Presentation on theme: "By Semaj Rashad IEGR 360: Ergonomics and Workplace Design Dr. B. Kattel Department of Industrial & Systems Engineering Morgan State University Fall 2011."— Presentation transcript:
By Semaj Rashad IEGR 360: Ergonomics and Workplace Design Dr. B. Kattel Department of Industrial & Systems Engineering Morgan State University Fall 2011
Agenda Objectives Methodology Background and Introduction Problem Definition Materials Results and Discussion Conclusion References
Objectives Recognize and see the concepts of applied ergonomics studies in an experiment. Recognize and see the concepts of a Body Part Discomfort Survey in an experiment. To practice anthropometric body measurement investigations To practice the general systems approach to ergonomics
Methodology Static Anthropometry Foot Length Scientific Management Adaptation Does a problem exist? Analysis of Problem Search for Possible Solutions Evaluate Alternatives Recommend Solution Implement solution
Background Anthropometry – body dimensions and measurements Static Anthropometry- body measured without motion. Foot Length – Distance from the back of the heel to tip of longest toe (parallel to the long axis of the foot) Bio-mechanical Approach – determine forces exerted on musculoskeletal system Flat-footed or fallen arches - low arch or no arch at all
Introduction Each foot is an intricate structure: 26 bones 33 joints 107 ligaments 19 muscles 2 arches 31 tendons 7,000 nerve endings 125,000 sweat glands Arch provides elastic, springy connection between the forefoot and the hindfoot. This relationship ensures that most of the forces incurred during weight bearing can be dissipated before reaching the long bones of the leg and thigh.
Introduction Without support problems can develop with lower body: knees, hips and lower back The biomechanical theory is that the arch-support orthotic will provide biomechanical support to the foundation of the body (the feet) will improve lower-extremity and whole-body alignment/biomechanics.
Problem Definition Subject A and B, both with fallen arches or flat feet, experience periodic pain in their feet, mostly located around the arch They have been recommended by doctors to try shoe inserts or insoles This study seeks to find the shoe insert that is the most comfortable solution
Materials Compared 5 arch support orthotic (shoe insert) brands Arch Pro-Tec Birkenstock Arch Supports Dr. Rosenbergs Instant Arches Sorbothane Ultra Orthotic Arch Shock Doctor – Ultra 2 Insole 3 types of shoes used per user
Procedure 1. Wear each shoe with each arch-support orthotic for 1 full day 2. Rate the comfort of the arch-support orthotic On a scale from 1-5 (1: very uncomfortable – 5: very comfortable) Provide comments 3. Answer follow-up questions about the experience with each arch-support orthotic
User A User A Profile Male, 24, 55, 150 lbs., Shoe size = 9 mens
Shoes worn for User A Shoes: dress shoe sneaker (high top) sneaker (low top)
User B User B Profile: Female, 24, 54, 130 lbs. Shoe size = 8.5 womens
Comfort Ratings Table Raw Data of Comfort Ratings (on a scale of 1-5) Taken during months of October – November User performed numerous day-to-day tasks including walking, working, sitting, etc. with the various arch support orthotics
Statistical Analysis Most favorable based on Combined Average Ratings: 1. Sorbothane 2. Shock Doctor 3. Dr. Rosenberg 4. Birkenstock 5. Arch Pro-Tec
Sample Survey Responses From Users User B on Arch Pro-Tec (wearing black boots) They felt tight around my arch, but I dont feel like it improved anything. User A on Birkenstock (wearing dress shoes) mild comfort, felt tight in the shoe (not enough room) User B on Dr. Rosenbergs (wearing black boots) I could feel them under my arch which felt akward and made my foot hurt after a while. I had to remove them before the end of the day User A on Sorbothane (wearing black low top sneakers) Eomfortable, barely noticed they were there…no discomfort at any period of the day. User B on Shock Doctor (sneakers) Entire foot felt great…I recommend only wearing in sneakers
Conclusions and Recommendations Based on the surveys and experimental analysis Sorbothane Ultra Orthotic Arches are recommended for users with fallen arches or flat feet. Received the highest average comfort ratings for various types of shoes Applicable to various industries: Manufacturing where one may be standing for an extended period U.S. Army where walking for an extended period of time has kept flat footed individuals out in some cases
References Flat Feet - NHS Choices. (n.d.). NHS Choices. Retrieved November 28, 2011, from http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/flatfeet/Pages/Introduction.aspx Flat Feet - Symptoms. (2010, April 2). NHS Choices. Retrieved November 28, 2011, from http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/flatfeet/Pages/Symptomspage.aspx Foot Facts. (2008). Synergy Massaging Insoles. Retrieved November 28, 2011, from http://www.synergymedicalproducts.com/Facts.html Franco, A. H. (n.d.). Pes Cavus and Pes Planus : Analyses and Treatment. Journal of American Physical Therapy Association. Retrieved November 28, 2011, from http://www.physther.net/content/67/5/688.full.pdf+html Kavros, S. J., Van Straaten, M. G., Coleman Wood, K. A., & Kaufman, K. R. (2011, March 16). Forefoot plantar pressure reduction of off-the-shelf rocker bottom provisional footwear. Clinical Biomechanics. Retrieved November 28, 2011, from http://www.sciencedirect.com.proxy- um.researchport.umd.edu/science?_ob=MiamiImageURL Kelaher, D., Mirka, G. A., & Dudziak, K. Q. (2000). Effects of semi-rigid arch-support orthotics: an investigation with potential ergonomic implications. Applied Ergonomics, 31, 515-522. Nigg, B. M., Nurse, M. A., & Stefanyshyn, D. J. (1999). Shoe inserts and orthotics for sport and physical activities : Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. Medicine Science in Sports Exercise. Retrieved November 28, 2011, from http://journals.lww.com/acsm- msse/Fulltext/1999/07001/Shoe_inserts_and_orthotics_for_sport_and_physical.3.aspx
Your consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.