پديد آورندگان :
ﺣﯿﺎﺗﯽ، ﻋﺒﺪاﷲ داﻧﺸﮕﺎه ﻋﻠﻮم ﮐﺸﺎورزي و ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻊ ﻃﺒﯿﻌﯽ ﺧﻮزﺳﺘﺎن - ﮔﺮوه ﻣﺎﺷﯿﻦﻫﺎي ﮐﺸﺎورزي و ﻣﮑﺎﻧﯿﺰاﺳﯿﻮن , اﻓﺸﯿﻦ، ﻣﺮزﺑﺎن داﻧﺸﮕﺎه ﻋﻠﻮم ﮐﺸﺎورزي و ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻊ ﻃﺒﯿﻌﯽ ﺧﻮزﺳﺘﺎن - ﮔﺮوه ﻣﺎﺷﯿﻦﻫﺎي ﮐﺸﺎورزي و ﻣﮑﺎﻧﯿﺰاﺳﯿﻮن , رﻫﻨﻤﺎ، ﻣﺠﯿﺪ داﻧﺸﮕﺎه ﻋﻠﻮم ﮐﺸﺎورزي و ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻊ ﻃﺒﯿﻌﯽ ﺧﻮزﺳﺘﺎن - ﮔﺮوه ﻣﺎﺷﯿﻦﻫﺎي ﮐﺸﺎورزي و ﻣﮑﺎﻧﯿﺰاﺳﯿﻮن
كليدواژه :
ﻣﮑﺎﻧﯿﺰاﺳﯿﻮن ﮐﺸﺎورزي , ارزﯾﺎﺑﯽ اﯾﻤﻨﯽ , ﻧﺨﻠﺴﺘﺎن , ﻣﻘﺒﻮﻟﯿﺖ ﻣﺪاﺧﻠﻪ , اﺑﺰار ﻏﯿﺮﭘﯿﭽﯿﺪه , ﭘﺮوﻧﺪ , ﻫﺎرﻧﺲ
چكيده لاتين :
Introduction Date fruit production has an important position in either Iran or the world. Life and economy of many of people who live in the West Asia and North Africa (WANA) depend on this agricultural product. Date palm crown access, as one of important operations of date fruit production, is performed in a traditional manner with a tool talked “Parvand” yet. It results in various ergonomic and safety problems, such as fall from height, sunstroke, and musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs). Meanwhile, mechanization could not adequately adopted by date palm growers. Possibly, ergonomic interventions in forms of simple tools mitigate ergonomic and safety problems in date palm crown access operation.
Materials and Methods In this study, some ergonomic interventions were investigated to improve the present status of ergonomic and safety status of this operation with employing nine workers from Ramshir city, Khuzestan province, Iran. Evaluated date palm climbing tools were as follows: Parvand (traditional tool), Parvand+rubber shoes (intervened tool), harness (intervened tool), and harness+rubber shoes (intervened tool). Parvand consisted of a backrest and a towing wire. In two last mentioned intervened tools, harness was replaced with backrest in Parvand. Indeed, harness was the brief name of composition of harness and towing wire. Comparisons were done based on some ergonomic, safety, bio-mechanical, and technical indices. Ergonomic evaluations included physical and cognitive ones. Body discomfort (BD), heart rate (HR), worker energy expenditure (EE), working oral temperature (OT), and physiological strain index (PSI) were the physical indices. Perception-based heat Strain Index (PeSI) and acceptance of climbing tools in view of workers were the cognitive Indices. Acceptance comprised workers’ perception about safety, work speed, ease of use, technical properties, and preference of the tools. Safety evaluation was conducted using failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) which resulted in a risk priority number (RPN) for each climbing tools. Bio-mechanical evaluations were performed using 3DSSPP software (to find the compression and shear forces on L5/S1 disc) and the investigation of mechanical stresses of Parvand and harness (to achieve the factor of safety (FoS) of tools). Technical index was the total time cycle (TTC) to perform date palm crown access (install climbing tool, ascending, and descending). Statistical analysis was conducted using IBM SPSS 24. During evaluation, workers’ qualitative feedbacks around intervened tools were recorded.
Results and Discussion Mean age, height, mass and body mass index of workers were 33.1 years, 1.71 m, 74.0 kg, and 25.3 kg/m2, respectively. According to the statistical analyses, there was no any significant difference among climbing tools regarding BD, HR, EE, OT, PSI, PeSI, RPN, and TTC. Bio-mechanical evaluations showed that all four climbing tool caused a low risk compression force on L5/S1 (<3400), whereas interventions including harness were significantly higher than those including Parvand. Traditional
