Figure - uploaded by Dan Högberg
Content may be subject to copyright.
Source publication
Although the automation level is high within the automotive industry, there are still a large number of manual tasks, especially is the final assembly of the vehicle. Overhead assembly operations is an example of a problematic manual task that can cause workers to develop musculoskeletal disorders in the shoulder complex. Exoskeletons may be a solu...
Context in source publication
Similar publications
The present study investigated the effect of a passive lower-limb exoskeleton on lumbar load and verified the effectiveness of biomechanical analysis for evaluating the physical burden while wearing the exoskeleton. Twelve healthy male participants performed an assembly task under three conditions: standing and high and low sitting while wearing th...
Citations
... An industrial exoskeleton can be of a passive or powered type. An industrial exoskeleton uses hydraulics, electric motors, and pneumatics methods to power itself and thus provide physical power and support for operators in assembly and maintenance operations [18]. One of the considerations with industrial exoskeletons is their ability to physically support older workers to compensate for their age-lost strength and endurance in shop floor operations. ...
... Inspired by the literature review conducted, the next subsections describe different scenarios found in the publications studied [3,[5][6][7]18, that should be taken into account for the designing of a theoretical framework for "Assessing the Psychosocial Impacts (Risks) of Industry 4.0 Technologies Adoption in the Operator 4.0". ...
... A scenarios planning exercise was first carried out in which different shop floor scenarios that the Operator 4.0 may face when adopting Industry 4.0 technologies in assembly, maintenance, and training operations were defined using as a reference those found in the literature review conducted [3,[5][6][7]18,; these were: ...
Emerging digital and smart technologies, including wearable and collaborative ones, related to the Industry 4.0 paradigm are playing an assisting, collaborative, and augmenting role for the Operator 4.0, and just as in previous industrial revolutions, the nature of work and the workplace for operators on the shop floor is changing. This literature review aims to look into the impact of digital and smart technologies adoption on the workers' psychosocial stage under the light of the Operator 4.0 typology. Based on the review conducted, a theoretical framework for assessing the psychosocial impacts (risks) of Industry 4.0 technologies adoption in the Operator 4.0 is proposed. The framework can be utilised by company managers, researchers, production engineers, and human resources personnel for carrying out a psychosocial risk assessment of the Operator 4.0 in assembly, maintenance, and training operations as these operations get digitally transformed and smartified based on self-report questionnaires. Findings reveal that the nature of work, the social and organisational environment of work, and related individual factors are key categories that might affect the Operator 4.0 psychosocial stage on the shop floor.
... According to the recent review by Moeller (2022) [19], studies examining the effects of EXOs in occupational settings mostly focus on passive EXOs, primarily investigating muscle activity (shoulder, upper limb, and body) and secondarily exploring other kinematic, physiological, or usability parameters. According to the review, the Paexo device has been considered in three studies [28][29][30], which demonstrated (in lab assessment) its effectiveness in reducing shoulder muscle activity without negatively impacting trunk activity or compromising performance, eliciting favorable judgments from users. ...
This study investigates the biomechanical impact of a passive Arm-Support Exoskeleton (ASE) on workers in wool textile processing. Eight workers, equipped with surface electrodes for electromyography (EMG) recording, performed three industrial tasks, with and without the exoskeleton. All tasks were performed in an upright stance involving repetitive upper limbs actions and overhead work, each presenting different physical demands in terms of cycle duration, load handling and percentage of cycle time with shoulder flexion over 80°. The use of ASE consistently lowered muscle activity in the anterior and medial deltoid compared to the free condition (reduction in signal Root Mean Square (RMS) −21.6% and −13.6%, respectively), while no difference was found for the Erector Spinae Longissimus (ESL) muscle. All workers reported complete satisfaction with the ASE effectiveness as rated on Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology (QUEST), and 62% of the subjects rated the usability score as very high (>80 System Usability Scale (SUS)). The reduction in shoulder flexor muscle activity during the performance of industrial tasks is not correlated to the level of ergonomic risk involved. This preliminary study affirms the potential adoption of ASE as support for repetitive activities in wool textile processing, emphasizing its efficacy in reducing shoulder muscle activity. Positive worker acceptance and intention to use ASE supports its broader adoption as a preventive tool in the occupational sector.
... Other studies reported a relation between the level of assistance and perceived reduced physical demand and exertion (Grazi et al., 2020), but did not investigate comfort. Moreover, the perception of effectiveness, comfort and acceptance seem to be highly associated with the model of the exoskeleton used (Perez Luque et al., 2020), the type of tasks performed (Theurel et al., 2018), and naturalness of the movement (Moeller et al., 2022). While comfort and usability are very inter-related concepts, to the authors' knowledge no studies investigated specifically the correlation between levels of assistance and device usability. ...
Upper-limb occupational exoskeletons to support the workers' upper arms are typically designed to provide antigravitational support. Although typical work activities require workers to perform static and dynamic actions, the majority of the studies in literature investigated the effects of upper-limb occupational exoskeletons in static and quasi-static activities, while only a few works focused on dynamic tasks. This article presents a systematic evaluation of the effects of different levels of antigravitational support (from about 60% to 100% of the arm gravitational load) provided by a passive upper-limb occupational exoskeleton on muscles' activity during repetitive arm movements. The effect of the exoskeleton on muscle activity was evaluated by the comparison of muscle activations with and without the exoskeleton. The average muscle activation was computed considering shoulder full flexion-extension cycles, and sub-movements, namely the arm-lifting (i.e., flexion) and arm-lowering (i.e., extension) movements. Results showed a quasi-linear correlation between antigravitational support and muscle activity reductions, both when considering the full flexion-extension cycle and in the arm-lifting movement (reductions were up to 64 and 61% compared to not wearing the exoskeleton, respectively). When considering the arm-lowering movement, providing antigravitational support close to or higher than 100% of the arm gravitational load led to increased muscle activations of the extensors (up to 127%), suggesting that such an amount of antigravitational support may be not effective for a complete biomechanical load reduction on the shoulder district in dynamic tasks.
... Furthermore, when comparing three different exoskeletons (EksoVest, Paexo Shoulder, Mate), 12 participants rated the Paexo and nine participants the ExoVest as the best supporting system for OHW. No participant voted in favour of the Mate Exoskeleton (Perez Luque et al., 2020). In another laboratory study (Daratany and Taveira 2020), the participants rated the usefulness of the exoskeleton at the overhead workstation (WS) after 8 min of use with 4-5.5 points on a 7-point scale. ...
... In a further comparison (Perez Luque et al., 2020) with three models, users preferred exoskeletons that had the least kinematic deviation from movement without an exoskeleton. In contrast, an exoskeleton with the greatest deviation from normal movement had the lowest acceptance rate among users. ...
Introduction: Many employees report high physical strain from overhead work and resulting musculoskeletal disorders. The consequences of these conditions extend far beyond everyday working life and can severely limit the quality of life of those affected. One solution to this problem may be the use of upper-limb exoskeletons, which are supposed to relieve the shoulder joint in particular. The aim of this literature review was to provide an overview of the use and efficacy of exoskeletons for upper extremities in the working environment.
Methods: A literature review was conducted using the PICO scheme and the PRISMA statement. To this end, a systematic search was performed in the PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus databases in May 2020 and updated in February 2022. The obtained studies were screened using previously defined inclusion and exclusion criteria and assessed for quality. Pertinent data were then extracted from the publications and analyzed with regard to type of exoskeleton used as well as efficacy of exoskeleton use.
Results: 35 suitable studies were included in the review. 18 different exoskeletons were examined. The majority of the exoskeletons only supported the shoulder joint and were used to assist individuals working at or above shoulder level. The main focus of the studies was the reduction of muscle activity in the shoulder area. Indeed, 16 studies showed a reduced activity in the deltoid and trapezius muscles after exoskeleton use. Kinematically, a deviation of the movement behavior could be determined in some models. In addition, study participants reported perceived reduction in exertion and discomfort.
Discussion: Exoskeletons for upper extremities may generate significant relief for the intended tasks, but the effects in the field (i.e., working environment) are less pronounced than in the laboratory setting. This may be due to the fact that not only overhead tasks but also secondary tasks have to be performed in the field. In addition, currently available exoskeletons do not seem to be suitable for all overhead workplaces and should always be assessed in the human-workplace context. Further studies in various settings are required that should also include more females and older people.
... Studies on how exoskeletons influence muscular activity usually find a reduction in the muscular activity in the shoulder muscles when wearing exoskeleton (Kiguchi and Hayashi, 2012;Huysamen et al., 2018;de Vries et al., 2019;Schmalz et al., 2019) When EMG is not involved, range of motion tends to be the focus. For example, Baltrusch et al. (2018) andPerez Luque et al. (2020) investigated how exoskeletons influence workers' range of motion. There are fewer studies published that explore the ergonomic impacts of exoskeletons using simulations in DHM tools. ...
... The main focus across the studies is on static tasks where the arms are elevated and held in a static position (Huysamen et al., 2018a, Schmalz et al., 2019Grazi et al., 2020), or on quasi-static tasks, where a specific activity is performed with hardly any arm movement around the shoulder joint (Pacifico et al., 2020). These quasi-static tasks comprise (overhead) assembly (Perez Luque et al., 2020), drilling (Alabdulkarim and Nussbaum, 2019), wiring (Kim et al., 2018), and sanding (Moyon et al., 2018). The handled loads (e.g., hand tools) in these types of tasks range from 0 to 5 kg. ...
The large-scale adoption of occupational exoskeletons (OEs) will only happen if clear evidence of effectiveness of the devices is available. Performing product-specific field validation studies would allow the stakeholders and decision-makers (e.g., employers, ergonomists, health, and safety departments) to assess OEs’ effectiveness in their specific work contexts and with experienced workers, who could further provide useful insights on practical issues related to exoskeleton daily use. This paper reviews present-day scientific methods for assessing the effectiveness of OEs in laboratory and field studies, and presents the vision of the authors on a roadmap that could lead to large-scale adoption of this technology. The analysis of the state-of-the-art shows methodological differences between laboratory and field studies. While the former are more extensively reported in scientific papers, they exhibit limited generalizability of the findings to real-world scenarios. On the contrary, field studies are limited in sample sizes and frequently focused only on subjective metrics. We propose a roadmap to promote large-scale knowledge-based adoption of OEs. It details that the analysis of the costs and benefits of this technology should be communicated to all stakeholders to facilitate informed decision making, so that each stakeholder can develop their specific role regarding this innovation. Large-scale field studies can help identify and monitor the possible side-effects related to exoskeleton use in real work situations, as well as provide a comprehensive scientific knowledge base to support the revision of ergonomics risk-assessment methods, safety standards and regulations, and the definition of guidelines and practices for the selection and use of OEs.
... The use of exoskeletons can allow for more flexibility and efficiency in manual work tasks, reduce work-related injuries, and can also help overcome one of the major challenges in the western industry today, namely that of a changing demographic and an ageing workforce [2]. The current status of this technology is not however without challenges as they often limit the range of motion, cannot fully cope with a huge diversity of anthropometrics, and can, if not used properly, result in pressure injuries [9]. ...
While previous Industrial Revolutions have increasingly seen the human as a cog in the system, each step reducing the cognitive content of work, Industry 4.0 contrarily views the human as a knowledge worker putting increased focus on cognitive skills and specialised craftsmanship. The opportunities that technological advancement provide are in abundance and to be able to fully take advantage of them, understanding how humans interact with increasingly complex technology is crucial. The Operator 4.0, a framework of eight plausible scenarios attempting to highlight what Industry 4.0 entails for the human worker, takes advantage of extended reality technology; having real-time access to large amounts of data and information; being physically enhanced using powered exoskeletons or through collaboration with automation; and finally real-time monitoring of operator status and health as well as the possibility to collaborate socially with other agents in the Industrial Internet of Things, Services, and People. Some of these will impose larger cognitive challenges than others and this paper presents and discusses parts of the Operator 4.0 projections that will have implications on cognitive work.
Industrial workplaces expose workers to a high risk of injuries such as Work-related Musculoskeletal Disorders (WMSDs). Exoskeletons are wearable robotic technologies that can be used to reduce the loads exerted on the body's joints and reduce the occurrence of WMSDs. However, current studies show that the deployment of industrial exoskeletons is still limited, and widespread adoption depends on different factors, including efficacy evaluation metrics, target tasks, and supported body postures. Given that exoskeletons are not yet adopted to their full potential, we propose a review based on these three evaluation dimensions that guides researchers and practitioners in properly evaluating and selecting exoskeletons and using them effectively in workplaces. Specifically, evaluating an exoskeleton needs to incorporate: (1) efficacy evaluation metrics based on both subjective (e.g., user perception) and objective (e.g., physiological measurements from sensors) measures, (2) target tasks (e.g., manual material handling and the use of tools), and (3) the body postures adopted (e.g., squatting and stooping). This framework is meant to guide the implementation and assessment of exoskeletons and provide recommendations addressing potential challenges in the adoption of industrial exoskeletons. The ultimate goal is to use the framework to enhance the acceptance and adoption of exoskel-etons and to minimize future WMSDs in industrial workplaces.
Work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs) constitute a large part of work absences among industry workers, together with all the health and economic problems that it carries. Exoskeletons developed for overhead operations can potentially be a solution to reduce risks for WMSDs. However, some companies are still hesitant to implement exoskeletons in their workplace, since the effects of using exoskeletons are still not fully proved. Digital human modeling (DHM) could help with this dilemma by facilitating studies of the viability of the exoskeletons for specific work tasks. This paper proposes a DHM based framework to implement the study of upper body exoskeletons focused on overhead assembly operations. The framework emphasizes the kinematics and forces interaction between the human and the exoskeleton.
