Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 1 Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 1 Ergo Project Overview Section

Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 2 Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 2 Berkeley Ergonomic Arm Filling the Vacuum in Dynamic Arm Support (Technology Transfer Partnership Opportunity) TEAM : Jeffrey Chung, Michael Siminovitch, Robin Lafever, Steve Dellinges, John Bercovitz and Chris Kniel

Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 3 Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 3 The National Business Concern 43% of all disabling workplace injuries and illnesses (nation-wide) are associated with ergonomics and at a financial cost of $16.8 billion. [Liberty Mutual Workplace Safety Index Report – 2002] National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) says, “ one-third of OSHA lost work day cases were result of over exertion and repetitive motion”. Ergonomic injuries financially cost companies $20 billion a year.

Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 4 Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 4 Individual and Lab-Wide Needs... Vision – Reach - Body Posture 62% worker injury cases caused by ergonomics. 20% employee visits to Health Services triggered by computer use. 145 WComp claims are “ergo-related” costing > $2M and 13,602 days of TD/Loss Work Days. Property dBase tracks > 9,800 computers used by 4,000 employees.

Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 5 Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 5 Why Design for Dynamic Support? Business and Institutional Manufacturers Association (BIFMA) addresses working postures:  “There isn’t a uniquely correct working posture that would fit any user for an extended period of time and/or accommodate every personal working habit”. There’s no one correct posture:  Body needs to move throughout the day  Non-neutral postures need to be supported to minimize static muscle loading.

Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 6 Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 6 Benefits of Ergonomic Intervention Rising Workers Compensation costs (medical, disability, rehabilitation and insurance premiums) Industrial and non-industrial (ADA) injury recovery and accommodation assistance Injury prevention across variety of industries Aiding the disabled and elderly population Productivity WComp Costs Quality of Work Life Company $ Bottom Line

Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 7 Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 7 Background - Ergo Arm Support Project EH&S management provided $25,000 seed money for Phase I:  Interdisciplinary Team Science (EH&S, EETD and Engineering)  Brainstormed creative concepts, developed engineering model Senior Lab management invests $150,000 funds to pursue Phase II:  Engineering design and prototype development of engineering model  Device evaluation/field testing with human subjects “Multi-Functionality” Design Application Goal: Dynamic musculoskeletal arm support across variety of work environments, working with or without tools.

Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 8 Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 8 Phase I, Design Effort

Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 9 Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 9 Idea Engineering Concepts Lab set up Concept generation Hardware Fab, Mod, Iterate Testing and Evaluation Screen candidates Invention Disclosure Engineering Development LBNL Technology Transfer Acquire instrumentation Measure Muscle Activity Refine Evaluation Criteria Develop Engineering Prototypes Conduct Engineering tests $ $ Industry Solution Development Funding LBL Presentation McGraw Presentation Seed money $ Production Prototype Funding $ Industry CRADA or SBIR Product Development Phase IPhase IIPhase III Develop Product requirements Design for manufacture Produce production prototypes Conduct product field testing We are Here ! Commercialization Project Evolution and Direction

Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 10 Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 10 Ergo Discussion Section

Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 11 Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 11 At Risk Thresholds Per OSHA, certain situations create MSD risks:  Performing same motion pattern every few seconds for > 2 hours continuously or 4 hours daily.  Maintaining non-neutral (unsupported, static/fixed or awkward posture > one (1) hour continuously or four (4) hours daily.  Forceful hand exertions > two (2) hours daily.  Unassisted frequent or heavy lifting  Boredom and monotony

Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 12 Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 12 Sources of Workplace Ergonomic Risks Repetitive Exertions Postural Stressors Contact Stressors Static Exertions Forceful Exertions Independently or In Combination Force – Frequency – Posture - Duration

Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 13 Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 13 Resulting Musculoskeletal Problems Muscle Pain Tendon Injuries Blood Circulation Disorders Nerve Damage

Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 14 Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 14 Ergo Risks During Computer Use Reach (static and dynamic) Mobility (range of motion) Loads/Forces Vision Mobility (range of motion) Body Posture Dynamic Support for the “Working Envelop/Spheres” Risk Reduction Thru:

Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 15 Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 15 Field Testing Experimental Protocol Evaluate effectiveness of engineered/functional prototype through collection of:  Quantitative data from EMG measurements  Qualitative data from user feedback surveys Eleven (11) subjects participated in study:  5 females (all Caucasian)  6 males (3 Caucasian, 3 Asian)  Stature Range (60” to 74”)  Dominance (10 right hand, 1 left hand)  No current upper extremity musculoskeletal disorders

Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 16 Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 16 Field Testing Experimental Protocol Target Muscle Groups:  Forearm extensor (left or right)  Tricep-lateral head (left or right)  Upper trapezius (left or right)  Middle trapezius (left or right)  Supraspinatus (left or right)

Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 17 Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 17 EMG Testing Scenarios Sitting without device, arms static and at neutral position (90 degrees) Standing without device, arms static and at neutral position (90 degrees) Sitting with device, arms static and at neutral position (90 degrees) Standing with device, arms static and at neutral position (90 degrees) Sitting without device, arms at 90 degree position performing sweeping motion Standing without device, arms at 90 degree position performing sweeping motion Sitting with device, arms at 90 degree position performing sweeping motion Standing with device, arms at 90 degree position performing sweeping motion Sitting without device, arms reaching forward from neutral/90 degrees position Standing without device, arms reaching forward from neutral/90 degrees position Sitting with device, arms reaching forward from neutral/90 degrees position Standing with device, arms reaching forward from neutral/90 degrees position Sitting without device, typing text with keyboard Standing without device, performing hand drill task Sitting with device, typing text with keyboard Standing with device, performing hand drill task Sitting without device, mousing movement tracking targets on the screen Standing without device, arms extended forward in static position Sitting with device, mousing movement tracking targets on the screen Standing with device, arms extended forward in static position

Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 18 Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 18 Field Testing

Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 19 Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 19 Field Testing

Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 20 Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 20 Results: 95% Confidence Benefit From Device N = 11ShoulderTricepsForearm Sitting w/ 90 Degrees Static * * Sitting w/ Arms Sweeping/Swinging * * Sitting w/ Arms Reaching Forward * * Sitting and Typing+++ Sitting and Targeting With Mouse+ * + Standing w/ 90 Degrees Static * * Standing w/ Arms Sweeping/Swinging * * Standing w/ Arms Reaching Forward * * * Standing and Drilling * Standing w/ Arms Extended – Static (N = 8) * * Static muscle loading was reduced in these muscle groups. + Typing and mousing activity showed positive effect/benefit, but didn’t reach the 95% confidence level.

Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 21 Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 21 Field Testing Conclusions Dynamic arm support concept and engineered prototype does significantly help reduce muscle activity “at resting levels” (MVC- APDF 10) involved with sitting and standing activities under:  Static positions/postures involving the upper arm and shoulder of the dominant hand side.  Swinging movements involving the upper arm and shoulder of the dominant hand side.  Reaching movements involving the upper arm and shoulder of the dominant hand side  Drilling tasks involving the upper arm Mousing and typing activities also showed reduced “at resting levels” (MVC-APDF 10), but not at the 95% confidence level User subjective feedback was consistently favorable in terms of sensations of reduced shoulder effort, ease of task and forearm comfort.

Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 22 Jeffrey Chung (x5818) 22 Questions...