手过头姿势下钻孔作业肌肉疲劳MET预测模型

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.08.1776

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为评价手过头姿势下钻孔作业过程中人员肌肉疲劳发展情况,先通过模拟手过头姿势下的钻孔试验,测量试验前肌肉的最大随意收缩(MVC)、试验后的最大剩余肌力(MRF)、力量输出衰减程度(ΔF)以及手腕、手肘和肩部的主观疲劳评分(RPE),记录最大耐受时间(MET);通过设定3种操作面(正面、侧面、底面)和3种操作高度的不同操作组合作为试验变量,比较不同操作方式对手过头姿势下钻孔作业的肌肉疲劳影响情况,随后分析3种操作面(正面、侧面、底面)和3种操作高度下对MET、MRF、ΔF以及手腕、手肘和肩部RPE的影响。研究结果表明:采用正面操作并降低手臂上举高度能有效减轻肌肉疲劳;不同操作面显著影响MET、MRF及ΔF,同时,显著影响手腕、手肘和肩部的RPE;不同的操作高度显著影响MET、MRF以及手肘的RPE;所建立的MET预测模型可反映手过头姿势下钻孔作业过程中人员肌肉疲劳状态。

关键词: 手过头作业, 钻孔作业, 肌肉疲劳, 最大耐受时间(MET), 预测模型

Abstract:

In order to evaluate the development of muscle fatigue during drilling operations in the hand-over-head posture, a simulated drilling test was conducted to measure the maximum voluntary contraction (MVC) of muscles before the test, the maximum residual muscle strength (MRF) after the test, the degree of strength output attenuation (ΔF), and ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) of wrists, elbows, and shoulders. MET was recorded. By setting different combinations of three operating surfaces (front, side, and bottom) and three operating heights as experimental variables, the effects of different operating methods on muscle fatigue during drilling operations under hand head posture were compared. Subsequently, the effects of three operating surfaces (front, side, and bottom) and three operating heights on MET, MRF, ΔF, as well as RPE of wrist, elbow, and shoulder were analyzed. Research has shown that using frontal manipulation and reducing arm lift height can effectively alleviate muscle fatigue. Different operating surfaces significantly affect MET, MRF, and ΔF, as well as RPE of the wrist, elbow, and shoulder. Different operating heights significantly affect MET, MRF, and RPE of the elbow. MET prediction model established in this article can reflect the muscle fatigue status of personnel during drilling operations in the hand-head posture.

Key words: overhand work, drilling operation, muscle fatigue, maximum endurance time (MET), prediction model

中图分类号:

X912.9安全人机学

赵川, 刘思棋, 赵晓一. 手过头姿势下钻孔作业肌肉疲劳MET预测模型[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(8): 238-246.

ZHAO Chuan, LIU Siqi, ZHAO Xiaoyi. MET prediction model of muscle fatigue in drilling with simulated overhand position[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2024, 34(8): 238-246.

图/表 17

表1

图1

图2

图3

图4

表2

图5

表3

表4

表5

图6

表6

表7

表8

手过头作业MET回归方程

函数形式	回归方程		决定系数R²	p	MET计算公式
指数函数	有截距	$y = 5.482 - 10.043 x$	0.61	截距: p<0.001; X: p = 0.000	$M E T = 6.693 × e x p (- 10.043 × f)$	(5)
指数函数	无截距	$y = 4.369 x$	0.29	p<0.001	$M E T = e x p (4.369 × f)$	(6)
幂函数	有截距	$y = 0.154 - 1.087 x$	0.31	截距: p<0.001; X: p = 0.000	$M E T = 0.201 × f - 1.087$	(7)
幂函数	无截距	$y = - 0.297 x$	0.73	p<0.001	$M E T = f - 0.297$	(8)

表8

表9

文中预测模型与部分现有MET模型的MAD及RD

模型			MAD/min	RD/%
—	式(5)	$M E T = 6.693 × e x p (- 10.043 × f)$	0.66 (0.38)	29.65(11.24)
—	式(8)	$M E T = f - 0.297$	0.68(0.43)	32.27(13.54)
单手拉车作业模型	易灿南等^[7] (指数模型)	$M E T = 38.093 × e x p (- 3.87609 × f)$	16.80(2.10)	72.51(5.95)
双手拉车作业模型	唐范等^[8] (幂函数模型)	$M E T = f - 3.9036$	9.40 (5.73)	57.48(5.35)
疲劳模型	MA Liang等^[15]	$M E T = - l n f / (k × f)$	17.35(6.18)	92.12(5.88)
一般模型	MANENICA^[11]	$M E T = 14.88 × e x p (- 4.48 × f)$	5.16(1.05)	33.18(11.40)
手部/抓握模型	MANENICA^[11]	$M E T = 16.6099 × e x p (- 4.5 × f)$	5.10(1.10)	37.64(9.76)
手部/抓握模型	AVIN等^[16]	$M E T = 29.078 × e x p (- 5.48 × f)$	10.39(1.89)	63.48(11.68)

表9

图7

表10

参考文献 16

[1]	吴琳, 肖吕武, 周浩, 等. 汽车制造业工人肌肉骨骼疾患工效学因素分析[J]. 中国公共卫生, 2012, 28(5):609-611.
	WU Lin, XIAO Lüwu, ZHOU Hao, et al. Ergonomic factors of musculoskeletal disorders in automotive manufacturing workers[J] Chinese Journal of Public Health, 2012, 28(5):609-611.
[2]	张立博, 袁修干. 飞机维修活动中的快速上肢评价[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2004, 14(7):34-37.
	ZHANG Libo, YUAN Xiugan. Application of rapid upper limb assessment in aircraft maintenance[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2004, 14(7):34-37.
[3]	ANTON D, SHIBLEY L D, FETHKE N B. The effect of overhead drilling position on shoulder moment and electromyogram-phy[J]. Ergonomics, 2001, 44(5):489-501.
[4]	田保珍, 范沁红. 汽车底盘维修中单手上举操作对肌肉疲劳的影响研究[J]. 中国工程机械学报, 2022, 20(3):221-225.
	TIAN Baozhen, FAN Qinhong. Research on the influence of single hand lifting operation on muscle fatigue in automobile chassis maintenance[J]. Chinese Journal of Construction Machinery, 2022, 20(3):221-225.
[5]	MACIUKIEWICZ J M, CUDLIP A C, CHOPP-HURLEY J N, et al. Effects of overhead work configuration on muscle activity during a simulated drilling task: ScienceDirect[J]. Applied Ergonomics, 2016, 53:10-16.
[6]	CHOPP J N, FISCHER S L, DICKERSON C R. The impact of work configuration, target angle and hand force direction on upper extremity muscle activity during sub-maximal overhead work[J]. Ergonomics, 2010, 53(1):83-91. doi: 10.1080/00140130903323232 pmid: 20069484
[7]	易灿南, 李开伟, 施式亮, 等. 静态单手拉车作业最大耐受时间建模[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2017, 27(2):64-69. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2017.02.012
	YI Cannan, LI Kaiway, SHI Shiliang, et al. Modeling for prediction of maximum endurance time in a static pallet truck pulling task with single arm[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2017, 27(2):64-69. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2017.02.012
[8]	唐范, 易灿南, 李开伟, 等. 静态双手拉车作业的肌肉疲劳分析与MET建模[J]. 人类工效学, 2019, 25(5):7-12,33.
	TANG Fan, YI Cannan, LI Kaiway, et al. Analyses of muscular fatigue and modeling of maximum endurancetime for static pulling tasks with two hands[J]. Chinese Journal of Ergonomics, 2019, 25(5):7-12,33.
[9]	ZHANG Zhanwu, LI Kaiway, ZHANG Wei, et al. Muscular fatigue and maximum endurance time assessment for male and female industrial workers[J]. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 2014, 44(2):292-297.
[10]	GARG A, HEGMANN K T, SCHWOERER B J, et al. The effect of maximum voluntary contraction on endurance times for the shoulder girdle[J]. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 2002, 30(2):103-113.
[11]	MANENICA I. The ergonomics of working postures[M]. London: Taylor & Francis, 1986:270-277.
[12]	SOOD D, NUSSBAUM M A, HAGER K. Fatigue during prolonged intermittent overhead work: reliability of measures and effects of working height[J]. Ergonomics, 2007, 50(4):497-513. pmid: 17575711
[13]	KHAN A, SULLIVAN L, GALLWEY T. Effect on discomfort of frequency of wrist exertions combined with wrist articulations and forearm rotation[J]. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 2010, 40(5):492-503.
[14]	余群舟, 郑智鹏, 郭林飞, 等. 建筑抹灰作业工人上肢姿势不舒适度评价模型[J]. 土木工程与管理学报, 2020, 37(1):31-36.
	YU Qunzhou, ZHENG Zhipeng, GUO Linfei, et al. Evaluation model for upper limb posture discomfort of workers in construction plastering[J]. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 2020, 37(1):31-36.
[15]	MA Liang, CHABLAT D, BENNIS F, et al. A novel approach for determining fatigue resistances of different muscle groups in static cases[J]. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 2011, 41(1):10-18.
[16]	AVIN K G, NAUGHTON M R, FORD B W, et al. Sex differences in fatigue resistance are muscle group dependent[J]. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 2010, 42(10):1 943-1 950.

试验编号	自变量
试验编号	操作面	操作高度/mm
1	正面S₁	H₁
2	正面S₁	H₂
3	正面S₁	H₃
4	侧面S₂	H₁
5	侧面S₂	H₂
6	侧面S₂	H₃
7	底面S₃	H₁
8	底面S₃	H₂
9	底面S₃	H₃

类型	正面与侧面	侧面与底面	H₁与 H₂	H₁与 H₃	H₂与 H₃
MET	0.000	0.479	0.231	0.998	0.058
MRF	0.070	0.000	0.000	0.001	0.004
ΔF	0.001	0.009	0.078	0.000	0.441

类型	MET	MRF	ΔF
S₁	3.97(±1.81)	10.08(±3.47)	2.61(±1.05)
S₂	1.40(±0.55)	6.52(±1.16)	0.86(±0.28)
S₃	1.60(±0.60)	12.10(±2.88)	2.91(±1.79)
H₁	2.59(±1.71)	9.69(±3.28)	1.82(±1.37)
H₂	2.28(±1.68)	8.72(±2.76)	1.72(±1.38)
H₃	2.10(±1.49)	10.30(±4.27)	1.70(±1.48)

类型	相关性	MET	MRF	ΔF
MET	皮尔逊相关性	1	-0.056	0.112
MRF	皮尔逊相关性	-0.056	1	0.201^*
ΔF	皮尔逊相关性	0.112	0.201^*	1

类型	正面与侧面	正面与底面	侧面与底面	H₁与H₂	H₁与H₃	H₂与H₃
手腕	0.726	0.731	0.169	0.672	0.699	0.993
手肘	0.762	0.213	0.759	0.478	0.003	0.554
肩	0.867	0.263	0.444	1.000	0.819	0.859