
Subject A1
Subject A1 -•—40 mm
«—50 min ja 2.8

B 2.4
.2 2.0
S 1-6 i
8 1.2 I
™ 0.8
® 0.4
1.5
«, 2.8
1 2-4
1 2°
2 1.6
o
0 1.2
u
!o 0.8
1 0.4
0.
1.5 2
Speed (km/ h) Speed (km/h)
28
(0
E 2.4
—»-
o 2.0
•kJ
S 1.6
o
<D 1 ?
O
o
CO 0.8
^
a> 0.4
-5 J 1 1.5 a
1.5
Speed (km/h)
Speed (km/h)
Fig. 5.6: Effect of time duration, subject and forward speed on postural configuration and
vertical vibration while operating power weeder.
119
The hand transmitted vertical vibration in the frequency range of 4-8 Hz was
recorded on power weeder in terms of acceleration (r.m.s.). The acceleration was 1,29,
0.90 and 2.32 m/s^ for subject A1, 1.07, 1.01, and 2.26 m/s^ for subject A2 and 1.19, 1.01
and 2.30 m/s^ for subject A3 at forward speeds of 1.0, 1.5, 2.0 km/h respectively for the
time duration of 40 minutes (Table 5.4). For the time duration of 50 min, it was 1.28,
0.98 and 2.31 m/s^ for subject Al, 1.05, 1.21 and 2.47 m/s^ for subject A2 and 1.2, 1.1
and 2.6 m/s for subject A3. The effect of time durations, subjects and forward speed on
vertical vibration of power weeder was non-significant at 5% level of significance (Table
5.8). The effect of interactions of these variables was also non-significant. It was
observed that the acceleration was minimum at the speed of 1.5 km/h, increased at 1.0
km/h and reached its maximum value at 2.0 km/h. The same trend was observed for all
the subjects. The reason for this was that there was more resonance at 1 km/h, which
decreased with increase in forward speed. As the forward speed increased further the
weeding/ploughing/pulverizing of soil increased which in turn increased the hand
transmitted vibration on the operator. According to British Standard (1987) human
reaction to root mean square weighted acceleration was fairly comfortable at 1.5 km/h
whereas it was uncomfortable to very uncomfortable at 1.0 and 2.0 km/h forward speeds.
5.4 Spraying by Manual Knapsack Sprayer
5.4,1 Effect of Subject and number of Strokes on Heart Rate while Spraying
by Knapsack Sprayer
The heart rate of the subject Al was 97, 102 and 107 bpm at stroke of 11,
16 and 21 per minute respectively (Table 5.9). The heart rate of subject A2 was
101, 107 and 122 bpm and for subject A3 96, 105, 111 bpm at 11, 16 and 21
strokes/min. The maximum variation was recorded in the heart rate of the subject
120
A2. This was due to the difference in physiological responses of the subject for
the same work load (Astrand and Rodahl, 1986). The effect of subjects and number
of strokes/min on heart rate was highly significant at 5% level of significance
(Table 5.10). Interaction among them was also significant. The spraying by
knapsack sprayer while operating at 11 and 16 number of strokes/min was under
"moderate work", whereas when the subject operated the machine on 21 strokes/
min the work category fell in "heavy work".
Table 5.8: Analysis of variance for vertical vibration while operating power weeder.
FACTOR MEAN
Subject(A) 1.5182670 (Al) 1.5263330 (A2) 1.5663330 (A3)
Torward speed(F) 1.1846670 (Fl) 1.0546000 (F2) 2.3716660 (F3)
ANOVA TABLE
Replication 4 .23089220 1.12
D 1 .15805490 .77 NS
A 2 .19869490E-01 .10 NS
DA 2 .24789260E-01 .12 NS
F 2 15.802740 76.85 .233869
DF 2 .49374580E-01 .24 NS
AF 4 .12350030 .60 NS
DAF 4 .13761040E-01 .07 NS
Error 68 .20561930 29.50
5.4.2 Effect of Subject and number of Strokes on Oxygen Consumption

The oxygen consumption was 0.70, 0.80 and 0.90 1/min for subject Al,
0.88, 0.99 and 1.23 l/min for subject A2 and 0.66, 0.85 and 0,97 1/min for subject
A3 at 11, 16 and 21 strokes/min respectively (Table 5.9). The subjects Al and
A3 were taking almost similar (0,79 and 0.82 1/min) amount of oxygen while
subject A2 took more (L03 1/min) at different strokes. It was also observed that
121
as the number of strokes/min increased the oxygen consumption by the subjects
also increased. The reason for this trend was that the muscles in order to recover
from the state of fatigue demanded more oxygen rich blood supply resulting in
increased oxygen consumption and heart rate. The effect of number of strokes/min
and subjects on oxygen consumption was statistically significant at 5% level of
significance (Table 5.11). Interaction among subjects and number of strokes was
non significant at 5% level of significance.
Table.5.9: Effect of subject and number of strokes on heart rate and oxygen consumption
while operating manually operated knapsack sprayer.
Subject Number of Heart rate (bpm) Oxygen consumption Workload Energy

strokes/min (1/min) (watt) Expenditure
(L) Mean S.D. Mean S.D. (kJ/min)
Al 11 97 1.27 0.70 0.03 37.97 14.52
16 102 1.30 0.80 0.03 44.97 16.69
21 107 1.95 0.90 0.04 51.47 18.70
A2 11 101 3.62 0.88 0.06 35.36 18.43
16 107 2.52 0.99 0.04 43.72 20.72
21 122 2.43 1.23 0.04 61.86 25.70
A3 11 96 2.10 0.66 0.04 31.62 13.86
16 105 1.26 0.85 0.03 45.24 17.68
21 111 6.10 0.97 0.13 54.54 20.29
Table 5.10: Analysis of variance for effect of number of strokes/min on heart rate while
operating knapsack sprayer.
FACTOR MEAN
Sub)ect(A) 102.07780 (Al) 109.93330 (A2) 103.73890 (A3)
No of stroke (L) 97.861110 (LI) 104.73330 (L2) 113.15560 (L3)
ANOVA TABLE
Source d.f. M.S. F-Ratio C D . (5%) C.V.
A 2 154.25350 18.19 2.90889
r L 2 528.11460 62.27 2.90889
AL 4 31.217010 3.68 5.03834
___ Error 16 8.4804720 2.77
122
Table 5.11: Analysis of variance for effect of number of strokes/min on oxygen
consumption while operating knapsack sprayer.
FACTOR MEAN
Subject(A) .79777780 (A 1) 1.0355550 (A2) .82555560 (A3)
No of stroke (L) .74666670 (LI) .87888880 (L2) 1.0333330 (L3)
ANOVA TABLE
Replication 2 .32910240E-02 1.02
A 2 .15211340 46.97 .568466E-01
L 2 ,18526990 57.20 .568466E-01
AL 4 .68152700E-02 2.10 NS
Error 16 .32387320E-02 6.42
5,4.3 Effect of Subject and Number of Strokes on Work Load and Energy
Expenditure while Spraying by Knapsack Sprayer
The work load increased as number of strokes/min of the sprayer
increased for all the subjects. The workload was 37.97, 44.97 and 51.47 watts at
11, 16 and 21 strokes/min respectively for subject Al, 35.36, 43.72 and 61.86
watts for subject A2 and 31.62, 45.24 and 54.54 watts for subject A3 (Table 5.9).
The increase in work load was linear for all the subjects, It reduced the work
output of the operator proportionately due to faster muscular fatigue. The force
on the handle increased with increase in number of stroke/min. There has been
increase in the energy expenditure by the subjects due to higher oxygen
consumption as the number of strokes/min increased. The energy expenditure by
subject A2 was higher as compared to Al and A3,
123
5.4.4 Effect of Subject and number of Stroke on Body Part Discomfort
Score while Spraying by Knapsack Sprayer
The body part discomfort score (BPDS) was 30.00, 31.67 and 34.50 at 11,
16 and 21 strokes/min respectively for subject Al (Table 5.12). It was 34.20,
33.90, 42.47 and 31.07, 29.50, 37.67 for Subject A2 and A3 (Fig. 5.4). The body
part discomfort score for all subjects was similar while operating knapsack at
different strokes/min. The effect of subjects and number of strokes on body part
discomfort score was highly significant at 5% level of significance (Table 5.13).
Interaction among them was however, non-significant at 5% level of
significance. The reason for increase in body part discomfort score with increase
in number of stroke could be that the force applied by the subject increased with
increase in number of strokes so the muscular fatigue in the hand occurred and
therefore the subject felt uncomfortable during operation. The body part
discomfort score experienced by the subjects was in the decreasing order in the
different body parts viz: upper and lower back, neck, left and right shoulder,
legs, left and right fore arm and left and right wrist palm.
5,4.5 Effect of Subject and number of Strokes on Overall Discomfort Rating

Overall discomfort rating for subject Al was 2.83, 3.83 and 3.67 while
operating knapsack sprayer at 11, 16 and 21 number of strokes/min (Table 5.12).
It was 3.00, 4.00, 4.33 and 3,17. 3.00 and 3.67 for subject A2 and A3. The effect
of subjects and number of strokes on overall discomfort was significant whereas
their interaction was non-significant at 5% level of significance (Table 5,14).
The machine was operated at 21stroke/min and 24 lit of liquid was sprayed in 36
124
Table. 5.12: Effect of subject and number of strokes on body part discomfort score, over
all discomfort rating and postural configuration (net bending angle) while
operating manual knapsack sprayer.
Subject Number of Body part discomfort Over all discomfort Net bending angle |
strokes/min score rating (degrees)
(L) Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Mean S.D.
Al 11 30.00 5.23 2.83 0.29 5.00 1.00
16 31.67 2.52 3.83 0.29 7.33 0.58
21 34.50 9.12 3.67 0.58 11.00 1.00
A2 U 34,20 0.72 3.00 0.00 4.33 0.58
16 33.90 2.46 4.00 0.50 6.00 1.00
21 42.47 2.72 4.33 0.58 8.00 1.00
A3 11 31.07 1.01 3.17 0.29 4.33 1.53
16 29.50 0.87 3.00 0.00 6.67 1.53
21 37.67 3.21 3.67 0.58 10.33 1.53
Table 5.13: Analysis of variance for effect of number of strokes on body part discomfort
score (BPDS) while operating knap sack sprayer.
FACTOR MEAN
Subject(A) 32.055560 (Al) 36.855550 (A2) 32.744450 (A3)
ANOVA TABLE
Source d.f M.S. F-Ratio CD. (5%) C.V.
Replication 2 22.916120 1.53
A 2 60.622720 4.04 3.86943
L 2 126.32760 8.42 3.86943
AL 4 8.2313880 .55 NS
Error 16 15.005850 11.43
min at operating pressure of 2.1 kg/cm . However, at 16 strokes/min the time
taken to empty 24 lit of spray took about 40 min while operating at 1.25-1.5
kg/cm pressure and at 11 strokes/min it took about 45 mm at 0.5- 0.75 kg/cm
operating pressure. The operation was carried out continuously and the tank was
125
filled by another person without removing the machine from operator's shoulder.
Due to above reason as the number of strokes/min increased, the time of spraying
decreased and not much difference in overall discomfort was observed. The
overall discomfort for all the subjects at all the strokes/min was categorized as
"light to moderate discomfort".
Table 5.14: Analysis of variance for effect of number of strokes on overall discomfort
rating (ODR) while operating knap sack sprayer.
FACTOR MEAN
Subject(A) 3.4444440 (A 1) 3.7777780 (A2) 3.2777780 (A3)
No of stroke (L) 3.0000000 (LI) 3.61 111 10 (L2) 3.8888890 (L3)
ANOVA TABLE
Replication 2 .33333330 2.29
A 2 .58333330 4.00 .381457
L 2 1.8611110 12.76 .381457
AL 4 .40277780 2.76 NS
Error 16 .14583330 10.91
5.4.6 Effect of Subject and number of Stroke on Postural Configuration

The postural configuration is difference between net bending angle of
spine during normal position and during working position. The net bending angle
for subject Al was 5.00, 7.33 and 11.00 degrees while operating the machine at
11, 16 and 21 strokes/min. respectively (Table 5.12). The net bending angel of
the spine for subject A2 and A3 were 4.33, 6.00, 8,00 degrees and 4.33, 6.67,
10.33 degrees at 11, 16 and 21 strokes/min respectively. It was observed that the
net bending angle for all the subjects at 21 strokes/min was more because of
more strokes/min and hence the force exerted on the handle was more. The
effect of subjects and number of strokes/min on postural configuration or net
26
bending angle was significant at 5% level of significance whereas the interaction
among them was non-significant (Table 5.15).
Table 5.15: Analysis of variance for effect of number of strokes on postural configuration
or net bending angle while operating knapsack sprayer.
FACTOR MEAN
Subiect(A) 7.7777780 (Al) 6.1111110 (A2) 7.1111110 (A3)
ANOVA TABLE
Replication 2 L3333330 1.03
A 2 6.3333330 4.90 1.13525
L 2 62.111110 48.09 1.13525
AL 4 1.4444450 1.12 NS
Error 16 1.2916660 16.24
5.5 Spraying by Power Knapsack Sprayer
5.5.1 Effect of Subject and Engine Speed on Heart Rate while Spraying by
The heart rate was 98, 104 and 109 bpm while operating power knapsack
sprayer at engine speeds of 4000, 5000 and 6000 rpm respectively for subject Al
(Table 5.16). The heart rate was 102, 109 and 117 bpm and 96, 102 and 109 bpm
for subject A2 and A3 respectively. The heart rate of subject A2 was maximum
due to variations in physiological differences of the subjects. With the increase
in engine rpm the vibration decreased but the noise increased (up to 98 dB (A))
at operators ear level, which was above the safe exposure limit of 90 dB (A).
Due to this reason heart rate increased with increase in engine rpm. The effect of
subjects and engine rpm on heart rate was highly significant at 5% level of
significance (Table 5.17), Interaction of these variables was non-significant.
127
Table 5.16: Effect of subject and engine rpm on heart rate and oxygen consumption
while operating power knapsack sprayer
Subject Engine Heart rate (bpm) Oxygen consumption Workload Energy

(1/min) (watts) Expenditure
Mean S.D. Mean S.D. (kJ/min)
Al 4000 98 2.81 0.72 0.06 39.49 14.99
5000 104 0.97 0.84 0.02 47.90 17.59
6000 109 1.98 0.93 0.04 53.98 19.47
A2 4000 102 2.06 0.90 0.03 36.59 18.77
5000 109 1.05 1.02 0.02 45.43 21.19
6000 117 3.42 1.15 0.06 56.09 24.12
A3 4000 96 1.47 0.67 0.03 32.27 14.04
5000 102 1.17 0.80 0.02 41.87 16.73
6000 109 2.61 0.93 0.05 51.34 19.39
Table 5.17: Analysis of variance for effect of engine rpm on heart rate while operating
power operated knapsack sprayer.
FACTOR MEAN
Subject (A) 103.79330 (A 1) 109.18330 (A2) 102.46440 (A3)
Engine RPM (E) 98.702220 (El) 105.18550 (E2) 111.55330 (E3)
ANOVA TABLE
A 2 113.92710 22.90 2.22795
E 2 371.57990 74.69 2.22795
AE 4 5.2100680 1.05 NS
Error 16 4.9748250 2.12
5,5.2 Effect of Subject and Engine Speed on Oxygen Consumption
The oxygen consumption by the subject Al was 0 J 2 , 0.84 and 0.93 1/min
while operating power knapsack sprayer at engine speeds 4000, 5000 and 6000
rpm respectively (Table 5,16). Similar trend in oxygen consumption was
observed for subjects A2 and A3. As the engine speed increased from 4000 rpm
to 5000 rpm the average oxygen consumption by all the three subjects increased
by 15.7%. Further increase of 13.6% in oxygen consumption was recorded when
28
engine speed increased from 5000 to 6000 rpm. The reason for this could be as
the engine rpm increased, the noise at operator's ear level also increased which
in turn increased the heart rate of the subjects, thus resulting in more oxygen
consumption. The effect of subjects and engine rpm on oxygen consumption was
significant at 5% level of significance (Table 5.18), whereas there interaction
was non-significant. The oxygen consumption by the subjects was under
"moderate work" category.
Table 5.18: Analysis of variance for effect of engine rpm on oxygen consumption while
operating power knapsack sprayer.
FACTOR MEAN
Subject (A) .83222220 (A 1) 1.0244440 (A2) .80000000 (A3)
Engine RPM (E) .76444450 (El) .88666660 (E2) 1.0055560 (E3)
ANOVA TABLE
Replication 2 .29140050E-04 .02
A 2 .13254070 77.00 .414436E-01
E 2 .13080710 75.99 .414436E-01
AE 4 .64092870E-03 .37 NS
Error 16 .17213940E-02 4.69
5.5.3 Effect of Subject and Engine Speed on Work Load
The workload for subject Al was 39.49, 47.90 and 53.98 watts for engine
speeds of 4000, 5000 and 6000 rpm respectively (Table 5.16). It was 36.59,
45.43, 56.09 watts for subject A2 and 32.27, 41.87 and 51.34 watts for subject
A3. The increase in workload when the engine speed increased from 4000 to
6000 rpm was 36.6, 53.2 and 59.2% for subjects A l , A2 and A3 respectively.
The reason for this could be the increase in age of the subject. The workload
declined with age (Rodahl, 1989).
129
5.5.4 Effect of Subject and Engine Speed on Energy Expenditure
An increase in energy expenditure (the product of oxygen consumption
and calorific value of oxygen) was observed for all the three subjects with
increase in engine speed. For subject Al energy expenditure was 14.99, 17.59
and 19,47 kJ/min for the sprayer's engine speeds of 4000, 5000 and 6000 rpm
respectively (Table5.16). The energy expenditure was 18.77, 21.19 and 24.12
kJ/min for subject A2 and 14.04, 16.73 and 19.39 kJ/min for subject A3
respectively. As the engine rpm increased, the noise level also increased, which
resulted in increased heart rate.
5.5.5 Effect of Subject and Engine Speed on Body Part Discomfort Score
The body part discomfort score was 24.00, 25.40 and 33.47 at engine
speed of 4000, 5000 and 6000 rpm respectively for subject Al (Table 5,19), It
was 28.33, 30.33, 36.80 for subject A2 and 26.80, 28.33 and 34.33 for subject
A3. The maximum discomfort experienced by the subjects was in upper and
lower back, left and right shoulders and neck. The effect of subjects and engine
speeds on body part discomfort score was highly significant at 5% level of
significance and their interaction was non-significant (Table 5.20). Not much
variation in body part discomfort score was observed for all the subjects at
different engine speeds. This was due to the fact that body part discomfort score
depends on time duration and stress on the subjects which did not vary in this
case. Some variation in body part discomfort score was observed due to variation
in noise level.
30
Table 5.19: Effect of subject and engine rpm on body part discomfort score, overall
discomfort rating, postural configuration (net bending angle) and vertical
vibration while operating power knapsack sprayer.
Subject Engine Body part Over all Net bending Acceleration

rpm discomfort score discomfort rating angle (degrees) (m/s^)
Al 4000 24.00 0.00 3.00 0.00 3.33 1.53 0.77 0.09
5000 25.40 1.51 2.83 0.29 5.67 1.53 0.25 0.10
6000 33.47 1.40 3.67 0.58 9.00 1.00 0.03 0.01
A2 4000 28.33 2.39 3.33 0.58 2.67 1.53 0.73 0.14
5000 30.33 2.47 3.33 0.58 6.00 2.00 0.29 0.04
6000 36.80 1.39 4.50 0.50 9.67 0.58 0.03 0.01
A3 4000 26.80 3.02 3.33 0.58 3.67 1.53 0.71 0.27
5000 28.33 2.39 3.00 0.00 7.33 1.15 0.34 0.04
6000 34.33 1.53 3.83 0.29 9.67 0.58 0.02 0.01
Table 5.20: Analysis of variance for effect of engine rpm on body part discomfort score
while operating power knapsack sprayer.
FACTOR MEAN
Subject (A) 27.622220 (Al) 31.822220 (A2) 29.822220 (A3)
Engine RPM (E) 26.377780 (El) 28.022220 (E2) 34.866660 (E3)
ANOVA TABLE
Replication 2 8.1715500 2.43
A 2 39.718430 11.80 1.83288
E 2 182.41630 54.18 1.83288
AE 4 1.1056290 .33 NS
Error 16 3.3669440 6.17
5.5.6 Effect of Subjects and Engine Speed on Overall Discomfort
The variation in overall discomfort rating (ODR) for all subjects at engine
speeds of 4000, 5000 and 6000 rpm was observed to be negligible. It was 3.16,
3.72 and 3.38 respectively for subject Al, A2 and A3 for all engine speeds. The
overall discomfort rating for subject Al was between 2.83 and 3.67, for subject
A2 between 3.33 to 4.50 and for subject A3 it was between 3.33 and 3,83 (Table
131
5.19). The overall discomfort rating for subject Al and A3 was.in the category
of "light discomfort" and for subject A2 "light to moderate discomfort". The
overall discomfort rating depends upon body part discomfort score which did not
vary for the subjects at different engine speeds, hence overall discomfort rating
also did not varied. The effect of engine speeds on overall discomfort rating was
significant at 5% level of significance and non-significant for subjects and also
for the interaction of these two variables (Table 5.21).
Table 5.21: Analysis of variance for effect of engine rpm on overall discomfort rating
while operating power operated knapsack sprayer.
FACTOR MEAN
Subject (A) 3.1666670 (A 1) 3.7222220 (A2) 3.3888890 (A3)
Engine RPM (E) 3.2222220 (El) 3.0555560 (E2) 4.0000000 (E3)
ANOVA TABLE
Source d.]r. M.S. F-Ratio CD. (5%) C.V.
Replication 2 .37029690E-01 .17
A 2 .70369640 3.29 NS
E 2 2.2870300 10.68 .462218
AE 4 .92596290E-01 .43 NS
Error 15 .21412130 13.51
5.5.7 Effect of Subject and Engine Speed on Postural Configuration
The net bending angle increased from 3,33 to 9.00 degrees for subject A l ,
from 2.67 to 9.67 degrees for subject A2 and 3.67 to 9.67 degrees for subject A3
when engine speed increased from 4000 to 6000 rpm (Table 5.19). This increase
in net bending angle was observed because as the engine speed increased the
spine of the subjects bent forward to maintain body equilibrium and also the
movement of the subject's hand for spraying required forward bending. The
effect of engine rpm on net bending angle was significant at 5% level of
132
significance (Table 5.22). It was non-significant for subjects and the interaction
of subject and engine rpm.
Table 5.22: Analysis of variance for effect of engine rpm on postural configuration (PC)
or net bending angle while operating power operated knapsack sprayer.
FACTOR MEAN
Subject (A) 6.0000000 (A 1) 6.1 111 110 (A2) 6.8888890 (A3)
Engine RPM (E) 3.2222220 (El) 6.3333330 (E2) 9.4444450 (E3)
ANOVA TABLE
Source d.iF. M.S. F-Ratio CD. (5%) C.V.
A 2 2.1111110 1.09 NS
E 2 87.111110 44.80 1.39288
AE 4 .72221760 .37 NS
Error 1(5 1.9444450 22.02
5.5.8 Effect of Subject and Engine Speed on Vibration
The whole body vertical vibration was measured on the shoulder girdle of
the subject in the 4-8 Hz frequency range. The acceleration decreased for all the
subjects when engine speed increased from 4000 to 6000 rpm. For subject A l ,
A2 and A3 it was 0.77, 0.25 and 0.03 m/s^ 0.73, 0.29 and 0.03 m/s^ and 0.71,
0,34 and 0.02 m/s respectively at the engine speed of 4000, 5000 and 6000 rpm
(Table 5.19). The reason for this was that as the engine rpm increased the
vibration in the engine decreased and so on the operator. The acceleration was
fairly uncomfortable at 4000 rpm whereas it was comfortable at 5000 and 6000
rpm. The frequencies near resonant frequency of the body (4-5 Hz) caused high
forces which produced a compressive load on the spine, The effect of engine rpm
on vertical vibration was significant at 5% level of significance whereas it was
non-significant for subjects and the interaction of subject and engine rpm (Table
5.23).
33
Table 5.23: Analysis of variance for effect of engine rpm on vertical vibration while
operating power knap sack sprayer.
FACTOR MEAN
Subject (A) .35133330 (A 1) .35022220 (A2) ^355]^560_(A3)
Engine RPM (E) .73555550 (E!) .29222220 (E2) 1 .28933330E-01 (E3)
ANOVA TABLE
Replication 2 .28847 lOOE-01 1.69
A 2 .59909290E-04 .00 NS
E 2 1.1477700 67.34 .130414
AE 4 .43872000E-02 .26 NS
Error 16 .17045620E-0I 37.07
5.6 Picking of Cotton Bolls in Standing Posture
5»6.1 Effect of Subjects and Time Durations on Heart Rate while Picking
The heart rate was 97, 101 and 108 bpm for 40, 50 and 60 min time
duration respectively for subject AI (Table 5.24). Similar trend was observed for
subjects A2 and A3. The effect of subjects and time duration on heart rate was
highly significant at 5% level of significance whereas there interaction was non-
significant (Table 5.25), Picking in standing posture comes under the category
of "light to moderate work". As the time duration of picking increased the stress
and workload on the human body also increased which led to increase in heart
rate. The average heart rate was 96^ 100 and 108 bpm for 40, 50 and 60 min time
duration for Subjects A l , A2 and A3 respectively.
5«6,2 Effect of Subjects and Time Durations on Oxygen Consumption while

Picking Cotton Bolls in Standing Posture
The oxygen consumption was 0.69, 0.89 and 0.55 1/min by subjects Al,
A2 and A3 for the time duration of 40 min respectively. For the time duration of
34
Table 5.24: Effect of subject and on heart rate and oxygen consumption while picking
cotton bolls in standing posture
Subject Time Heart rate Oxygen Workload Energy

duration (bpm) consumption (watts) Expenditure
(min) (1/min) (kj/min)
Mean S.D. Mean S.D.
Al 40 97 4.21 0.69 0.08 37.88 14.50
50 101 5.29 0.77 0.11 43.13 16.12
60 108 2.55 0.91 0.05 52.75 19.09
A2 40 100 2.59 0.87 0.04 34.31 18.15
50 104 1.47 0.94 0.02 39.34 19.53
60 111 1.76 1.05 0.03 47.74 21.83
A3 40 90 4.28 0.55 0.09 23.04 11.45
50 95 2.42 0.63 0.05 29.49 13.26
60 103 2.64 0.81 0.06 42.57 16.93
Table 5,25: Analysis of variance for effect of time duration on heart rate while picking
cotton bolls in standing posture.
FACTOR MEAN |
Subject (A) 101.91670 (Al) 104.74110 (A2) 95.932230 (A3)
Time duration (S) 95.715560(81) 99.732220 (82) 107.14220(83)
ANOVA TABLE
Source r.
d.] M.S. F-Ratio CD. (5%) C.V.
Replication 2 57.420140 12.13
A 2 182.05900 38.47 2.17304
S 2 302.37850 63.89 2.17304
AS 4 .96875000 .20 NS
Error 1(5 4.7326390 2.16
50 min it was 0.77, 0,94 and 0.63 1/min respectively whereas for 60 min time
duration it was 0.91, 1.05 and 0.81 1/min respectively (Table 5.24). The effect of
subjects & time duration on oxygen consumption was significant at 5% level of
significance and their interaction was non-significant (Table 5.26). Average
oxygen consumption was 0.79, 0,94 and 0.66 1/min for subject Al, A2 and A3
respectively. This variation in oxygen consumption was the result of individual
135
characteristics of the subject. For all subjects, average oxygen consumption was
0.70, 0.78 and 0.92 1/min for time duration of 40, 50 and 60 min respectively.
This was because as the time of work increased the stress/workload on the
subject also increased. Therefore, for the muscles to recover from the state of
fatigue, more oxygen rich blood supply was demanded resulting in increased
heart rate and hence increased oxygen consumption.
Table 5.26: Analysis of variance for effect of time duration on oxygen consumption while
picking cotton bolls in standing posture.
FACTOR MEAN
Subject (A) .79349990 (A 1) .94985550 (A2) .66464450 (A3)
Time duration (S) .70384440(81) .78067780 (S2) .92347780 (S3)
ANOVA TABLE
Replication 2 .21786900E-01 10.93
A 2 .18359530 92.11 .44595 lE-01
S 2 .11180360 56.09 .44595 lE-01
AS 4 .15262480E-02 .77 NS
Error 16 .19931530E-02 5.56
5.6.3 Effect of Subjects and Time Durations on Workload and Energy

Expenditure while Picking Cotton Bolls in Standing Posture
The workload for subject Al was 37.88, 43.13 and 52.75 watts for the
time duration of 40, 50 and 60 min respectively (Table 5.24). For subject A2 and
A3 similar trend was observed. Workload increased by 39.25, 39.14, and 84.7%
for subject Al, A2 and A3 respectively, when the time duration increased from
40 to 60 min. The percentage increase in workload for subjects Al and A2 was
almost same and it increased significantly for subject A3 because there is a
gradual decline in functional capacity with advancing age/years (Mc Ardle et al
1994). The Energy expenditure at 40, 50 and 60 min time duration was 14.50,
136
16.12 and 19.09 kj/min respectively for subject Al (Table 5.24). For subject A2
it was 18.15, 19.53 and 21.83 kJ/min and for subject A3 1K45, 13.26 and 16.93
kJ/min respectively.
5.6.4 Effect of Subject and Time Duration on Body Part Discomfort Score
The body part discomfort score for subjects A l , A2 and A3 for 40 min
time duration was 22.0, 22.50 and 23.30 respectively (Table 5.27). For 50 min
time duration it was 31.80, 34.20 and 30.80 and for 60 min 42.20, 40.40 and
44.87 respectively for subjects A l , A2 and A3. The maximum discomfort
experienced by the subjects during picking of cotton bolls in standing posture
was in left and right wrist palm, upper and lower back, left and right shoulder
and legs. The effect of time duration on body part discomfort score was highly
significant at 5% level of significance while it was non-significant for subjects
and the interaction of subject and time duration (Table 5.28). Not much
variation in body part discomfort score was observed for all the subjects. Body
part discomfort score for time durations of 40, 50 and 60 min varied highly
because body part discomfort score depends upon time of operation and the
increase in that increased the stress in the body parts of the subjects which
resulted in increased body part discomfort score.
S.6.5 Effect of Subject and Time Duration on Overall Discomfort Rating

The overall discomfort rating for all the three subjects Al, A2 and A3 was 1.67,
1.67 and 2.33 respectively for time duration on 40 min (Table 5.27). For time duration of
37
Table 5,27: Effect of subject and time duration on body part discomfort score, over all
discomfort rating and postural configuration (net bending angle) while
picking cotton bolls in standing posture.
Subject Time Body part discomfort Over all discomfort Net bending angle
duration score rating (degrees)
(min) Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Mean S.D.
Al 40 22.00 2.29 1.67 0.58 -0.67 0.58

50 31.80 4.91 2.67 0.58 - 1.67 0.58
60 42.20 2.99 4.33 0.58 -2.00 1.00
A2 40 22.50 1.50 1.67 0.58 4.33 0.58
50 34.20 1.59 3.00 0.00 2.00 1.00
60 40.40 7.81 4.33 1.15 1.67 0.58
A3 40 23.30 2.79 2.33 0.58 4.00 2.00
50 30.80 5.41 2.83 0.76 4.00 1.00
60 44.87 7.04 4.67 1.15 5,67 0.58
Table 5.28: Analysis of variance for effect of time duration on body part discomfort score
while picking cotton bolls in standing posture.
FACTOR MEAN
Subject (A) 32.000000 (A 1) 32.366660 (A2) 32.988890 (A3)
Time duration (S) 22.600000(81) 32.266670 (S2) 42.488890 (S3)
ANOVA TABLE
Source d.l ' M.S. F-Ratio CD. (5%) C.V.
Replication 2 25.201390 1.22
A 2 2.2500000 .11 NS
S 2 890.25870 43.04 4.54306
AS 4 11.675990 .56 NS
Error 1(r 20.685360 14.01
50 min it was 2.67, 3.00 and 2.83 and for 60 min it was 4.33, 4.33 and 4.67 respectively
for subjects Al, A2 and A3. The overall discomfort rating for all subjects and for 40 min
time durations was in the category of "light discomfort". But when time duration changed
40 to 60 min, it was in the category of "very light to moderate discomfort". When the
time duration increased the overall discomfort rating also increased because it depends
Upon body part discomfort score (BPDS) which increased with increase in time. The
138
effect of time durations on overall discomfort rating was significant at 5% level of
significance, whereas it was non-significant for subjects and also for the interaction of the
two variables (Table 5.29).
Table 5.29: Analysis of variance for effect of time duration on overall discomfort rating
while picking cotton bolls in standing posture.
FACTOR MEAN
Subject (A) 2.8888890 (Al) 3.0000000 (A2) 3.2777780 (A3)
Time duration (S) 1.8888890 (SI) 2.8333330 (82) 4.4444450 (S3)
ANOVA TABLE
Source d.lr. M.S. F-Ratio CD. (5%) C.V.
A 2 .36111370 .66 NS
S 2 15.027780 27.39 .739859
AS 4 .13888740 .25 NS
Error 1(3 .54861080 24.24
5.6.6 Effect of Subject and Time Duration on Postural Configuration (Net

Bending Angle) while Picking Cotton Bolls in Standing Posture
The net bending angle was - 0.67, - 1.67 and - 2.0 degrees for subject Al
for the time duration of 40, 50 and 60 min respectively (Table 5.27). For subject
A2 it was 4.33, 2.00 and 1.67 degree and for subject A3 4.00, 4.00 and 5.67
degrees respectively. The effect of subjects on net bending angle was significant
at 5% level of significance (Table 5,30). It was non-significant for time
durations but highly significant for their interaction. Net bending angle was
least for subject Al, increased slightly for subject A2 and further increased for
subject A3. The reason could be the height of subject Al was less as compared
to that of A2 and A3, and age factor due to which the spine bending angle
changed i.e. spine bending angle increased with increase in age.

Table 5.30: Analysis of variance for effect of time duration on postural configuration (or
net bending angle) while picking cotton bolls in standing posture.
FACTOR MEAN
Subject (A) -1.4444440 (A 1) 2.6666670 (A2) 4.5555550 (A3)
Time duration (S) 2.5555560(81) 1.4444440(82) 1.7777780(83)
ANOVA TABLE
Replication 2 1.0370370 1.09
A 2 84.703700 88.82 .975492
S 2 2.9259260 3.07 NS
AS 4 3.8148160 4.00 1.68960
Error 16 .95370330 50.71
5.7 Picking of Cotton Bolls in Bending Postures
5.7.1 Effect of Subjects and Time Duration on Heart Rate while Picking
Cotton Bolls in Bending Posture
The heart rate was 98, 103 and 110 bpm for 30, 40 and 50 min time
durations respectively for subject Al while picking of cotton bolls in bending
posture (Table 5.31). For subject A2 it was 98, 102,7, 110 bpm and for subject
A3 97, 98 and 106 bpm respectively. The effect of subjects and time durations on
heart rate was highly significant at 5% level of significance while their
interaction was non-significant (Table 5.32). The heart rate of all the three
subjects increased with increase in time duration due to an extremely stooping
posture for a longer time that increased stress and workload on the human body.
Picking in bending operation comes under the category of "moderate work".
5,7,2 Effect of Subject and Time Duration on Oxygen Consumption while

Picking Cotton Bolls in Bending Posture
The oxygen consumption for subject Al was 0.72, 0.81 and 0.95 1/min for
the time duration of 30, 40 and 50 min respectively (Table 5.31). For subject A2
it was 0.84, 0.92 and 1.04 l/min and for subject A3 0.70, 0,71 and 0.88 1/min
140
respectively. The effect of subjects and time durations on oxygen consumption
was significant at 5% level of significance while their interaction was non-
significant (Table 5.33). Since more muscular fatigue occurred in bending
posture so it required more oxygen rich blood supply and hence oxygen
consumption was more with increase in time of picking in bending posture.
Table 5.31: Effect of subject and time duration on heart rate, oxygen consumption, and
body part discomfort score and overall discomfort rating, while picking cotton
bolls in bending posture.
Subject Time Heart rate Oxygen Workload Energy Body part Overall
duration (bpm) consumption (watts) expenditure discomfort discomfort
(min) (1/min) (kJ/min) score rating
Al 30 98 4.56 0.72 0.09 39.52 15.00 23.00 0.87 2.33 0.58
40 103 4.50 0.81 0.09 45.67 16.90 37.67 2.39 4.50 0.50
50 110 0.97 0.95 0.02 55.27 19.87 47.20 1.71 6.00 0.00
A2 30 98 3.12 0.84 0.05 32.18 17,56 26.00 3.46 3.33 0.58
40 103 3.51 0.92 0.06 38.42 19.27 40.00 1.00 5.50 0.50
50 111 2.39 1.04 0.04 47.71 21.82 53.33 2.52 6.67 0.58
A3 30 97 3.23 0.70 0.07 34.03 14.53 24.80 3.30 3.33 1.15
40 98 2.86 0.71 0.06 34.89 14.78 34.27 2.05 4.33 1.15
50 106 1.10 0.88 0.02 47.36 18.28 50.67 2.52 5,67 0.58
5.7.3 Effect of Subject and Time duration on Workload and Energy

Expenditure while Picking Cotton Boils in Bending Posture
The workload for subjects Al, A2 and A3 for time duration of 30 min was
39.52, 32.18 and 34.03 watts respectively (Table 5.31). It was 45.67, 38.42 and
34.89 watts for 40 min and 55.27, 47.71 and 47.36 watts respectively for 50 min
time duration. There were not many variations in workload for all the subjects
with respect to time duration. The energy expenditure was 15.09, 16.90 and
19.87 kJ/min for the time duration of 30, 40 and 50 min respectively for subject
Al. It was 17.56, 19.27, and 21.82 kJ/min for subject A2 and 14.53, 14.78 and
141
18.28 kJ/min for subject A3 respectively. It was observed that the energy
expenditure increased with increase in time duration and oxygen consumption
increased with increase in heart rate as bending posture required more energy
expenditure (Vos, 1973).
Table 5.32: Analysis of variance for effect of time duration on heart rate of while picking
cotton bolls in bending posture.
FACTOR MEAN
Subject (A) 103.56450 (Al) 103.92000 (A2) 100.48670 (A3)
Time duration (B) 97.913340 (Bl) 101.27330 (B2) 108.78440 (B3)
ANOVA TABLE
Source d.f. M.S. F-Ratio CD. (5%) CV.
Replication 2 37.062500 5.65
A 2 32.090280 4.89 2.55927
B 2 278.82640 42.48 2.55927
AB 4 5.0885470 .78 NS
Error 16 6.5644530 2.50
Table 5.33: Analysis of variance for effect of time duration on oxygen consumption while
picking cotton bolls in bending posture.
FACTOR MEAN
Subject (A) .82666670 (A 1) .93666670 (A2) .75888890 (A3)
Time duration (B) .75111 n o (Bl) .81333330(82) .95777770 (B3)
ANOVA TABLE
Source d.f M.S. F-Ratio CD. (5%) CV.
Replication 2 .12380390E-01 4.57
A 2 .72447460E-01 26.77 .519675E-01
B 2 .10116960 37.38 .519675E-01
AB 4 .17207450E-02 .64 NS
Error 16 .27066340E-02 6.19
5,7.4 Effect of Subject and Time Duration on Body Part Discomfort Score
The body part discomfort score (BPDS) for subject Ai was 23.00, 37.67
and 47.20, for subject A2 26.00, 40,00 and 53.33 and for subject A3 24.80, 34.27
and 50.67 for the time duration of 30, 40 and 50 min respectively (Table 5.31).
142
The maximum discomfort experienced by the subjects was in the following
decreasing order - upper and lower back, buttock, left & right thighs and left &
right legs and feet. The bending angle between trunk and upper legs varied
between 95 to 137 degrees. The effect of subject and time duration on body part
discomfort score was highly significant at 5% level of significance and was non-
significant for the interaction of these two variables (Table 5.34). The body part
discomfort score increased with increase in time durations because with increase
in time duration more stress occurred on the body parts in bending posture.
Table 5.34: Analysis of variance for effect of time duration on body part discomfort score
while picking cotton bolls in bending posture.
FACTOR MEAN
Subject (A) 35.955550 (Al) 39.777780 (A2) 36.577780 (A3)
Time duration (B) 24.600000(81) 37.311110 (B2) 50.400000 (B3)
ANOVA TABLE
A 2 37.855030 6.37 2.43593
B 2 1497.7960 251.86 2.43593
AB 4 11.148440 1.87 NS
Error 16 5.9469720 6.51
5.7.5 Effect of Subject and Time Duration on Overall Discomfort Rating

The overall discomfort rating for 30 min time duration was 2.33, 3.33 and
3.33, for 40 min time duration 4.50, 5.50 and 4.33 and for 50 min 6.00, 6.67 and
5,67 for all the three subjects respectively (Table 5.31), For the time duration of
30 min overall discomfort rating was in the category of "Very light to light
discomfort", for 40 min time duration it was in the category of "moderate to
heavy discomfort" and for 50 min time duration in the category of "Very heavy
143
to extreme discomfort". The effect of subject and time duration was significant at
5% level of significance while the interaction of these two variables was non-
significant (Table 5.35). It was observed that the overall discomfort rating for all
the subjects increased with increase in time duration because overall discomfort
rating depends upon BPDS which also increased with increase in time duration.
Table 5.35: Analysis of variance for effect of time duration on overall discomfort rating
while picking cotton bolls in bending posture.
FACTOR MEAN
Subject (A) 4.2777780 (A 1) 5.1666670 (A2) 4.4444450 (A3)
Time duration (B) 3,0000000(81) 4.7777780 (B2) 6.1111110 (83)
ANOVA TA8LE
Source d.f. M.S. F-Ratio CD. (5%) c.v.
A 2 2.0092740 3.97 .710395
B 2 21.925940 43.35 .710395
AB 4 .48147390 .95 NS
Error 16 .50578520 15.36
5.8 Noise at Operator's Ear in Stationary Mode
The noise level increased with increase in engine speed while operating
the power weeder (Table 5.36). The increase in noise level was by 14.6% when
engine speed increased from minimum throttle to full throttle. For minimum and
l/4th throttle position, the subject can work up to 8 h, for 2/3rd throttle position
7.1 h whereas at full throttle position up to 4.8 h. As per the international
standard (IS 12207, 1987) and according to OSHA, the sound level for safe
working limit is 90 dB (A) for 8 h duration (Bhattacharya 1999).
Noise at operator's ear in stationary mode while operating power knapsack
sprayer also increased with increase in engine speed (Table 5.37) and the
144
increase was by 18.5% when engine speed increased from 4000 to 6000 rpm. The
safe expose limit was 7 h and 3.8 h per day respectively for engine speeds of
5000 and 6000 rpm. It is generally conceded that 40 hours of exposure per week
of noise of 90 dB (A) or greater per day will result in hearing loss. Noise induced
hearing loss does not usually occur in a rapid traumatic manner. In fact, the
problem may be more acute and widespread because the loss occurs
imperceptibly, slowly, and without pain. Noise loud enough to produce
permanent hearing loss often produce a temporary threshold shift and ringing in
the ears (Mehta 2000). Depending on the individual, the noise intensity and the
length of daily or weekly exposure, it may take several years for significance
hearing loss to occur. This indicated that steps should be taken to reduce the
existing excessive noise levels.
Table 5.36: Noise at operator's ear level while running power weeder in stationary
mode.
Throttle Position Rl R2 R3 S.D. Mean Exposure

{dB(A)} limit ( hrs)
Min.Throttle 82 81.5 82.5 0.50 82.00 >8
1/2 Throttle 85.4 85.4 85.2 0.12 85.33 >8
2/3 Throttle 91.2 91.1 90.5 0.38 90.93 7.1
Full Throttle 94 94.8 93.4 0.70 94.07 4.8
Table 5.37: Noise at operator's ear level while operating power knapsack sprayer in
stationary mode.
Engine RPM Rl R2 R3 R4 S.D. Mean Exposure limit

{dB(A)} (hrs)
4000 79.8 79.8 79.7 83.1 1.67 80.6 >8
5000 89.6 90.9 91.4 92.2 1.09 91.03 7
6000 96.4 95.6 95.4 94.5 0.78 95.48 3.8
145
5.9 Vibration Characteristics of Power weeder in Stationary Mode
It was observed that as the engine speed of the weeder increased the peak
acceleration also increased at different machine parts. At ideal throttle position, the
vibration at base of the handle, engine top, chassis and handle was 4.26, 5.80, 3.24 and
9.85 m/s respectively (Fig. 5.7). Comparing the acceleration at the different location of
power weeder, it was observed that the vibration at the handle was highest followed by
engine top, chassis and base of the handle. With the change in throttle position from ideal
to 3/4^^*, vibration increased 2 times at base of handle, 4.74 times at engine top, 7.56 times
at chassis and 4.88 times at handle of the machine. With the further change in throttle
position to 3/4^^ and to full throttle, the vibration at the base of handle and chassis reduce
drastically whereas it increased at engine top and handle by 2 and 1.5 times respectively.
90
80 ••—base of handle
"^ 70 » - ~ Engine top
E
•^60 •A—Chasis
o ^—Handle
••S 5 0
I 40
u
% 30
S 20
10
>d% 1/4 th 1/2 3/4 th Fuil

Throttle position
Fig. 5.7: Vertical vibration on different part of power weeder in stationary mode.
5.10 Vibration Characteristics of Power Knapsack Sprayer
The maximum vibration was observed on the exhaust and minimum on the
frame of machine at 4000 rpm (Fig 5.8). When rpm of the machine increased to
146
5000 the vibration on exhaust and engine also increased to two fold and on
insecticide tank it increased to three fold. The highest increase was observed on
frame of the machine i.e. 5.24 fold (from 3.3 tol7.32 m/s"). With further mcrease
in rpm i.e. from 5000 to 6000 rpm the vibration on exhaust increased 1.69 fold
and on engine top 1.53 fold. On machine frame not much variation was observed
but on insecticide tank the vibration increased 2.75 fold when it was compared
with 5000 rpm.
. 70
E 60
E 50 Exhaust
•^40 Engine j
Frame j
iao Tank
J£ 20
O
" 10
4000 5000 6000

Engine RPM
Fig. 5.8: Vertical vibration on different part of power knapsack sprayer in stationary
mode.
5.11 Development of Computer Programme for Verification of Mathematical

Equations
Web page based program was designed and developed for calculating forces
acting on different body parts during selected operations for cotton crop cultivation. It is
compatible with Microsoft Internet Explorer browser version 6 or latter. The main page
consists of colour picture of each operation (Fig. 5.9). Each and every picture is linked
with corresponding free body line diagram to under stand clearly the abbreviations used
in program. The core program was developed using FORTRAN-77 language (Appendix-
D). Web page has provided user-friendly buttons and link pages. The program executes
147
in DOS mode. In order to shift directly from web page to DOS mode, a button named as
PROGRAM has been placed. Clicking the dynamic web button (Program) executes all
necessary operations (compilation, executable file generation etc.) needed for running
FORTRAN program with help Inbuilt FORTRAN compiler i.e. Force2. The main page
has also been provided the feature of installation of Force2 compiler, if computer of the
user does not have the compiler. An auto run compact disk (CD) has been made for the
bio-mechanical analysis and it contains all the above said features of web page launching.
When the operation is selected from main menu the free body diagram of the
subject appears on the screen. The user can understand different symbols from free body
diagram. This selected operation requires data inputs like weight of body, external force
applied, etc. The body posture adopted for the operation was defined in terms of the
minimum angle that the link makes with the horizontal plane. Once the data input is
provided in the programme, the programme will compute all the forces acting on
different body parts. To verify the validity of equation through programme presented here
weight of different body links and the angles between the links of a particular subject at a
particular posture were taken into consideration for knapsack sprayer. The weight of
different body links were calculated by the method mentioned by Winter (1990). For this,
only the weight of the subject is required and the programme calculates weight of all the
links. When the programme was made to run, the following values of different forces
acting on the body of the subject were obtained (Appendix - E).
F, = " 0.73 kgf F2 - 0.99 kgf

F3 = 1.24 kgf F4 = - 0.58 kgf
F5 = - 42.47 kgf F6 - 44.20 kgf
F7 = 4.95 kgf Fg = ~ 6.36 kgf
Ri = 3.46 kgf R2 = "0.17
148
{ •> •'^•7'"''''*^'";'"t^"?>/'^'?^J'VS^-^^ .. . „
L;h>-M-:rhAM'\\LA_\_\LVSJS
i*...^7'^'' * ••\-.*-s-*<'He
M^tfrtjk-iJ K*'5a|k*^'>; '^.f^ -iVWî p!^WifT*-"V-:ri;jiKSaf-:< 5 ^ - ^ f V . J
Fig 5.9: Computer screen of the menu frame of the programme showing different farm
operation in cotton crop.
It is clear from these values that the maximum force was F5, Fe, F7, Fg followed
by Ri. From this, it can be concluded that the maximum discomfort was in the body parts
where these forces are acting i.e. trunk and shoulder, legs and wrist palm. During field
experiments on knapsack sprayer the subject was asked to report the parts with maximum
pain. For this, he was shown a body diagram and was asked to identify the part where he
was suffering from maximum pain. The parts which the subject identified were trunk and
shoulder, legs and wrist palm. In this way the body part discomfort score of the subject
was obtained indicating maximum discomfort. It was compared with theoretical
calculations through programme and was almost same which showed the validity of the
equations.
149
The mathematical equations were developed for all five machines/operations but
the equation was validated only for manually operated knapsack sprayer because
instrumentation was not possible for other machines/operations during this study.
5.12 Optimum Values of Independent Variables
Three subjects Al, A2 and A3 operated the power weeder at forward speeds of
1.0, 1.5 and 2.0 km/h for two time durations i.e. 40 min and 50 min. For all the three
subjects the heart rate, body part discomfort score, overall discomfort rating, and
energy expenditure were minimum at forward speed of 1.0 km/h for 40 min time duration
but at this speed the vibration in machine was more as compared to that of 1.5 km/h and
also the work done by the subject was very less. The heart rate, body part discomfort
score, overall discomfort rating, and energy expenditure were slightly more at forward
speed of 1.5 km/h than that at 1.0 km/h and they were even higher at forward speed of 2.0
km/h. Therefore, for the subject to work for the 40 min time duration, the optimum speed
should be 1.5 km/h and when the time duration was increased to 50 min, the optimum
speed suggested was 1.0 km/h (Table 5.38).
The heart rate was minimum when subject operated the knapsack sprayer at 11
strokes/min and operating pressure of 0,5 to 0.75 kg/cm^ but the spray quality was very
poor. The heart rate, oxygen consumption, energy expenditure, body part discomfort
score and overall discomfort rating increased drastically when strokes/min was increased
to 21 that led to early fatigue in the subject (back, shoulder and hand). At 16 strokes/min
the heart rate, oxygen consumption, energy expenditure, body part discomfort score
and overall discomfort rating was almost similar to that at 11 strokes/min for subjects. At
16 strokes/min the operating pressure was significantly higher (L25-1.5 kg/cm ), which
150
improved the quality of spray without giving much discomfort to the subject. According
to BIS standard the sprayer had good quality of spray when it was operated at 16
strokes/min. So the machine should be operated at 16 strokes/min for about 40 min
(Table 5.38).
The heart rate was minimum when subjects operated the power knapsack
sprayer at 4000 rpm engine speed and the whole body vibration on human back
was maximum (0.7-0.8 m/s ) which is "fairly uncomfortable". At this engine
speed the air velocity at hose (12.1 m/s ) was less which deteriorated the quality
of mist formed resulting in poor spray on the plants. The heart rate, body part
discomfort score, overall discomfort rating and energy expenditure were very high
when subjects operated the machine at 6000 rpm. This was due to high noise
level (above 95 dB (A)) which according to OSHA standard should not be above
90 dB (A) for 8 h of working. So, the optimum engine speed was taken as 5000
rpm at which the heart rate and energy expenditure were in the "moderate work"
category and part discomfort score and overall discomfort rating were same as that
at 4000 rpm and subject can work comfortably for about 20 min. Also at 5000
rpm of engine the air velocity resulted in better quality mist formation and hence
better spray on the plants and the vibration measured in terms of acceleration
was under the category of "Comfortable" (Table 5.38).
When the subjects picked the cotton bolls for 50 min time duration, the
heart rate and energy expenditure were found very much similar to that for 40
min and the values came under the category of "moderate work" but the work
output increased by 23%. For both time duration of 40 and 50 min the overall
51
discomfort rating was under the category of "very light to light discomfort".
When ali three subjects worked for 60 min time duration, not much variation was
observed in heart rate and energy expenditure but body part discomfort score
increased significantly and overall discomfort rating fell under the category of
"moderate to heavy discomfort". But there was no significant increase in work
out put. So the optimum time duration for subjects performing cotton bolls
picking operations in standing posture was 40-50 min which did not lead to
discomfort and also increased the work output (Table 5.38). However, in the case
picking in bending posture the work output increased by 41% when the operation
was performed for 40 min duration as compared to 30 min. When the time
duration was increased to 50 min, due to stooping posture, body part discomfort
score was more and overall discomfort rating fell under the category of "very heavy
to extreme discomfort". Moreover, the work output did not increase much. So the
optimum time duration for subjects performing cotton bolls picking operations in
bending posture was recommended as 35-40 min (Table 5.38).
Table 5.38: Optimum Value of Independent Variables
Name of machine/ operation Time duration Speed/ Work category j

(Min) strokes/engine
rpm
flower weeder 40 - 50 min 1-1.5 km/h Moderate work
Manually operated knapsack About 40 min 16strokes/min Moderate work
Î'ayer
^wer knapsack sprayer About 20 min 5000 rpm Moderate work
Cotton bolls picking in standing 40 - 50 min - Light to
^ture Moderate work
Cotton bolls picking in bending 35 - 40 min - Moderate work
152
CHAPTER VI
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Cotton is the most important crop of India. Most of the operations in cotton crop
production like weeding, spraying and picking are done manually. The ergonomic
studies had been carried out on agricultural workers performing selected farm operations
such as weeding by power weeder, spraying by manually operated knapsack sprayer and
power knapsack sprayer and picking of cotton bolls in standing and bending postures in
cotton crop. The power weeder and power sprayer transmitted vibrations to human body
parts, which resulted in early fatigue and hence reduced work output of the workers. In
picking operation, different body postures like bending and standing/stretching were
studied to calculate the discomfort of different body parts. Since man is an integral part of
the man-machine system, present study was conducted to find the energy expenditure,
optimum working time of the operator (without fatigue) on the basis of ergonomic
consideration.
Various farm activities in which the agricultural workers were involved were
appraised in physiological and biomechanical perspective* Forces and reactions acting on
body links and joints on the agricultural workers resulting in work related body pain and
fatigue were analyzed by developing mathematical equations based on some
assumptions. Forces acting on various body segments were resolved in vertical and
horizontal planes and the sum of all horizontal forces, vertical forces as well as the sum
of moments about a point was separately taken as zero. Mathematical equations were
developed for all five machines/operations (power weeder, manually operated knapsack
sprayer, power knapsack sprayer and picking of cotton bolls in standing and bending
153
posture) under static conditions. Web page based programme was designed and
developed using FORTRAN-77 language for use of mathematical equations. The
programme was executed in DOS mode.
The different independent variables such as three subjects (Al, A2 and A3), 3
forward speeds (1.0, 1.5 and 2.0 km/h), 2 time durations (40 and 50 min), 3 number of
strokes/min (11, 16 and 21) and 3 engine rpm (4000, 5000 and 6000) were taken for the
present study. These independent variables were selected to find their effect on heart rate,
oxygen consumption, postural configuration, body discomfort and vertical vibration on
the subjects. The experiments were conducted in the field with 3 replications in cotton
crop. All three subjects were trained and were given 30 minuets rest before starting the
experiment. The study was divided in three phases. In the first phase evaluation of power
weeder on all subjects was carried out for two time durations (40 and 50 min) with three
forward speeds (1.0, 1.5 and 2.0 km/h) and five replications. In the second phase
knapsack sprayer was operated on 11, 16 and 21 strokes/min and power knapsack sprayer
was operated with three engine speeds i.e. 4000, 5000 and 6000 rpm. In the last phase
picking of cotton bolls was done in two postures i.e. bending and standing with three time
durations (30, 40, 50 min for bending and 40, 50, 60 min for standing).
The Novatech force transducer was mounted on the handle of knapsack sprayer
for recording the force exerted by the subject. The heart rate monitor was used for
measurement of heart rate. To measure, the deviation of spine from its normal position in
terms of net bending angle flexicurve was used. The technique suggested by Corlett and
Bishop (1976) was used for measurement of body discomfort in terms of overall
154
discomfort rating and body part discomfort score. The oxylog2 was used to measure
oxygen consumption by the subjects.
The subjects were calibrated on tread mill and their heart rate and oxygen
consumption were recorded at different speeds. The relationship between heart rate and
work load, oxygen consumption and heart rate was obtained through graphs. The
workload and oxygen consumption by the subjects in the field were computed from the
subject characteristic curves obtained during calibration of the subjects. The force
transducer was calibrated in the laboratory for recording the force on the handle of
sprayer. The field experiments were conducted at the Department Research Farm and
factorial RBD was used in the experiments. The data was analyzed statisfically.
On the basis of results obtained, the following conclusions can be drawn:
1. The heart rate was 101, 110 and 97 bpm and workload 43.59, 47.24 and 33.20
watts respectively for the subjects Al, A2 and A3 at 40 min time duration and 1.5
km/h forward speed. It was therefore concluded that all the three subjects felt
most comfortable while working on power weeder at either 1.5 km/h forward
speed for 40 min time duration or at 1,0 km/h forward speed for 50 min time
duration.
2. The body part discomfort score was 25.44, 34.64, and 29.68, overall discomfort
rating 3.00, 3.90 and 3.10, net bending angle 1.60, 4.80 and 4.40 degrees and
vertical vibration 0.20, 1.01 and LOl m/s^ respectively for the subjects Al, A2
and A3 at 1.5 km/h forward speed of power weeder and 40 min time duration.
These values were significantly higher at 1.5 km/h forward speed and 40 min time
duration than those at 1.0 km/h forward speed and 50 min time duration.
155
3. For manually operated knapsack sprayer the heart rate was 102, 107 and 105 bpm
and workload was 44.97, 43.72 and 45.24 watts at 16 stokes/min respectively for
subjects Al, A2 and A3. Heart rate and workload were also recorded at 11 and 21
stokes/min but it was observed that at 16 strokes/min heart rate and workload
provided better spray quality on plants and no fatigue to the operator.
4. While recording body part discomfort score the most painful parts reported by the
subjects were shoulder, trunk, legs and writs palm for manually operated
knapsack sprayer.
5. For power knapsack sprayer, the heart rate varied from 104 to 109 bpm and
workload from 42 to 48 watts respectively for all the three subjects at 5000 rpm
engine speed and was the best suitable engine speed for all subjects.
6. The energy expenditure varied from 11.45 to 21,83 kJ/min for picking of cotton
bolls in standing posture for different time durations and the subjects under study.
The values of heart rate were 101,104 and 96 bpm, workload 43.13, 39.34 and
29.49 watts respectively for 3 subjects at 50 min time duration.
7. The energy expenditure varied from 14.53 to 21,82 kJ/min for picking of cotton
bolls in bending posture for different time durations and the subjects under study
The heart rate was 103, 103, 98 bpm, workload 45.67, 38.42, 34.89 watts
respectively for subjects at 40 min time duration. It was observed that the subjects
were able to work without fatigue and also more output was obtained at 40 min
time duration.
8. The force applied on the handle of knapsack sprayer varied between 2.9 to 5.6 kgf
at different strokes.
156
). The vertical vibration on the handle of power weeder increased from 9.85 to
76,90 m/s^ when throttle position increased from ideal to full. The vertical
vibration was 20.4 m/s^ at 4000 rpm and increased to 66.4 m/s^ at the exhaust of
the engine of power sprayer when rpm increased to 6000. The minimum vertical
vibration was recorded on the frame (3.2 to 20.1 m/s^).
10. The noise at operator's ear level was 85 dB (A) when throttle position was at
minimum and increased to 94.1 dB (A) when the weeder operated in stationary
mode at full throttle. For power knapsack sprayer, variation in noise at operators
ear level was 80.6 to 95.48 dB (A) when it was operated at 4000 - 6000 rpm,
11. The noise of power knapsack sprayer affected the heart rate and other
physiological parameters and also the performance of the operator.
12. Physiological cost of selected farm operations in cotton crop production system
performed by the subjects was established. Weeding was identified as the most
energy consuming operation followed by spraying by knapsack sprayer, picking
of cotton bolls in bending posture, spraying by power knapsack sprayer and
picking in standing posture.
13. Thus it can be concluded that the power weeder should be operated at 1.0-1.5
km/h for 40-50 min time duration. Manual knapsack sprayer should be operated at
16 strokes/min for about 40 min. Power knapsack sprayer should be operated at
5000 rpm engine speed for about 20 min. Recommended time duration for
picking in standing posture is 45-50 min and for picking in bending posture 35-40
min. This recommended operational parameter gave maximum output without
fatigue to the operators.
157
SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE WORK
1. The experiments should be carried out for more number of subjects of different
anthropometric dimensions and age to optimize the values of various operational
parameters of the machines/activities.
2. The experiments should also be carried out for evaluating the effect of noise of
power vêeder and power knapsack sprayer on the subjects during field
experiments.
3. Validation of equations should be taken up for all machines/operations.

REFERENCES
Anonymous (1994) Package of Practices for Kharif Crops, Punjab Agricultural

University, Ludhiana,
Anonymous (2000-02) Annual Report of AICRP on Human Engineering and Safety in
Agriculture, Department of Farm Machinery. TNAU Coimbatore.
Anonymous (2005a) Agricultural Statistics at a Glance 2004, Directorate of Economics
and Statistics, Ministry of Agriculture, Govt, of India.
Anonymous (2005b) Package of Practices for Kharif Crops. Punjab Agricultural
University, Ludhiana.
Astrand P and Rodahl K (1986) Text book of work physiology : physiological bases of
exercise pp 669-674. Ilird edition McGraw Hill Book Co. New York.
Astrand P and Rodahl K (1977) Text book of work physiology. pp 339 llnd edn. McGraw
Hill Book Company, New York.
Bansal A S (1983) Noise from agricultural machinery in India. Proceeding of 11th
International conference on Acoustics held at Paris PP 267-270
Bansal A S and Dhir R K (1994) Studies of noise induced hearing loss among some
selected farm machinery operators belonging to village near Ludhiana
unpublished technical report, Deptt of Mechanical Engineering, Punjab
Agricultural University, Ludhiana,India.
Bansal A S, Bheniwal N S and Kumar A (1982) Survey of noise level of tractor. Paper
presented in XIX annual convention of ISAE heald at Udaipur on Feb 15-17. pp
55
Barger E L, Carleton W M , Mckibbean E G and Bainer Roy (1963) Tractor and their
power units, pp 251-317, John Wiley Private Limited, New Delhi.
Bawa H S and Kaul R N (1974) Some studies on vibration of a Knapsack power sprayer
effecting operator comfort. Journal of Agril Engg. 11(1): 34-37.
Bhattacharya S K (1999) Assessment of nose and vibration with referance to health
standared. Paper presented in a workshop on occupational health and safety in
agriculture held at national institute of occupational health, Ahamedabad on Feb.
14-18, pp 96-101.
Borg G A V (1962) Physical performance and perceived exertion.pp 56. Lund,Sweden.
Bot S D M and Hollander A P (2000) The relationship between heart rate and oxygen
uptake during non-steady state exercise. Ergonomics 43(10); 1578-92,
BSI 6841(1987) Measurement and evaluation of human exposure to whole body
mechanical vibration and repeated shock, London*.
Carsloo S (1982) The effect of vibration on the skeleton, joints and muscles. Applied
Ergonomics 13(4): 251-58.
59
Charlotte F H, Robert G, Asa K and Jorgen W(1995) A portable ergonomic observation
method (PEO) for computerized online recording of postures and manual
handling. Applied Ergonomics 26(2): 93-100.
Corlett E N and Bishop R p (1976) A technique for assessing postural discomfort.
Ergonomics 19(2): 175-82,
Corlett E N, Madeley S J and Manenica I (1979) Posture targeting : A technique for
recording working postures. Ergonomics 22(3) : 357-66.
Datta S R, Chatterjee B B smd Roy B N (1985) The energy cost of pulling hand carts.
Ergonomics 28(1): 229-236.
Delooze M P , Kingma I, Thunnissen W , Vanwijk M J and Toussaint H M (1994) The
evaluation of a practical biomech anical model estimating limber movements in
occupational activities. £rgowo/w/c5'37(9): 1495-1502.
Emerson P D (1975) Practical noise centrol. Industrial engineering 7(6): 24-28.
Evans O M, Zerbib Y, Faria M H and MonodH (1983) Physiologyical responses to load
holding and load carriage. Ergonomicsl^Q) ' 161-71.
Gayatri (2000) It's noisy world. Science Reporter 37(1): 9-15,62
Gerke F G and Hoag D L (1981) Tractor vibration at the operator's station. Transactions
oftheASAE24i5yAl3\Al34.
Gite L P and Singh G (1997) Ergonomics in agricultural and allied activities in India.
Technical Bulletin No. CIAE/97/70. Central Institute of agricultural
engineering3hopal,India.
Gite L P (1991) Optimum handle height for animal drawn mould board plough. Applied
Ergonomics 22(1): 21-28,
Grandjean E (1982) Fitting the task to the man - An ergonomic approach, pp 77-
81 .Taylor& Francis Ltd, London.
Griefahn B, Brode P and Jaschinski W (2000) Contrast thresholds and fixation disparity
during 5 Hz sinusoidal single and dual axis (vertical and lateral) whole body
vibration. Ergonomics 43(3): 317-32.
Griffm M J (1982) The effect of vibration on health. Memorandum No, 632. Institute of
sound and vibration research university of Southampton U.K.*
Griffin M J, Whitham E M and Parsons K C (1982) Vibration and comfort: Transitional
seat vibration. Ergonomics 25(4): 603-30.
Guignard J C (1985) A text book of Industrial Hygiene rod toxicology, Biological
Response, pp: 653-724 Ilnd Edition. John Wiley & Sons New York .
Gupta P K (1979) Human body response to vibrations induced by an experimental power
knapsack equipment. Unpublished M.Tech Thesis^ Punjab Agricultural
University, Ludhiana, India.
Gupta S J, Dimri G P and Malhotra M S {\9^^) Metabolic responses of Indians during
sub maximal and maximal work is dry and humid heat. Ergonomics 20(1): 33-40,
160
Gupta S N and Jain Vipul (1988) Noise induced hearing loss in Ludhiana industrial
workers. Proceeding International conference on noise as public health
problem.pp 91-95. Stockholm, Sweeden.
Haslegrave C M (1994) What do we mean by a working posture? Ergonomics 37(6) :
781-97.
Herberts S P, Kadefors R and Broman H (1980) Arm positioning in manual tasks an
electrographic study of localized muscle fatigue. Ergonomics 23(7): 655-65.
Huang B K and Suggs C W (1968) Tractor noise and operator performance. Transactions
oftheASAE 11(\): 1-5,
IS 12180(1987) Methodfor noise measurement of agricultural tractors, Bereau of Indian
Standard, Manak Bhawan,9, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi.
IS 12207 (1987) Recommendation on selected performance characterstics of agricultural
tractors. Bereau of Indian Standard, Manak Bhawan, 9, Bahadur Shah Zafar
Marg, New Delhi.,
ISO:2631(1985) Evaluation of human exposure to whole body vibration-PsiYt-l: General
requirement. International Organization for Standardization ,Geneva.*
Keyserling W M (1986) Postural analysis of the trank and shoulders in simulated real
time. Ergonomics 29(4): 569-83.
Knapp L W and Parks J T (1970) Small tractor operator position and safety behaviour.
Agricultural Engineering 8: 455-459
Kroemer K H E, Kroemer H J and Kroemer E K E (1994) How to design for ease and
efficiency. Prentice hall New Jersy.
Kroemer K H E, Kroemer H J and Kroemer E K E (1997) Engineering physiology bases
of ergonomics/ human factor. John Wiley & Sons New York.
Kroemer K H E and Grandjean E (2000) Fitting the task to the human, A textbook of
occupational ergonomics pp 118. Vth edition, Taylor & Francis Ltd., U.K.
Kumar Adarsh, Tandon S K and Saxena J P (2002) Ergonomic evaluation of manual
v^ccd^r. JAgricEngg 39(4): 17-22.
Kumar Adarsh, Verghese Matthew, Mohan Dinesh, Mahajan Puneet, Gulati Parveen and
Kale Shashank (1999) Effect of whole body vibration on the low back. Spine 24 :
2506-15.
Legg S J and Mahanty A (1985) Comparison of five modes of carrying a load close to the
trunk. Ergonomics 28(12): 1653-60.
Lusted M, Healey S and Mandryk J A (1994) Evaluation of the seating of quatas flight
deck crew. Applied Ergonomics 25 : 275-82.
Mass S, Kok M L J, Westra H G and Kemper H C G (1989) The validity of the use of
heart rate in estimating oxygen consumption in static and in combined
static/dynamic exercise. Ergonomics 32(2): 141-48.
61
Mc Ardle D E, Katch F I and Katch V L (1994) Essentials of exercise physiology, pp 508
Lea & Feblger, A waverly company Philadelphia.
Mehta C R, Shyam M, Singh P and Verma R N (2000) Ride vibrations on tractor-implement
system. Applied Ergonomics 31 : 323-28.
Mehta C R,, Tiwari P S and Varshney A C (1997) Ride vibrations on a 7.5 kW power tiller.
Journal of Agril Engg, Resarch 66 : 169-76.
Mehta M L (2000) Farm mechanization in new millennium status and strategy . pp24.
Souvenir of fourteeth national convention of Agril engineers, The Institution of
Engineers(India) Kamatka State Centre, Banglore.
Mittal M and Malik S L (1991) Biomechanical evaluation of lift posture in adult koli female
labourers. Ergonomics 34(1); 103-104,
Mittal V K, Bhatia B S and Ahuja S S (1996) A study of the magnitude, causes and profile of
victims of accidents with selected farm machinery in Punjab. Final report of ICAR
adhoc research project, Department of Farm Power and Machinery, Punjab
Agricultural University, Ludhiana,India,
Monnich H T (1985) Result of a epidemiological longitudinal study of hearing among
tractor drivers, operators of agricultural machines. Proceeding of 8th Joint
Ergonomic Symposium, Silsoe, Bed Fordshire, UK.
Morehouse L E and Miller T A (1963) Physiology of exercise pp75-102. C V Mosby co. St.
Louis, USA.
Morrison, C S and Harrington R E (1962) Tractor seating for operator comfort. Agricultural
Engineering 43(11): 632-635 & 650-652.
Nag P K, Sebastion N C and Malvankar M G (1980) Occupational workload of Indian
agricultural workers. Ergonomics 23(2) : 91-102.
NASA (1978) Anthropometric source book vol I : Anthropometry for Design NASA
referance publication 1024(NASA RP-1024), Lyndon B Johnson space centre,
Huston Texas,
Nigg B M and Herzog W (1999) Bio mechanics of the muscle- skeletal system, pp 156 llnd
edition, Jonh Wiley & sons, NewYork.
Pawar J G (1978) Investigation of human energy requirement for power tiller operation.
Unpublished M.Tech. Thesis Punjab Agricultural University Ludhiana.
Rebuck J A, Kroemer K H E and Thomson W G (1975) Engineering Anthropometry
Methods, John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Rodahl K (1989). The physiology of work pp 51-79 Taylor & Francis Ltd.,London.
Saha P N, Datta S R, Banergee P K and Narayanee G G (1979) An acceptable workload for
Indian workers. Ergonomics 22(9): 1059-71.
Samanta A and Chatterjee B B (1981) Physiological study of manual lifting of loads in
Indians. Ergonomics 24(7): 557-64.
Sanchez J, Monod H and Chabraud F (1979) Effect of dynamic static and combined work on
heart rate and oxygen consumption. Ergonomics 22(8): 935-43.
162
Sanders M S and McCormick E J (1987) Human factor in Engineering and design.pp 488-
498. Sixth Ed. McGraw Hill Book Co. New York.
Seidel H, Bastek R, Brauer D, Bucholz C H, Meister A, Metz A M and Rothe R (1980) On
human response to prolonged repeated whole body vibration. Ergonomics 23(3) :
191-211
Shivagaje Ashok, Madhukar K, Yadav D, Nanda P and Mathankar M (2004) Cotton scenerio
in India. Current Science, 87(1):8.
Singh H (1972) Human energy requirement of selected farm operations, unpublished M.Tech
Thesis Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, India.
Singh S and Singh J (2002) Research Digest on Energy Requirement in Agricidtural Sector,
Department of Farm Power and Machinery, Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana,India,
Singhal V (2003) Indian Agriculture. Indian economic data research center. New Delhi.
Stamford B A and Noble B J (1974) Metabolic cost and perception of effort during bicycle
ergometer work performance. Medicine and Science in sports and exercise. 6 : 226-
31.*
Suggs C W and Splinter W E (1961) Effect of environment on the allowable workload of
man. TransASAE4: 48-51.
Tayyari F and Smith J L (1997) A text book on occupational ergonomics 1st edition, pp.57-
71. Chapman & Hall, Madras, India.
Terrier P, Aminian K and Schutz Y (2001) Can accelerometry accurately predict the energy
cost of uphill/downhill walking? Ergonomics 44(1): 48-62.
Thakur T C and Das H (1978) Effect of environment and models of operation on human
performance. Journals of Agricultural Engineering 15(3): 151-57.
Thompson S B and Bales W (1994) Clinical considerations and comparative measures of
assessing curvature of the spine. JmedEng Technology 18(4): 143-147*
Tiwari P S and Gite L P (2000) Physiological cost evaluation of a 10.5 kw rotary power tiller
with and without seating attachment. Agricultural Engineering Today 24(6):49-59.
Tewari V K and Geeta S P (2003) Occupational stress on Indian female agricidtural
workers, pp-365-366, A paper presented at XXXVII Proceeding of convention of
Indian Society of Agricultural Engineering held at Uaidapur.
Verma S S (1994) Prediction of maximal aerobic power in man: a nomographic approach.
Ergonomics37i9yA5Q3-l2,
Verma S S, Malhotra M S and Gupta J S (1979) Indirect assessment of energy expenditure at
different work rates. Ergonomics 22(9): 1039-44.
Vos H W (1973) Physical workload in different body posture, while working near to, or
below ground level. Ergonomics 16(6): 817-28.
Winter D A (1990) Biomechanics and motor control of human movement Ilnd edition John
Wiley & Sons, New York.
* Ongmalnotseen
163
APPENDIX - A
Specification of instrument used in the study
1,Computerized treadmill:
Type CAT EYE computerized treadmill
Model EC-T220
Over all dimensions (LXWXH), mm 2031 x872x 1466
Running belt area, mm 510 X 1520
Display system LCD screen, numeric display, Green LED
display
Data input system Data card and buttons
Pulse monitor Chest belt Type (Polar compatible)
Weight capacity of belt ,kg 180
Total machine weight, kg 120
Motor, hp 2.5, DC, Variable speed
Speed, km/h 1.0 to 18 with step of 0.1 km/h
Inclination of belt (%) Oto 12.0 with step of 0.5
2.Polar Head rate Monitor:
A. Polar coded transmitter
Battery type Built in lithium cell
Battery life Average 2500 hours of use
Operating temperature -10 to + 50^C (14tol22"F)
B Wrist receiver
Display 14 seven segment digit, 2 dot matrix areas, 46
symbols, total 184 segments
Overall dimension (LxB^H), mm 48x42x11
Battery type CR2032
Battery life Average 1 year (1 h/day, 7 days/week)
Memory 8 K bytes RAM
Accuracy of heart rate ±1% or ± 1 beats / min, whichever larger
measurement (definition applies to steady state conditions)
3* Oxylog 2:
Make MORGAN MEDICAL LTD
Model MORGAN OXYLOG 2
Overall dimension (LXWXH), mm 185 X 82x215
Measurement range 0.1-10 liter oxygen consumption per minute
Flow transducer Turbine type flow meter attached to a face
mask.
Oxygen sensor FIGARO KE-23 oxygen fuel type cells
Batteries 5volt supply in 4 cell Nicd
Power consumption 230 |aa non active power down mode
28 mA standby mode
42 mA active with sample pump off
62 mA active with sample pump running
Display Four row 20 column liquid crystal display
Data storage
164
Time, minute 2000
No of subject tests 16
Variable stored Minute breath count, minute inspired volume,
total inspired volume, minute 02 consumption,
total 0 2 consumption
Weight, kg 1.8
4. Anemometer:
Make LT butron
Model AM-4201
Display Liquid crystal displays, (18 mm size)
Overall dimension (L^WxH), mm 160x80x35
Power supply( batteries), Volt 9
Sensor Fan Type
Dia of sensor, mm 72
5. B&K portable six - channel PULSE multi analyzer:
Parameter Type
B & K portable six-channel PULSE multi analyzer system composing 3560 C
of
a) Acquisition front end 2827
b) LAN Interface module 7533
c)6/l-chennel input/output module 3032-A
d)noise and vibration analysis software maintenance and up gradation 7700 AMSl
agreement for 7700A
Charger to deltatron converter, with built in TEDS 2647A
Data recorder software for pulse 3560 7701
Rechargeable nickel cadmium battery QB0048
HP Omni book 6000 Note book PC U10183G
ENDEVCO 751-10 Isotron accelerometer EE0103
10-32 UNF to BNC connector JP0145
Accelerometer cable(30 meter) AO0038K
1/2" pre polarized OV condenser microphone, 6Hz to 20 kHz 4189
Microphone Pre amplifier with 7 pin connector 2669L
Hand arm vibration transducer set 4392
6. Novatech Load cell
Make Novatech measurement ltd, England
Battery 6V sealed lead acid rechargeable
Battery life 35hrs with a 350 ohm bridge
Bridge excitation 5 V dc fixed
Bridge Resistance 85ohm minimum
Span 0.75 to 7.5 mV/v for full scale
Resolution 1:19999
Peak hold 500ms peak capture
Digit filtering 0.5 to 5 second
Operating temperature -lOdegrre C to 50degree C
Thermal drift 100 ppm / degree C Max.
165
APPENDIX - B
Specification of the equipment used during study
I.Power Weeder: ^
Type of Machine Se/f Propelled H
Power source 5.5 hp diesel engine (Greaves make)
Rated engine rpm 1700
Overall dimension (LXWXH),mm 1690x600x970
Working width, mm 450
Speed ratiofromengine to wheel 48:1
Power cut off device dog clutch
No. of blade on the shaft 16 (Alternatively in four row, four
blade on each row)
Shape of blade j L. Type
Main clutch One
Implement clutch One
Turning clutch Two
Type of mounting of blade on Through nut & bolts
rotary shaft
Weight, kg [18
2. Knapsack Sprayer:
Make ASPEE Agro Equipment Pvt. Ltd. Bombay
Model ASPEE hi-tech sprayer
Tank capacity, liters Jl__„„_^_„.„]
Over all dimension (LxWxH),mm 610x360x540
Piston stroke length, mm 52
Pump diameter mm 34
Angular displacement of the 34
Handle, degree
Length of handle, mm 500
Spraying lance weight, gm 310
Wt of sprayer with empty tank, kg 6.8
3. Power operated Knapsack sprayer:
Make Aspee Agro Equipment pvt. ltd. Bombay
Model Aspee Bolo Mist blower L - 34
Insecticide Tank Capacity, liters 12
Fuel tank capacity, liters 2
Engine
Make Greaves Ltd (FEU) Chennai
Rated Power, hp 1.2
SFC,gm/kwh 650
Fuel Petrol Oil Mixture
Hose length 820
Air velocity developed, m/s 62
Sleeve Position Four
166
APPENDIX" C
Heart rate and oxygen consumption at different workload on treadmill*
"Speed Subject A1 Subject A2 Subject A3

(km/h) HR WL OC HR WL OC HR WL OC
(bpm) (watts) (1/min) (bpm) (watts) (i/min) (bpm) (watts) (1/min)
^0.0 74.0 0.00 0.29 78.0 0.00 0.50 76.0 0.00 0.32
^1.0 79.0 12.90 0.36 81.0 12.24 0.58 81.0 10.25 0.39
^1.5 82.0 19.35 0.42 85.47 18.36 0.62 86.7 15.38 0.44
^2.0 87.6 25.80 0.51 89.3 24.48 0.71 88.1 20.51 0.51
"'2.5 89.0 32.25 0.58 95.6 30.60 0.79 92.0 25.64 0.58
"3.0 98.9 38.70 0.65 100.0 36.72 0.86 96.5 30.76 0.62
"3.5 101.8 45.15 0.72 105.8 42.84 0.95 99.1 35.89 0.70
"4.0 104.8 51.61 0.80 113.4 48.96 1.10 100.8 41.02 0.75
"4.5 108.0 58.06 0.88 116.0 55.08 1.18 104.6 46.15 0.81
"5.0 112.0 64.51 0.99 121.3 61.20 1.22 106.4 51.27 0.89
"5.5 123.0 70.96 1.29 125.9 67.32 1.29 111.8 56.40 0.97
"6.0 134.6 77.41 1.45 133.7 73.44 1.41 117.5 61.53 1.19
* HR = Heart rate (bpm)

OC = Oxygen consumption (1/min)
WL = Work load (watts)
The subjects characteristic equations obtained are:
1) Subject Al
,2 _
HR = 0.7385 WL + 68.99 (R' = 0.95)
HR = 49.893 OC + 62.326 (R^-0.98)
2) Subject A2
HR = 0.7973 WL + 72.478 (R^ = 0.98)
HR = 60.731WL +47.056 (R^=0.99)
3) Subject A3
HR = 0,645 WL + 75.487 (R^ - 0.99)
HR= 47.964 OC + 64.053 (R^-0.97)
167
APPENDIX- D
Computer Programme of Bio Mechanical analysis in FORTRAN-77
C Program Developed by Er.Anoop Dixit for Bio-Mechanical Analysis

C of the Subject in Cotton Crop Under Ph.D. Program
character* 15 O
WRITE(*,1)
write (*,'(/20x,a\)') 'WELCOME to Bio-Mechanical Analysis',
+ 'Operations are abriviated as',
+ 'Power Weeder; PW ,
+ 'Manually Operated Knapsack Sprayer; MKSP',
+ 'Power Operated Knapsack Sprayer; PKSP',
+ 'Cotton Picking Standing Position; SPIC,
+ 'Cotton Picking Bending Position; BPIC
WRITE(*,1)
22 write (*,'(//lx,a\)') 'Enter Operation'
Read (*,*) O
PI=3.141593
CONV=PI/180.
If(O.EQ.'PW')then
goto 100
elseif(0.eq.'MKSP')then
go to 200
elseif(0.eq.'PKSP')then
go to 300
elseif(0.eq.'SPIC')then
go to 400
elseif(0.eq.'BPIC')then
go to 500
else
goto 1001
end if
C PROGRAM FOR CALCULATING THE FORCES AND REACTIONS ON
DIFFERENT
C BODY PARTS DURING WEEDING OPERATION BY POWER WEEDER
100 write (*,'(5X,a\)')'Enter Body Weight ='
read (*,*) B
write (*,'(5X,a\)')'Enter Thl ='
read(*,*)thl
write (*,'(5X,a\)')'Enter Th2 - '
read (*,*)th2
write (*,'(5X,a\)')'Enter Th3 ='
read (*,*)th3
write (*,'(5X,a\)')'Enter Th4 - '
read (*,*)th4
68
read (*,*)th5
write (*,'(5X,a\)')'Enter FPW ='
read (*,*)FPW
Rl =(((B*0.017)/2)* COS(Conv*THl))-(FPW*SlN(Conv*TH]))
F2 = -((B*0.017)/2)* COS(Conv*THl)/SlN(Conv*TH2- Conv*THl)
FI = ((Rl*COS(Conv*THl))+(F2*SIN(Conv*TH2))- (B*0.017))/
+ SIN(Conv*THl)
F4 = -(((B*0.028)/2)*COS(Conv*TH2))/SIN(Conv*TH2+Conv*TH3)
F3 = ((F4*COS(conv * TH3))+(F2*COS(conv*TH2))-(Fl*COS(conv*THl)))
+ /COS(conv*TH2)
F6 = -(((B* 0.5 )/2)* COS(conv*TH3))/SIN(conv*TH3+conv*TH4)
F5 = ((F4*COS(conv*TH3))-(F3*COS(conv*TH2)HF6*COS(conv*TH4)))/
+ COS(conv*TH3)
F8 = -(((B*0.1)/2)*COS(conv*TH4))/SIN(conv*TH4+conv*TH5)
F7 = ((F5*COS(conv*TH3))+(F6*COS(conv*TH4))-(F8*COS(conv*TH5)))/
+ C0S(TH4)
R2 = (F8*SIN(conv*TH5)-F7*SIN(conv*TH4)+ B*0.043 )
WRITE(*,1)
write(*,'(/lx,a)')'Forces Acting on Different Body Parts During
+ Weeder Operation'
WRITE(*,1)
1 F0RMAT(/1X,79C*'))
WRITE (*, 10) R1,R2,F1,F2,F3,F4,F5,F6,F7,F8
10 FORMAT (//IX, 'Rl=', F6.2,//lX,'R2=',F6.2y/lX,Tl=',F6.2,//lX,
+ •F2=',F6.2,//lX,'F3-',F6.2y/lX;F4=',F6.2,//lX,T5=',F6.2,
+ //1X,'F6=',F6.2,//1X,'F7=',F6.2,//1X;F8=',F6.2)
2 WRITE(*,l)
WRITE (*,'(/40x,a)')'END'
WRITE(*,1)
goto 1000
DIFFERENT
C BODY PARTS DURING SPRAYING OPERATION PERFORMED BY MANUALY
OPERATED
C KNAPSACK SPRAYER
200 write (*;(5X,a\)')'Enter Body Weight ='
read (*,*) B
read (*,*)thl
read (*,*)th2
write (*,'(5X,a\)')'Enter ThS -'
read (*,*)th3
write (*;(5X,a\)')'Enter Th4 - '
read (*,*)th4
169
read (*,*)th5
write (*,'(5X,a\)')'Enter FSP ='
read (*,*)FSP
WRITE(*,'(5X,a\)')'Enter FK ='
read (*,*)FK
Rl = (((B*0.017)/2)* COS(Conv*THl))+(FSP*COS(Conv*THl))
F2 = -((B*0.017)/2)* COS(Conv*THl)/SIN(Conv*THl-Conv*TH2)
Fl = ((F2*COS(Conv*TH2))- (Rl*SIN(Conv*THl)))/
+ COS(Conv*THl)
F4 - -(((B*0.028)/2)*COS(Conv*TH2))/SIN(Conv*TH2+Conv*TH3)
F3 =((F4*COS(conv * TH3))+(F2*COS(conv*TH2))-(Fl*COS(conv*THl)))
+ /COS(conv*TH2)
F6 = -((((B* 0.5 )/2)+(FK/4))* COS(conv*TH3))/
+ SIN(conv*TH3+conv*TH4)
F5 = ((F4*COS(conv*TH3))-(F6*COS(conv*TH4))-(F3*COS(conv*TH2)))/
+ COS(conv*TH3)
F7-((F5*COS(conv*TH3))+(F6*COS(conv*TH4)HF8*COS(conv*TH5)))/
+ COS(conv*TH4)
R2 - (F8*SIN(conv*TH5)-F7*SIN(conv*TH4)+ B*0.043 )
WRITE(*,1)
write(*,'(/lx,a)')Torces Acting on Different Body Parts
+ while Operating Knasack Sprayer'
WRITE(*,1)
11 FORMAT (//IX, 'Rl^', F6.2y/lX;R2=',F6.2y/lX;Fl=',F6.2y/lX,
+ •F2=',F6.2,//1X;F3=',F6.2^/1X,T4-',F6.2,//1X,'F5=',F6.2,
+ //1 X,'F6=',F6.2,// 1 X,'F7=',F6.2y/l X,'F8=',F6.2)
WRITE(*,1)
WRITE(M)
goto 1000
DIFFERENT
C BODY PARTS DURING SPRAYING OPERATION PERFORMED BY POWER
OPERATED
C KNAPSACK SPRAYER
300 write (*,'(5X,a\)')'Enter Body Weight - '
read (*,*) B
write (*,'(5X,a\)')'Enter Th 1 ='
read (*,*)thl
write (*,'(5X,a\)')'Enter Th2 -'
read (*,*)th2
read (*,*)th3
70
read (*,*)th4
read (*,*)th5
write (*,'(5X,a\)')'Enter FPS ='
read (*,*)FPS
WRITE(*,'(5X,a\)')'Enter FH ='
read (*,*)FH
Rl - (((B*0.017)/2)* COS(Conv*THl))+(FH*COS(Conv*THl))
F2 = ((B*0.017)/2)* COS(Conv*THl)/SIN(Conv*THl+Conv*TH2)
Fl = ((F2*COS(Conv*TH2))+ (Rl*SIN(Conv*THI)))/
+ COS(Conv*THl)
F4 = -((b*.028/2)*COS(Conv*TH2))/SIN(Conv*TH2+Conv*TH3)
+ /COS(conv*TH2)
F6 = -((((B* 0.5 )/2)+(FPS/4))* COS(conv*TH3))/
F5 = ((F4*COS(conv*TH3)HF6*COS(conv*TH4)HF3*COS(conv*TH2)))/
+ COS(conv*TH3)
F8 = -(((B*0. l)/2)*COS(conv*TH4))/SIN(conv*TH4+conv*TH5)
+ C0S(C0NV*TH4)
R2 = (F8*SlN(conv*TH5)-F7*SrN(conv*TH4)+ B*0.043 )
WRITE(*,1)
write(*,'(/lx,a)')'Forces Acting on Different Body Parts wliile
+ Operating Power Knasack Sprayer'
WRITE(*,1)
12 FORMAT (//IX, 'Rl=', F6.2,//lx;R2=',f6.2y/lx,'Fl=',f6.2,//lx,
+ 'F2=',f6.2,//lx;F3=',f6.2,//lx,T4=',f6.2,//lx,T5=',f6.2,
+ //lx,'F6=',f6.2,//lx,'F7=',f6.2,//lx,'F8=',f6.2)
WRITE(*,1)
WRITE(*,1)
goto 1000
DIFFERENT
C BODY PARTS DURING PICKING OPERATION PERFORMED BY THE
SUBJECT IN
C STANDING POSTURE
read (*,*) B
read(*,*)thl
write (*;(5X,a\)')'Enter Th2 ='
read (*,*)th2
171
read (*,*)th3
read (*,*)th4
read (*,*)th5
write (*,'(5X,a\)')'Enter FPIC ='
read (*,*)FPIC
WRITE(*;(5X,a\)')'Enter FIPS ='
read (*,*)FIPS
Rl-(((B*0.017)/2)* COS(Conv*THl)HFPIC*SIN(Conv*THl+CONV*FIPS))
Fl = ((F2*COS(Conv*TH2))+(Ri *SIN(Conv*THl))+(FPIC*COS(CONV*FIPS))
+ )/COS(Conv*THl)
F4 = -((b*0.028)/2)*COS(Conv*TH2)/SIN(Conv*TH2+Conv*TH3)
+ /COS(conv*TH2)
F6 = -(((B* 0.5 )/2)+ COS(conv*TH3))/
F5-((F4*COS(conv*TH3))-(F6*COS(conv*TH4))-(F3*COS(conv*TH2)))/
+ COS(conv*TH3)
F7-((F5*COS(conv*TH3))+(F6*COS(conv*TH4))-(F8*COS(conv*TH5)))/
+ C0S(C0NV*TH4)
R2 = (F8*SIN(conv*TH5)-F7*SlN(conv*TH4)+ B*0.043 )
WRITE(*,1)
write(*,'(/lx,a)')TorceS on Diff. Body Parts While Cotton
+ Picking in Standing Position '
WRITE(*,1)
13 FORMAT (//IX, 'Rl=', F6.2y/lx,'R2=',f6.2,//lx;Fl=',f6.2,//lx,
+ T2=',f6.2,//lx,'F3=',f6.2,//lx,'F4=',f6.2,//lx,T5=',f6.2,
+ //lx;F6=',f6.2;/lx;F7=',f6.2,//lx,'F8=',f6.2)
WRITE(*,1)
WRITE (*;(/40x,a)')'END'
WRITE(*,1)
goto 1000
DIFFERENT
C BODY PARTS DURING PICKING OPERATION PERFORMED BY TH E
SUBJECT IN
C BENDING POSTURE
read (*,*) B
write (*;(5X,a\)')'EnterThl-'
read(*,*)thl
172
read (*,*)th2
read (*,*)th3
read (*,*)th4
write (*;(5X,a\)')'Enter Th5 ='
read (*,*)th5
write (*,'(5X,a\)')'Enter FPB ='
read (*,*)FPB
WRITE(*,'(5X,a\)')'Enter FIPB ='
read (*,*)FIPB
R1 =((((B*0.011)12)* COS(Conv*TH 1 ))+(FPB*SIN(Conv*TH 1 -CONV*FIPB))
+ )/COS(CONV*THl)
Fl = ((FPB*COS(Conv*FIPB))- (F2*COS(Conv*TH2)))
+ /COS(Conv*THl)
F4 = ((b*0.028)/2)*COS(Conv*TH2)/SIN(Conv*TH2-Conv*TH3)
F3 =((Fl*COS(conv * THl))+(F2*COS(conv*TH2))-(F4*COS(conv*TH3)))
+ /COS(conv*TH2)
F6 = -((((B* 0.5 )/2))* COS(conv*TH3))/
+ COS(conv*TH3)
+ C0S(C0NV*TH4)
R2 = (F8*SIN(conv*TH5)-F7*SIN(conv*TH4)+ B*0.043 )
WRITE(M)
write(*,'(/lx,a)')'Forces on Diff. Body Parts wiiile Cotton
+ Picicing in Bending Position '
WRITE(M)
14 FORMAT (//IX, 'Rl=', F6.2,//lx;R2=',f6.2,//lx,Tl=',f6.2,//lx,
+ T2=',f6.2,//lx,'F3=',f6.2,//lx,'F4=',f6.2,//lx,'F5=',f6.2,
+ //1 x,'F6-',f6.2,//1 x,T7-',f6.2,//l x,'F8=',f6.2)
WRITE(M)
WRITE(M)
goto 1000
1001 write(*;(/lx,a)')' PI Enter Operation Name'
go to 22
1000 End
173
APPENDIX^ E
Verification of mathematical equation for knapsack sprayer
Data of the subject which was got during experiment in the field:
Body weight of the subject (BW) - 80 kg
Weight of forearm Wi= 0.017 BW

- 1 . 3 6 kg
Weight of upper arm W2= 0.028 BW
= 2.24 kg
Weight of trunk and head W3= 0.5 BW
= 40 kg
Weight of upper leg W4- 0.1 BW
= 8 kg
Weight of lower leg W5= 0.043 BW
= 3.44 kg
9] = angle that fore arm makes with horizontal = 20 ^
02 == angle that upper arm makes with horizontal = 60 ^
03 = angle that trunk & head makes with horizontal = 1 5 ^
04 ~ angle that upper leg makes with horizontal ~ 17 *^
05 = angle that lower leg makes with horizontal = 20 ^
Fsp = force required for pushing & pulling of the knapsack sprayer
and boom weight == 3 kg
Fic == load (weight of knapsack sprayer) carried by trunk of the subject = 17 kg
—^cos6J
^cos61
Forces exerted by fore arm on upper arm F2 = — ~
sin(9j -82)
F2= 0.99 kgf
W
Reaction force on forearm Rj = —J-cosOi -f F^p cosO,
Ri= 3.46 kgf
74
Forces exerted by upper arm on fore arm Fj = ~ *
cos 81
Fi--0.73kgf
—cos 6^
Forces exerted on trunk from upper arm F. = —
sin (02 4-83)
F4 = -0.5 kgf
c Â r * t r^ F. COS (93 4-F, cos 6^2-i^ cos 6',

Forces exerted on upper arm from trunk F^ = —= *
cos ^2
F3= 1.24 kgf
- —^ + - ^ cos9.
I 2 4J
Forces exerted on upper leg from trunk F^ = —^-—j ~^
sin(03 +64)
F6=-44.195 kgf
Forces exerted on trunk from upper leg F F. cos G/ 3o - L^^^ô^J^
F . cos9. - F1 3,. cos9.
COSG3
F 5 - 42.47 kgf
^cos<9,
Forces exerted on lower leg from upper leg Fg = --^
sin(^,+^,)
Fg- "6.36 kgf
F. cosB. -f F. cosG. -FnCosG,

Forces exerted on upper leg from lower leg F^
COSG4
F7 - 4.95 kgf
Reaction force from ground on the lower leg (R2)
R2 = Fg sin G5 " F^ sin 0^ -f W^
R2="0.17
175
VITA
Name of the student Anoop Kumar Dixit
Father's name Shri Shiva Shankar Dixit
Mother's name Smt. Uma Dixit
Nationality Indian
Date of birth 31^^Manuaty, 1970.
Pemianent home address 72, Ruhai Muhal

Auraiya-206122
UP
EDUCATIONAL QUALIFICATION
Bachelor degree
University and year of award : G B Pant University of Agricultural

and Technology, Pantnagar,
Udhamsingh Nagar, Uttaranchal ,1993
OGPA/OCPA/ % marks 4.21/5.00
Master's degree
University and year of award : Punjab Agricultural University,

Ludhianaand 1996
OGPA/OCPA/ % marks : 7.60/10.00
Ph.D
OCPA 8.43/10.00
Title of Master's Thesis Ergonomic studies on tractor mounted belt and

cup type semi automatic potato planter.
Award/Distinctions/
Fellowships/Scholarships Fellowship during Master's degiee
^ \>
' • > / / ; ' ^ '

Title of the Dissertation : Ergonomic Studies on Agricultural Workers Performing
Selected Farm Operations in Cotton Crop.
Name of the student : Anoop Kumar Dixit
Admission No. : L-2002-AE-78-D
Major Subject : Farm Power and Machinery
Minor Subject : Computer Science and Engineering

Name and Designation of : Dr Surendra Singh, Senior Research Engineer
Major Advisor Dept of Farm Power and Machinery
Degree to be Awarded : Ph. D.
Year of Award of Degree : 2006
Total pages in Dissertation : 176 + xvi
Name of University : Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana-141004
AiBSTRACT
The ergonomic studies were carried out on agricultural workers performing selected farm operations
such as weeding by power weeder, spraying by manual and power knapsack sprayer and picking of
cotton bolls in standing and bending postures in cotton crop. Ergonomic evaluation of
machines/activities with respect to physiological parameters like heart-rate, body discomfort, postural
configuration and vibrations had been carried out. Mathematical equations were developed for all five
machines/operations under static conditions. These equations were developed to determine the
muscular forces acting on body segments of the workers while working on these machines/operations.
The web page based programme using FORTRAN 77 language was designed and was executed in
DOS mode. The independent parameters selected were three subjects of different age groups, 3
forward speeds (1.0, 1.5 and 2,0 km/h) and 2 time durations (40 and 50 min) for power weeder,
number of strokes/min (11, 16 and 21) for manual knapsack sprayer and 3 engine rpm (4000, 5000
and 6000) for power knapsack sprayer and 3 time durations each (40, 50 and 60 min) in standing and
(30,40 and 50 min) bending postures. The heart rate varied between 93 and 125 bpm and energy
expenditure between 12.76 and 26.91 kJ/min for all forward speeds and time durations in weeding
operation. Over all discomfort rating (ODR) varied from 2.70 to 6.50, vertical vibration from 0.90 to
2.55 m/s^ and postural configuration from 3.8 to 11 degrees. The heart rate varied from 96 to 111
bpm, ODR between 2.83 - 4.50 and postural configuration between 4.33 and 11 degree while
operating knapsack sprayers. For cotton bolls picking in standing and bending postures the heart rate
varied from 90-111 bpm, ODR from 1.67-6.67 and net bending angle between -2.00 and 5.67 degrees.
Mathematical equations developed were validated only for manually operated knapsack sprayer and
results were same as reported by the subjects. It can be concluded from the experiments that power
weeder should be operated at forward speed of 1.5 km/h for 40 min time duration, manual knapsack
sprayer should be operated at 16 strokes/min with 24 lit of spray and power knapsack sprayer at
5000 rpm. Cotton bolls should be picked for 40-50 min, in both bending and standing posture.
Key Words : Biomechanical analysis, body posture, cotton picking, ergonomics, postural
/Configuration, power weeder, sprayer, vibration & noise.
(ff
(Signature of Major Advisor) (Signature of the Student)
IV

Dixit - 2006 - ERGONOMIC STUDIES ON AGRICULTURAL WORKERS PERFORMING SELECTED FARM OPERATIONS IN COTTON CROPS PDF

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

Dixit - 2006 - ERGONOMIC STUDIES ON AGRICULTURAL WORKERS PERFORMING SELECTED FARM OPERATIONS IN COTTON CROPS PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ERGONOMIC STUDIES ON AGRICULTURAL WORKERS

PERFORMING SELECTED FARM OPERATIONS

Submitted to the Punjab Agricultural University

Anoop Kumar Dixit

Department of Farm Power and Machinery

This is to certify that the dissertation entitled, "Ergonomic studies on

agricultural workers performing selected farm operations in cotton crop"

Machinery (Minor subject: Computer Science and Engineering) of the Punjab

Agricultural University, Ludhiana, is a bonafide research work carried out by Anoop

Kumar Dixit (L-2002-AE-78-D) under my supervision and no part of this

dissertation has been submitted for any other degree.

(Dr. Surendra Smgh)

This is to certify that the dissertation entitled, "Ergonomic studies on

agricultural workers performing selected farm operations in cotton crop"

submitted by Anoop Kumar Dixit (L-2002-AE-78-D) to the Punjab Agricuhural

University, Ludhiana in partial fulfillment of the requirement: for the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy, in the subject of Farm Power and Machinery (Minor

Advisory Committee after an oral examination of the same^ - ^ cjsM^^^oyixhiP^ v^'wh

(Dr. Surendra Singh) External Examiner

Name of the student : Anoop Kumar Dixit

Admission No. : L-2002-AE-78-D

Major Subject : Farm Power and Machinery

Minor Subject : Computer Science and Engineering

Degree to be Awarded : Ph. D.

Year of Award of Degree : 2006

Total pages in Dissertation : 176 + xvi

Name of University : Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana-141004

(Signature of Major Advisor) ' ^ ^ (Signature of the Student)

Chapter Topic Page

providing employment directly or indirectly to around 35 million people (Shivagaje et

Major cotton-producing states in India are Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, Haryana,

that there is no improvement in production in these states, as a result of which cotton

production in India has declined significantly (Anonymous, 2005a). Despite having

each) in 1950-51 to an all-time high of 14.231 million bales in 1996-97 (Singhal,

369 kg lint/ha (Anonymous, 1994).

necessary to use pesticides and plant protection and weeding equipment.

With the introduction of modem technology, ergonomics becomes essential

helping to provide improvements in farming can serve as a dominant scientific

discipline for socio-technical development.

Ergonomics is an applied science and plays an important role in design of

satisfaction. It is the scientific discipline concerned with the understanding of

system performance. Ergonomics contributes to design and evaluation of tasks, job

abilities and limitations of people.

efficiency of performance with more human comfort, it is necessary to design the

agricultural machine/implements, keeping in consideration the operators capabilities

and limitation. Ergonomical evaluation is necessary to assess the energy expenditures

more safety will be recommended to be used in the agricultural operations.

Farm mechanization contributes to raising farm productivity. For achieving

productivity of the farming input, timely application of farming inputs, managerial

capabilities of farmers and growth environment supported by educational

infi-astructure and government policy.

environment for the operator becomes an important consideration, if productivity and

or self-propelled sprayer. Picking of cotton is done manually and uprooting of cotton

sticks is done either manually or by cotton stalk uprooter. Ease of performing an

to be appraised in physiological and biomechanical perspective. These operations are

links and joints of the workers are to be analyzed.

a proper work rest schedule for optimum performance.

Singh, 2002). Mittal et al (1996) conducted a study on agriculture machinery

discomforts of different body parts. Therefore it is necessary to evaluate the

performance of implements used in these operations from ergonomic point of view.

1. To develop mathematical equations for muscular force acting on body

segment of the workers while performing selected farm operations involved in

2. To assess the energy expenditure of different field operations performed by