No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Palletising Support in Intralogistics: The Effect of a Passive Exoskeleton on Workload and Task Difficulty Considering Handling and Comfort
Abstract
In logistical processes such as palletising and order picking, musculoskeletal disorders increase. As part of the INNOVATIONSLABOR research project, the latest model of a passive exoskeleton manufactured by LAEVO was investigated in a laboratory study. A final sample of N = 37 persons (73% men) from 20 to 64 years of age evaluated the exoskeleton regarding general comfort, local comfort in different body parts, handling characteristics such as adjustment possibilities, freedom of movement, efficiency, task support and task impairment with validated questionnaires. The analyses show that passive exoskeletons seem to have potential for static activities, but their wearing comfort and user handling should be further developed.
... In 2019 and 2020, 36 and 38 included papers were published, respectively. The included papers comprised 51 validation studies (Aida et al., 2009;Blanco et al., 2019;De Busk et al., 2017;de Vries et al., 2019;Ebrahimi et al., 2017;Han et al., 2019Han et al., , 2020Hao et al., 2020;Hondzinski et al., 2019;Hull et al., 2020;Huysamen et al., 2018a;Inose et al., 2017;Inoue and Noritsugu, 2018;Jeong et al., 2020;Johnson et al., 2018;Kazerooni et al., 2019;Kim et al., 2015Kim et al., , 2020aKobayashi and Nozaki, 2008;Koopman et al., 2019b;Kosaki and Li, 2020;Kudernatsch and Peterson, 2018;Kurita et al., 2017;Lamers et al., 2020;Lanotte et al., 2018;Lazzaroni et al., 2019;Lee et al., 2012b;Li et al., 2013;Lim et al., 2015;Lotti et al., 2020;Luo and Yu, 2013;Muramatsu et al., 2013;Näf et al., 2018;Naruse et al., 2005;Natividad et al., 2019;Otten et al., 2018;Park and Cho, 2017;Sasaki and Takaiwa, 2014;Shin et al., 2019;Sylla et al., 2014a,b;Tiseni et al., 2019;Ulrey and Fathallah, 2013;Wehner et al., 2009;Wijegunawardana et al., 2019;Yong et al., 2017;Yu et al., 2019;Chen et al., 2018;Zhang et al., 2016), 66 evaluation studies (Abdoli-E et al., 2006;Abdoli-E and Stevenson, 2008;Abdoli-Eramaki et al., 2007;Alemi et al., 2019, 2019Bosch et al., 2016;Bridger et al., 2018;Daratany and Taveira, 2020;Frost et al., 2009;Gilotta et al., 2018;Godwin et al., 2009;Gorsic et al., 2020;Grazi et al., 2020;Huysamen et al., 2018b;Hyun et al., 2019Hyun et al., , 2020Ji et al., 2020;Kelson et al., 2019;Kim et al., 2020b,b,c;Kim and Nussbaum, 2019;Kinne et al., 2020;Ko et al., 2018;Koopman et al., 2019bKoopman et al., , 2020Kozinc et al., 2020a;Lamers et al., 2018;Lee and Chee, 2013;Lotz et al., 2009;Luger et al., 2019;Madinei et al., 2020a,b;Maurice et al., 2020;Miura et al., 2018b;Muramatsu et al., 2011;Pacifico et al., 2020;Picchiotti et al., 2019;Pillai et al., 2020;Pinho et al., 2020;Qu et al., 2021;Sadler et al., 2011;Schmalz et al., 2019;So et al., 2020;Spada et al., 2017Spada et al., , 2019Steinhilber et al., 2020;Theurel et al., 2018;Toxiri et al., 2018;Van Engelhoven et al., 2019;von Glinski et al., 2019;Wei et al., 2020a,b;Whitfield et al., 2014;Xiloyannis et al., 2019;Yin et al., 2019Yin et al., , 2020Yong et al., 2019;Zhu et al., 2018;Poliero et al., 2020;Tan et al., 2019) and 22 field studies (Amandels et al., 2019;Baltrusch et al., 2021;Claramunt et al., 2019;De Bock et al., 2021;de Vries et al., 2021;Dewi and Komatsuzaki, 2018;Ferreira et al., 2020;Gillette and Stephenson, 2018;Gillette and Stephenson, 2019;Graham et al., 2009;Hefferle et al., 2020;Hensel and Keil, 2019;Iranzo et al., 2020;Miura et al., 2018b;Motmans et al., 2019;Moyon et al., 2018;Omoniyi et al., 2020;Settembre et al., 2020;Smets, 2019;Spada et al., 2018;Thamsuwan et al., 2020;Wang et al., 2021). ...
... During the assembly tasks, the working height was adjusted to anatomic landmarks, i.e. trochantor major, knee and ankle height. Thirty-three back exoskeleton evaluations used a dynamic isolated lifting task (Abdoli-E et al., 2006;Abdoli-E and Stevenson, 2008;Abdoli-Eramaki et al., 2007;Alemi et al., 2019;Alemi et al., 2020;Baltrusch et al., 2019;Baltrusch et al., 2020a;Frost et al., 2009;Godwin et al., 2009;Gorsic et al., 2020;Huysamen et al., 2018c;Hyun et al., 2020;Ji et al., 2020;Kinne et al., 2020;Ko et al., 2018;Koopman et al., 2019b;Koopman et al., 2020;Kozinc et al., 2020a;Lamers et al., 2018;Lotz et al., 2009;Madinei et al., 2020a;Miura et al., 2018b;Picchiotti et al., 2019;Poliero et al., 2020;Qu et al., 2021;Sadler et al., 2011;Tan et al., 2019;Toxiri et al., 2018;von Glinski et al., 2019;Wei et al., 2020a;Whitfield et al., 2014;Yin et al., 2019;Yong et al., 2019). Twenty-one evaluation protocols encompassed a symmetric free lifting task (Abdoli-E and Stevenson, 2008;Abdoli-Eramaki et al., 2007;Alemi et al., 2019;Alemi et al., 2020;Baltrusch et al., 2019;Baltrusch et al., 2020a;Frost et al., 2009;Godwin et al., 2009;Gorsic et al., 2020;Huysamen et al., 2018c;Koopman et al., 2019b;Koopman et al., 2020;Kozinc et al., 2020a;Lamers et al., 2018;Lotz et al., 2009;Picchiotti et al., 2019;Poliero et al., 2020;Qu et al., 2021;Sadler et al., 2011;von Glinski et al., 2019;Wei et al., 2020a;Whitfield et al., 2014;Yin et al., 2019). ...
... -E et al., 2006;Abdoli-E and Stevenson, 2008;Abdoli-Eramaki et al., 2007;Alemi et al., 2019;Frost et al., 2009;Koopman et al., 2019b;Koopman et al., 2020;Kozinc et al., 2020a;Lamers et al., 2018) and 2 semi-squat lifting (Hyun et al., 2020;Ko et al., 2018) during the exoskeleton evaluation. Another evaluation study utilised a customised palletising task where 64 boxes were moved from one euro-pallet to another (Kinne et al., 2020). The masses used in these tasks varied between 0 kg and 25 kg. ...
Objectives
To provide an overview of protocols assessing the effect of occupational exoskeletons on users and to formulate recommendations towards a literature-based assessment framework to benchmark the effect of occupational exoskeletons on the user.
Methods
PubMed (MEDLINE), Web of Science database and Scopus were searched (March 2, 2021). Studies were included if they investigated the effect of one or more occupational exoskeletons on the user.
Results
In total, 139 eligible studies were identified, encompassing 33, 25 and 18 unique back, shoulder and other exoskeletons, respectively. Device validation was most frequently conducted using controlled tasks while collecting muscle activity and biomechanical data. As the exoskeleton concept matures, tasks became more applied and the experimental design more representative. With that change towards realistic testing environments came a trade-off with experimental control, and user experience data became more valuable.
Discussion
This evidence mapping systematic review reveals that the assessment of occupational exoskeletons is a dynamic process, and provides literature-based assessment recommendations. The homogeneity and repeatability of future exoskeleton assessment experiments will increase following these recommendations. The current review recognises the value of variability in evaluation protocols in order to obtain an overall overview of the effect of exoskeletons on the users, but the presented framework strives to facilitate benchmarking the effect of occupational exoskeletons on the users across this variety of assessment protocols.
... A weighting procedure applied to each item then calculates the subject's total mental workload or task load index [24][25][26][27]. However, an increasing number of studies use the raw workload index, which is the arithmetic mean of the 6 items [3,[28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37]. The independent analysis of the 6 subscales can also be used to differentiate between two tasks and determine which aspects of mental workload have the most impact on the subject [3,29,30,[32][33][34][38][39][40][41][42][43]. ...
... However, an increasing number of studies use the raw workload index, which is the arithmetic mean of the 6 items [3,[28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37]. The independent analysis of the 6 subscales can also be used to differentiate between two tasks and determine which aspects of mental workload have the most impact on the subject [3,29,30,[32][33][34][38][39][40][41][42][43]. ...
As wearable assistive devices, such as prostheses and exoskeletons, become increasingly sophisticated and effective, the mental workload associated with their use remains high and becomes a major challenge to their ecological use and long-term adoption. Numerous methods of measuring mental workload co-exist, making analysis of this research topic difficult. The aim of this review is to examine how mental workload resulting from the use of wearable assistive devices has been measured, in order to gain insight into the specific possibilities and limitations of this field. Literature searches were conducted in the main scientific databases and 60 articles measuring the mental workload induced by the use of a wearable assistive device were included in this study. Three main families of methods were identified, the most common being ’dual task’ and ’subjective assessment’ methods, followed by those based on ’physiological measures’, which included a wide variety of methods. The variability of the measurements was particularly high, making comparison difficult. There is as yet no evidence that any particular method of measuring mental workload is more appropriate to the field of wearable assistive devices. Each method has intrinsic limitations such as subjectivity, imprecision, robustness or complexity of implementation or interpretation. A promising metric seems to be the measurement of brain activity, as it is the only method that is directly related to mental workload. Finally, regardless of the measurement method chosen, special attention should be paid to the measurement of mental workload in the context of wearable assistive devices. In particular, certain practical considerations, such as ecological situations and environments or the level of expertise of the participants tested, may be essential to ensure the validity of the mental workload assessed.
... Furthermore, the exoskeleton rods collided with the pallet jack while performing tasks. The Laevo exoskeleton had good feedback for order-picking tasks also in the studies of Kinne et al. [45] and Cardoso et al. [46]. NASA TLX subdimensions decreased when using the exoskeleton except for the mental workload which had a slight increment. ...
The human-centered workplace design philosophy and the operator 5.0 concepts are gaining ground in modern industries moving through the personalization of the operators’ workplace for improving workforce well being and capabilities. In such a context, new assistive technologies, such as passive exoskeletons, are good candidates to be wisely adopted in manufacturing and logistics systems. A growing interest in these devices has been detected over the last years, both from an academic and company perspective, with an increasing number of design solutions and tests according to their field of application. Aiming to investigate the current state of the art, we propose a literature review focused on passive exoskeletons for manufacturing and logistics (M&L) systems. We categorize the exoskeletons assessment in relation to the M&L tasks in which they are applied to give the reader an easy and direct insight into the exoskeleton performance in real settings. Further, the impact of the exoskeleton deployment from an efficiency perspective and its cost-effectiveness evaluation are provided. Finally, a maturity heat map is proposed to track the maturity level of different exoskeletons by focusing on a set of scientific and industrial domains. A discussion and a future research agenda are also provided by focusing on the managerial implications of investing in these devices.
... A usability study indicated that workers in this study accepted the exoskeleton, and that only a few movements were evaluated negatively after the exoskeleton had been put on. Kinne, Kretschmer, and Bednorz (2019) used a questionnaire to gain insights into users' perspectives of wearing an exoskeleton during warehousing tasks and found that most respondents agreed that wearing comfort and user handling requires improvement. This was confirmed by Winter, Felten, and Hedtmann (2019), who interviewed workers finding a perceived discomfort in the chest and thighs when wearing an exoskeleton. ...
This paper evaluates how technical assistive devices for manual materials handling were analysed in the literature in a warehousing context. Works that discuss the economic and/or human factors impact of assistive devices on the warehousing system or the people employed therein were identified in a systematic literature review. Building on a conceptual framework proposed in this paper, our evaluation of the literature shows which types of assistive devices were analysed in the past, and from which perspective these devices were examined. Some works studied the devices exclusively from an operator well-being or an efficiency perspective, while several works analysed the devices’ performance in terms of both dimensions. Several works contained in our literature sample highlighted trade-offs between both ergonomic and economic measures and, within the first category, between alternative ergonomic indicators, which shows that assistive devices have to be evaluated carefully in light of their intended application. The paper further identifies research gaps and emphasises the need to understand the interactions between human- and system-related variables that can be supported by assistive devices in designing effective manual materials handling systems.
The use of exoskeletons is increasingly considered as a solution to reduce workers' exposure to physical risk factors, such as low-back disorders. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of the CORFOR® occupational soft-back exoskeleton on trunk muscle activity and kinematics during an order picking manual task performed in the field. 10 workers, with at least 4 weeks' experience using the exoskeleton, performed a 1.5-hour order picking task with and without the exoskeleton. Trunk muscle activity, upper-body kinematics and the exoskeleton's acceptance were assessed. Erector spinae muscle activity was significantly reduced by 7.5% with the use of the exoskeleton. Moreover, trunk flexor muscles activity, trunk kinematics, or low-back pain were not affected. Further, the acceptance of the exoskeleton was rated as favourable. Thus, at least in the test company, the integration of the CORFOR® exoskeleton for order picking tasks is promising.
Order picking is a key task in almost all supply chains and has a significant effect on operational efficiency of warehouses. Although most companies still rely on manual order picking, research on diverse possibilities to automate order picking tasks or support human order pickers with technology is increasing rapidly.
This paper conceptualises Order Picking 4.0 (OP 4.0), considering substitutive and supportive technologies. Based on a conceptual background, a framework for OP 4.0 as a sociotechnical system is developed. A systematic literature review is performed to assess the state of knowledge in this field, and prospective research opportunities in OP 4.0 are highlighted.
The exoskeleton technology is discussed as a promising approach in order to relieve physical work in logistics and thereby contribute to health prevention. In recent years, several models have come onto the market that are designed to support specific manual activities. However, especially the work in logistics is characterized by changing activities that cause different physical strains. An exoskeleton test center is being set up at Fraunhofer IML to investigate the effect of exoskeletons in realistic workplaces under laboratory conditions. In a logistics course consisting of typical main and secondary activities of logistics workers, exoskeletons of different categories will be compared in participant studies. Objective and subjective methods are used to analyze movement behavior and performance effects as well as to determine user impression. In a preliminary study, two participants tested a powered exoskeleton over a four-week period in a selected area of the logistics course while their movements were analyzed with motion capturing. The findings will be used to design the planned studies with a larger study sample. After evaluation of the exoskeleton test center and the experimental design, it can be used by future users as well as for exoskeleton manufacturers.
Digital technologies are more and more finding their way into logistics. On the one hand, they are associated with positive effects on the ergonomics of logistics work by replacing repetitive, stressful and ergonomically disadvantageous tasks. But, on the other hand, studies indicate that the intensification of work is increasing. According to this discrepancy, we investigate how digital technologies, ergonomic improvements and work intensification are related. We present qualitative-explorative results from different logistics departments and warehouses using digital technologies in order picking. Our aim is to analyze whether opportunities to substitute ergonomically disadvantageous tasks are used to integrate more challenging and attractive activities or whether they give rise to easier tasks. We show that such substitution potentials are almost exclusively used for intensifying work and hence, that possible positive ergonomic effects are eliminated or not at all a crucial aim when digital technologies are implemented in order picking.
The objective of this study was to assess the effect of a passive trunk exoskeleton on functional performance for various work related tasks in healthy individuals.
18 healthy men performed 12 tasks. Functional performance in each task was assessed based on objective outcome measures and subjectively in terms of perceived task difficulty, local and general discomfort.
Wearing the exoskeleton tended to increase objective performance in static forward bending, but decreased performance in tasks, such as walking, carrying and ladder climbing. A significant decrease was found in perceived task difficulty and local discomfort in the back in static forward bending, but a significant increase of perceived difficulty in several other tasks, like walking, squatting and wide standing. Especially tasks that involved hip flexion were perceived more difficult with the exoskeleton.
Design improvements should include provisions to allow full range of motion of hips and trunk to increase versatility and user acceptance.
The aim of this review was to provide an overview of assistive exoskeletons that have specifically been developed for industrial purposes and to assess the potential effect of these exoskeletons on reduction of physical loading on the body. The search resulted in 40 papers describing 26 different industrial exoskeletons, of which 19 were active (actuated) and 7 were passive (non-actuated). For 13 exoskeletons, the effect on physical loading has been evaluated, mainly in terms of muscle activity. All passive exoskeletons retrieved were aimed to support the low back. Ten-forty per cent reductions in back muscle activity during dynamic lifting and static holding have been reported. Both lower body, trunk and upper body regions could benefit from active exoskeletons. Muscle activity reductions up to 80% have been reported as an effect of active exoskeletons. Exoskeletons have the potential to considerably reduce the underlying factors associated with work-related musculoskeletal injury. Practitioner Summary: Worldwide, a significant interest in industrial exoskeletons does exist, but a lack of specific safety standards and several technical issues hinder mainstay practical use of exoskeletons in industry. Specific issues include discomfort (for passive and active exoskeletons), weight of device, alignment with human anatomy and kinematics, and detection of human intention to enable smooth movement (for active exoskeletons).
Research on robotic exoskeletons has rapidly expanded over the previous decade. Advances in robotic hardware and energy supplies have enabled viable prototypes for human testing. This review paper describes current lower limb robotic exoskeletons, with specific regard to common trends in the field. The preponderance of published literature lacks rigorous quantitative evaluations of exoskeleton performance, making it difficult to determine the disadvantages and drawbacks of many of the devices. We analyzed common approaches in exoskeleton design and the convergence, or lack thereof, with certain technologies. We focused on actuators, sensors, energy sources, materials, and control strategies. One of the largest hurdles to be overcome in exoskeleton research is the user interface and control. More intuitive and flexible user interfaces are needed to increase the success of robotic exoskeletons. In the last section, we discuss promising future solutions to the major hurdles in exoskeleton control. A number of emerging technologies could deliver substantial advantages to existing and future exoskeleton designs. We conclude with a listing of the advantages and disadvantages of the emerging technologies and discuss possible futures for the field.
NASA-TLX is a multi-dimensional scale designed to obtain workload estimates from one or more operators while they are performing a task or immediately afterwards. The years of research that preceded subscale selection and the weighted averaging approach resulted in a tool that has proven to be reasonably easy to use and reliably sensitive to experimentally important manipulations over the past 20 years. Its use has spread far beyond its original application (aviation), focus (crew complement), and language (English). This survey of 550 studies in which NASA-TLX was used or reviewed was undertaken to provide a resource for a new generation of users. The goal was to summarize the environments in which it has been applied, the types of activities the raters performed, other variables that were measured that did (or did not) covary, methodological issues, and lessons learned
The results of a multi-year research program to identify the factors associated with variations in subjective workload within and between different types of tasks are reviewed. Subjective evaluations of 10 workload-related factors were obtained from 16 different experiments. The experimental tasks included simple cognitive and manual control tasks, complex laboratory and supervisory control tasks, and aircraft simulation. Task-, behavior-, and subject-related correlates of subjective workload experiences varied as a function of difficulty manipulations within experiments, different sources of workload between experiments, and individual differences in workload definition. A multi-dimensional rating scale is proposed in which information about the magnitude and sources of six workload-related factors are combined to derive a sensitive and reliable estimate of workload.
Ergonomieunterstützung in der Logistik - Industrieller Einsatz von Exoskeletten an Palettier- und Kommissionierarbeitsplätzen zur körperlichen Entlastung von Mitarbeitern
- N Bednorz
- S Kinne
- V Kretschmer
Chancen und Risiken für den Einsatz von Exoskeletten in der betrieblichen Praxis
- R Hensel
- M Keil
- B Mücke
- S Weiler
Grundauswertung der BIBB/BAuA-Erwerbstätigenbefragung
- P Wittig
- C Nöllenheidt
- S Brenscheidt
Exoskeletons for industrial application and their potential effects on physical workload
- M P De Looze
- T Bosch
- F Krause
- K S Stadler
- L W Sullivan
- MP Looze de