Comparisons of physical exposure between workers harvesting apples on mobile orchard platforms and ladders, part 2: Repetitive upper arm motions

Farmworkers are exposed to physical risk factors including repetitive motions. Existing ergonomic assessment methods are primarily laboratory-based and, thus, inappropriate for use in the field. This study presents an approach to characterize the repetitive motions of the upper arms based on direct measurement using accelerometers. Repetition rates were derived from upper arm inclination data and with video recordings in the field. This method was used to investigate whether harvesting with mobile platforms (teams harvesting apples from the platform and the ground) increased the farmworkers' exposure to upper arm repetitive motions compared to traditional harvesting using ladders. The ladder workers had higher repetitive motions (13.7 cycles per minute) compared to the platform and ground workers (11.7 and 12.2 cycles per minutes). The higher repetitions in the ladder workers were likely due to their ability to work independently and the additional arm movements associated with ladder climbing and walking.

Consistency among musculoskeletal models: caveat utilitor

Musculoskeletal simulation software and model repositories have broadened the user base able to perform musculoskeletal analysis and have facilitated in the sharing of models. As the recognition of musculoskeletal modeling continues to grow as an engineering discipline, the consistency in results derived from different models and software is becoming more critical. The purpose of this study was to compare eight models from three software packages and evaluate differences in quadriceps moment arms, predicted muscle forces, and predicted tibiofemoral contact forces for an idealized knee-extension task spanning -125 to +10° of knee extension. Substantial variation among models was observed for the majority of aspects evaluated. Differences among models were influenced by knee angle, with better agreement of moment arms and tibiofemoral joint contact force occurring at low to moderate knee flexion angles. The results suggest a lack of consistency among models and that output differences are not simply an artifact of naturally occurring inter-individual differences. Although generic musculoskeletal models can easily be scaled to consistent limb lengths and use the same muscle recruitment algorithm, the results suggest those are not sufficient conditions to produce consistent muscle or joint contact forces, even for simplified models with no potential of co-contraction.